<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rate It If You Hate It + In App Purchasing = Disaster?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.iliumsoft.com/2009/10/27/rate-it-if-you-hate-it-in-app-purchasing-disaster/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.iliumsoft.com/2009/10/27/rate-it-if-you-hate-it-in-app-purchasing-disaster/</link>
	<description>Behind the Scenes at Ilium Software</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 21:31:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: iGadget</title>
		<link>http://blog.iliumsoft.com/2009/10/27/rate-it-if-you-hate-it-in-app-purchasing-disaster/comment-page-1/#comment-35758</link>
		<dc:creator>iGadget</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2009 22:50:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.iliumsoft.com/?p=1709#comment-35758</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think they should adopt the same approach as Android, allowing you to uninstall and get a refund within 24 hours.  This keeps the application descriptions honest, and if any app is only going to be of interest for 24 hours then it&#039;s probably not wanted.
I used Android for a few months and I refunded 2 apps out of about 20, as they had bugs or were just plain bad.

I often hesitate when I see a $12 app on the iPhone, not simply because of the price, but because I&#039;m being asked to risk that money on something I can&#039;t see running. Google&#039;s approach is much better and removes the whole &#039;in-app purchase&#039; concept.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think they should adopt the same approach as Android, allowing you to uninstall and get a refund within 24 hours.  This keeps the application descriptions honest, and if any app is only going to be of interest for 24 hours then it&#8217;s probably not wanted.<br />
I used Android for a few months and I refunded 2 apps out of about 20, as they had bugs or were just plain bad.</p>
<p>I often hesitate when I see a $12 app on the iPhone, not simply because of the price, but because I&#8217;m being asked to risk that money on something I can&#8217;t see running. Google&#8217;s approach is much better and removes the whole &#8216;in-app purchase&#8217; concept.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://blog.iliumsoft.com/2009/10/27/rate-it-if-you-hate-it-in-app-purchasing-disaster/comment-page-1/#comment-35746</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 02:01:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.iliumsoft.com/?p=1709#comment-35746</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Marc No argument there.  &quot;It doesn&#039;t matter what we do as long as we do something&quot; has infected too much of the software industry (to say nothing of every other segment of life)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Marc No argument there.  &#8220;It doesn&#8217;t matter what we do as long as we do something&#8221; has infected too much of the software industry (to say nothing of every other segment of life)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Boon Chye</title>
		<link>http://blog.iliumsoft.com/2009/10/27/rate-it-if-you-hate-it-in-app-purchasing-disaster/comment-page-1/#comment-35734</link>
		<dc:creator>Boon Chye</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 02:29:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.iliumsoft.com/?p=1709#comment-35734</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree with the in app purchase comments as I have many times wanted to try and buy an app but then hesitate because I have no way to fully test an app compare to a trial version in Palm or Windows Mobile.

Although the cost of the apps are still pretty cheap but if you add up the cost of trying multiple apps, the cost will balloon.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with the in app purchase comments as I have many times wanted to try and buy an app but then hesitate because I have no way to fully test an app compare to a trial version in Palm or Windows Mobile.</p>
<p>Although the cost of the apps are still pretty cheap but if you add up the cost of trying multiple apps, the cost will balloon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://blog.iliumsoft.com/2009/10/27/rate-it-if-you-hate-it-in-app-purchasing-disaster/comment-page-1/#comment-35730</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:49:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.iliumsoft.com/?p=1709#comment-35730</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reading Marc, Bill and Dave&#039;s  postings resulted in me examining what I paid for the apps I have on u iphone.  Clearly I am outside of the norm as I have only 2 free apps from &quot;independent&quot; developers  and four for which I paid $1.99.  The rest range from $4.99 to $11.99

Keeping that in mind here is my proposal.  Remove the ability to rank anything that is free.  Its FREE for Pete&#039;s sake.  For that price take your chances and if you do not like it, dump it.

Remove the Rank it if you dump it feature.  It is a completely biased survey.

Allow only someone who has purchased the app to rank it (already in place).

Apple clearly does not want to quantify the downloads (unlike downloads.com) but providing a figure that showed what percentage of people who downloaded an app subsequently removed it would be useful.

Just my 2 cents.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reading Marc, Bill and Dave&#8217;s  postings resulted in me examining what I paid for the apps I have on u iphone.  Clearly I am outside of the norm as I have only 2 free apps from &#8220;independent&#8221; developers  and four for which I paid $1.99.  The rest range from $4.99 to $11.99</p>
<p>Keeping that in mind here is my proposal.  Remove the ability to rank anything that is free.  Its FREE for Pete&#8217;s sake.  For that price take your chances and if you do not like it, dump it.</p>
<p>Remove the Rank it if you dump it feature.  It is a completely biased survey.</p>
<p>Allow only someone who has purchased the app to rank it (already in place).</p>
<p>Apple clearly does not want to quantify the downloads (unlike downloads.com) but providing a figure that showed what percentage of people who downloaded an app subsequently removed it would be useful.</p>
<p>Just my 2 cents.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Dave</title>
		<link>http://blog.iliumsoft.com/2009/10/27/rate-it-if-you-hate-it-in-app-purchasing-disaster/comment-page-1/#comment-35719</link>
		<dc:creator>The Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:29:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.iliumsoft.com/?p=1709#comment-35719</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I generally don&#039;t rate a free app that didn&#039;t live up to it&#039;s description but it did appear to have some useful functionality.  To get a rating at all it needs to be an app I used (or at least tried to use) long enough to give a useful rating

Crashing, data loss or excessively annoying interface design (obtrusive popup dialogs being my current pet peeve) being the way to get a low rating from me.

