[eharris560]

I think they should implement a partial rights to app publishing contract for paid apps

[Laura Knotek]

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

If a user no longer wants to use an app, or if he/she finds another app he/she likes better, why would the user have any obligation toward the developer of the app that is no longer desirable?

[busngabb]

They do need to invest more in app developers. Keeping them sweet and paying for some serious exclusives is perhaps the most important thing right now, as the platforms are all pretty equal on terms of performance, its public perception of marketplace strength that seems to be used to judge these days.

A lot of those "pulling out of Windows Phone" recently have just been doing so as a publicity stunt. The media is hot on the idea of Windows Phone failing and will promote developers who pull out.

[dlusted]

The clue was in the title....
How to protect end users who have paid for an app to be tried into a contract for said app dev to provide support and updates for a given term, and not just leave the platform (example Carbon twitter client) after the end user has paid for app. As, as soon as they pull out; the app is removed from Store.
So therefore if you require a hard reset or change your device, the said app will no longer be available even though you've purchased it.....

[Laura Knotek]

The clue was in the title....
How to protect end users who have paid for an app to be tried into a contract for said app dev to provide support and updates for a given term, and not just leave the platform (example Carbon twitter client) after the end user has paid for app. As, as soon as they pull out; the app is removed from Store.
So therefore if you require a hard reset or change your device, the said app will no longer be available even though you've purchased it.....

Ok. That makes more sense. It is actually about preventing developers from abandoning users, rather than users abandoning developers.

[GreenScrew]

To an extent there isn't a lot of lure for well established apps to expend dev dollars on an immature platform until its matured but on the other hand you'd think the opportunity for new/upstart initiatives on a platform with less competing apps as WP has would be appealing. Hard for a new seedling to get going in a mature forest but it will take off in an open meadow...

[snowmutt]

Sorry, there is nothing to do here. I understand the frustration, but if Microsoft wants developers, they can't attach ultimatums to it. Why would developers come to WP if MS holds a gun to their head, especially if WP isn't helping them earn money?

A growing ecosystem and assistance to developers can get them here, but profit is the only thing that will keep them here.

[eharris560]

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

If a user no longer wants to use an app, or if he/she finds another app he/she likes better, why would the user have any obligation toward the developer of the app that is no longer desirable?

if the app is popular MS would have the rights to keep the app in the market as is, are rights to purchase the app for 2x the development cost.

[summer600]

Sorry, there is nothing to do here. I understand the frustration, but if Microsoft wants developers, they can't attach ultimatums to it. Why would developers come to WP if MS holds a gun to their head, especially if WP isn't helping them earn money?

That is not what the OP means. He suggests MS should implement some form of publication rights to MS for published paid apps that have users who invested money. This would allow MS to keep the app published even though the app developer abandoned the app and hence prevent loss of apps after say a reset of your Phone. It would also mean MS keeps apps online at their cost to support users, ie. have their bought apps available even after the Developer abandons the platform.

I would hope however such means will not really be needed and the number of developers abandoning WP will diminish.

[SOMEnameItried]

That's fixed pricing. I don't find that fair for the dev to have to accept 2x the dev cost. It maybe a better deal to some, and at the same time it would be horrible to others.

For example:
If Facebook pulled out, MS would pay 2x the price of dev hours for the app. For FB, that cost is easily not justified. They'd have to take in account what kind of cashflow is coming in from that app / asset (patents) and negotiate like any other business would. Plus this might end up being a rights issue where if they (MS) purchase it, who is liable for account info and problems?

So in regular terms:
If you decided to leave your home, and the community relied on all the things you did for it and how it was presented, we could demand rights to your home for 1/3 less of the after market value. Let's say you did some upgrades, and your home was in great condition too. You'd be pretty pissed.

Now I understand the concern of holding onto the software. Part of that problem is the registration for devs. Google does a flat registration of $25.00 while MS does $100.00 per year. If MS made it a flat fee, you wouldn't have to worry about developers dropping their apps as much. As an app dev, I wouldn't want to continue to publish something if there was no profit.

Cheers,
Kelly

[vormison]

I am not well versed in development or publishing. From a user perspective, no one cares where the apps are coming from. MS needs to publish more games themselves and find new developers or set up studios to develop apps and games for their platform. When info first came out about development, it seemed as though WP would be the easiest platform to develop for - perhaps this is why we have so many independently made apps of high quality- such as those from Rudy Hyun. However, why would a big team with high overhead develop for WP right now?

