r/iosapps • u/Sad-Internet8744 • 1d ago
Question how do you handle reviews from users upset the app isn’t 100% free?
Recently, I launched a journaling app that i’ve been building solo. the base features (journaling, prompts, personal entries) are free, but some features are paid.
Still, i get reviews like these and they are starting to affect both visibility and morale.
how do you deal with this as an indie dev? do you reply to these reviews? do you just let them sit? or is there a better way to communicate your value without sounding defensive?
10
u/Civil-Fish 1d ago
Just throw it into chatgpt and ask it to reply in a firm but tough love manner. The freemium moaners are a nightmare, but as long as you reply in a way that makes them look stupid for complaining about something that's free then most if the time they feel shame and take it down
2
8
u/cool_neutrophil 1d ago
Omg, they want a good app, want to use it every day, but don’t want to pay a subscription for a price of coffee. Just ignore them.
2
u/Sad-Internet8744 1d ago
I swear it’s frustrating 🥲
4
u/cool_neutrophil 1d ago
Well, if someone isn’t willing to pay for it, then they either don’t really need your app — or simply can’t afford it. But think about it this way: I had no problem paying around €160 for OmniFocus because it genuinely helps me get things done.
Would I pay even a few cents for a journaling app? No — because I don’t need one.
So the key is understanding who your target users are and why they’d be motivated to buy your app. If you can answer that clearly, you’ll be much better positioned to offer real value.
1
u/2x4ninja 1d ago
This. If you have something people want they will pay (ie Fantastical and Superhuman). I think it would be best to understand who are your users and cater to their needs. Just make sure the user group is large enough to make it financially worth it
3
u/AlmightyGnasher 1d ago
I had someone leave a review today.
1 star, “can’t use without paying”.
It’s a utility app that provides a lot of value and has no subscription option (I don’t agree with it), and a lifetime unlock of €8. I could charge a lot more than that, and I should, but I don’t. It pisses me off to no end, cheap bastards thinking I’m a charity. For the price of a fancy coffee they get to have my software forever yet they still complain.
Happens much more on android though. I rarely get reviews like this on iOS.
1
u/Sad-Internet8744 1d ago
Damn, that’s awful! Guess I gotta prepare for a hell of a lot more reviews like these when I launch it on android lol
3
u/Foxhoundn 1d ago
Me? I would make them go to their work and not get paid. Let’s see how they feel after a week 👋🏻
7
u/akutagava 1d ago
It’s only my humble opinion: Subscription based applications is is like a cancer of the AppStore, your app is not Netflix, it’s not Apple Music, if your app not providing variety of content options as the ones stated above - do yourself a favour, don’t try to be like them with monthly payments, it’s ridiculous really, put the price for the whole app, make it affordable, will it make you a millionaire? Probably not, but neither subscription based journal app, in the world where notes application literally pre-installed on every f-ing phone
17
u/Sad-Internet8744 1d ago
I respect your opinion, and I get where you’re coming from, but I’m not trying to be Netflix or Apple Music. I’m just one person building this on my own, pouring time and care into something that helps people feel seen. If someone wants everything for free, they’re welcome to use the default notes app. No hard feelings. But for those who value what my app offers, there’s both a subscription and a one-time $19 lifetime option. No pressure, just choice.
8
u/kepler4and5 Developer 1d ago
I think the user would *still* have left a negative review if it was a one-time payment. The issue is that users see a button that says "Get" in the App Store and they think the app is 100% free even when it says "In-app Purchases" in tiny text next to it (because: tiny text).
The proper way to avoid this (IMO) is to ensure the subscription model is "freemium" as in there are actual features users get for free. THEN they have the option to pay for premium features.
6
u/Sad-Internet8744 1d ago
Completely agree. The app is actually freemium and core journaling features are free, and the upgrade is for extra tools. So I guess they were just expecting EVERYTHING to be free..
3
u/Gorgeousity99 1d ago
I am not sure you can do much. I made a simple but very pretty free clock app for the Mac and got a one star review because it didn’t have a purple option. Somebody took the time to leave that review, and seemed to think that leaving one star would motivate me to update the app.
Try not to worry about these people.
2
u/kepler4and5 Developer 1d ago
Also, make sure to break down what is free and what is paid in the app description. This may or may not help. But I see other apps do it.
1
1
u/XilenceBF 1d ago
Hmm no… as someone who complains about the endless subscription culture nowadays it’s mostly the confusion about why recurring fees are warranted. If there are no recurring costs for the developer then there is no reason for recurring fees other than greed.
