CoverSutra kerfuffle highlights Mac App Store teething troubles
The Mac App Store is off to a great start, but it's not all sweetness and light. Users have been confused by how some third party apps bought elsewhere show as "installed" in the store UI whilst others don't -- and in fairness, it is confusingly inconsistent. Meanwhile, developers are struggling to deal with the lack of upgrade pricing, and what that means for their existing customers.
As with the iOS App Store, everyone buying an app pays the same price, whether they are a new customer or someone who bought a previous version. There is also no ability to "grandfather in" licenses from elsewhere. For example, I purchased Pixelmator v1.6 from its website for $60 back in September, but the team has now announced that v2 will be exclusive to the Mac App Store.
If they had maintained the $60 price point, I would have had to pay the full amount again in order to move my license from their own system and onto the Mac App Store. Generously, they have dealt with this by offering Pixelmator v1.6 for $30 on the store for a limited time -- with a free upgrade to v2 when it is released. This isn't perfect; some people like me feel annoyed that they paid twice the current rate just a few months ago for a product that won't get an upgrade to v2, and Pixelmator's developers are also effectively giving new customers an upgrade discount they perhaps shouldn't be entitled to. Overall, though, it's the best of a bad set of choices they can make.
Not all devs are having such a smooth ride, however.
Noted iTunes remote control app CoverSutra, written by Sophia Teutschler (see previous TUAW coverage of this app), is another app that has become a Mac App Store exclusive as of the latest v2.5 release, and has had a price cut to boot -- from the previous $25 down to just $5. Which is a great deal for everyone, right? Well, except that all the purchasers of v2 were promised "free upgrades to v3" in their registration emails -- a promise that has now been broken, as there is no way to give them access to the Mac App Store version unless they pay $5.
Clearly, this isn't ideal (and one wonders why Teutschler didn't brand the Mac App Store release as v3.0 to sidestep this issue -- she says she simply forgot about the upgrade promise.) The developer did make a promise of free upgrades, and that promise hasn't been kept; clearly that's not a good thing at all. One option she says she has looked at is maintaining two builds of the software, one in the Mac App Store and one distributed separately (and for free) to existing users, but as a one-woman-operation she says she simply cannot find the time to support two different tracks of her application. As a software dev myself, I sympathize with her position on that.
On the other hand, we are talking about $5 here -- not an enormous sum of money in most people's minds -- and the reactions to the announcement in Teutscheler's blog comments are nothing short of appalling and completely out of all proportion (warning: considerable NSFW and unpleasant language, both in English and German.)
It's hard to know who to side with on this issue; the developer who failed to live up to a commitment to free updates, or the users who overreacted so thoroughly to this "betrayal" that you'd think they all had written "I <3 CoverSutra" all over the insides of their school lockers.
I believe the heart of the problem doesn't lie with either of them though. The real issue is that Apple's Mac App Store should have catered for this scenario a bit better, perhaps by offering developers the ability to issue codes to their existing registered customers that would qualify them for a discount in the store. Apple would have lost money (as their 30% cut would be of a smaller purchase amount), but users wouldn't feel like they were paying twice, and developers like Pixelmator wouldn't have to choose between unpalatable options. It's worth noting that some shops have chosen to issue refunds to past purchasers (RealMac with Courier), while others have committed to continued updates for traditionally-licensed products up to the next major release (SuperMegaUltraGroovy with TapeDeck).
Daniel Jalkut has noted that Aperture is an interesting edge case for the store, because it has traditionally been offered with upgrade pricing, unlike Apple's other in-house software. He did some analysis of the store that found hints at upgrade options; perhaps this is a feature to be released later, or perhaps it was something that was considered but discarded. No upgrade pricing might be acceptable in the iOS store, where most packages are just a few bucks, but if the Mac App Store wants to handle disparate price points then upgrade options would be welcomed by many developers.
Share
Categories
The Mac App Store is off to a great start, but it's not all sweetness and light. Users have been confused by how some third party apps...
Add a Comment
Like many users, I got Coversutra as part of a MacHeist Bundle. It could be argued, since I didn't by the bundle to get that particular software, that I got it for free.
I've used it pretty much every day for the last two years and I really don't think $5 is a lot to pay for a relatively minor upgrade and official access to the software on both of the Macs I own.
Yes, the developer made a promise. Yes, this could have been handled differently, but all things considered, it was handled with some level of compassion and consideration for her customers and that deserves noting.
If there's anything I'd like to ask of the developer, it's an option to reduce the album cover size back to its prior size. The larger cover option is nice, but it would be great to be able to revert.
I fear that the furore about this product licensing change is likely to be distracting Coversutra's developer from the much more appealing possibility of working on improving the product.
Some of us like it enough to pay $5 for some development action on a very useful product.
