Apple Swaps "Get" Button For "Free" To Avoid Confusion Over In-App Purchases 103
New submitter lazarus (2879) writes Apple is falling in line with the European Commission's request that app sellers do more to stop inadvertent in-app purchases. Following Google's lead, Cupertino has removed all instances of the word "free" within its iOS and Mac app stores (with the exception of its own apps, like iMovie), and replaced them with the term "Get." The new label clarifies what users can expect when downloading an app. Apps previously labeled as "Free" will now have a "Get" label. If those apps include in-app purchases, a small gray "In-App Purchase" label will appear below the "Get" button.
Also in iBooks (Score:3)
I just ran into this in iBooks, and was very nervous until I confirmed that other normal books still had prices. So "Get" means "free iBook", too.
Re: (Score:2)
But there can still be in-book purchases.
Pay $1.99 at the end of chapter 10 or the author kills off your favourite character.
Re: (Score:2)
But there can still be in-book purchases.
Pay $1.99 at the end of chapter 10 or the author kills off your favourite character.
Which is why the extra label below warning about in-app purchaces is a good idea. Still haven't seen that with books though, but if they keep getting away with it elsewhere it is just a matter of time.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Give away a good murder mystery. Charge $50 for the last chapter.
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually an awesome idea. Kind of like a choose your own adventure book, but you have to pay more for certain pathways.
Re: (Score:3)
No. Just no.
Re: (Score:1)
No. Just no.
why not? It seems quite novel. Might end up with a different form of reading entertainment.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Also in iBooks (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I just ran into this in iBooks, and was very nervous until I confirmed that other normal books still had prices. So "Get" means "free iBook", too.
For books, maybe. But it really just obfuscates the issue for software because they just swapped out "free" for "get", while still barely giving a nod to the DIFFERENCE between actually free, and "free trial but you have to pay to unlock the full version".
Granted, they did add an indicator for "in-app purchases", but made it as unobtrusive as they reasonably could. In my opinion, that is dishonesty. Or at best, being honest only very reluctantly and begrudgingly.
Re: (Score:3)
Because apple doesn't get a cut of that money. Duh.
Re: (Score:3)
Because after 20 years of killing Nazis, I still haven't bought the full version of Wolf3d.
Re: (Score:2)
I registered mIRC and WinZip a few years back...after 15+ years. I guess shareware really can pay off eventually.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Because it was even rarer for a developer to make any money.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Doom episodes were 9 levels.
One of which is a secret level. The canon ending of each episode is ExM8 if I remember correctly.
Ultimate Doom had 4 episodes.
One of which duplicates the shareware episode. The app would ship with E1, and the "Ultimate Doom" expansion pack would contain E2, E3, and E4.
Re: (Score:2)
In fact a bunch of games already do this. I know that Capcom has released Ghost Trick and the latest Phoenix Wright on iOS doing exactly what you're talking about. You get the first chapter free and have to pay to unlock the rest of the game. (And, unlike certain other Capcom iOS ports, those two ports are really well done.)
It actually works out pretty well, you basically get a free demo (like you would with shareware) and then you can pay for the full version. The only issue is that due to Apple restrictio
Re: (Score:2)
Turns out that it was only a full version for my device, not my account.
The majority of in-app purchases I've seen tied to your account, not your device, and allow you to restore them when you move to new devices. My experience is admittedly extremely limited (a couple of games my mom and brother own) but in those cases you were able to restore purchases from one device to a new device. More recent games even save to iCloud so you're now even able to keep your save games when moving to a new device, something that you weren't allowed to do earlier.
(For some dumbass reason the o
Re: (Score:2)
I wish that happened. Realistically if Doom were done like how most IAP games are laid out these days, we have to buy IAP for the chainsaw and everything past the fist and pistol, IAP so we can use the powerups, IAP so that the secret panel unlocks, and when we died, either wait 2 hours, or pay $1.99 for three more lives... then the next few levels would be an entirely different app, and we would have to re-buy the rocket launcher and BFG all over again.
Re: (Score:2)
And don't forget having to pay for more ammo.
"Looks like your shotgun is out of ammo. Additional rounds of 100 shotgun shells cost 50 Doom-bucks. You can occasionally find Doom-bucks scattered around the levels (but it will take you days to find it and you have no more ammo so you'll be defenseless), you can pester your friends on Facebook about playing Doom to earn 10 Doom-bucks per friend, or you can buy more Doom-bucks (on sale today: 45 Doom-Bucks for $19.99!)."
Re:why can't we go back to the old shareware syste (Score:5, Interesting)
why can't we go back to the old shareware system?
Because unfortunately for all of us that loathe the free + in-app micropayment model, it actually makes money. There's no way an entire ecosystem built around this model would have sprung up if everyone hated it as much as I did.
