[macworldguy]

What happened to the try before you buy honour system ?

Sure, it's great for this guy that wrote the article because no doubt the software he buys is more then likely paid by some corporate account or written off as a business cost.

As best as i understand i have to pay for the software from apple store FIRST. To get a refund is like trying to get out of HELL. Even those "guarantee" refund purchases take a lot of begging to get the refund for a software that is not suitable for my requirements.

What happened to the try before you buy ?

I am just a "single" user/owner of all my Macs and have installed the software i buy on more then one machine at any given time.
I am sure the software developers don't worry about users such as my self.


The App store is not for me because it takes away the honour system of try before you buy.

[varase]

imarcw, on 13 February 2011 - 08:26 AM, said:

I agree with everything in the article, but I would also point out that Apple's unique position of supplying both the hardware and the system software for their devices is what allows them to be so successful in their licensing approach. Not only does it fit with their mission of making their products as easy to use as possible, but they will always make money even from the most dishonest users, because you can't pirate an iMac. (Yes there are "Hackintoshes," but not enough to affect Apple's bottom line.)

... As opposed to say buying a Dell where the hardware comes from Dell and the OS from Microsoft?

I fail to see how this is different, as in the above example Dell and Microsoft both get their cut from the new PC purchase.

I do think that Mac users tend to be more munificent with their computer purchases, since they've already showed that they're willing to pay more to get something more, whereas a lot of PC users wouldn't think of parting with another dime after their original (lower priced) purchase.

This isn't to say that there aren't dishonest Mac owners - just that in general they're more willing to part with money for added value than their PC brethern - something they're constantly being ridiculed for in the CNET forums.

[ericole]

GaryDauphin, on 13 February 2011 - 05:43 AM, said:

Well said! And to reinforce your point, I notice a general lower price point for Apps on the App store, thus removing the last barrier to honest folks who want to stay honest. I think this store is good for everyone, and we need to support the developers who participate by paying for their wares!

Surely you don't mean to imply that "honest people" will reach a price point that will make them dishonest? I certainly hope not. If so, then we are on a downward spiral. I think a lot of things have gotten beyond their "worth" price point (eg gasoline), but I'm not about to start filling up and trying to drive off without paying.

[SeanButterworth]

imarcw, on 13 February 2011 - 08:26 AM, said:

I agree with everything in the article, but I would also point out that Apple's unique position of supplying both the hardware and the system software for their devices is what allows them to be so successful in their licensing approach. Not only does it fit with their mission of making their products as easy to use as possible, but they will always make money even from the most dishonest users, because you can't pirate an iMac. (Yes there are "Hackintoshes," but not enough to affect Apple's bottom line.)

This is the crux of Apple's approach, which is why there's never been the need for the OS to be licensed by Mac owners.

[patriotusa]

ridddder, on 13 February 2011 - 11:51 AM, said:

patriotusa, on 13 February 2011 - 09:53 AM, said:

I wish that the honor system worked for vendors as well. The biggest problem I see with the App Store on both iOS and now OS X is that there is no requirement for a "lite" or demo version of the software. It's completely "You pay your money, you take your chances." If the software does not perform as advertised, or is unstable, then you are out however much you spent. The lower price of the software in the app stores seems to be a double-edged sword. It's great that the price is lower, but vendors seem less inclined to offer demos. They seem to think that if the software only cost a few dollars, then people will be willing to risk the purchase without a demo. Ironically PC/Mac software or games that cost $50 or more almost always have a demo version. Not so with most software in the app store.

Microsoft requires every vendor who sells games in the Xbox Live Marketplace to have a downloadable demo. Apple should require the same.

Too bad you don't hold other things or products to the same quality gulag. Sure you may buy an a burger without tasting it for two dollars, since there are no such thing as a taste test of something costing that amount. Or maybe you will get a two dollar toy from the dollar store for your nephew without knowing fully what it is like, I mean it is only two dollars, right? In fact you probably crap away two dollars a week on junk food without knowing you do, but that really isn't the point is it?

Perhaps if you write the developer, and ask them if the features you want are in there isn't an option, or if you write a reviewer about the same thing, I suspect waiting for that email would be like waiting for a porta-potty at a KISS concert. Some people like you would fork over the measly two bucks, then gripe about how the app sucks, but not you. You would rather gripe about the app before you buy it because anti-oxidants be damned that grape soda didn't quench your thirst like it said on the can.

