My son Fallon, who is six and still hasn’t lost any teeth, has a beef with Apple, iTunes, and the iOS App Store. “Apple is greedy,” Fallon says. But he has come up with a way for Cupertino to improve its manners through a revised business model.
Fallon would like to buy more apps for his iPod Touch, but the good ones cost money (what Fallon calls computer money) and he has been burned in the past by apps that weren’t really as good as the reviews suggested, probably because the reviewers weren’t six.
“If I buy an app and I don’t like it, I want Apple to give me my money back,” says Fallon. “Or maybe they can keep a little of it. Here’s my idea. If I buy an app and delete it in the first hour I get all my computer money back. If I delete it after a day Apple can keep 10 pennies from every dollar. If I delete it after two days Apple can keep 20 pennies. If I keep the app for 10 days or more I can’t get any money back.”
“So it’s like renting to own?” I asked.
“Maybe. I’m not sure. Don’t ask me these things, Daddy, I’m just a kid.”
This Apple doesn’t fall very far from the tree.
heh, wait until that guy buys his first house. he’ll finagle triple the price back in payoffs for faults 😉
good plan, by the way, but it would probably be implemented as nagware.
It’s sad that you could mistake the sense of fairness innate to children with the speculator’s lack of morality. I will admit that if children ran Apple, it would be less profitable. On the other hand, there wouldn’t be children making their phones.
Please share your evidence of child labor.
http://inhabitat.com/apple-supplier-audit-reveals-use-of-child-labor/
An article from 145 weeks ago? What – did you Google and just throw up the first tripe you landed on? How about doing some more Googling in that same timeframe and you might discover those reports were thoroughly debunked. But hey, keep blindly hating!
Nice idea, and shades of Google’s laudable policy (although 2 hours would be more comfortable), but I can foresee one major problem; Apple would:
a) have to withhold all payment to the app creator until the ‘warranty’ period ended, or
b) manage some way of doing chargebacks for refunds or partial refunds.
Apple would have no problem with a), but I suspect devs would revolt at the suggestion of either.
I think b) could be problematic for large developers like Adobe. Fallon is talking about $0.99 apps. What about $30-$50 apps (mostly photography and productivity apps)? If I change my mind in the first few days who gets to keep the 10%? Apple? The developer?
Please remind Fallon what it was like in the pre-mobile days when software came on a disc? Returns were next to impossible.
Then make it hours instead of days and it works.
In my experience, there’s definitely a shareware model evolving on the Android side. A free, either de-tuned demo or ad-supported version, and a full-priced, full-featured version.
The kinks aren’t completely worked out, with a number of roll-your-own styles emerging from various developers, but so far B&N has done the most to elegantly support both developers and users with easy try-before-you-buy support in their app marketplace. They don’t allow ad-networks on the apps in their store, so I reckon that creates a bit more need. What did Ben Franklin say, “necessity is the mother of invention?” 🙂
This could have been avoided if Apple would have followed Microsofts model in the Xbox Live Arcade (or whatever it’s called now) and either embraced demos or made them mandatory as Microsoft did.
That Microsoft could get something so fundamental to software sale so right, and Apple so wrong, is simply boggling. And we’re are paid updates for developers? Another crucial feature that is missing – and in-app purchases is hardly a clean substitute. Hopefully these were Forstall issue that will now get fixed… But I’m not holding my breath 🙁
Why the HECK NOT??? If you don’t like the product, you SHOULD get your money back. Creating an “uninstall application” has been around in practically every OS for years. It’s time for mobile apps as well.
Way to go Fallon!!!
I’m not sure what an un-installer has to do with the issue.
Uninstall it & get your money back.
@Roger McK: Never used an iOS device huh? Uninstalling an app is pretty darn simple, no extra application needed (or wanted).
Yes, the issue is not uninstalling but getting a refund upon uninstalling.
> So it’s like renting to own?
Actually, it’s just renting. Unless it comes on a disc, or can be put on a disc, the vendor still controls, and thus, owns it.
Fallon is a smart guy. He has a bright future. Companies should listen to people like him.
The software developer has always owned the software. What the user was paying for was a license — a right to use. You don’t own any software you didn’t write yourself.
