Apple needs to build in proper software support for app trials. You shouldn't need two copies of the apps in the app store (each with their own ratings and comments). You should be able to purchase the full version of the app and keep your existing data (tricky to do unless the developer builds in code to send your data to the server and load it back into the paid version of your app, since apps can't share data).

You're right that trials should be represented as a first-class concept in the App Store, but right now the best solution is already fairly elegant: in-app purchases for free apps. That lets you sell the upgrade to the full version from inside the trial version, and avoids any issues with data migration.

I hope they also introduce a real "try before you buy" option for all paid apps that wish to support a trial period.

Today's new feature seems like a promotion of apps that offer a "lite" version. It makes "lite" apps more discoverable, but doesn't come close to offering a trial option (and I'm not sure why 9to5mac believes that making a few free apps discoverable will help "fight app piracy")

It looks like it's more of a curation strategy. It looks like they want to reduce the amount of noise in the App Store by getting rid of the Free vs Paid Apps split. The first step was allowing In-App Purchase for Free Apps.

Lack of this prevents me from buying tons of apps. The idea of spending money with no promise of ROI is pretty hard for me.

I'd like to see the addition of videos to go with screenshots on the app description pages. A good video walk through is sometimes better than a lite version or a time bombed trial. It would be fantastic for games.

The solidly financial reason for Apple to do this would be to fight refunds.

No idea if there are app-return-rate numbers, but doing refunds isn't a cheap process.

The solidly financial reason for Apple to improve the quality of the App Store is to sell more software, encourage quality app development, and ultimately sell more devices.

In reality, Apple adds sections like this to the App Store all the time, in order to feature quality software. It's nothing remarkable.

Under what circumstances does Apple even issue refunds? The app store terms of service is pretty clear within the first few paragraphs that all sales are final.

http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/us/terms.html

That may be true, but in practice Apple issues refunds to anyone who asks.

My understanding of this is that the developers have to pay 100% of the refund, even though they only got 70% of the revenue. Does anybody know if that is, in fact, the case?

That was not the case for me. I've seen some refunds in my financial report, but apple only took their 70% back, not the full 100%.

There is a scary clause in the agreement which says they could do that, but to my knowledge they never have. All of the scary blog posts on the subject were worried speculation, not actual applications of that policy.

This is worrying. Apple have a history of treating developers badly with the App Store. They might start enforcing that rule someday.

>Apple have a history of treating developers badly with the App Store.

Citation?

In iTunes, Go to Purchase History, 'Report a problem'. Give a reasonable sounding reason why, and it's usually granted.

It's widely accepted that there's a 90-day refund policy [citation needed].

If I'd known I could do this, I wouldn't be so cautious about app purchases!

I have heard each user can only do this once. If you try to do this more than once, they will likely not accommodate you.

This is what I was told when I requested a refund. I have only had the need to make one refund request, so I can't say whether it is true.

The most interesting thing was that they don't do anything to take the app back. I received a refund, but still have the app on my phone. In fact I think it's even been updated since without a problem.

Here's a snippet from the email from Apple support.

"I have reversed the charge for the accidental purchase you reported. Please note that the iTunes Store Terms of Sale state that all sales are final, so this is a one-time exception."

Do you know of an instance of this actually happening? I know about the scary clause, but I've never heard of it actually being applied. It's become something of an urban legend.

You state this as though it's a fact, so I assume you have some citation of it, you know, actually happening to someone?

There's no W-9, you are not an Apple employee. You're an independent contractor / company. Normatively the IRS only witholds taxes on employee pay.

You’re thinking of a W-2. The W-9 is what some U.S. companies (like Apple) have to create for bookkeeping purposes, when the government suspects the payment mechanism could be used to evade taxation. Since my company is a sole proprietorship without a payroll department, I wasn’t exempt from the W-9 deduction, so I needed to fill one out when I applied as a developer.

Your comment has nothing to do with the policy's of apple. They keep the 30% of the cost and take the 100% out of revenue.

It has everything to do with the comment I was replying to. Specifically the part quoted below:

> (I’m not sure how the IRS W-9 cut is handled; that’s about 28% in the U.S. It would suck if the IRS keeps that cut until tax time.)

I have no idea why this comment is here....total accident, think I was shooting at something else.

I really hope this practice extends into all app stores. It would only be bad for people who make bad apps.