Go to Windows 7 Insider Guide
October 15, 2009 2:24 PM PDT
Apple OKs in-app purchases for free iPhone apps
(Credit:
Apple)
Developers of iPhone and iPod Touch applications can now enable purchases from within their freely available App Store applications.
Until now, Apple has permitted in-app sales of content, subscriptions, and digital services only for apps costing at least 99 cents.
Apple on Thursday sent the following e-mail to developers:
(Credit:
Apple)
Considering all the drama surrounding the App Store approval process, this latest move by Apple appears to be a positive one for iPhone SDK developers, as it gives them a bit more flexibility in how they design and potentially profit from the applications they build.
We'd like to hear from developers of iPhone applications that use in-app purchases, though; please tell us about your experiences in the comments.
E.g., you get the free app, but to use extended features you'd put in your credit card # into the app -- or buy a license key from a 3rd party website -- bypassing Apple from their cut. So their lawyers specified in the SDK license agreement that developers can't charge anything outside iTunes thus free apps shall remain free.
With In App Purchases, all Apple had to do was to mandate any payment to use this new system... but for whatever reason Apple insisted that free apps can't have any extra paid features. That just resulted in the continuing stupidity of Free vs Paid versions of apps, clogging the already diluted App Store with twice the number of useless apps.
Developers could use the method to get content onto the phone that Apple does not approve of if they don't control what you can or cannot see through the app itself.
Not sure what this will really mean in the end.
Thanks apple! Why not just stick to what you say?
Because the previous position was a "bad idea" and resulted in inconvenience for both developers and customers when releasing "lite" versions of titles as demonstrations of the full versions. As long as the developer is clear about what the free version of the application delivers and that the option to upgrade for a specified value is available then this is good news. I never did understand the previous position on the subject and I am glad that they have seen sense.
Apple: We now allow shareware! Hurray!
Not much different from developers having a Free and a Paid version of the same app now though.
Will this kill this ability for someone who downloads a free app and then upgrades it to the full product from getting it on both phones (assuming still that both phones use the same iTunes account)? I was never clear on the in-app purchase copying rights and really didn't like the idea at all. So, does this mean that my wife and I have to each buy the in-app upgrade if a developer uses a free app to get you in and then makes it an in-app purchase to get the full version? If so, this ROYALLY SUCKS! I had avoided in-app purchases because I believed (maybe incorrectly) that if the in-app purchase was lost somehow (through a iPhone corruption without a good backup, etc., since the in-app purchases aren't stored as a separate app in iTunes itself) that you couldn't redownload it again. I've got to assume that's correct since otherwise all of the GPS software people would be giving endless subscriptions, unless subscriptions work differently than in-app software upgrades.
Please someone tell me that in-app purchases are redownloadable using the same iTunes accounts, like the apps themselves (but only if it's true -- don't just lie, please)! I'm pissed and will cut down on a lot of spending if a lot of developers use this model. I don't like it.
Thanks a lot! I'd appreciate the clarification!
When "purchasing" software you do not actually own the software, but a license to use the software. Generally you must purchase a seperate license for every device you wish to run the software on (though this is not always the case, you should consult the EULA for more details if one exists.) My point though is that you were most likely required to purchase 2 copies to run on 2 seperate devices concurrently, and you are essentially complaining that you are no longer required to steal a license. While I am not one to criticize as I have not always been entirely ethical with my use of software, this should not be the main point in your case arguing for or against this decision.
Well, I'm sorry I offended your sense of ethics. Sarcasm intended.
Apple has made the iTunes store a maze of rules concerning each type of product sold, without a single resource of a place to go to know how many copies of what I am allowed to have legally. After reading all of the legal-ese that Apple puts up as their rules for use (terms of service, licensing agreements, etc.) about the iTunes store, I actually e-mailed Apple directly with this question when my wife got her iPhone about six months after I got mine (when the 3G initially came out). I asked the question of whether is was legal, albeit definitely possible, for two users to install the same piece of App Store content on two different phones (explaining the situation that she uses my iPhone account on her iPhone and doesn't have her own iTunes account). I was referred back to that legal-ese, rather than being given a simple yes or no answer. I replied back and there was no success in getting a simple yes or no answer. Unreal!
I then went to the Apple Support forums. An Apple employee told me (I didn't check their credentials, I assumed the Apple icon below their username was sufficient -- maybe I was wrong again, by your standards), that it was "fine to do" and there was no mention that it fit in a grey area or that it was illegal. Speaking as an Apple employee, I assume his (along with about six other users comments) made it a legal thing. I should have had one of Apple's many attornies issue me a letter fully explaining why it was or wasn't legal.
I did my "due diligence" by asking Apple Support directly for a clear answer. They didn't provide it. I then went to APPLE'S support forums and received a reply by an APPLE employee, who has a clearly higher standard expectation of knowledge than a standard user there, who did give me a clear answer. I've been doing nothing wrong by my standards, even if that Apple employee was wrong...he shouldn't have answered if he didn't know an absolute answer. He should be fired if he was wrong, which I'm not sure he is.
It used to be that licensing was simple. You bought a copy and could install it one place only. If you changed computers, and removed the old copy, you could put it on the new computer or give or sell it to someone else (which is now illegal by numerous companies). Some companies now even allow multiple concurrent installations, as long as only one copy is being used at one time. That's just scratching the surface of the problems. Software licesening can be confusing, unless its publisher makes it clear. The responsibility of making it clear to a user rests ABSOLUTELY with the publisher, or in their absense of ability to make their own rules, as in this case, their distributor, SPECIFICALLY APPLE, IN THIS CASE! If they can't make it clear for a person who reads licensing agreements daily (I do have have since the beginning of the 1980's), how in the heck can they expect a normal user to understand things if they don't provide clear answers when asked (or provide a simple webpage with explanations of the licensing rules for each type of product they sell on the iTunes store).
This is Apple's problem, not mine. I wasn't making a comment on the change in Apple's policy, but asking about how my understanding of the previous policy was affected by this change. I'll pay for legal licensing, however it better be re-downloadable in the even of a hardware issue when the phone hasn't been successfully backed up (which for a very long time, I couldn't do because the iTunes software had a bug in it -- again, an APPLE issue, not mine).
Get off your legal high-horse and come down here with the rest of us. I'll send the software piracy vigilanties over to your home and business and see how many violations they come up with. If you're clear, then speak from the mountain like Moses did. Until then, answer my question or just shut up!
What a jerk!
http://bit.ly/2BUmRh
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/10/android/
Perhaps fired up by Google's strong third-quarter earnings, CEO Eric Schmidt was particularly confident about the company's mobile future on Thursday. "Android adoption is about to explode," he claimed during an earnings call, as all the "necessary conditions" are set for growth.
Indeed, there are now 12 Android phones on the market across 32 carriers in 26 countries. The Android strategy is to offer a low-cost, fully-featured, open-source OS to cell phone manufacturers -- so they can concentrate on hardware -- and thus corner the nascent mobile search market. In the second quarter, mobile searches on Google were up 30%, according to the company.
-
by HamwayAppsCom
November 7, 2009 10:01 AM PST
- check out http://itunes.a...d302326354?mt=8
-
Like this
Reply to this comment
-
(24 Comments)This is setup is a basic lite then upgrade to a full version if you like.