←back to thread

A bug saved the company

(weblog.rogueamoeba.com)
379 points ingve | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.423s | source
Show context
strogonoff ◴[] No.45023841[source]
Free-trial-based approach to software distribution is not the best. Compared to at least one better alternative, it is:

0) worse when it comes to developer bottom line (if you are being generous, try to provide enough trial time and usable software during trial period, a large chunk of your users will just never pay);

1) worse when it comes to user experience (you are interrupted, you encounter blocked-off functionality, which basically means that upsell is part of core GUI);

2) worse when it comes to developer experience (now you don’t just program one great product, you also have to program into your core GUI the upsell—the various ways in which it becomes restricted while remaining usable);

3) worse when it comes to product improvement (the unhappy user will simply delete the software and you’ll never know what they didn’t like);

4) exactly identical when it comes to honest paying user’s expenses.

No doubt, there are worse options. (One that takes the cake: advertise it as free software, but constantly upsell the “full version” offered on subscription basis.)

What’s that better alternative I’m comparing free trials against, then? Simply offer returns. Buy it, get a license, make your trial period however long you like; don’t like it—request a refund, get money back, get license revoked. What it means is that “tried and not bought” is no longer one of the “happy paths”. As a result, you have a better chance of really understanding what was wrong (if I must ask you for refund, you are in touch with me), and you also exhibit more confidence in your product up front.

I believe App Store in fact works this way. If someone’s thinking about distributing there and feels like the only way to offer a trial is IAP, maybe reconsider: you don’t need that overhead, one fully featured version is enough if your users can already get their money back if they don’t like it. I believe refund process happens automatically for you as a developer, though I’m not sure whether or not the feedback they provided will be forwarded to you. Willing to be corrected.

replies(4): >>45023900 #>>45023944 #>>45025466 #>>45026682 #
wat10000 ◴[] No.45026682[source]
As a prospective buyer, I'm not much swayed by a promise of returns. I never know how easy it's going to be. It might be promised that it's quick and easy, then turn out to be a giant pain. There might be terms hidden in the fine print that I missed. I might have to (the horror) talk to a human, which is not what I want when buying software.

I've been buying this sort of software since it was called "shareware" and was obtained on floppies or downloaded over XMODEM from a local BBS. I made a living from it for a long time. The fact that almost nobody has done it this way should indicate it's not as good as it sounds. (The App Store may work this way in practice, but the stated terms are that you request a refund and then it might be granted, at the discretion of Apple. They also explicitly state that requests might be refused for "abuse" which is not defined, and could very well include merely getting too many refunds. It can't really be treated as a trial.)

replies(1): >>45049354 #
strogonoff ◴[] No.45049354[source]
> As a prospective buyer, I'm not much swayed by a promise of returns.

Aren’t you used to it in all other areas of life?

> I've been buying this sort of software since it was called "shareware" and was obtained on floppies or downloaded over XMODEM from a local BBS. I made a living from it for a long time.

Sure. At the time I was a poor student so I am familiar with the concept of shareware but never paid for it back then. However, I think this concept is not as intuitive to anyone who was not in tech space at that time.

> The fact that almost nobody has done it this way should indicate it's not as good as it sounds.

Perhaps, but this is not always how it works. Often there’s friction and inertia that blinds people to better alternatives.

> The App Store may work this way in practice, but the stated terms are that you request a refund and then it might be granted, at the discretion of Apple. They also explicitly state that requests might be refused for "abuse" which is not defined, and could very well include merely getting too many refunds.

Perhaps you’re right, but then all I can say is that painless refunds should be a thing.

replies(1): >>45052677 #
1. wat10000 ◴[] No.45052677[source]
Aren't I used to what in all other areas of life? Being able to try something without risk because I can always return it? Definitely not. The issues I mention apply everywhere. Physical items are even worse, because even the best return process requires me to actually go somewhere to do it.
replies(1): >>45063819 #
2. strogonoff ◴[] No.45063819[source]
Really? I thought it’s the norm in developed countries, that sellers choose to be good about return to avoid reputational damage and/or are forced to be so by customer protection laws.