From what I understand, the Windows Phone team or segment is the same that handles the Xbox 360 portion. Everything, however, seems extremely segregated. By now, the overall picture of what they are trying to accomplish should be set in stone but it's hard for anyone - developers, users, etc. to figure out exactly what in the **** MS is doing on the WP standpoint.

[eharris560]

That's fixed pricing. I don't find that fair for the dev to have to accept 2x the dev cost. It maybe a better deal to some, and at the same time it would be horrible to others.

For example:
If Facebook pulled out, MS would pay 2x the price of dev hours for the app. For FB, that cost is easily not justified. They'd have to take in account what kind of cashflow is coming in from that app / asset (patents) and negotiate like any other business would. Plus this might end up being a rights issue where if they (MS) purchase it, who is liable for account info and problems?

So in regular terms:
If you decided to leave your home, and the community relied on all the things you did for it and how it was presented, we could demand rights to your home for 1/3 less of the after market value. Let's say you did some upgrades, and your home was in great condition too. You'd be pretty pissed.

Now I understand the concern of holding onto the software. Part of that problem is the registration for devs. Google does a flat registration of $25.00 while MS does $100.00 per year. If MS made it a flat fee, you wouldn't have to worry about developers dropping their apps as much. As an app dev, I wouldn't want to continue to publish something if there was no profit.

Cheers,
Kelly

FB would not be covered under this because it is a free app.
In one form or another MS is going to be blame for things like this. So why not have some preventive measures. This is the reason I argue against independent 3rd party developed apps (even though they have pushed the industry alone). End user is subject to that developer's mood. They stop support if the wind is blowing wrong that day. Speaking for myself I don't buy WP for the apps. I buy WP because like it, apps are just a plus. All this does is make me reluctant to buy apps from independent developers.

[SOMEnameItried]

I don't think you can eliminate cost just because it's free. Some apps that are free have ads to generate revenue, so when they check the books, I'm sure those people would still have to negotiate. Plus there is always a price on something; either what's going into it or the cost to the consumer.

Of course, if the app was open source, then it may work.

That's why I say if a lot of WP8 users have that concern then MS should expand the registration to not expire. It would be the easiest change to help the apps to stay alive in the market. You and the Devs would be happy.. and probably encourage more development.

Anyway, it's an example.

As for me, I'm not an App-hungry individual too, but I enjoy making apps.

Cheers,
Kelly

[eharris560]

The original question was directed towards paid apps. People don't really feel suckered if developers removes or stops supporting apps that were free.

[SnailUK]

I dont see the issue.

If the developer is leaving the platform it's generally their fault, they've either priced the app wrong, got a app people don't want, or not tried hard enough to market the app.

Rather than just walk off in a huff, they should look at their pricing, see if dropping the price helps, or maybe releasing an ad supported version, or at least try to promote the app on websites like this.

Apple don't bare any

[eharris560]

I dont see the issue.

If the developer is leaving the platform it's generally their fault, they've either priced the app wrong, got a app people don't want, or not tried hard enough to market the app.

Rather than just walk off in a huff, they should look at their pricing, see if dropping the price helps, or maybe releasing an ad supported version, or at least try to promote the app on websites like this.

Apple don't bare any

I agree with you. However, this is a problem WP doesn't need right now. People already complain about missing apps. If developers removing paid apps become a regular thing. WP will have a bigger problem.

[freestaterocker]

I dont see the issue.

If the developer is leaving the platform it's generally their fault, they've either priced the app wrong, got a app people don't want, or not tried hard enough to market the app.

Rather than just walk off in a huff, they should look at their pricing, see if dropping the price helps, or maybe releasing an ad supported version, or at least try to promote the app on websites like this.

Apple don't bare any

You're assuming they're all leaving due to lack of profit. This may be the case for some, but I think something bigger is happening here. I think at least some of these devs are being lured away by Google as part of their ongoing struggle to keep WP8 from becoming competitive. Their CEO has had a hard-on to destroy MS for ages.

[Daniel Ratcliffe]

You're assuming they're all leaving due to lack of profit. This may be the case for some, but I think something bigger is happening here. I think at least some of these devs are being lured away by Google as part of their ongoing struggle to keep WP8 from becoming competitive. Their CEO has had a hard-on to destroy MS for ages.

This is why I'm staying exclusive to WP. The app I'm developing will be developed by a different person for each platform. Then Google can be like "Get that app off the WP Store and we'll give you a huge paycheck" to the Android developer, except the Android developer ISN'T the WP developer. And I wouldn't easily bow to a bribe from Google.