Database Users

[Q] Request for feedback: increasing my app usage

Hi all,
As a new dev in the android ecosystem, I am looking for other devs feedback on the following.
I have an app with about a few thousands user base. Growing slightly, but also with a decreasing active ratio.
As my revenue is ads driven, I'd like to experiment a few tricks to encourage users to use the app more, without being too intrusive.
A few ideas:
- show a notification after a few days that the app hasn't been used, to encourage the user using it again.
- feature: user can share the app's install page with friends (stimulate organic growth), via a share intent.
-> Devs, any stories on trying something similar?
Any feedback appreciated.

I'm a new developer, old-time programmer. Put 2 apps out December 21, 2009 and I'm approaching a whopping 30 sales; be happy you have 1,000+ (or more)
Wish I could help with the question, but I'm not really sure how to expose apps to a wider audience. I've thought about porting to iPhone/iPad and Windows Mobile to expand my user base. But I'm still pretty new to Android development and want to get more into it before learning yet another programming language right now.
I've actually thought of going to local bars and trying to strike-up conversations with people using smartphones and showing them my apps. Maybe buy them a drink LOL.
I firmly believe that if you have a solid working app and one person uses it, they may tell 5 of their friends and maybe 2 of them will buy it and tell 5 more people of which 1 or 2 might but it. Pyramid type sales but it's slow moving.
What kind of bothers me is all the damn FREE apps out there; I think they should be segregated from the Google Market; I've yet to go to any type of Market and get something for free! LOL And I wonder about free apps sometimes. Take SMS pop-up or whatever it's called. It's a decent app...it's free. I saw it at "over 250,000 downloads". Well, why didn't they charge $1.00 or $0.50 for it (do the math, I'll take $125,000!!). Any possibility it's forwarding people's text messages? Just sayn'

adn37 said:
A few ideas:
- show a notification after a few days that the app hasn't been used, to encourage the user using it again.
- feature: user can share the app's install page with friends (stimulate organic growth), via a share intent.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your first option sounds REALLY annoying. Your second option sounds perfectly fine. See later on for further points on what might help.
Rootstonian said:
What kind of bothers me is all the damn FREE apps out there; I think they should be segregated from the Google Market; I've yet to go to any type of Market and get something for free! LOL And I wonder about free apps sometimes. Take SMS pop-up or whatever it's called. It's a decent app...it's free. I saw it at "over 250,000 downloads". Well, why didn't they charge $1.00 or $0.50 for it (do the math, I'll take $125,000!!). Any possibility it's forwarding people's text messages? Just sayn'
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not everyone is in it for the money. Some people just maybe write something that is missing on the market but don't want to make money from it. It might be just their hobby. Not everyone needs to be capitalistic, trying to turn everything into revenue.
The Android market is a lot about freedom, and there is high competition between free and paid apps. If your sole intent is to make money on apps, you will probably better off trying to target iOS. The most recent news I have is that an average iOS user will spend 7 times as much money on apps than an Android user. I think this fact kind of speaks for itself.
However if you still want to stick by, here are a couple of things I would suggest:
Offer a (free) lite version of your application as this will give users the ability to see whether your app means business or not, and if they'll like it they might go further to go for the paid version.
Android market uses keyword searching (there's probably a better term), so make sure your description hits as many possible words that may be applicable to your product while not being too heavy to read.
Advertising... don't ask me where as I wouldn't be able to help much with that. But if you're in it to make money, you probably have a business model so you should have some capital too that you can put into advertising.
That's about all I guess.

@Rootstonian
I have apps on the market, and in the last 3 months have made over $1k off ads in my free version, while only making about $250 off of the full paid version.

