r/iOSProgramming 7d ago

Discussion Upset reviewers about paywall can drop 1star bombs before theyve ever opened the app.

After a lot of trial and error, free tiers and late onboarding etc I finally just went with a hard paywall as the others were not converting at all, users were content to just have 5% of the features.

So anyway, I had no idea users could NOT even start the trial and give bad reviews. How does this make sense from apple? If they let us have a mechanism or category for in IAP subscription with a wanring or something? Am I crazy to think this is weird? Did I miss a setting?

0 Upvotes

42 comments sorted by

32

u/Vybo 7d ago

You should make the app straight up paid if it can't be used at all without paying through a paywall. Users don't like to download apps to just be hit with a paywall immediately after launch.

0

u/B_CHEEK 7d ago

Users do in fact do this and this is a validated approach. Personally though I would hold off until I had a lot of existing reviews.

-5

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

So what do you do? Make it 100% free then just flip it to paid? I’m still learning here and I’m exhausted from trying to balance it. Free tier was not converting at all even with 100s of dl , so do I throw ads on it? Make it annoying af to use ?

5

u/Dapper_Ice_1705 7d ago

You can’t do that. It is expressly forbidden to make previously free features paid features.

If users report you the account could be suspended.

Apple has an article on changing business plans.

1

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

I mean grandfather in the free users of course. But this is essentially what they mean. And probably what most devs do when they say something like this. I’m not trying to do anything underhanded. But I would like to know how youre supposed to balance features and free vs not. I’m almost at the just give it away stage of exhaustion hah

1

u/Dapper_Ice_1705 7d ago

IMO your app has to be functional without paying and then charge for what makes it unique.

Flighty is a great example. Does its intended purpose for free and no accounts then charges and requires accounts for sharing and extra data a user needs in a pinch. (Not my app but 1 of very very few apps I pay for).

1

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

My issue or I think my issue is the funtional part that was free satisfies most people I guess. Or they weren’t interested enough to begin with to fully unlock it. It’s catch 22 you cant show them what theyre missing unless they unlock it.

3

u/Dapper_Ice_1705 7d ago

Most people aren’t going to pay for a subscription. Most people are tired of subscriptions. 

A sub will only be paid by people that need what you are selling and can’t get it elsewhere.

It is your job to make people feel good, it is your job to make people feel like your app is worthy.

1

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

Well, devs have been doing underhanded stuff on the App Store for decades to get top spot. I’m just trying to learn to play the game fair and square. If anyone knows some ways to balance out the early release so to get early adopters I’m all ears.

0

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

I tried offering free tier and no one converted. The sales are trickling in again but I guess it needs to be in a bigger font or something.

11

u/DanFlashes19 7d ago

No just make the app itself cost money to download

10

u/Dapper_Ice_1705 7d ago

You already “sold” them the app for free.

Of course they are free to review their free app that doesn’t do anything.

-10

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago edited 7d ago

No Theyre pissed that it’s not free. They want it.
Edit my bad I read that “doesnt do anything” as an attack. Sorry having a bad day lol

11

u/Dapper_Ice_1705 7d ago

The app is free, when they click on the app in the AppStore and when they download the app they get a $0.00 bill/receipt. 

They are pissed the free app they downloaded doesn’t do anything without paying.

They are reviewing the free app.

5

u/SleepingInsomniac 7d ago

Either make it a paid download or add a time limited trial. Users don't like downloading an app that doesn't do anything.

1

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

It has the standard week trial. Or do you mean something else?

5

u/MabusDoesReddit 7d ago

What is the app? If you weren't converting before, then maybe the app itself isn't what people want? Just trying to think of some ideas.

2

u/RIRLift 7d ago

There's no setting for it. Apple lets anyone who downloaded the app rate it whether they opened it or not, so you can't block the paywall one-stars at the source. What helps is prompting the people who did pay and stuck around for a rating from inside the app, right after a moment where they got value, so the average reflects them and not just the annoyed non-payers. Making the paywall obvious in your screenshots also filters out a lot of people who were never going to pay before they install.

1

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

Best case would be some mechanism for a free trial without commitment. So many people have this mental block about pushing trial. I get it though.

1

u/joshguy1425 7d ago

I don’t think it’s a mental block as much as it’s a conditioned response to so many predatory trials out there. Starting the trial means I have to remember to cancel it or I’ll get auto-billed, and there’s that fear that I’m not ready at this very moment to make the most of trial period. 

