
Microsoft explains Windows 8 Store: Free 7-Day Trial, lower pay-cuts and more - imkarthikk
http://www.the4cast.com/microsoft/microsoft-explains-windows-8-store-free-7-day-trial-lower-pay-cuts-for-popular-devs-and-more/
======
kogir
I think the generous free trial could allow them to raise the floor even
higher than $1.49.

Part of the reason I won't buy expensive apps on iPhone is because there's no
recourse if they're terrible. Google's 15 minute trial period is a start, but
for some games that's not long enough to download the content they need to
run.

It will also motivate developers to create apps with more than 7 days worth of
value. How many people will actually keep a fart app or a game with 2 levels
for more than 7 days?

I think this will be an interesting experiment and look forward to seeing what
effect is has on the quality and quantity of available applications.

~~~
ntkachov
This will, however, lower the number of 1 off apps that people need.
Sometimes, I need an app to do something that I do once a year. I have no
intention of paying $5 for this app and chances are, I'll download it and
return it clean within that 7 day period. So if your app is very situational,
the MS app store might do more harm than good.

~~~
jws
The trial period appears to be at the developer's option.

Presumably apps like "Tax Me! 2012" and "Fantasy Football Draft Dominator"
will know better than to offer a free trial.

~~~
imkarthikk
That's interesting! So not ALL the apps would have trails! :(

------
jaipilot747
Relevant post on MSDN:
[https://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/07/20/mak...](https://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/07/20/making-
money-with-your-apps-through-the-windows-store.aspx?Redirected=true)

The $1.49 may not be very far from $0.99 in real terms, but I feel it
significantly increases resistance. I'd be much more willing to spend $0.99
for an app I want to check out than $1.49. Wonder what the rationale behind
that figure is.

~~~
heyitsnick
For me, the resistance between $1 and $1.49 is about equal. That is, pretty
much zero resistance. Anything below about $2 i think i would still click
'purchase' on a whim without really investigating it. Only at about $3 is
would i pause and consider if i really needed it.

(fwiw i'm far from rich, and I own an Android + iPhone and have purchased less
than 30 apps lifetime... so I guess whimsy doesn't strike me often, even at
99c! Just adding another data-point.)

~~~
sirclueless
I think there is a very real difference between 0.something and 1.something.
$1.49 is an "awkward" price, that is not as obviously "as cheap as we can make
it".

In the iOS ecosystem there is something of a race to the bottom in pricing,
where everyone is competing to have the most widely used $.99 app. I can see
how Microsoft considers this to devalue the app ecosystem: a system where apps
compete on both price and value is more healthy than a system where 50% of the
paid apps are at $.99 and everyone competes on visibility.

------
mrobataille
$1.49 might be a play to attract developers whose revenue is tied to the
lowest app store price point.

------
jmcqk6
One serious problem with the Windows 8 Store. It will only be for Metro Style
apps, which require the complete stack to be on the the "Metro" .net stack.

I have an app that I was looking to port to Windows 8. It's written in .NET,
and uses good architecture so that (I thought) all I would need to do is hook-
up the UI. Nope. I can't just reference the core dll and be off. That dll has
to be a "Metro class library." Now, I apparently have to maintain two versions
of my core library in addition to the UI layers. This is a problem.

~~~
nigelsampson
That's untrue, desktop apps can (and already have) been listed in the Windows
Store. They're essentially links out to your website where you'd need to
handle your own payment and downloads, but you'd have a presence and show up
in search results etc. Search for Age of Empires Online in the store for an
example of a Desktop app listing.

~~~
jmcqk6
I've searched for a way that I can make this happen, but I'm not seeing it
anywhere. Is it only Microsoft software that takes advantage of this? I
suppose that getting into the search results is very useful.

EDIT: found a link

[http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/06/08/list...](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windowsstore/archive/2012/06/08/listing-
your-desktop-app-in-the-store.aspx)

------
kyriakos
1.49 is there to ensure no crappy apps. after all in case of MS trials are
possible meaning you no longer need to buy crappy apps just because the
description sounds good.

~~~
suresk
I don't have any particular problems with the 1.49 price point (and I kind of
wish the iOS app store hadn't set a standard where a $2 or $3 app is
considered "expensive"), but how does an extra $.50 prevent crappy apps?

~~~
sirclueless
$1.49 is an awkward price, because it involves fractional dollars, and
unwelcome mental calculations. The jump from $1.49 to $1.99 is easy to make,
because $1.99 is way more attractive (how many $1.49 apps are there in the iOS
app store?). From there, $1.99 to $2.99 is also easy, still only a 50%
increase. Suddenly - _POOF_ \- you have a whole array of apps priced around
2-3-4 dollars, instead of a $.99 bloc. This raises the price floor of apps on
the Windows market, and there are a multitude of studies describing how
effective price anchoring can be.

~~~
suresk
One nit: There are exactly 0 apps on the iOS App Store priced $1.49, because
it isn't possible to price an app at that amount (it goes up in increments of
$1).

That said, I agree with you - I hope it successfully makes apps in the $2-$10
range more popular, which means developers can invest more time in them and
make them better.