Very good responses there This forum does have some very intelligent people on it!
I'm anti-adware unfortunately. If that hurts my sales, then so be it; I can live with that. I won't allow ads in my apps.
As far as free versions, I would have to write "crippled" versions of the programs to limit full functionality. Well, not going to do that either. And to be honest, who can't afford $1.00?
Actually, the 15 minute return policy has hurt me I think. Some apps just can't be reviewed in 15 minutes, to wit, my current (almost done) Spam Text Blocker. There is no way someone can evaluate that in 15 minutes, so I have to code some type of limit on how many rows can go into the spam database.
Anyways, I'm way off topic (as usual) and being negative which is usually something I don't do. And I must remember, my stuff has only been out ONE month.
I do use a Macbook Pro, and I have downloaded the iPhone SDK; maybe I should take a break from Android OS and port a couple of apps to iOS and see what they do.
P.S. A smart man doesn't limit his options. How does the apps with ads stuff work?

Just apply to admob, its easy. They give nicely detailed usage statistics too

hi all,
Thanks for the feedback.
On "tell a friend about this app" feature:
Your second option sounds perfectly fine. See later on for further points on what might help.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll just stick with that, then. Any idea what's best to link to? A blog? Android market?
I'm still looking for an app that does it in a nice way, as a case study.
I'm a new developer, old-time programmer. Put 2 apps out December 21, 2009 and I'm approaching a whopping 30 sales; be happy you have 1,000+ (or more)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I feel you. Unfortunately, this is all about execution and idea potential. As coders, we are often thinking about code quality, this is only the 1st step.
On ads: at the end of the day, it might be a hobby to design apps, but fun decreases when it comes down to fixing bugs for the sake of it. Ihmo, a slight revenue is good, as it encourages devs to keep up enhancing their apps.
I'm anti-adware unfortunately. ... And to be honest, who can't afford $1.00?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not a big fan of ads neither. It's all about culture. On Android, people are reticent to pay.

Good points and well said Adn
I actually got into this starting with Google Market apps, but my true goal is to get into corporate mobile development. I feel this is a technology barely in it's infancy. Just as almost all business' needed a web page, I think the same will hold true for a mobile app.
I just put in my resume to a company looking for an iPhone developer (1 year contract), but they also wanted to talk to Android developers too (wish me luck LOL).
Now, I'm on the fence as to what platform to go with. I think with the iPhone AND iPad, that iOS is the way to go with regards to corporate coding; so I'm going to head in that direction for now.

[Q] Paid vs Ads

In your opinion what has been better charging for apps or giving them for free with ad support? Also what kind of apps tend to do better with paid/ad based revenue?

Saw a few articles about that in the last few weeks. They talked about applications that have a free ad supported version and a paid ad free. The free version generates the most revenue. Paying seems a big threshold for some and is even impossible in a lot of countries.
Most banners are not intrusive in portrait mode but I do think they are mostly too large in landscape mode.

I do non-ad apps. The two that I have published are $1.00. Who can't afford a buck, really?
Perhaps having to sign-up for Google Checkout stops people from leaning towards the non-free apps.

Rootstonian said:
I do non-ad apps. The two that I have published are $1.00. Who can't afford a buck, really?
Perhaps having to sign-up for Google Checkout stops people from leaning towards the non-free apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You would be surprised, ppl get defined all the time when trying to buy my app and its only 1.5 lol. Tho I guess there could be more reason why they are declined lol.
Sent from my Nexus One

If youre making a game... id say free version will make more money.
If its a utility... a paid version will make more money because the user wont have the app open for very long or use it very often

Lakers16 said:
If youre making a game... id say free version will make more money.
If its a utility... a paid version will make more money because the user wont have the app open for very long or use it very often
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to google docs, the onBackPressed() simple calls finish(). So it would be the same.
Honestly this isnt making any sense, calling onBackPressed() *should* be teh same as pressing the back button, but its not...

Lakers16 said:
If youre making a game... id say free version will make more money.
If its a utility... a paid version will make more money because the user wont have the app open for very long or use it very often
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But if a user does not use it very often it is better to have an ad supported version as the user will not like to pay for it.

