[android-developers] Re: In app billing...

There is not need to rely on Google to support in app billing. Feel
free to checkout out Single-Click Checkout for in-app Android
payments. The APIs are available to validate a transaction and expose
the full/premium app.

On Feb 3, 5:03 pm, Mark Carter <mjc1...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Interesting points, String.
>
> I was recently thinking about how to change an existing Lite/Pro combo to
> use in-app-upgrade instead.
>
> I can't see a nice way to do it. The best way I can think of is to introduce
> in-app billing to the Lite version and convert the Pro version into some
> kind of "pro key" token app. The Lite version would check for existence of
> this "pro key" app (and validate) if the in-app-upgrade had not been
> purchased.
>
> Does that work?
>
> On 4 February 2011 03:53:38 UTC+7, String <sterling.ud...@googlemail.com>wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, February 3, 2011 2:25:29 AM UTC, hackbod wrote:
>
> > How about using it to be able to put your app up on market as a free trial
> >> version, using in-app billing to unlock the full version?
>
> > I've been thinking about this since the announcement yesterday. I used to
> > think this was a good use for in-app billing, but now I'm not so sure.
>
> > My issue is with how to present the app. That's *app,* singular, because
> > you'll only have one, as opposed to the lite/pro or trial/unlock pairs which
> > are common now. With this current approach, especially lite/pro, users
> > understand what they're getting with the free aspect. They see "Lite" in the
> > title, and they immediately know they're not getting the whole enchilada.
> > Expectations are managed.
>
> > If the app is all-in-one (unlocked through in-app billing), I'm betting
> > many users won't realize that they need to pay until AFTER they install it.
> > It's well established that a large percentage don't read the Market
> > description. So then they'll be annoyed that they didn't get the full
> > version, with crappy 1* Market comments following soon after. Not a recipe
> > for success.
>
> > OTOH, I've had good results with separate lite/pro apps. My top-selling app
> > was fed by a Lite version which rose in the Free rankings of its category,
> > then more recently has fallen back down. But not before the Pro version rose
> > high enough to gain decent visibility on the Paid side, and it's now doing
> > well enough that it doesn't need the support of Lite any more. Moral: with
> > two apps, you get two shots at success.
>
> > I'm not saying that in-app billing to unlock a trial may not be right for
> > some apps, some devs. Just that I, for one, am not convinced.
>
> > String
>
> > --
> > 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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<android-developers%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en

--
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+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en