I was referring to my copy of the product. If it’s on disc, the vendor can’t take it back like Amazon has done. I only buy software, music, books, etc that I can continue to use and reinstall without the vendor’s permission. Otherwise, I’m just renting for an unspecified time.
That’s irrelevant. Children don’t care whether one owns software or a right to use software and they don’t need to. The important point is if the customer is not satisfied with the product he/she should be able to return for a refund. Or take their business somewhere else.
The equally important point that David was making is that if your are satisfied with the product you should be able to use it forever, in any device meeting the original system requirements. This implies no dependence on a “cloud” or anything similar for future use. If “continued availability” is the case it is essentially as useful to the purchaser as ownership.
Many businesses do not allow refunds for functional products without a non-trivial restocking fee (e.g. Best Buy).
I assume most car dealers don’t accept returns, but if they did they’d have to depreciate the car prior to giving you any money back, and you definitely won’t get anything back for registration fees, taxes, inspection fees, loan fees, etc.
I think it is solely for the customer’s benefit & approval rating to implement this system so obvious to a child. If Apple can prove to themselves that people will buy *more* products ($$) overall if they know they can sample&test choices, then I forsee this happening. Otherwise, unlikely (sadly).
it is general policy for software, music, movies, pay per view, etc. that you pass your money over for X. you obtain a non-exclusive use license for variable duration, access to a copy of X in one form or another, and there it is.
basically, the only exception is lawyers who bury under whereas clauses a full and complete takeover (theft) of all your base and rights.
contained in the Universal Copyright Acts is language that has been interpreted by the high courts of many countries, including the US Supreme Court, a right-of-use that enables you to put that copy in any number of forms and places, as long as they are all under your control, and only one is used, and any rights that may transfer with the original release of X go with it if you sell X legally, and you have to transfer or destroy any of those right-of-use copies.
you can structure the payment any damn old way you want to, and that’s Fallon’s brief. give something back to the community as a trial period.
Apple will refund your money if you don’t like an app, but they limit the number of apps you can do it for. Good luck Fallon.
Here’s the procedure, http://gizmodo.com/5886683/how-to-get-a-refund-from-the-app-store. I know it works since a few of my customers have succeeded.
Thanks for the link. It sure looks like Apple has already covered all the reasons one would need to return an app. Looks like you have solved the problem for many people who were not aware of this option. (My solution, to use a umpc, is not appropriate for most, but it does make it unnecessary to buy separate apps for portable use.)
Actually you can generally get all your money back from Apple now, it’s just not as easy as it could be. You have to follow the “report a problem” link on the e-mail receipt and explain the problem you have.
You can say to Fallon that at least he’s not dealing with the ridiculous prices — averaging $60 — for modern game console titles. You might get a small pittance back for “trading in” one of those carts or discs, but at least the initial cost wasn’t as painful to begin with.
I put it to my sons this way: Would you rather take a chance on _one_ $40 to $60 game to not be a stinker, or would spending that same amount on 20 to thirty iOS games not improve their odds of realizing several top notch gems, even if a few might not be up to snuff?
While we’re at it, let’s improve the buying experience in the App Store.
– Why should I have to navigate off of iTunes to see a video of an app in action?
– Why are developers limited to just five screenshots?
– By bumping up the maximum number of screenshots, we can do away with the DOCTORED shots that we see. You know, where two screenshots are artfully tilted within the same tiny frame, where you can’t make out any real detail, while giant WordArt letters cross the image with STUNNING VISUAL DISPLAY and IN APP UPGRADES and the like..?
I have a better question: Why do we need iTunes at all just to buy stuff. Amazon can sell me anything I want through my browser, and I can put the software, music, or video anywhere I choose on my Windows or Android devices using file explorer. From what I’ve heard, iTunes is 70 MB of crapware that people put up with to feed their iDevices.
99.99% of people purchasingiTunes content – apps, music, video, books — want to consume it on the device they are purchasing it on – a Mac or Windows PC, iPhone , iPad , Apple TV. It makes no sense to sell it via a browser. Apple and Amazon are NOT in the same market.