As a user, having to sign up for Google checkout did stop me from buying, but I got on it cause I figured out the can bill through my carrier.
But honestly, the thing that really keeps me from buying more apps - and specially games with downloadable content - is the 15 minute refund window.
Most of the times that is not enough for me to figure out if the app or game have this or that bug that could potentially turn me off.
Examples: I bought tapatalk, only to find out it FC on me frequently, at which point I am better off using g the free XDA app.
I also bought PSX4DROID only to find out later that it FC on my device when I change orientation - found out dropping the phone and loosing progress -
Lately I am opting for apps that have a free version or a fully functioning trial.
If I'm going to drop some cash then I want to make sure I'm getting something fully functional which will be supported by the dev.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA App

I prefer ad supported apps over paid apps.
Two Reasons,
1) Ad Supported apps are free.
2) I'm only 13 (well almost 14 ) so I can't really pay for apps.

Not to mention a lot of people are broke.

It's all basic Economics (yes, I actually liked economics classes in college).
2 things: Supply and Demand and Economies of Scale
Which boils down to quality vs. quantity. Do you create and make that "KILLER APP" that sells 100,000 copies at a measly $1.00 each? Yeah, I would be happy.
Or do you create 100 "NICE TO HAVE APPS" and sell 1000 copies each at same price?
Still would be happy
I really still think the mobile app market (Android, Windows Mobile, iOS) are still in an infancy stage. Especially when it comes to corporate implementations; whether end-user or in-house.

Syn Ack said:
Not to mention a lot of people are broke.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Broke? Explain to me how someone who has sh at least $50 phone eith the majority bring well over this can not afford $1-3 apps?
Do ad supported apps do better then paid? Generally yes, but its no2 bc ppl can't afford it. Fickle had create an environment where any person with a key board csen go out and make an app. Bc of this this the majority are free and crap.
Look at the iphone quality of apps, out far exceeds that of android by far. This had nothing to do eith number of users, but rather bc paid aps actually still on the iphone. Look at the best paid aps on android...less thrn 10k sales that's crap. A company can not operate on that number of sales.
Its all about mentality of the user and supply n demand...
Sent from my Nexus One

I prefer ad supported apps. That way, I can get the app for free, with no hassle on my end, but the dev is still making money. And when it's an app that I really like, I tend to just click the ads a bunch of times.

[Q]Why are the ad blocking patches permitted here?

Why are the ad blocking patches permitted here?
I remember the scandal with the "Impaled Angry Birds" version.
So why are developers developing in the disadvantage of others that rely on ads to receive revenue for apps that aren't lite versions and have no paid apps released?
More importantly, why are these distributed, discussed and allowed on this developer forum?

nemuro said:
Why are the ad blocking patches permitted here?
I remember the scandal with the "Impaled Angry Birds" version.
So why are developers developing in the disadvantage of others that rely on ads to receive revenue for apps that aren't lite versions and have no paid apps released?
More importantly, why are these distributed, discussed and allowed on this developer forum?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess because they're not technically breaking any rules.
There are rules against pirating apps but none against blocking the ads (which is sort of the same thing if you think about it, both are stopping the developers from getting the money they deserve).
But yes, i think 'adblockers' should be banned from these forums. I can't believe Google even allows them to be posted to the market tbh
You should start a poll and see if we can get the rules changed

It's not illegal to block ads on webpages? Which the apps also block.
/Feras - Galaxy Tab

I've felt adblockers necessary in a few games because they were almost unplayable. The problem also is alot of people only wanna block web ads but the ad blockers get apps too.
Sent from my Incredible using XDA App

I don't have a problem with watching ads in apps and I think it's a better way then selling apps that have no ads. I wouldn't buy most of the apps I have installed and with ads I can help the developers.
BUT: some ads are linking to a wap page which uses WAP billing. So when you touch the ad you have a contract over 10$ a week or something which is automatically billed with yor normal moblile contract. that makes it impossible to get your money back without risking high fees from your mobile provider for not paying your bills. Beacause it's not possible to block WAP billing (at least with O2) the only possible way to avoid this is to block the ads.
I'm very sorry for that, but if nothing changes (possibility to block wap billing, ads without wap links ...) I keep on blocking the ads.

