How about charging for the apps using a "service model" You could name you apps like
com.foobar.theapp2009q1 com.foobar.theapp2009q2 com.foobar.theapp2009q3 com.foobar.theapp2009q4 When version X expires, the app can launch an Intent to point the user to the newer version. This way it should be seamless. This model should work for some apps (the "service" type, such as dating/matchmaking, accessing real state info database, etc) but not others (such as games, which people think once they paid they own the right to it forever). If you provide a good service, I think people won't mind paying $0.49 per quarter for it ... On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 7:22 PM, snctln <catlin.s...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I am not a Google employee but I hope you don't mind if I chime in > > In the Developer Distribution Agreement it says > > 3.3 You may also choose to distribute Products for free. If the > Product is free, you will not be charged a Transaction Fee. You may > not collect future charges from users for copies of the Products that > those users were initially allowed to download for free. This is not > intended to prevent distribution of free trial versions of the Product > with an "upsell" option to obtain the full version of the Product: > Such free trials for Products are encouraged. However, if you want to > collect fees after the free trial expires, you must collect all fees > for the full version of the Product through the Payment Processor on > the Market. In this Agreement, "free" means there are no charges or > fees of any kind for use of the Product. All fees received by > Developers for Products distributed via the Market must be processed > by the Market's Payment Processor. > > From what I can see I do not think that you will be able to change an > app from "Free" to "Paid". > > One of my apps on the market is a "Lite" version, it only allows the > user to play a limited number of levels. I curious about how easy it > will be to maintain both a "Lite" and a "Full" version of an > application from 1 source tree. Right now I can compile the different > version by changing 1 boolean variable and recompiling... Maybe the 2 > different version have to have different package names, or maybe the > market be able to tell the difference somehow? > > Good luck with your game > > ---snctln > www.snctln.com > > > On Feb 11, 1:03 pm, Robert Green <rbgrn....@gmail.com> wrote: > > Here's the scenario: > > > > The app is on the market for free. The publisher then decides to make > > it a pay app and changes the status. I'm assuming you can just do > > that, but my questions are: > > > > 1) Will the publishing console require us to upload a new version if > > it is to be a pay app, or can we just change it on-the-fly? > > 2) If we can change it on-the-fly, how will that affect users that > > have downloaded the free version? Do they get the license to the paid > > one as well (so they can delete but reinstall the app for free, get > > updates, etc?) > > > > I've finished a game but I've been just waiting for the paid apps to > > come online before publishing it. I'm now thinking that I wouldn't > > mind a 1 week free period before going paid but something felt like > > the users who download it for free would never have to pay even after > > I change it to paid and add some sort of desirable update that makes > > them want to download the new version (and pay then to get it if they > > have to). > > > > Could someone from google please fill us in on this? > > > > Thank you > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
