Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

NEWSSTAND ISSUE .....What the hell was Apple thinking????

L

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors G3
Original poster
Oct 27, 2009
8,912
11,062
I like Newsstand but hate the way they implemented it. Why is everything expect 2 Newsstand apps labeled as free? And 95% of them don't have any free content or not even a sample. What the hell is the purpose of labeling a newsstand app with no free content as "free"?

What was so hard about putting Newsstand apps with no free content in the paid section and putting those with free samples or limited content in a newly created trial section?

It sucks that you have to download the app first to find out if they offer any free samples/content. Some do have enough reviews that tell you if they offer free content or not. Others don't have any reviews yet. I would actually make a purchase or two if I can get a sample first. No sample no purchase. I'm pretty sure others feel the same.

If anyone is interested ...... So far the few Newsstand apps I've found with samples and free limited content are ......

The New York Times .... Free access to top news section. Updates daily.
Mens Health .... One free back issue
Linux Format .... One free back issue
The Oklahoman ... free for 7 days

If anyone can add on to the list ...... :)
 
Please tell you aren't one of the many on the App Store giving them 1 star reviews because "THEY AREN'T FREE!!11111"....

IMO, Apple is doing it right. The app itself is free, while the content is not. Sure, publications should included a sample issue but that has nothing to do with Apple. I downloaded the Offical Xbox Magazine and didn't even think about a sample issue. I knew what it contained and subscribed. Hell, I had never even read MacLife before, but subscribed when I saw it was .99 a month.
 
Good for you that you know what your buying. However I don't, and would like a sample first. Even if I had a favorite magazine, how would I know if it doesn't crash or if they loaded the content correctly to my liking.

All I'm asking for is proper labeling, not whether the vendor should provide a sample or not. Is that to hard to ask for? The way things are now in Newsstand .... Why even have differ categories in the first place if 98% are going to fall under "free"?

BTW .... yes I rated a couple 1 stars, just to voice my opinion. So did many others. Eventually it will get noticed by the Vendors & Apple.
 
HazyCloud said:
The app itself is free, while the content is not.
Click to expand...

LoL...the app is just a portal to paid content. By itself, it adds no value. As the OP said, if it included a sample...well alright.

The magazine subscription model is very different than other apps that include in-app purchases. It will put some people off when they initially see "free".

Instead of rating them down, I sent an email stating I would purchase if cheaper.
 
tigres said:
Who wants to read the newstand magazines on a 3.5" iOS device anyway. iPad, OK but iPhone? really:confused:
Click to expand...

You're the first to mention iPhone/iPad in this thread. Which device you should be reading them on is not being discussed here.

LIVEFRMNYC said:
Good for you that you know what your buying. However I don't, and would like a sample first. Even if I had a favorite magazine, how would I know if it doesn't crash or if they loaded the content correctly to my liking.

All I'm asking for is proper labeling, not whether the vendor should provide a sample or not. Is that to hard to ask for? The way things are now in Newsstand .... Why even have differ categories in the first place if 98% are going to fall under "free"?

BTW .... yes I rated a couple 1 stars, just to voice my opinion. So did many others. Eventually it will get noticed by the Vendors & Apple.
Click to expand...

When you say proper labeling, what do you mean? Should the free apps with subs be listed as paid? I'm just trying to understand you here.

jpcarro said:
The magazine subscription model is very different than other apps that include in-app purchases. It will put people some off when they initially see "free".
Click to expand...

So when people see that Sports Illustrated is "free", they should assume they get the magazine for free?
 
The real question is: Why does Apple even bother with a NewStand on the iPhone when there's barely any available?
 
LoganT said:
The real question is: Why does Apple even bother with a NewStand on the iPhone when there's barely any available?
Click to expand...

There's a lot more than what Apple shows in the Newsstand store. Go to the App Store and look under Genres>Newsstand.
 
HazyCloud said:
When you say proper labeling, what do you mean? Should the free apps with subs be listed as paid? I'm just trying to understand you here.
Click to expand...

Free apps(which is basically every app in Newsstand with the exception of two) should include some type of free or limited content. It's like giving me a free styrofoam cup with nothing inside.


HazyCloud said:
So when people see that Sports Illustrated is "free", they should assume they get the magazine for free?
Click to expand...

They should assume something is "free". Even if it's a extremely small sample like the first 5 pages. But download a "free" app that gives the user zero access to anything unless you pay is BS.
 
Agree with the original post.

Labeling all those magazines as free is not very accurate.

And yes, we are now living in a time where people expect free content, even if supported with ads or in-magazine purchases.

Apple should get at least a few actually free items up there.
 
LIVEFRMNYC said:
I like Newsstand but hate the way they implemented it. Why is everything expect 2 Newsstand apps labeled as free? And 95% of them don't have any free content or not even a sample. What the hell is the purpose of labeling a newsstand app with no free content as "free"?

What was so hard about putting Newsstand apps with no free content in the paid section and putting those with free samples or limited content in a newly created trial section?

It sucks that you have to download the app first to find out if they offer any free samples/content. Some do have enough reviews that tell you if they offer free content or not. Others don't have any reviews yet. I would actually make a purchase or two if I can get a sample first. No sample no purchase. I'm pretty sure others feel the same.
Click to expand...

I did the same thing as you thinking they might be free. I free app that can't be used for anything but paid content is misleading. Would any publication actually charge for their app when they're making the real money off the subscriptions?
 
Really what they should do is have a publishers App that's free, but has the Magazines in the app cost money.

So have a CondeNast app.
 
LoganT said:
Really what they should do is have a publishers App that's free, but has the Magazines in the app cost money.

So have a CondeNast app.
Click to expand...

That's how it is now. The publisher apps are free while the magazines you can buy separately or with a subscription. Isn't that what you meant?
 
There are a lot of apps that are magazine based and are free. However, you need a subscription to read the content. Zinio is free, but the magazines you can subscribe to are not. People app is free , but you need a subscription. Mac}Life is free but you pay for the content, Wall Street Journal... Same thing... What about Men's Health? Oh, let's not forget the comic book apps. EPSN: The Mag is also free but with paid content. I could probably go on for quite some time.

Now the implementation of Newstand is what is wrong. Right now, Newsstand is sort of a folder, where you place magazine apps inside it. I feel it should be implemented like Zinio or iBooks. You have your subscriptions and you have a separate link to the "Store."

That is my two cents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back