It annoys me on the iOS App Store you can't search for 'paid' apps. The choices are either 'free' or 'any'. The paid apps generally involve much less bullshit than the free ones but they are always lost in the search. The only way to find paid apps is to look at the charts.
What really annoys me is freemium games for kids that insist you start a subscription (for no good reason) to get rid of the ads, instead of a one-off payment. They are literally banking on parents forgetting about subscriptions.
> It annoys me on the iOS App Store you can't search for 'paid' apps. The choices are either 'free' or 'any'.
Because Apple are really a big back of dicks. In a few months in the EU we’ll be able to install third party app stores and I welcome some actual competition.
I installed an app recently that had a 7 day free trial. Cool, I'll do that, I'm excited for the app. I immediately cancelled the autopayment on the trial after signing up because I wanted to explicitly evaluate at the end of the trial instead of have it assumed i want to continue. The app then immediately cut off my trial access. It's frustrating that Apple even tells the app developer that it was cancelled.
Honestly, even non-game apps. I was looking for a white noise generator to use with a Bluetooth speaker recently and was appalled at several of the top picks in that category having subscriptions— and not just any subscription, but like $5-10/mo. For some looping sound files.
I ended up going with Noisli; it may not have all the features, but it's at least simple and straightforward and had a modest one time fee to unlock all functionality.
I did try that out and it's better than nothing, but I like Noisli's selection of sounds, and that you can create little blends of them— like bonfire + running water + crickets for a camping scene, or train tracks + rain + cafe for a journey scene.
It also being on my homepage vs buried in a settings menu was worth a few dollars to me.
This is a great tip! On vacation I just went through the hell of looking for white noise apps that were all subscription. I ended up using a spotify track on loop. I sure wish I knew this existed already on my phone. Thank you.
While unpopular, I do understand the rationale for the subscription model. Even if it's "just some looping sound files," an app project like that is never really "done" because of Apple's ever evolving operating system demanding revision on the developer's part, or the software will stop working. And that's not even going into the cost of running a server, which the majority of apps, even simple ones, require for cross-device functionality.
I understand the bitterness on the part of users, especially with so many subscriptions (including this one, IMO) being quite egregiously priced. But at the same time, the app market on both platforms is extremely competitive and it's difficult to get an app to a level of popularity where advertising or lower charges can fund the effort involved to keep maintaining it.
I don't really have an answer here, unfortunately. I think the availability of free apps for phones for decades based on the hand-wavy ad-tech "we'll monetize user data later" has created the impression among phone users that just because software runs on their phone and not their PC, that it has basically no worth. It's not as if the code is easier to write for a smaller screen.
If an app is a front end to a service that by its nature must be a service, a subscription model makes sense. Outside of that, though, a subscription model is a showstopper for me. I may subscribe to a service if it's important enough to me, but I will never rent software.
I understand that view, but it's just not that simple. Firstly you don't "own" any of the apps you've bought: you've not bought the executable, you've bought a license to use the executable, a license which may be terminated for any number of reasons: some by the developer, some by Apple. Second, due to Apple making changes to their OS, that app you've bought will require updates and I've chosen my word very carefully there, it will require them. Those updates take work; believe me I've held a few apps in maintenance mode in my time, it is not idle work. It involves a lot of testing of new iOS builds and updating projects/implementations of Apple's code, on and on. It is not a nothing job.
So you has my theoretical customer who've bought an app for a fixed one-time purchase would presumably have something to say to me in the form of an email if Apple drops a new iOS update, and the app no longer works, right? Because you paid your money and you want to use this software. And I totally agree! I want to update it and keep it working for you. But the one-time purchase model is not conducive to this relationship, because it's effectively infinite time investment for me, and a one-time payment for you. And the amount of money I can make to justify that time investment has a natural ceiling: people only need to buy my app once to use it on all their devices, and no matter how good it is, there's a natural ceiling in terms of sales I can achieve, because only so many people are going to want it.
Again, I don't really have a solution to this. The economics of app development are tricky.
It is for me, and when it comes to what I'm going to spend my money on, that's all that matters.
> you don't "own" any of the apps you've bought
I'm sure that you know what I mean here. I "own" it meaning that I am in possession of an installable that isn't dependent on an outside service, and that can't be modified or removed without my permission.