I'd probably shouldn't be allowed, but I am glad that it is.
Some developers just throws ads in at the last minute and it often ruins the playability of a game and you end clicking ads by accident just trying to use the app which is not acceptable. I'll click an ad when I choose to.
My feeling is a lot of apps don't use ads respectably or creatively enough and so I rarely want to click an ad anyway. It's generally some lame text link to a larger corp. with little relation to the small-name game I'm playing. If someone's is going to make an awesome game, make an awesome ad too for something the majority of the people who downloaded your game are going to want. Have seen an endless stream of banner ads for the last 10 years of my life. Yawn.

Meltus said:
I guess because they're not technically breaking any rules.
There are rules against pirating apps but none against blocking the ads (which is sort of the same thing if you think about it, both are stopping the developers from getting the money they deserve).
But yes, i think 'adblockers' should be banned from these forums. I can't believe Google even allows them to be posted to the market tbh
You should start a poll and see if we can get the rules changed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Be careful with the "stopping developers from getting the money they deserve." comment. It is what the mpaa and riaa goons say too. It's hard to say who would use or stop using an app based on ads/too many ads if they couldn't be blocked. Developers can also sell limited free versions and full paid.
I won't deny or argue it, as there are problems with both sides, but a blanket ban seems a bit one sided in favor of the powers that be.

Adblockers themselves aren't breaking any of our rules, and are thus allowed - though it's certainly debatable what kind of person would use them.
That being said, I know there are apps out there that simply work around the adblocking and show you the ads anyways.
Note that copyrighted apps re-posted here but with the ads disabled (in most cases even without the ads disabled) is definitely against the rules. If you spot one, report the post and it will be removed, as happened with Impaled Angry Birds - though it was unfortunate it took so long to be removed (you can blame me for that if you want, I do).

I get annoyed at ROM revs that apply this. Let the user decide. I had a guy ask me to make one of my apps free because he said all the other apps like it were. I would but so many people block ads now. I'd like payment for my work and I can't find a good spot to place ads in the app. Maybe a load screen, but people would tire of that fast IMO. Maybe it is possible to write code to check if ads are blocked and have the app not function or very limited.
Sent from my iPhone with the bigger Gee Bees.

the adblockers simply make it "one click" easy to block the ads. there are numerous ways to get around the ads if you truly want too.
on a side note: how much of do the developers really lose? I'm not saying I'm one side or another but yes developers like getting paid and consumers don't like seeing ads.
my point being that most adblockers need access to your hosts file (phone must be rooted). xda is very big across the net but still a sort of 'niche' area where only a certain percentage of those us that like doing things to our phones meet. the vast majority of the market is totally unaware of what even rooting is.
as a very unscientific test, i asks all the people i know that use their phones for social networking and playing games (angry birds) questions pertaining to rooted phones and such. only about 2% of them even had a minor clue as to what i was talking about.
so to close this rant: adblocks might be bad/good in various ways but the majority of those ads are getting clicked and the developers are seeing something from that (of course i mean, if the ads really are paying)
i guess this has nothing to do with the OP question. simple answer. Ad Blockers aren't breaking any rules.

pxldtz said:
the adblockers simply make it "one click" easy to block the ads. there are numerous ways to get around the ads if you truly want too.
on a side note: how much of do the developers really lose? I'm not saying I'm one side or another but yes developers like getting paid and consumers don't like seeing ads.
my point being that most adblockers need access to your hosts file (phone must be rooted). xda is very big across the net but still a sort of 'niche' area where only a certain percentage of those us that like doing things to our phones meet. the vast majority of the market is totally unaware of what even rooting is.
as a very unscientific test, i asks all the people i know that use their phones for social networking and playing games (angry birds) questions pertaining to rooted phones and such. only about 2% of them even had a minor clue as to what i was talking about.
so to close this rant: adblocks might be bad/good in various ways but the majority of those ads are getting clicked and the developers are seeing something from that (of course i mean, if the ads really are paying)
i guess this has nothing to do with the OP question. simple answer. Ad Blockers aren't breaking any rules.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most of the time developers make very little from Ads, but in some rare cases (Angry Birds being a brilliant example) the company turns over about 1 million dollars a month, purely from ads.
The point of ad-supported apps, the way i see it anyway, is that you offer a free version that's ad supported and a 'paid' one that isn't (i know this isn't always the case, but that's the fault of the developer). Blocking the ads in the free one will undoubtably stop the users from buying the paid one, meaning the developer will lose out.
And whilst it's true that a very small percentage of all android users actually have rooted their phone and can use Ad Blockers, does that justify using one?