You’re conveniently ignoring the fact that Apple lets you buy apps via iTunes, which completely destroys your argument. In any case, on either platform, it makes perfect sense to shop on the PC instead. Some might be paranoid, but personally, I just prefer shopping on a larger screen, and entering long numbers with a real keyboard.
It should go without saying, but in case it does not, the store imbedded in iTunes is still browser-based, and inferior to any stand-alone experience, PC or mobile.
My wife can’t purchase anything “on” her 5th-gen iPod — it doesn’t run iTunes or connect to the internet. I seriously doubt that 99.99% of iTunes purchases are made from the device the content is intended for.
In our all-Linux household, we must run XP in a virtual machine in order to purchase content from Apple. We then manually copy it to the music library on our home server, and from there we load it onto whatever device(s) we wish to keep a copy on.
I’ve asked my wife to stop asking for iTunes gift cards for Christmas and ask for Amazon instead. Far less hassle getting the content we’re paying for into our central library and onto the devices we own.
While I’d enjoy the ability to force a refund, developers can and sometimes do offer freemium/trial versions of their apps. If they don’t, it’s primarily on them.
So, they should copy Android again?
I think that’s a good idea… So surprised people have dealt with it so long already.
I’m not. The kid is 100% correct. Apple is greedy.
Fallon has his dad’s gene’s, for sure 🙂 How about letting him write a post now and then on whatever topic he’d like to? I find it quite refreshing to listen to or read what kids have to say, quite a few of them actually, pretty much everywhere.
Perhaps he’s already posting under a pseudonym. 🙂
Sounds like Fallon wants the “Google” manners. Try an android phone.
Fallon is not alone in not having lost any teeth. My own six year old son, who will be seven in January, has not lost any teeth, though he does have one that is getting loose.
Fallon wishes your son good luck with the Tooth Fairy!
Which tree did the apple fall closer to mama ? Fallon is photogenic.
Wives tale is that the longer a kid’s teeth stay in, the better (harder, less cavities) they tend to have. And the canine teeth get longer and develop holes with which you can easily suck milk out of a glass… or other stuff.
I’ve got to say, I’ve been burned by the Apple App store too. The thing that bugs me is when you pay good money for an app and then Apple later pulls it for some reason. It’s fine if I restore from iTunes (who does that anymore) but when I restore from iCloud I loose everything that Apple deems outmoded or redundant to it’s offerings. This most recently happened with an app called photobeamer and I’ve yet to see something comparable for iOS. I think if Apple pulls an app that I paid for they should refund my money or at least their 30% cut. This happens more times than you might think and it the one thing that really sucks about the app economy. No one owns anything anymore, we just license it.
Yow – I didn’t realize iCloud backups don’t keep everything! Good thing I still routinely sync to iTunes – even easier now that they finally offer wifi sync. But still a pain.
App management is indeed a nightmare. I cringe as apps get updated and older devices like my ipad 1 will start to get left behind. I have a separate iTunes library on a second machine, but it feels like every time I turn around its updating from my other libraries or the store :p. Multiple device management – esp with different iOS versions – is non-existent!
Apple typically does not offer refunds unless the app was misrepresented. But if you do return the app, Apple keeps their cut and the developer ends up paying it.
Apple refund clause: Bad for developers?
http://news.cnet.com/apple-refund-clause-bad-for-developers/
App Store refunds will not bankrupt developers
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2009/03/app-store-refunds-will-not-bankrupt-developers/
The ArsTechnica article seems to contradict the intent behind the “Report a Problem” link in an earlier post. I wonder if Apple just ignores reported problems or most people have been trying to get refunds without using that particular procedure.
Fallon is onto something… and in the old days, it was called shareware.
There really needs to be some sort of demoware shareware… although, at one level, developers can and do provide free “lite” versions of their apps.
Maybe more should!
Ah, from the mouths of babes. Sometimes we adults should listen. Obviously a very intelligent kid. Good looking too. Mama Cringley must be proud.
Since EU consumer rights mandate a six day cooling off period on any online purchase aren’t apple already legally required to give any EU citizen a full refund if they ask for it within that time?
It’s a pretty basic level of consumer rights, I have never tried to get a refund like that but I suspect they would have no option but to comply if they want to do business in the EU.
Rest of the world, feel free to continue begging them for scraps.
