 one amazing app.

This is their loss. This garbage of having 15 different apps to accomplish a
job that can be done with one will eventually be finished whether it is on the
iPhone or iPad.

Much of the App Store is about word of mouth and less about price. If you give
a comprehensive app that is worth the price and has proper dev support, the
payers will be there.

Today, I need an incredible amount of apps just to do what would take 5
minutes on Photoshop. An opening is left on iOS by Adobe to fill the solution.
Virtually no one is doing this.

Jobs' intention was not to hurt devs, but to kill piracy, reduce software
pricing and make it safe for people to get apps without worrying about
malware. Some devs may no longer exist because they can't adapt but that is
not his fault.

The main mistake Apple has made so far is not allowing a trial period for apps
or offering refunds within a certain window.

~~~
rogerchucker
I thought those "lite" versions are essentially the "trial period" apps.
Refund window is problematic as Google witnessed (and thus stopped it); but
then again, if your app cannot provide me long term value then may be you
deserve a refund.

~~~
jiaaro
What they really need is a way to link the demo and full version together in
the app store.

Apps with a "demo" version should have a seamless upgrade-to-paid-version
experience.

Some apps have done this with via in-app purchases (check out living language
for example [http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/living-language-spanish-
for/i...](http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/living-language-spanish-
for/id453341418?mt=8)) which does a great job of this and manages to get $15
out of you by demonstrating the value the app provides very effectively before
asking for money.

------
jyap
Firstly, as someone else pointed out, this was written over 2 years ago.

Pricing must also take into account the distribution power of the app store
and the actual usage medium.

iPad app prices are higher is a good example but then again this was written
pre-iPad.

------
PhuFigh