The OP has a point that the patches do take away revenue but the ad blockers are very different than other pirated methods since they do not change the programs themselves merely make additions to the phone's hosts file.
Ad Blockers of ANY kind (even on desktops) do the same thing. By blocking ads on Websites you are in essence STEALING money from the person who runs that site too!
but every major browser and Security suite has one!
And I would personally urge developers that if they want to use the AD subsidized business model they should at least offer a way to remove the ads via a one time donation. (Some do!)
I personally will not use or run any apps that use Ads simply because I know that 99% of all malware comes from scripts of hijacked servers these ads eminate from.
And it really sucks for those with limited data plans who will quickly run out of bandwidth quota from all the ads.
I really understand the OP (and other developers) point and I support their right to be compensated.
But please pick a better way to get compensated. A Lite version may entail slightly more work but it will ensure you will get something for it as opposed to hoping you get something for it because someone hacked the hosts file and stopped your revenue stream dead in it's tracks.

Meltus said:
And whilst it's true that a very small percentage of all android users actually have rooted their phone and can use Ad Blockers, does that justify using one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not at all, i'm simply stating both sides. it's going always going to be a pro/con dilemma. same with the mpaa/riaa except adblocking does not constitute piracy where you are literally stealing and not paying as opposed to modifynig your operating system to behave as you wish.
Asphyx said:
I personally will not use or run any apps that use Ads simply because I know that 99% of all malware comes from scripts of hijacked servers these ads eminate from.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
frankly speaking i do the same. I use ABP for firefox and i have a modifed hosts file as well that keeps these ads from ever appearing on my machine.
so atleast for justification on that part, consider the performance hits from multiple flash/banners/whatever popping up everytime you want to just browse the net.

Meltus said:
I guess because they're not technically breaking any rules.
There are rules against pirating apps but none against blocking the ads (which is sort of the same thing if you think about it, both are stopping the developers from getting the money they deserve).
But yes, i think 'adblockers' should be banned from these forums. I can't believe Google even allows them to be posted to the market tbh
You should start a poll and see if we can get the rules changed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can download ad free from the market for a while. Apparently Google does not have a problem with it. Why should XDA ban something that you can download from the market?
The other thing is that you can not stop people from editing their host file (because this is the only thing the application is doing)
So banning it from these forums doesn't make any sense at all IMO.

What ppl don't under stand is that if these programs didn't have ads they would cost money. Ppl do not write these programs for free, ads are they get paid. If u remove the ads u will see more programs being paid and less ad supported.
This stuff imo should not be allowed. But this will up end up costing everyone bc a few ppl are greedy. Whether it helps the performance of the game or w/e its besides the point. That was the developers decision. I am surprised its not against the terms of use.
My 2 cents lol
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App

i don't understand why it would be against the terms of use? free vs paid vs ad supported all have valid points and you will never completely make everyone happy, whether it be the developer or the end user.
consider all the websites you visit on any given day and your antivirus software that you have installed that blocks a certain number of popups/ads that generate revenue for these websites.
how is this any different from having an ad blocker on your phone? it's still very much the same thing and i'm sure those that don't like the mentality of ad blocking on their phone use some sort of ad blocker on their pc.

Blocking ads is not a good thing for developers if that's how they get their money but it also takes away from the end-user experience. Ads usually get in the way (see Angry Birds) or they take away some of people's bandwidth if they don't have unlimited data. So no matter how you look at it somebody "pays" for it either way.
I'm not arguing for or against if this development should be on xda, just a different angle that i was thinking about for a long time.

the same, i'm not arguing for either side. just a debate towards both ends.
it's almost a rock/paper/scissors argument. each on trumps another.
developer distributes free app with ads. consumer likes app but dislikes ads. developer needs to keep consumer happy to get any downloads but still needs to get their revenue stream flowing, ie. ads stay in.
rinse, repeat.