> due to Apple making changes to their OS, that app you've bought will require updates
I don't use Apple devices, and if Apple platforms are that unstable, then that's a good reason not to!
> I want to update it and keep it working for you
So you charge for the update. You don't charge an ongoing monthly fee.
This stuff isn't actually that complicated. The industry worked it out pretty well a long time ago -- it's just that all of that knowledge has been disregarded in favor of a subscription model that allows a deeper soaking of customers.
Yeah, I get that, and definitely once they're operating a backend for me I'm 100% on board with paying a few dollars a month to keep that service alive.
Obviously these devs have done the math and it works better for them to charge 1000 users $10/month each than to find 20000 users who will pay $6/year.
Part of me just reacted against the slimy, mattress-store level marketing copy trying to shame me into spending $10 a month because "can you really put a price on a good night's sleep?"
I refuse patently to support or purchase anything using manipulative marketing like that. Hard pass. If you want to sell me something, show me the benefits/let me try it, and sell me that product like I'm a human being you have an ounce of respect for.
I pay Apple a fixed amount each month for all devices in my family to have access to a range of features, including a wide range of ad-free games I don't need to pay for. That doesn't feel to me like a cartel, that's just a bundled subscription, similar to the one that Netflix is trying to move to. Can you explain why you think that they're trying to group games studios together to maintain high pricing, when I actually end up paying much, much less than I would if I were to buy the games individually, or pay individual subscriptions to get rid of ads, or worse give up all my data and get bombarded with advertising when I just want to play a game for a few hours?
They created the problem and now they’re selling you the solution. They don’t allow you to search for paid apps. That’s an intentional design choice on their part. They also frequently change and deprecate APIs, forcing devs to constantly update their apps, necessitating the use of subscriptions. I won’t give them the credit for fixing a problem they created, and I really don’t like the idea of paying them for the privilege.
For the record, I’m happy to pay for good apps and games and services.
It's more complicated (and arguably worse) than that. Because Apple provides no way to do a trial of a game (without subscription pricing) some games will have a free tier with ads and an IAP to remove ads. These wouldn't show up under "paid apps" even though they technically qualify.
If you look at what App Store business models Apple makes easy and which ones require jumping through hoops it's pretty clear that they want you to fill your app with IAP or use a subscription model. One time purchase software is possible, but is treated as a second class citizen (no paid upgrades, no demos/trials).
You at least get 200 of the top paid games in each genre.
Personally, I prefer to use a real game system over a phone to play games. It’s not Apple’s fault that smartphones aren’t a good place to play games. A game developer targeting phones can only hope to capture a sliver of spare attention of someone who is already doing something else (like waiting in a lobby or taking a 10 minute bus ride).
That’s why iOS games rarely cost anything to buy while Nintendo has been selling $40 games on mobile devices for decades.
Without sticks and buttons phones can only hope to emulate a real game system. A developer on a more dedicated game system can expect to find players who want to spend multiple hours on a game.
Oddly, their offer is ridiculously small outside of the US. There are good games, but for example, every single one featured in Arcade's launch trailer is unavailable in Canada.
I'd have expected that with their experience (Music, TV, App Store), they would have done better there.
Dont want to let my kids loose on Apple Arcade though. I like to curate exactly what they get to play - educational games with no advertising or bullshit.
Apple Arcade is just a subsection of the App Store with a subscription fee for a curated list of games with no ads or in-app purchases. The Screen Time limits you place on the device around allowed apps or capabilities work just fine with Arcade. If anything, it would make your life easier because the games you allow can’t change course later and add in ads or IAP.
Now that I think about it, not many paid apps. There are some subscription ones that don't suck - Numberblocks and Alphablocks. The Duplo games are pretty good. Reading Eggs is old school but good.
My kid's school got him to isntall Numbots which is pretty good. Not sure how it works if you install it direclty rather than getting a login via the school.
Minecraft Education is avaiable on a 'clubs and societies' license to anyone (you dont have to be a school anymore) but they dont publicise that much. Start your own club, install Minecraft Education. You have to set up an Office365 tenant though to manage the logins and subscriptions which is a faff.
Toca Kitchen 2 is a simple paid app where you prepare food and feed it to characters, fun for little ones and really well designed.
What really annoys me is freemium games for kids that insist you start a subscription (for no good reason) to get rid of the ads, instead of a one-off payment. They are literally banking on parents forgetting about subscriptions.