All I know is there is no way I'm buying any Apps without a way of me trying it out first.
January 11 2011 at 1:19 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyReminds me that she already had some experience with enraged customers back in 2008… Last time she eventually fixed the problem. Did she forget?
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/2662/16538168.png
http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/6350/91070686.png
The information about free updates until v3 used to be on her website. She just has couple of holes in her memory (and her website)…
http://sophiestication.de/2008/01/coversutra-20/
I'm of the opinion this is mostly Apple's fault and partly (for sure)
devs fault. If Apple had set up a good system (one that majority of
app buyers are used to), we wouldn't be discussing this issue like we
are.
Thank Sophia for Pix looking like a "shining example" of how to do
things in the transition we are in. Because IMO, the PIx deal stinks.
I own neither CS nor Pix, but I see it as foolish to re-buy Pix now
before you even know a) that 2.0 will for be released and b) how good
it might be. Furthermore, Pix had several options instead of one they
chose, and this one is just better than CS route, but not 'best
around.' IMO, a better option would be make 2.x release on MAS the $30
in honor of existing customers, and make current version $60 on MAS. I
really do see this as better option and feel equipped over last few
days to explain why if someone thinks I'm somehow overlooking
something in this suggestion. And I don't think this is best
suggestion. It is only better way if dev is sold on idea of "MAS only"
and announcing that now. IMO, best option now is - be (very) prepared
to issue refunds for those who feel screwed over by transition to MAS.
Blame those refunds on Apple, and hope Apple does things differently
as current business model is not a good one moving forward. That is an
opinion, but seems to be one that many of us in Mac land are sharing
in last few days.
I'm challenging people online to show me (via link) this "promise" you
were given by Sophia regarding free upgrades. So far, I'm not seeing
that. I've seen the "thanks for registering your app, and you will get
upgrades to 3.0 for free" thing, but that is a) not a promise and b)
instead a very generous offer made what, 4 years ago? If you see that
as a 'promise' you are acting a bit bizarre, IMO. And if you see this
situation as 'much worse' than Pix situation, then that just blows me
away. Again, all I can say is thank Sophia for Pix deal showing up (to
some gullible consumers) as "shining example."
Buying it in the App store just to help out!
January 09 2011 at 9:59 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyI love the potential of the app store. However, It may take same time to work those glitches out to perfection.
As compared to PING, I think the app store is much close to being perfect, though.
Micah Boswell
Actually, Sophie only promised free upgrades to the next major version, namely 3.0.
January 08 2011 at 11:01 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyOne thing I've noticed is that the license agreement for App Store purchases is for non-commercial use.
I run the IT for a company that has switched over to Mac in the last few years. If I can't buy software from the App Store for the company and the publisher changes to be exclusively App Store only then we can't buy 1 seat, 2 seats, or 100 seats because of the agreement. This is bad for them and bad for us. If more and more apps become App Store only then the pool of available software for the platform for commercial use shrinks and leaves me unable to legally buy and use products that we use and rely on.
Obvious answer is to provide a mechanism whereby a developer can give a free copy of their app to a certain iTunes ID.
That way, users of the old non-app-store version can give the developer their iTunes ID and get gifted a free copy of the new version.
Can't believe this hasn't been mentioned by now, but as far as your Pixelmator license goes, 2.0 was ALWAYS going to cost you money... 1.x updates were the only ones promised for free by the devs. So buying the app in the App Store is essentially paying in advance for your 2.0 license, as the App Store version will be getting a free update to 2.0, which that was never the case for the version sold through Pixelmator's website.
Ultimately, I agree with the point of the piece that Pixelmator is a shining example of how to do it right, while CoverSutra is anything but. I just wish the article had been clearer about why Pixelmator's approach was ideal in the first place.
(Incidentally, as a 1.x user of YummySoup!, the temporarily discounted price of the 2.0 version of the app on the App Store got me to buy the update which I'd been holding off on... another good-will move IMO)
Deals of the Day
more deals- Used Apple iPad 32GB Wi-Fi Tablet for $200 + free shipping
- Apple iPod nano Multi-Touch 8GB MP3 Player for $100 + $8 s&h
- Cases for New iPad at HandHeldItems: Extra 20% off, $2 credit, from $3 + $3 s&h
- $15 Apple iTunes Gift Card for $8 for new Saveology customers
- Retro 80's Case for iPhone for $11 + $2 s&h
- HHI 360 Dual-View Stand Case for new iPad w/ $2 credit for $12 + $3 s&h
Software Updates
more updatesFeatured Stories
more stories
Popular Stories
TUAW (or The Unofficial Apple Weblog) is a website devoted to tips, reviews, news, analysis and opinion on everything Apple.
68 Comments