Slashdot Mirror
Why We Agonize Over Buying $1 Apps
theodp writes "When it comes to explaining decision making and behavioral economics, Dan Ariely is the man. In his latest blog post, Ariely tackles the irrationality of app buying, explaining why the thought of paying even $1 for an app turns into an agonizing decision for those perfectly willing to spend $4 on coffee, or $500 on devices that they arguably don't really need. Had Apple created a really low minimum price for apps — say $0.15 — instead of offering free apps on day one, Ariely suggests, we would be anchored to the idea that apps should cost something. 'Then paying more (maybe even $2) for an app would be a simpler step,' he concludes, 'maybe one that we could take as easily as paying $4 for a latte.'"
As a long-time Linux user, one of the best points is that everything comes without strings attached. I would say "the idea that apps should cost something" is questionable at best, but leave it to Apple and their users to advocate it.
Great Intellect...
Free software has been around a lot longer than that. Even OSX and iOS are based on it.
I agonise over paying for apps, thus locking me in to a platform even more with each successive purchase.
I think what it really comes down too is that people have a feeling that software being sold at $1 might as well be free. Deep down they know their own time is worth more than that, so why would they even give a dollar for what should be free?
OTOH, software that has good features, seemingly good support, and solves a problem they have being sold at $20 actually seems like a more reasonable proposition.
The only exception being tiny games. Although I think even Angry Birds was more than $1. I wouldn't know, I purchased it for the PC. That game is damn addictive.
Perhaps it's because there is no recourse for me as a consumer if the app just doesn't work. At least with that $4 coffee I can send it back if it's bad, can't do that with an app.
I would never attach my Credit card to an app store, due to having a 6 yr old in my house who loves to play with my phone.
Having a threshold at $1 means other developers also wont try to undercut at $0.9 , and drag the whole pile of apps down to $0.05 eventually.
why the thought of paying even $1 for an app turns into an agonizing decision for those perfectly willing to spend $4 on coffee,
The answer is simple, isn't it? The seller is not making just one mug of coffee and keep selling clones of it at 4$ a mug. Would you really pay 4$ for a copy of a mug of coffee? Though we all know apps are created by labor and capital investment, though we know that app is as much a product as a mug of coffee is a product, though many of us actually make a living writing code, we still balk because we also know the cost of replication is zero. We should not think that way, but we do.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Modding to undo accidental posting. Oh, wait...
In the year in which i own the galaxy tab i spend more for buying software than in the ten years before. If an app does what i want and it costs $1 then i buy it. the price has an eception ally low priority in my buying decisions.
For andorid these are
a) Does the app require unreasonable rights without explaining?
b) has the app a clearly decribed concept what is does and what it doesnt?
c) does the app behave reasonably in the refundable period?
d) Are the many users with really strange problems.
If all poitns above are right, and the app is not trivial, i will pay $10 without thinking
I think it's much simpler than that. People don't understand what software does and really see no difference between the device and the programs that run on it. From that point of view, when you buy an app you are paying for something that's "already there", since it was a device that ran apps before and it's a device that runs apps now. The only change is the new app, which is not a tangible thing, but a behaviour. Paying for behaviour seems kinda like paying someone to teach your dog a new trick, and that's just plain silly.
...I've worked with OSS for a decade, even $0.15 sounds ridiculous for a piece of software.
Liberty in your lifetime
Users want a trial which is why I offer a free app, Perpenso Calc for iPhone RPN, 5 modes: Scientific Stats Business Hex Bill, which is upgradable to full (RPN, tape, etc) via in app purchase.
Users may also want customization so I offer the more specialized functionality (statistics, business, hex, etc) as in app purchases. So rather than a higher priced app with everything included I can keep the price down and let users only pay for the specific functionality they want.
Top of the line office software, IE only Microsoft Office
Top of the line AAA games, IE Skyrim
Other then that... corporate users need security software, and gullible home users will also buy it (reason I say gullible is primarily because there are few to no features or increased reliability of free vs paid antivirus's that I've seen). Had nothing to do with how the tablet market was set on launch day, the phones were based on the market of software, and in the end phones and tablets do not currently support much in the way of software that people aren't used to having for free.
When you buy a $4 coffee, and it doesn't turn out the way you expect, there is a real, living, breathing, human being standing in front of you that can fix it.
When you buy a $500 tablet from Walmart and decide you don't like it, you can just go back to the store and return it, no questions asked.
When you spend $1 on an app, and it either isn't what you expect, isn't what is advertised, or doesn't work on your device, the process of getting your money back is a significantly higher hurdle.
On iTunes, you have to request a refund from your PC, and if the holy gods of Apple deem your claim valid, and that's a HUGE "if," then you might get a partial or whole refund, depending upon what they decide. You can't simply uninstall the app and say "I didn't like it and want a refund."
Buying a $1 app is like buying a car. It's agonizing because there is little or no customer satisfaction process once they have your money. It turns out that it doesn't matter what the price is.
You know, I used to think that if media had a decent price, that I would actually purchase more games.
More and more lately I'm coming to realise that I wouldn't buy most things at any price.
Why would I spend £10 on a DVD, when I can save that £10 towards a new car or a mortgage deposit?