There are many, many people who download and play a huge number of free games, and never bother paying, or perhaps pay for a game rarely. Many of those people (like kids) are time rich and cash poor, so don't blink as spending ridiculous hours grinding away. There are a much smaller number of people who get addicted to these games and spend a ridiculous amount of money on in-app purchases... far more than would have ever been paid if they had just purchased the game outright. Those people are the real targets.
My only hope is that people eventually grow tired of these sleazy tactics and refuse to participate. Then again, people still waste money at casinos and buying lottery tickets, so I'm not really holding my breath. I'll just continue supporting developers that sell their games up-front for a fixed price - a model I much prefer.
Re: (Score:2)
There's no way an entire ecosystem built around this model would have sprung up if everyone hated it as much as I did.
That's a presumption I'm not sure I agree with. I'm genuinely unconvinced that anyone actually likes the model, or likes the game mechanics it produces as a result.
But it turns out that hunting for "whales" is very very profitable. (whales being the folks with obsessive/addictive personalities that shell out hundreds for these apps)
In mo opinion, I think nearly all of us hate it (including t
Re: (Score:2)
Similarly if you have a game with a ton of "gear sets" and I've found 2 of 3 pieces of a legendary set, I might consider buying the third from the cash shop (or buying premium currency to then trade with a player in the AH) rather than grinding for it because the gear is a means to an end, and I'd rather spend time it would take to get that last item exploring different areas of the game rather than repeating the same one I've already done ad nausium
In which case, the game is defective by design and the AH
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure I necessarily agree with your conclusion. The free market produces a wide variety of products at nearly all price points, from extremely inexpensive to ridiculously high end products. Search through any app store and exclude the free crap and stuff with micropayments, and you'll still find a lot of great products.
It's like this with most categories of products I can think of. Just because McDonalds is highly profitable at serving low-cost, low-quality products doesn't mean you can't find a g
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So... (Score:1)
"It dilutes actual free games that would be simply ad supported"
If it has ads then it's not free.
Re:So... (Score:4, Informative)
This story is literally about changing a string from "Free" to "Get".
Further, the headline has it backwards. Swapping X for Y means you swap out X and swap in Y.
What about Free and no in-app purchases? (Score:2, Interesting)
An app that's free and doesn't have any in-app purchases, meaning it's 100% free with zero chance of incurring any charges, should still be able to have the "Free" button. Why isn't that possible to do? "Get" is ambiguous and doesn't indicate to the consumer that the app is free. I can see a decline in popularity of truly free apps, and confusion among consumers, from this change. If they all say "Get" then there's no way for the consumer to discern truly free from the rest.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Because an app that doesn't offer in-app purchases now, might do so next month.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes but it would require an app update to make that change, and apple approves all program updates. So just switch the free/get button at that point.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes but it would require an app update to make that change, and apple approves all program updates. So just switch the free/get button at that point.
That doesn't help the people who downloaded it when it was Free, and then Updated it.
Apple would have to also change the Update button to Get, which might not be a bad idea.
Re: (Score:2)
But what if you've already downloaded the app. You see that Cool Game X is labeled as "free" (thus doesn't cost anything or have any in-app purchases) so you download it. A couple of weeks later, there's an update that promises new levels so you install the update. Suddenly, you're told you can get new levels for $1.99 each, a heap-load of premium currency for $25, etc.
I'll admit that I primarily use Android devices so perhaps Apple is different, but on Android, you don't see a "free/get" button when you
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'd like to be able to set that as a toggle in my search results for apps.
Re: (Score:1)
Because an app that doesn't offer in-app purchases now, might do so next month.
OK, so if it comes out with an update like that, make it require my Apple account password again, and it should display a warning. "Flappy Crushbird Saga is no longer free! If you update Flappy Crushbird Saga, you may now be charged for in-app purchases! [OK | Keep Free Version | Delete App]."
I don't see what's so challenging about this. "Free" should mean the app costs me nothing to install/use, and I cannot incur any charges using it. If it says "Free," then whatever I do in the app, I pay nothing. If I h
Re: (Score:2)
"Flappy Crushbird Saga is no longer free! If you update Flappy Crushbird Saga, you may now be charged for in-app purchases!
This is just silly. "Flappy Crushbird Saga" is still free. It's the purchases you make while using the free app that cost money. You don't have to make those purchases.
Changing "free" to "get" is removing information from the consumer. "Get" applies to apps that aren't free, too. "Free" means "get" and "you don't have to pay to get"; "get" simply means "click this to get the app" -- what you pay for it is revealed later.
I don't see what's so challenging about this. "Free" should mean the app costs me nothing to install/use, and I cannot incur any charges using it.
Free should mean you don't have to pay to get the app. It should have nothing to do w
Re: (Score:2)
Changing "free" to "get" is removing information from the consumer. "Get" applies to apps that aren't free, too. "Free" means "get" and "you don't have to pay to get"; "get" simply means "click this to get the app" -- what you pay for it is revealed later.