Oh I see your point, EXACTLY......

Ignoring the juvenile and feeble aspects of your post, I will respond to the issue of dual standards: Who says I don't hold other things or products to the same standard? If I buy a burger at a restaurant that does not have the ingredients in it that were advertised, or tastes terrible, I would not hesitate to return it even if it only cost $2. Same with a toy, flashlight, camera or any other product that does not work as advertised. Software is not the same as other products because retailers (brick and mortar or virtual) do not allow you to return it. Demos are therefore the only way to judge the usefulness and functionality of software without making a non refundable purchase.

In addition, much of the software in the app stores cost significantly more than $1 or $2. Apps costing $5+ are increasingly common, and many cost $15 or more.

[k88dad]

"(Apple) also understands that anti-piracy techniques don’t stop pirates, but they do get in the way of honest users."

That is the money quote. Windows Genuine Advantage is the most humorous thing ever thought up by Microsoft. I recently started to use Steam. Not so much for the discounts (which are great) but because it's a way to avoid optical media DRM. Having a game fail to run because the disc is scratched (or lost, or your optical drive is sucky...) is annoying. I also support developers who actually provide customer support. Case in point is Spiderweb Software. Say I bought a game from them a decade ago. I deleted it 8 years ago. I decide I want to play it again. I just send them an email. Within a day, there will be a new license code sitting in my inbox. Customer service is why I've sent a lot of money to them over the past 15 years.

Support developers and computer makers who provide good value and customer service. It's that simple.

[Andr]

ryanwiebe, on 13 February 2011 - 05:37 AM, said:

Andr, on 13 February 2011 - 05:23 AM, said:

Then *why* is it a good thing?

Because it creates a better user experience. That bit was clearly laid out in the article.

I actually missed that. Pardon me.

[JMBoivin]

donfrase, on 13 February 2011 - 07:28 AM, said:

Nice article, even if you can't spell honour properly. ;-)

Canadian eh? ;-) - We DO have a lot of vowels, natural resource in Canada I hear.

[DJRumpy]

JMBoivin, on 14 February 2011 - 03:55 PM, said:

donfrase, on 13 February 2011 - 07:28 AM, said:

Nice article, even if you can't spell honour properly. ;-)

Canadian eh? ;-) - We DO have a lot of vowels, natural resource in Canada I hear.

Actually either spelling is correct, although the original spelling in Latin was 'Honor' based on the word esteem.

[alex_santos]

It may be based on the honour system but please note the terms and conditions and the end license agreements with the software developers.

http://www.apple.com...terms.html#APPS

[Arno_Wouters]

I read this article with growing amazement. To my mind the Mac App Store replaces the existing honor system by a system that forces users to pay for software they can't try. The following examples illustrate why this is a bad thing.

(1) Two months ago I read a raving review of Scrivener in MacWorld. I didn't seem to be what I needed but why not try it if MacWorld recommends it and the trial is free? Two weeks later I was wildly enthusiast and bought the software.

(2) Two weeks later, I read an equally raving review about the iPhone app PasteBot. I was pretty sure that I would be very enthusiast about the software. There was no possibility to try the software, but why not take the risk if the software seems useful and is recommended by MacWorld? After 'trying' the app for 5 minutes, it was clear that I had wasted my money. I deleted the app and posted an extensive review detailing why I found the app useless. Two weeks later I discovered that the review has been removed.

[Flighter]

revco, on 13 February 2011 - 06:40 AM, said:

GaryDauphin, on 13 February 2011 - 05:43 AM, said:

... I notice a general lower price point for Apps on the App store, thus removing the last barrier to honest folks who want to stay honest...

Maybe in your neck of the woods. In Australia the prices on apps I was interested in have risen by at least 20%. Plus not being able to trial the apps before buying. How is that good?

And don't forget that the Au dollar is worth *more* than the US dollar these days too.

[vincent860524]

I must say the the Mac App Store is NOT the fastest app in the world.

[Ulriczhn7]

ATX, on 13 February 2011 - 08:29 AM, said:

donfrase, on 13 February 2011 - 07:28 AM, said:

Nice article, even if you can't spell honour properly. ;-)

The American spells it without "u", just like colour is the Queen's English way of spelling. Humor as the humoured does.

But "rite" should have been spelt "right"