Legacy 32 Bit Apps

[CTHarrryH]

The other issue that developers have is that Apple doesn't have a "previous version - discount for new" ability in Apple store and apparently doesn't want one. So if you bought a .99 app and it is now a 4.99 app the developer has no way to give the upgrade for 2.00 - either free or full price.

 

[InAustralia]

Looking at the app it appears the developer changed from a pay up-front to an In-App purchasing model. But both apps appear to be getting developed and maintained, with the last reported updates being within a week of each other.

So it looks like you're not missing out on anything and don't need to repurchase the app, unless I've mistaken or misunderstood something.

I will have to re-purchase the App once iOS11 comes out as the 32bit app version will stop working.

 

[ackmondual]

I hate that is the case especially with games. I would rather pay once 10 euro/dollar to get a great app/game without ads and in-app purchases. I don't mind to pay a bit more after 1 or 2 years or so to support the developer.

In past years, I've scoured articles on this. For developers, it's a pain in the neck that Apple doesn't let them charge for updates. As the 2nd post mentioned, a once-off payment was discovered to be insufficient to cover their expenses. The vast majority of developers do NOT make enough money to cover the $141 yearly developer fee (which is $99 after Apple takes their usual 30% cut). If they charged "really premium pricing" like $50 for a iPhone game. Admittedly, it may be an Iphone game with some incredible design and graphical assets, but it will never work because... users generally do NOT pay for stuff (not especially when there's so much free content/alternatives). Even if they do, $50, or whatever the real number is will likely be far above what the market's willing to pay.

To that end, devs have sacrificed ratings on their existing apps, and made updated versions of them as brand new apps as a loophole to charge again. By saying you're willing to pay $10 up front, and more in 1 or 2 years, that's sort of a subscription model.

I heard in a podcast one person say "I am of the opinion that in if you develop an app, it should be a subscription model, or have very premium pricing". He was referring to just the situation we've found ourselves in... it doesn't work. There's a reason why freemium and ads are dominating the charts.

 

[pacorob]

But if apps do have anough people who buy the app for like 10 dollar (a year or once) then this would probably cover the costs per year for being in the App Store + maintenance on the app. It's however probably difficult to know how many people will buy an app and if they are willing to pay every year for it.

I hate the fact that a lot of apps now shifted to soooo many in-app purchases.
Luckely not all developers do that. I think there are enough people out there which would love to pay for a good premium app and pay a certain price a year/month for it as well.

 

[alba63]

No idea how many 32bit apps I still use (on the iPAD 2 I cannot go to iOS10), but generally I am always surprised how much iOS (and Android) users critisize app pricing. In the classical PC world, programs (they weren't called "apps" in the old days cost 20 bucks (for small developpers tools) up to several hundreds for consumer products (like Office, Photoshop etc.).
Spending 2, 3 or sometimes 5-10 bucks for an app is generally below my limit of thinking. As has been said here already, no developer can live by selling a 2-3 Euro/ dollar app ONCE to a client and then deliver updates for free for years. This approaches the "for free" concept. It may work for the few "super hit" apps that sell hundreds of thousands of copies, or even millions, but without being an insider: this is probably the absolut exception. For the rest the developers have to work and live. A few bucks (majority under 10$/€) every 2 years is ok for me, specially IF I use the app regulary.
BUT: it has to be communicated in an appropriate way. Silently re-selling the app with the wrong policy (life- long updates) is psychologically bad.

 

[redcarlsen]

You don't HAVE to update to ios 11. in which case you could just keep running all your apps as you do now. It's not ideal, but it's still an option.
I also wish developers would update (especially paid) apps. I remember ios 9 maybe broke some audio for some games, and even some big developers acknowledged it but simply said they were not going to do anything about it. Pretty lame.

 

[pacorob]

No idea how many 32bit apps I still use (on the iPAD 2 I cannot go to iOS10), but generally I am always surprised how much iOS (and Android) users critisize app pricing. In the classical PC world, programs (they weren't called "apps" in the old days cost 20 bucks (for small developpers tools) up to several hundreds for consumer products (like Office, Photoshop etc.).
Spending 2, 3 or sometimes 5-10 bucks for an app is generally below my limit of thinking. As has been said here already, no developer can live by selling a 2-3 Euro/ dollar app ONCE to a client and then deliver updates for free for years. This approaches the "for free" concept. It may work for the few "super hit" apps that sell hundreds of thousands of copies, or even millions, but without being an insider: this is probably the absolut exception. For the rest the developers have to work and live. A few bucks (majority under 10$/€) every 2 years is ok for me, specially IF I use the app regulary.
BUT: it has to be communicated in an appropriate way. Silently re-selling the app with the wrong policy (life- long updates) is psychologically bad.

You have a good point there. I do think it also really depends what the app has to offer and if it's something you would use daily or once every while if I would go for a subscription or not. I then prefer the old way of buying games or software and spend like 20 euros or even more on it. I know I spend at the time like 100 guilders (55 euros) on Warcraft 2 for my Mac.
It also indeed depends if a developer is doing this as his full time job or just as a side project next to their day job. I don't think a lot of developer can only have one app as their main daily job.

You don't HAVE to update to ios 11. in which case you could just keep running all your apps as you do now. It's not ideal, but it's still an option.
I also wish developers would update (especially paid) apps. I remember ios 9 maybe broke some audio for some games, and even some big developers acknowledged it but simply said they were not going to do anything about it. Pretty lame.

It ofcourse also depends if you have older devices that won't even get the option to update to iOS11. All my devices (iPhone SE, iPhone 5s, iPad mini2) do get this updated pushed. I know you can reject it but it keeps asking (horrible way of pushing things by Apple).

Also security wise it's not smart to then stick with iOS10 as my devices are now running. Luckely the amount of apps I use with 32bit is limited.

A few games (of which some luckely did an update to 64 bit recently) and TouchArcade but for that one the developer already told us that they don't have the money to upgrade the app which is a shame because there is no actual alternative like it I think.
I guess I should switch to the website, however that isn't the same experience.