I&#039;m flat out brutal to paid apps that didn&#039;t live up to the description though, with a free app I&#039;ll just delete it unrated, with a paid app I get my $0.99 worth of satisfaction back with a 1-star rating.

To me, the whole thing could be fixed with a combination of a sane refund policy (negating the need for in-app-purchase type free trials).  

This might help slow down the price-race-to-the-bottom too, negating the need to keep prices low enough that users are willing to gamble.  Personally, I&#039;ve paid hundreds or possibly thousands of dollars into PalmOS software over the years I used that platform, at least a couple hundred for Windows Mobile software, but when it comes to iPhone I will rarely even spend $10 since I don&#039;t know if the software even does it&#039;s basic functionality and I certainly don&#039;t have a clue whether or not it does it well.

The rating system is a bit more difficult a nut to crack, although to start off with, showing star ratings from users who left a comment vs didn&#039;t leave a comment wouldn&#039;t be a bad place to start.  Another thought would be to allow developers to request users rate apps from within the app (and you&#039;d better believe that if an app annoys me with this request, it will be getting a 1 star, so abuse by developers should self-regulate)

Another thought would be to weight reviews with a comment differently from reviews without comments and to reward users who regularly write useful comments somehow.

Moving all paid apps over to the &quot;Paid&quot; category regardless of whether payment is upfront or down the road would fix up the whole free vs paid issue.

Like with most things iPhone, the gap between &quot;ideal&quot; or &quot;fair&quot; and &quot;the way Apple tells it&#039;s users they want&quot; is substantial.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I generally don&#8217;t rate a free app that didn&#8217;t live up to it&#8217;s description but it did appear to have some useful functionality.  To get a rating at all it needs to be an app I used (or at least tried to use) long enough to give a useful rating</p>
<p>Crashing, data loss or excessively annoying interface design (obtrusive popup dialogs being my current pet peeve) being the way to get a low rating from me.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m flat out brutal to paid apps that didn&#8217;t live up to the description though, with a free app I&#8217;ll just delete it unrated, with a paid app I get my $0.99 worth of satisfaction back with a 1-star rating.</p>
<p>To me, the whole thing could be fixed with a combination of a sane refund policy (negating the need for in-app-purchase type free trials).  </p>
<p>This might help slow down the price-race-to-the-bottom too, negating the need to keep prices low enough that users are willing to gamble.  Personally, I&#8217;ve paid hundreds or possibly thousands of dollars into PalmOS software over the years I used that platform, at least a couple hundred for Windows Mobile software, but when it comes to iPhone I will rarely even spend $10 since I don&#8217;t know if the software even does it&#8217;s basic functionality and I certainly don&#8217;t have a clue whether or not it does it well.</p>
<p>The rating system is a bit more difficult a nut to crack, although to start off with, showing star ratings from users who left a comment vs didn&#8217;t leave a comment wouldn&#8217;t be a bad place to start.  Another thought would be to allow developers to request users rate apps from within the app (and you&#8217;d better believe that if an app annoys me with this request, it will be getting a 1 star, so abuse by developers should self-regulate)</p>
<p>Another thought would be to weight reviews with a comment differently from reviews without comments and to reward users who regularly write useful comments somehow.</p>
<p>Moving all paid apps over to the &#8220;Paid&#8221; category regardless of whether payment is upfront or down the road would fix up the whole free vs paid issue.</p>
<p>Like with most things iPhone, the gap between &#8220;ideal&#8221; or &#8220;fair&#8221; and &#8220;the way Apple tells it&#8217;s users they want&#8221; is substantial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marc</title>
		<link>http://blog.iliumsoft.com/2009/10/27/rate-it-if-you-hate-it-in-app-purchasing-disaster/comment-page-1/#comment-35716</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:03:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.iliumsoft.com/?p=1709#comment-35716</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Bill: Great points, Bill. I agree that they need something - but I&#039;m not convinced that doing something poorly is a good solution.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Bill: Great points, Bill. I agree that they need something &#8211; but I&#8217;m not convinced that doing something poorly is a good solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://blog.iliumsoft.com/2009/10/27/rate-it-if-you-hate-it-in-app-purchasing-disaster/comment-page-1/#comment-35713</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:02:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.iliumsoft.com/?p=1709#comment-35713</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree the current review system is flawed and needs to be replaced with something that encourages fair evaluations.

&quot;if you paid for the app there is a good chance you wanted it and like it&quot;

Not so sure about that.  I&#039;ve paid for dozens of applications that turned out to be pretty bad.  Either the description was misleading, or the blog reviews were way off the mark, or the software just simply didn&#039;t work.  No, when I pay for an app there&#039;s a good chance I want to try the app, not that I&#039;ll like it or will continue to use it.  Just as the current review system is flawed, the pay before you try system was equally flawed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree the current review system is flawed and needs to be replaced with something that encourages fair evaluations.</p>
<p>&#8220;if you paid for the app there is a good chance you wanted it and like it&#8221;</p>
<p>Not so sure about that.  I&#8217;ve paid for dozens of applications that turned out to be pretty bad.  Either the description was misleading, or the blog reviews were way off the mark, or the software just simply didn&#8217;t work.  No, when I pay for an app there&#8217;s a good chance I want to try the app, not that I&#8217;ll like it or will continue to use it.  Just as the current review system is flawed, the pay before you try system was equally flawed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