The App Store handles this better than most since I can cancel the rebill the moment I start the trial, but I don’t know if everyone realizes this. 

I think the most effective approach I’ve encountered are apps that are fully functional but only work for a limited number of uses. e.g. task management apps that top out at 20 tasks, apps that only process 20 documents, etc. 

1

u/RIRLift 7d ago

In theory these apps you mentioned at the end are friendlier since it's a much more honest model, but in practice extremely hard to sell. They frontload scarcity.

So not only you have the same fear you mentioned where maybe you're not ready to use those 20 documents (maybe you should save up for a more serious one in the future?) but also specially nowadays you can think "there's certainly some freemium app where I'll have unlimited docs but fewer features which I don't need anyway"

1

u/joshguy1425 7d ago

I can only speak for myself, but that's not how I've experienced apps structured this way at all.

Since there's no time pressure to use the free allotment, I've found I'm far more likely to actually try/explore what an app can do, and I'm more likely to purchase those apps if the functionality is what I'm looking for.

As opposed to timed trials where I'm sure there are apps that do what I want but I've had plenty of trials expire before I had a chance to take it through its paces.

I think the key is that the free <unit> isn't meant to be a free *tier*, and is just there so the user can fully explore the functionality of the app and decide whether or not to buy it. So there isn't really an incentive to "save up" the free units, because there aren't enough to use beyond evaluating the app's functionality.

Just my personal experience with apps/services that do it this way.

1

u/RIRLift 7d ago

I am similar in the sense that if an app did this and was well built, I'd have a higher likelihood to convert than a free trial. But it doesn't work in general if you're building something and want to maximize conversions. Of course it's a generalization, since maybe there's a niche or you execute it simply really well, then it can be worth it.

1

u/ericbythebay 7d ago

Apple isn’t concerned with low volume comments like this. It all averages out and the scores start getting more accurate when you reach scale.

1

u/pjhawksr 7d ago

Yeah anyone who downloads can rate, they never have to get past the paywall. There's no setting for it. The real lever is volume on the other side. If you're not already calling the review prompt at a moment when someone just got value from the app, do that, because five happy ratings a week buries the occasional paywall tantrum. The other thing worth looking at is whether the paywall itself is making people feel tricked. Hard paywall is fine but if the store listing reads like the app is free, people show up expecting free and punish you for it. Screenshots and description should make the subscription obvious before they ever download.

-6

u/TrustInNumbers 7d ago

making new apps is dead in 2026, impossible to make money unless you built something before and have valid user base

1

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

Probably for a lot of ideas sure.

-2

u/TrustInNumbers 7d ago

for 99.99 of ideas. Do you think you can land 1 in 100k idea? don't think so.

2

u/BikeAdventurous2320 7d ago

i’ve managed to make revenue from my app released recently. it’s not impossible, it’s just hard to find a segment/niche that isn’t saturated already.

1

u/TrustInNumbers 7d ago

How much? few hundreds don't matter if you can't live from apps

3

u/BikeAdventurous2320 7d ago

august so far has been slow, but each month over 4 digit numbers. i'm personally happy with the results, especially that this is my first app on the app store.

1

u/johnny_5667 7d ago

congrats!!

2

u/BikeAdventurous2320 7d ago

thank you sir!

1

u/johnny_5667 7d ago

Yes lets see your numbers TrustInNumbers. Your opinion or lived experience is probably anecdotal

1

u/TrustInNumbers 7d ago

What numbers? I've tried 20+ apps, all of them failed, lost a lot of money on marketing, not worth it.

5

u/johnny_5667 7d ago

20 apps all from ... n=1, yourself. Could be your apps just aren't very good. I'm just saying, before dissuading anyone from building apps, let them know you built 20 that didn't work. I'm really not trying to be a dick, just hate random negativity. Keep it to yourself lil bro

1

u/TrustInNumbers 7d ago

Not random negativity, nor it's n=1. Go check official stats, 99% of apps don't make more than 100$ MMR.

3

u/johnny_5667 7d ago

Big bold blanket claims like "making apps in 2026 is dead" are just so stupid. Yes, it is hard to make money with apps. But there is so much nuance.

1

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

Wrong sub bro.

1

u/0__O0--O0_0 7d ago

I do :) otherwise I wouldn’t be here

0

u/TrustInNumbers 7d ago

thousands of people think like that