Er, us cretins in the rest of the world can already get refunds as has been pointed out. And if you try to abuse your EU protections to game the system I’ll wager it’s just as legal for them to just stop future transactions from you, just like they can close or freeze abusive accounts elsewhere.
Laws like you cite are great for companies not doing the right thing. Apple isn’t one of them…
If Apple isn’t one of them, what is the point of this Cringely column and it’s 80+ comments? Is Cringlely, Fallon, and most of the comments all wrong about Apple’s refund policy for apps?
More ignorant than wrong…
The beauty of Fallon’s idea is that Apple has a crowd based crap meter. The more people want their money back the less its worth and Apple should get rid of it from their store!
Oh and its what true capitalism is about —- crap fails success is in the hands of the consumer!
And Apple should be proud that a kid ( a future Steve Jobs) could clean the Augean stables in a single day.
If Apple followed Fallon’s advice it could use neural computing to reduce the Apps in iTunes to the most profitable and desired by unreturned Apps. And possibly invent the future algorithm to bet Google — now there’s a motive!
This is why I rate my apps 17+… so I don’t have to deal with customers like this.
That aside, the solution is obvious, give the little man his own android device and let him create and install his own custom kernel. Bwahahaha! Go ahe
P.S. Way to go naming him Fallon. With a name like that, he’s going to be a track star, be tougher than any MMC star, or at least know the ins and outs of every emergency room procedure related to trauma.
Fallon was my grandfather’s name. He was born in 1893 the son of a Missouri horse trader and tobacco farmer. Fallon earned a journalism degree from the University of Michigan then served as an artillery lieutenant in France during World War I. As a newspaper editor in small southern towns in the 1920s and 30s he was forced to move more than once because of the KKK. My mother, who is now 88, remembers waking to a wooden cross burning on their lawn. Fallon’s five brothers became engineers, geologists, medical doctors, and one was a celebrated rum runner named Moreau. Another was a psychiatrist and longtime neighbor of Bill Gates. My Fallon is every bit as big a character as his great-grandfather was and is very proud of his name.
My brother named his boy Fallon after the Louis L’Amour book of the same name. http://www.louislamour.com/novels/fallon.htm.
AWESOME COMMENT SYSTEM IS AWESOME.
Blank lines == submit. Awesome!
I’d like to hear more about the celebrated rum runner, Moreau. Professionals are all very well, but having a rum runner in the family would tend to enliven the Thanksgiving get togethers.
Moreau imported whiskey at night from the Bahamas into Florida on a fast boat with a Liberty engine until he was almost caught and had to dump $10,000 worth of booze off Bimini. That was too close for Mo, who returned with his ill gotten gains to spend the next 50 years as a farmer and as president of the Bank of Tuckerman in Arkansas.
[…] –Robert X. Cringely’s son, Fallon […]
I don’t own any Apple products, so this is kind of strange to me. But wouldn’t it be enough to have a trial system for the apps? Almost 100% of all the apps in the Windows Phone store have some kind of trial; isn’t the same true on iTunes? A mandatory “try before you buy” system for all the apps (be it reduced time or functionality) would solve your problem, I think.
I once spent about $4,000 on Electronics Workbench, a group of electronic design and simulation software including UltiBoard and MultiSim. Then I found that certain features didn’t work, adding parts was nearly impossible (even with the instructions). Technical support was terrible with a different person replying because the previous one had just left the company.
Then I got an updated version of the software and it got worse. So I told them I was uninstalling it and demanded a refund. Think about this; demanding a software refund. Unheard of at the time. They refused point blank.
Few month later after my constant nagging the head of Electronics Workbench phoned and offered me half my money back. I took the very latest brochure and started going through all the advertised features that didn’t work. A couple of days later I got a full refund.
At least with the AppStore the cost model has changed. Rather than paying $40 per game it’s a small fraction of the cost.
Likewise electronic publishing won’t fully take off until the magazine you buy on your iPad is a small fraction of the cost of the printed edition.
Logically, it seems that ebooks should be cheaper because of the much lower cost of distribution. However, in a market based system, where prices are set based on maximizing total income, ebooks may be more valued because of search-ability and portability. Of course, in the long run, printed book prices will rise because few high quality copies will be printed due to very low demand. And it will always be cheaper to run off a cheap copy on your own printer than to pay someone else to do it and ship it.
