
Android phones look to expand app offerings - gibsonf1
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/09/02/BU381F6GOA.DTL
======
ryandvm
> Trip Hawkins, the founder of Electronic Arts Inc., who now runs mobile-
> gaming company Digital Chocolate. He calls Google's policy of letting people
> use paid apps for as long as 24 hours and return them for a full refund
> "senseless and lazy."

I think this is interesting. There is a definite divide between game
programmers and "utility" programmers on this issue.

As a developer of a utility app, I am in favor of the 24 hour policy. It means
people will try my app, see that it does what they need and decide to keep it.
Of course this only works because it offers ongoing utility. (Shameless plug:
<http://www.appidio.com/apps/gas-oil-mix/>)

Given the typical quality of mobile apps in general, I know I would personally
be much less inclined to buy one without the possibility of a refund. Nobody
likes being ripped off.

However, games are typically a fleeting distraction. You download a game, play
it for a half hour and may very well never use it again. I'm quite sure the 24
hour refund policy hurts game sales.

Perhaps what Google needs to do is allow developers to choose whether or not
they allow refunds. I do not mind at all if someone returns my app. It
obviously wasn't worth their $0.99 - that's my fault. But there are plenty of
apps that have a very short anticipated lifespan or single plausible use
event. Making them subject to the 24 hour return policy really hurts those
product categories.

~~~
ydant
I think a better solution might be more along the lines of system-supported
(as in linked to the full app) trial applications that can be upgraded in
place, along with the application provider being able to specify if refund is
allowed or not. Maybe not shareware style where the license server unlocks the
app since that's usually pretty easy to crack open, but two different apps
that the system treats the same.

It's frustrating trying to find the free vs. paid application and then having
to upgrade and potentially lose settings defined in the free one. This was the
case when I had an iPhone and is now the case with Android.

But an ability for trying an app is essential. On the iPad I find it
incredibly frustrating how many apps I am interested in that don't seem to
have a trial program. So I'm being asked to spend $6-10 for an application
that I have absolutely no clue if it's good or not. At $1 I can justify that,
but $10 is a meal and isn't so easily just tossed aside.

