On Nov 16, 2:45 pm, String <[email protected]> wrote: > I use shared prefs and have code like this when I first start the paid > version:
Thanks. That may help. > > > I've tried the DEMO and LICENSE, where a license app will unlock the > > DEMO app and make it full. > > Yeah, I've been round that block too. I did eventually get to a place > where I wasn't getting complaints; my license had a launcher intent > that popped a dialog telling the user to run the "trial", and a button > to remove itself from the launcher. Seemed to cover most of the idiots > out there. ;^) > > But the kicker was, my sales increased several-fold when I ditched the > trial/license approach in favor of just having separate free & paid > versions. My best explanation is that it just makes more sense to > novice users; the free/paid paradigm is more widely understood than > trial/license. Or, in the words of one of my testers, "I don't want to > buy a license, I want to buy the app!" Whatever... the bottom line is > free/paid makes more money. > We are on the same page. I can *hope* for the several fold increase, because this will be somewhat of a pain to implement. I think I am reaching a point where some people are finding my paid app first - you don't have to scroll as far you used to. If there are people willing to pay for the app without even reading the description, much less try the DEMO version, I should probably accomodate them. I can't wait to introduce content plugins, where you install an app and then it enables new classes of content in the main app. Then again, maybe I can wait. Who knows what the market will make of that. ;) Nathan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