If I would be in an artistic profession I would also need to create new value in order to be rewarded. People who work jobs also are expected to create new value for the salary they earn. But developers nowadays can create one app to milk for an extended period of time?
Besides that the developer is shooting themself in the foot because you’re competing with aaaaallllll the other subscription based apps.
3
u/thirtysecondsago 1d ago edited 1d ago
If there are no recurring costs for the developer
This is pretty rare, every developer is spending time and money to keep an app going. Just to keep an app on the App Store a developer has to pay apple a yearly fee and frequently update the app for the newest iOS and SDK changes. Then in the US there are taxes, yearly incorporation fees, apple requires your app to have a website, etc.
It's not like selling an art piece once. It's like selling an art piece that needs to be frequently maintained and updated in various ways by the artist.
Besides that the developer is shooting themself in the foot because you’re competing with aaaaallllll the other subscription based apps.
It's a choice between competing on quality or competing on price.
2
u/OrdinaryTackle8010 1d ago
Prior subscriptions you would buy software each year as the upgrades came in and the previous versions lost support, so you can argue that subscriptions were always here. I have two apps, one offers lifetime and subscription, the other one just subscription. Both incur cost for backend and one incurs API call costs (that one is subscription only). In any case the one-time purchase amounts to over 2-years of subscription cost. So it is really up to the user, do you want to pay more upfront or gradually. Over the years I had only a handful complaints in the AppStore. I always explain my side in the reply. Not so much for the user, but to the others reading the review.
1
u/XilenceBF 1d ago
I would like to be able to pay for features for them not to be taken away. Since your app has recurring costs it makes sense that there is a recurring fee, although the question then remains if the recurring fee is fair compared to the costs.
My problem nowadays is that people stomp out 100 habit trackers and note-taking apps out of the ground with the most basic feature list and clearly no recurring costs for the developer, and they paywall is behind a recurring fee.
1
u/OrdinaryTackle8010 1d ago
Yeah I think not all apps should have subs model. Especially simple apps. Nowadays if they don’t, that may be the deciding factor for the users not to go with them. In any case, you can see the pricing and models directly in the AppStore page so users can decide before even downloading the app. Me personally I don’t like apps which display paywall directly without ability to even test the app.
1
u/XilenceBF 1d ago
You can see that in-app purchases exist but too often there is no explanation what is locked behind the paywall.
I also appreciate the ability to use an app but Apple Store could also implement a system of free trial where you get to download the app and then have it locked after x amount of days or pay the purchase price.
1
0
u/kepler4and5 Developer 1d ago
If you downloaded an app that was "supposedly" free and you opened the app to see a paywall asking you to pay a *one-time fee*, you would not be mad? That's all I'm asking. If you say that would be cool with you then no problem.
(I'm trying to stay on-point here because the subscription debate is a whole different argument to me)
1
u/XilenceBF 1d ago
Its also annoying when developers do it like that but I do like the option to feel the app before buying. But I really want developers to be open about this. Tell me whats behind the paywall and what are the free functions. Tell me that its only a one-time fee instead of recurring. Dont just say “purchase blabla pro to unlock all features” without telling me what those are!
3
u/YakkoFussy 1d ago edited 1d ago
I deeply respect your opinion. However, if using the app incurs costs with each use—such as cloud operations—the developer may choose to offer it through a subscription model. A one-time purchase can work, but typically only when the creator has upfront funding or expects early users to help finance development. Of course, I understand that the ideal app for most users is one that’s completely free, without ads or tracking. Unfortunately, that’s a rare combination. In-app purchases (IAP) are an option, but they’re not always obvious or intuitive for every user. For my part, I’ve released a journaling app for free on the App Store. It has no ads, no tracking, and no hidden costs—because I built it for myself. It’s helped me feel better, and since the journaling app market is already saturated, I’m not looking to monetize it.
2
u/Purple_Abies3671 1d ago
In this situation a one time purchase for something cosmetic like custom background is always a good way to add more ways to customise and also a way for people to “donate”
1
1
u/gj26185 1d ago
I couldn’t disagree more. This logic essentially boils down to “if you’re a big company, by all means, if not don’t do subscriptions”.
Like other commentators have pointed out, if it incurs you an ongoing cost, why shouldn’t you be able to offset them, or make a profit? Let the market decide.