For eBooks, particularly magazines, I think the price structure is wrong. It’s priced to be the most that someone will pay, but that may not necessarily be what will make publishers the most.
You’ve got to remember that when you produce a product you need to make as much as you can off each unit. Because you don’t want to have warehouses filled with product you want the most money returned for the least amount of product produced. Less product reduces your risk.
Electronic publishing is different as there’s no warehouse filled with stock. You can go for a much bigger audience. Cringley.com is only one column but millions read it. A good technical magazine in the UK probably sells about 50k copies, others less. But it’s a volitile medium; people see it as something that will be deleted rather than kept for any length of time.
So between free and $8 is a value where you’ll get many more readers. And at that point you’ll then start to make much more profit.
Plus, and this is important, there’s distribution. In the UK many newsagents have closed. Those that remain only stock a core element of magazines. Supermarkets stock a subset of those. The store which was the best for stocking magazines was Borders, but they’re long gone. So even if someone was looking to buy your publication they may not be able to. It’s a problem I have trying to find electronics magzines without a special trip to a city centre bookstore.
Electronic publishing can be the saviour of printed media, but only if they get the price right. At the moment publishers haven’t figured out they’d be better to burn their printed business for eletronic. If they don’t, someone else will (remember Steve Jobs said similar about a new product taking away sales from the old. Better to make it your product that taking it away!).
Great idea, but there’s no way Apple would refund money… they need to keep their status as the World’s Richest Company, even if it’s from the wallets of children…
[…] – Robert X. Cringely’s son, Fallon […]
So thankful for this, was worried about who would carry on this noble crusade but now sure we will be in good hands after his daddy retires.
Bob Timmons is right. The purchase price of Android apps are fully refundable for 15 minutes after purchase. Afterwards, Google suggests contacting the developer directly.
http://support.google.com/googleplay/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=134336&topic=2450225&ctx=topic
Bottom line is that Fallon represents the digital kids of today who, like it or not, in about 30 years will be the ones helping to set policy at Apple. Tim Cook and Phil Schiller’s generation will be out of the decision making loop by then. Fallon’s generation will pretty much do what makes sense to them. Yep Fallon will have the last laugh.
Well hell who knows if Apple will still be the dominate marketing force in 30 years anyway.
Smart kid. It would have to be limited to one return per product release, naturally. Perhaps there would be other ways to game the system that would need limits, but overall it ought to increase revenue for the developers. One interesting case might be the apps that are pretty expensive but the user only wants to use once. I’d rather have 10% of $50 than 0% of $50. Even with return as the intention, the developer benefits, and I’ve read that there are ways to make unlicensed copies of apps on mobile devices, so that would be reduced with a sliding scale.
In the Android store, there’s a kludge where people get a free app and then they can choose to support it with a payment key, which gets listed as a separate app. That can be mere gratitude, ad removal, extra features, etc. Not entirely unlike the kaji shareware keys of yesteryear.
It’s ugly though – the App Stores need to integrate these various payment models into their API’s. Perhaps Fallon ought to brainstorm the various corner cases and then publish his protocol before one of these corporate Bozos (Bezos?) decides to file for a patent on it.
There would be some difficult engineering involved in implementing this — if you remove an app from iTunes, how do you ensure it was removed from all your mobile devices? I think developers would have to support this strongly and make the case to Apple that this would be profitable before they’d consider tackling the work.
Curious that there aren’t more of us Android developers here in the comments, or at least I’ve seemed to have missed them. I reckon Cringely’s demo seems to skew a bit older.
Anyway, the kludge to which you refer is a conspicuous limitation of Android which they are slowly getting around to fixing. It can also be worked-around by the Marketplaces. B&N to their credit has a very nice, integrated try-before-you-buy solution. I’m hoping Amazon and Google catch-up in this regard shortly.
We had a decent number of immediate returns on our single, fairly esoteric app. Maybe around 25-30%. After we added a Demo version, returns fell off a cliff. The Demo still gets a decent number of downloads, but not sure it’s translating into very many sales. For this app, which was largely meant as a learning exercise for ourselves anyway, we are fine with it. For our next app, which is supposed to be our bread and butter, I’ll be sorely disappointed if the experience repeats.