Nope. "Get" is only for apps you can get without paying. If the app costs money to "get", you have to click on the amount it costs.
Free* would be funnier (Score:2, Insightful)
Free* would be funnier.
*Not free.
Re: (Score:1)
Free* would be funnier.*
*Not funny.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
You can still create an Apple Store Id without giving them a credit card. Much like creating a gmail account that isn't attached to Google+, you have to be determined to look for the right options but it is still possible
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe you used to, you can't now.
Yes you can.
http://support.apple.com/en-us... [apple.com]
Re: (Score:2)
If you have already created an Apple ID, you MUST enter a payment method before you can access anything. You can THEN remove the payment information. So, you have to give them a way to charge you for things and then hope they forget it when you tell them.
If you haven't created an Apple ID yet, you have to go through a process with iTunes to buy something that is "free", and then you create an Apple ID. During that process, you M
Re:How about NOT demanding a credit card upfront (Score:4, Insightful)
I struggled with this problem for some time as well and found the "BEST" soloution...
Gift cards....
I had an old gift card with a zero balance. I entered in the numbers, including the CVV code and apple was happy and allowed me to create the account.
If they try to use the card, naturally it will be declined but it isn't even in my own name in the first place (gift cards dont require your detail since they are "stored value" cards.)
Re: (Score:2)
First, Apple has no real incentive to abuse my credit card. Second, I don't really have to trust companies with my credit card, if I look over the bill when I get it and dispute questionable charges.
Remove the word Store (Score:1)
Listen to Yoda (Score:5, Insightful)
Backwards your title is. Confused people will be.
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly. In English, "Swap Foo for Bar" means you start with Foo and replace it with Bar.
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly. In English, "Swap Foo for Bar" means you start with Foo and replace it with Bar.
Which English? When I see "Swap Foo for Bar" that means wherever I see Bar, I replace it with Foo.
When I see "Swap Foo with Bar" that means wherever I see Foo, I replace it with Bar.
Re: (Score:1)
Exactly. In English, "Swap Foo for Bar" means you start with Foo and replace it with Bar.
Which English? When I see "Swap Foo for Bar" that means wherever I see Bar, I replace it with Foo.
When I see "Swap Foo with Bar" that means wherever I see Foo, I replace it with Bar.
Quite right, but so is the GP.
Most people will just read the key words and have their brain fill in the blanks. So we look at the title and see "swap... Foo... Bar..) and most people's brain will assume the operator is with and we're replacing Foo with Bar. I did the same, then realised the entire sentence, in context didn't make sense so I re-read it properly (a lot of people wont pick up on that and re-read it).
So you're right that the headline is technically correct... but the GP is right in that t
Re: (Score:2)
Alternative title: If your "get" button is broken, Apple will now replace it for "free".
Re: (Score:2)
Incorrect title (Score:1)
What they did was swap the "Free" button for a "Get" button.
Why is it that, in 2014, people STILL get this shit backwards?
When you swap one thing FOR some other thing, the other thing is what you have in the end, not the one thing.
Jesus Christ...
Expecting people to click on "Free" was bad UI (Score:1)
Separate from the in-app purchase issue, this is a UI improvement. "Free" is important information, but it was not obvious to new users that they should click on that word in order to download the app.
Like a lot of Apple's UI, it was obvious and easy-to-use, *once you already know how it works*. Basically it was usable, but not especially discoverable. "Get" is an improvement on multiple fronts.
az0
Why couldn't it just be "$0.00" (Score:3)
Wait... (Score:2)
They redefined the word "free" to avoid confusion?
Re: (Score:2)
They redefined the word "free" to avoid confusion?
You just redefined the word "redefined" to crate confusion.
why not do the right thing ? (Score:3)
It's time for having 3 categories. Paid, in-app-purchases, free.
Seriously.
With a low number of exceptions, in-app purchases are just todays scam/trick to get your app into the "free" section of the store, without it actually being free.
I want a section for genuinely, 100% free apps, simply because there are quite a lot of them out there and because it would be the honest thing to do and because I mind being tricked a lot more than having to pay for something.
Re: (Score:1)
It's time for having 3 categories. Paid, in-app-purchases, free.
I would add a fourth. Thus the list would be Paid, in-app-purchases, free with ads, FREE. FREE would be really free. Not even ads.
Re: (Score:2)
It's time for having 3 categories. Paid, in-app-purchases, free.
I would add a fourth. Thus the list would be Paid, in-app-purchases, free with ads, FREE. FREE would be really free. Not even ads.
Would this include Apps that harvest data like Google's?
Instead of banning Inapp-Purchases (Score:2)
They rename the button. Great. Will prevent abuse. Not.