Wil Shipley of Delicious Monster feels the pain when he can’t sell a paid upgrade to his software through the Mac App Store, and he has sales graphs and logic to prove why Apple’s refusal to allow paid upgrades is bad for both developers and users. When will Apple realize this? follow link
Open Files with Finder's App Switcher
Say you're in the Finder looking at a file and you want to open it with an application that's already running but which doesn't own that particular document. How? Switch to that app and choose File > Open? Too many steps. Choose Open With from the file's contextual menu? Takes too long, and the app might not be listed. Drag the file to the Dock and drop it onto the app's icon? The icon might be hard to find; worse, you might miss.
In Leopard there's a new solution: use the Command-Tab switcher. Yes, the Command-Tab switcher accepts drag-and-drop! The gesture required is a bit tricky. Start dragging the file in the Finder: move the file, but don't let up on the mouse button. With your other hand, press Command-Tab to summon the switcher, and don't let up on the Command key. Drag the file onto the application's icon in the switcher and let go of the mouse. (Now you can let go of the Command key too.) Extra tip: If you switch to the app beforehand, its icon in the Command-Tab switcher will be easy to find; it will be first (or second).
- ExtraBITS for 2 April 2012 (02 Apr 12)
Why the Mac App Store Needs Paid Upgrades
That's great except for one thing. If version ∞ requires a newer version of the OS than 2 did, then you're preventing some people from buying your software.
I've already faced that problem with iOS. My iPod touch is too old to run iOS 5 so there are a lot of apps I can't get until I buy a new device.
Now I understand there are costs to supporting older OSs, but in this case the developer already has a compatible version. Refusing to sell it doesn't seem like a sensible strategy.
This sort of thing is what computers are for!
I'm on the fence on this issue. Upgrades seem like a no-brainer, but it already leads to abuses in the non-App Store world — too many software companies charge upgrade fees in order to get known bugs fixed ("It has these great new features, and it also patches bugs that we're not going to patch in the earlier version"). In-app upgrade purchasing is too easy a way to cripple an app.
Apple would probably need to set standards on how long a product had to be supported before an upgrade fee could be charged. But since Apple has essentially done away with upgrades on their own products (and reduced prices accordingly), I think they will be pushing others to do the same.
I also find migrating non-App Store users to Mac App Store version is a great pain. There are thousands of our existing users wanting to migrate to Mac App Store version at a lesser price. While we get only 50 promo codes per version, we can't give it to every user. Moreover, migrating freely from non-App Store to App Store version will not benefit to Apple as well.
If we make our app free for a limited time, we would lose a huge chunk of our revenue. Similarly, slashing the price to negligible would raise the ranks but when the price is set back to normal it would lose both visibility and also opportunity cost.
But, it would have been great to have an option to set some system to migrate these existing users at a reasonable price covering 30% split of Apple.