You named your boy for Jimmy Fallon?
Or are you going to go highbrow now and claim it was The Prestige?
[…] Apple is greedy says Fallon Cringely My son Fallon, who is six and still hasn’t lost any teeth, has a beef with Apple, iTunes, and the iOS App Store. “Apple is greedy,” Fallon says. But he has come up with a way for Cupertino to improve its manners through a revised business model. […]
This could and should be made to work.
It would make it easier to charge more for high quality software without fear that no one would try it. A high price might actually be an incentive to download and try something.
It would get people to actually use the app immediately, before the refund period expired, which could improve the rating accuracy and give quicker feedback to developers. It would refine the rating system, with a retention curve + ratings from those who kept the software.
And no one need feel cheated.
It should be optional for developers, though. A 99 cent puzzle game would not be a good candidate for this method of sale.
Bad idea.
Many apps are single-use only or only required in specific cases.
This suggestion would open up so many ways to fraudulently use products and then uninstall them at no cost.
I’m having a hard time thinking of any app that is single-use by design. But any app may very well be used only once or twice by a particular purchaser. In that case the developer should realize that that customer really did not find it very useful to him and should be glad to give a refund, perhaps in exchange for feedback about how the purchaser was disappointed or how the purchase was made by mistake.
I like the idea of a limited use app that lets you try out all its features. The limitation could be something like not being able to save the results of your sessions or only being able to use the app for a fixed number of hours. This seems fair to all concerned parties to me.
The Windows Store uses this method. App developers can offer a trial period where they can limit the feature set anyway they like. Or they can limit the software after the trial period expires. This mirrors traditional pc software trials, except for the hassle with licence keys.
As does B&N. You may find interesting my comment a couple posts above. I expect Google and Amazon will get around to aping it sooner or later. Provided there’s not a patent troll parked on the idea.
I couldn’t help but notice the picture of a lemon on the wall behind Fallon. It sounds like Apple needs its own set of lemon laws or rules.
Wow, he’s grown a lot!
I like the way your kid thinks. Here is one of the evils with the closed systems we have with Apple and even Google. There isn’t an open market for these products where the consumer can shop for the best price and store policy. There is a reason I shop at Costco and its because of their liberal return policy and favorable prices. Stores like Target and Best Buy have terrible return policies and I will think twice about buying there if there is the same product somewhere else at the same, or maybe even higher, price.
I don’t see this changing, sadly.
I like.Thinks for your sharing.
Apple is missing an opportinity to make even more money. It is the “no returns” policy that artificially forces low app prices. If it were easy to return apps for a refund there would be no risk in trying a more expensive app. People are willing to throw away a dollar or too on a risk. If you want proof look at the $550 million Power Ball. When apps get into the $5 to $10 dollar range, I personally look for solid reviews before purchasing.
From time to time, I’ll pull out one of my “laws” to address some conversation at hand such as “No untested feature goes unpunished”, but in this case a more appropriate one is:
“Ideas do no dominate culture. Culture dominates ideas.”
One of the wonderful aspects of raising children is that there is little culture to restrict ideas. That wide eyed innocence of pondering the possible is precious and should be nurtured.
Sounds like a great kid.
Not only apple, every android products supplier are greedy
Give me a break, the apps are like $5. It is the cheapest gaming platform EVER. I couldn’t even buy games for the Atari 30 years ago for that even adjusting for inflation.
You are seeing low quality games, because the market has become so soft people won’t even pay $5 for a game anymore, well you get what you pay for.
maryland antiques…
[…]Apple is greedy says Fallon Cringely[…]…
OptionsXO…
[…]Apple is greedy says Fallon Cringely[…]…
Sounds like a great idea!
I’ve not bought that many apps, but I got burned recently and discovered that I can’t have a refund, even though the app does not do what it actually says it will do.
I bought Wifi2Hifi – it says it will work with “whatever audio program is playing on your computer”. Well, I bought it for use with Propellerhead Reason, and it works with everything I tried except for that program!
Apple told me to contact the developer. The developer just ignores me.