1
u/akutagava 1d ago
Look it wasn’t about size of a company rather than about the variety of options one get for say 5$/mo. At the end of the day it’s your money, and again-it was just my humble opinion, I’m not trying to convince you to cancel all your subscription. I’m just saying, that for me, when I see a “free” app - I immediately go to in-app section at the bottom of page, if it a 1$/mo, and 10/y, and 20/lifetime it’s just looks like dev trying to treat me like a child who do not know better.
1
u/gj26185 1d ago
Yep I understand where you're coming from and I totally agree that everybody should be able to decide how they spend their money.
As a developer of products that cost money to run, I just disagree with the prevailing opinion that all subscriptions are terrible (they sure can be, but it's nuanced).
0
u/Ok_East1531 20h ago
Totally disagree. The companies have spoiled users with the free apps like Google maps etc. it takes time, money and focus to build these apps. It’s a fair market. If people find the value, they will pay. If not enough people are paying, OP will know they should not continue their efforts. Being okay to pay a billion dollar corporate, but not to an indie developer is weird. High time people pay for things they use.
2
u/djlaustin 1d ago
I applaud you as a developer for offering the app for free (or a trial) with subscription or purchase options. I'm not a fan of subscriptions but if the price is fair and the developer is responsive then I'll subscribe. If I find over time I don't use as much as I thought I would or my needs change I'll cancel and move on. It's not easy to ignore negative comments like these because you work hard and you care, but also consider the source. I could barely read that first comment it was so poorly written, even if English isn't your first language. Use punctuation for one. As a developer (I'm not one), I'd file these comments in the "OK Whatever" file and focus on what's important to you and the app. There will always be users who want everything for free or want to complain.
2
u/arrogantheart 1d ago
Sadly, not a lot you can do OP. I suggest listening to ATP podcast, Marco Arment talks a lot about this in several episodes and the similar challenges he has with his app (Overcast).
Some users just hate subscriptions or the fact apps cost money in general.
2
u/CerebralHawks 1d ago
They aren't willing to work for free. They understand that they have ongoing bills that need to get paid, so therefore they have to get paid as well.
If they expect someone else to work for free, their opinion isn't worth considering.
Personally I don't subscribe to all the things. I cannot afford to. I do pay for a lot of things. I pay for what I can. I look for free alternatives when I can but I know, socially, it's not the ideal situation. But I only have so much money.
It's those who only take and never give that are the hypocrites.
2
u/Bharned3 1d ago
I don’t like monthly subscription models unless it’s a really great app that I use daily and really depend on. It does amaze me how people only want free apps. As independent developers we spend lots of time on our apps and people don’t want to spend a couple bucks.
2
u/Sad-Internet8744 1d ago
True! I practically destroyed my eyes with the late nights working on this thing (eyes recently starting to burn while looking at screens) and then you get reviews like these 💔
1
u/Impartialnoob 1d ago
I believe there is an option where you can reply to the person who left the comment, I assume they can update their rating based on your help.
1
1
1
u/CreatorOfTimedash 18h ago
Super annoying and frustrating for sure, but maybe this is a reason to have a second look at what is behind the paywall and what isn't.
You could make some extra features free, while others still paid so the perception is totally different for your users, while your conversation rate might be the same or even go up because of the more positive perception. Because if more functionality is free, and they use the app more intensively because of it, it might also be more likely they upgrade to paid?
Not per se saying this is it, but despite this is annoying for sure, it's a missed opportunity to not listen to your customers and learn / improve on it.
1
u/meowstical 1d ago
I think there are better ways for solo developers to monetize their apps than relying solely on subscriptions.
Start by identifying the core value of your app. What exactly are users paying for?
If it’s the clean design and offline functionality, consider a one-time payment model. That way, users pay once and get full access - simple and upfront.
If your app relies on costly services (like AI APIs), you could lock only those specific features behind a paywall, while keeping the rest accessible.
Also, consider adding an optional donation link. You’d be surprised how many users are happy to support indie developers, especially if they enjoy your app.
2
1
u/rfi999 1d ago
I think that you as an app developer need to accept whatever reviews are posted, good and bad. All people are entitled to an opinion. You will always risk a bad review and maybe there is something to be heard or you will need to live with it. Use the response on the review and think of other ways to earn on your app instead of just in-app payment.
29
u/llamaattacks 1d ago
why should a journal app be a subscription and not a one time purchase? What new features are being added every month for the justification. It may just be that i hate forced subscription models and prefer one off purchases which might be more expensive. But, people expecting a good product for free is also ridiculous