Why would I spend £10 on a book or £1 on a newspaper, when £90 (9 books) buys me an e-reader which will give me free books until the thing breaks?
Why would I spend £anything on games, when I can simply play older ones?
When I was a schoolchild, money existed to be frittered away on the next shiny.
Now I'm (only a few years) older, I can see that in order to live any semblance of a decent life, I'm going to have to save, and save HARD.
Why should I feel sorry for artists? Are they in a worse position than me? In the vast majority of cases I would doubt it.
With regards to expensive coffee - I don't buy it, but I do buy coffee when I'm out, occasionally. Why? Because it is more convenient than making coffee at home, and I can get it instantly as opposed to waiting. Buying 'apps' generally works in reverse.
Subsequent copies of computer programs are non-scarce, I'll grant. But without a first copy there are no subsequent copies, and first copies of computer programs are scarce. The typical publishing model to recover the cost of making this first copy involves spreading its cost across subsequent copies.
I've not found the same return policy on software.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Why would you pay?
You can get unlimited water in the river or falling out of the sky. Why would you pay for a beverage to quench your thirst?
If you think I'm not adding enough value for what I charge - that's fine, you're welcome to not use what I'm making (free market, etc).
Say I think your product is overpriced for what it does, and I make my own alternative product that's cheaper or free. To keep people from choosing my product over yours in a free market, you sue me on dubious grounds involving some sort of claimed infringement, on the basis that a settlement is cheaper than a competent legal defense. Is it still a free market?
Google Search is ad-supported. People agonize over buying a $1 app because it could have been an ad-supported $0 app.
The whole comparison is backwards. The fact that people 'agonize' over a $1 app isn't the odd thing. The fact that they don't over a $4 latte is the dysfunctional behavior. Many people who definitly cannot afford it are spending enough on lattes that they could afford to buy a brand new car if they would just redirect the funds. I 'agonize' over the $1 app because I am fully aware of the 'nickle and dimeing' system that they are working in. The point of the $1 app is to separate you from your money in small enough increments that you don't notice how much you are spending.
In Soviet Russia, accidental post undoes YOU!!!!
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I pay the author their due, for the work they put into the app. If I don't see any value in it, I don't get it, free or otherwise. Buying apps via Apple or Google or boxed software from a retailer is always a gamble, but you can read comments before buying, or work out if it is worth less than a cup of coffee.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
I realize its not quite what you are referring to but iPhone apps are tied to your iTunes account, not a particular device. So if you have and iPhone and an iPad you can load the app on both. When you upgrade a device you can load the app on the new device.
90% of $1 apps are crap. So you have to spend $10 to get one good app.
People are not agonizing over just $1; they're agonizing over having to spend $1 ten times and the time to download and evaluate ten apps to find a good one.
---------
There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
As an owner of a Playbook. I can say it was not my intention to purchase any apps for that device.
It was for music, videos and readying some ebooks. I also ended up using it to read and respond to my corporate email from my Blackberry.
It does all those pretty much to my satisfaction I have to say.
The only apps that interested me to round up the features of this tablet were a few games I found interesting. I ended up buying Star Front a StarCraft clone for 0.99 cents. The low price for the purchase was helping because I didn't feel like I would loose anything should the game not be worth it. I'm glad to say it was.
I then purchased Nova2 on the Playbook. Again for 0.99 cents. It came down from 6.99 I think which wasn't a price I was willing to pay for something I wasn't sure would be worth it and while I am enjoying it, tablets are not the best devices to play an FPS game. But for a dollar. I can't feel like I have something to complain about.
The problem in my view is that as a long time buyer of games. I have always owned the copy of any game I have bought.
Not in this case. I am not the owner here. I can't resell it or lend it to a friend. It's more like a long term rental. Once the Playbook's life ends. It's gone assuming I don't purchase the Playbook 2 instead of getting an Android device as my 2nd tablet. I don't imagine that I will be able to play it via emulation in the future like I was able to for old DOS games.
Maybe I will be proven wrong but that remains to be seen. So anything that is a high cost for a game I can't even test before purchasing is a situation where you feel like you need to tread carefully. I watched Youtube reviews of the games before buying them.
"You sir, ARE the problem."
You are sitting on your computer here right now, just as I am. Neither of us are out feeding starving kids in Africa.
Whether we are wrong in doing so is a judgement that an individual makes.
I obey the law in as much as it serves me. I obey the law because I do not want to be imprisoned, or get a criminal record, reducing my chances of gainful employment and a happy, free life.
I certainly do not obey the law simply because it's there. If my mother was struggling in a hospital bed, I would ignore UK euthanasia law. If I saw a person being assaulted in the street, and felt I was in a position to fight off the attacker, I would consider my actions justified, regardless of what the law may say.
I simply choose to make the personal judgement that piracy is not a crime which significantly affects other people. No-one is entitled to be paid for their work. And even if they were, Western software developers, authors and artists are very low on my list of priorities for "people in need of money".
Don't get me wrong, I am incredibly grateful that authors of the work I use put the effort in. But in the current position I'm in, I simply cannot justify spending money on anything that can be trivially obtained for free.