If a consumer likes the app but dislikes the ads, said consumer should buy the full / pro / ad-free version.
Ads themselves bring very little in profits unless the app is used a LOT (like the Angry Birds example, which is extremely rare), and it's the correct type of app. A game is always in the foreground, you actually see the ads. A utility which runs a background service and is built well so you hardly ever need to interact with it, you'll see the ads pretty much never, and click on them even less. It is even arguable that a less well-built app brings in more ad-profits because you need to interact with it more.
I would argue (and in my experience this is correct) ads have more effect profit-wise in the number of people who are annoyed by ads and thus buy the full version than the ads themselves bring in. This is an important effect of ads that should not be overlooked, and this is IMHO a more important revenue stream adblockers negate than the ads themselves.
As for how big the percentage of adblocker users is, also depend on the target. For example, an application with ads targeted at root users, is much more likely to get adblocked than a non-root app. I would guesstimate (based on my own experience) the factor may be as high as a 20x difference.
At the end, it all comes down to that the user wants things to be free (and somehow they still want to be payed at their own jobs) while developers want to somehow get payed for their work, just like everybody else does. Somehow most users these days seem to think that because they technically can rip people off, it is not morally and ethically irresponsible to do so.
Reasonings like "I wouldn't pay for it anyway" or "I can't pay for it" or "I won't click the ads" or "the interface with ads annoy me" or "the ads take my limited bandwidth" are all both nonsensical and invalid in most cases. If you don't like it, be a real man and just don't use it, or pay for a version that doesn't have these limitations (and if it doesn't exist, again, simply don't use it). Don't have a credit card? Get one. Don't want to click ads? Then don't. (Or did you think they were placed in that annoying spot by accident ?). Want it different? Pay up. It not being the way you want it is never a valid reason to rip others. Ads taking your bandwidth? Pay up.
I'd like a car like yours, maybe I should just take yours and leave you empty-handed ?
Now of course with the latter statement, you would get people arguing that the unlicensed copying of software (in this case, yes, I am equating adblocking on ad-supported apps to piracy) is technically not theft while stealing your car is. While that would arguably be true from a dictionarial definition standpoint, it certainly isn't true from an economic standpoint.
As anyone with some knowledge of economics will assert to, a product's price calculation (excluding gaining market dominance or entry factors, simplified) goes something like this:
sale price = ( (research and development / expected units of sale) + (manufacturing cost + distribution cost) ) * (1 + profit margin)
Because "copying software is essentially free" (though distribution can still be a big amount, it is for more popular projects usually a negliable factor), the argument is usually that the manufacturer (developer) doesn't lose anything. In reality, all it does is remove (manufacturing cost + distribution cost) from the equation, and still leaves you with the costs of research and development and profit margin. Therefore, there is still a very real correlation between the economic effect of this and the economic effect of "actual" theft. It is not an unreal possibility that the developer of a semi-popular ad-based application could buy a new car if there were no adblockers, while now he is flat broke.
Adblocking in this case reduces the total units sold because there is no way or incentive to pay up. It is the same as piracy in the way that you are using something for nothing. Then again, it shouldn't be outlawed in the same way that BitTorrent shouldn't be outlawed. It's not the tool that is the problem, it's (the bulk of) the people using it.
Wow, I've really gone off on a tangent today. And that's not even including developer rights vs user rights, or when no ad-free version is available, or the guns vs piracy difference, or how developers on Android don't make any money anyways, or etc etc.

hmmm interesting thread personally i think it is wrong to edit a program to remove the ads in it that should be a no no, because your altering someone elses work, and essentially losing them revenue which would cause free apps to become just paid and non ad supported (possibly)
adblocking via hosts files however i think is perfectly fine as your not altering someone elses work. adfree i also have no problem with as essentially its just a downloader for hosts files i guess for people who don't know how to push a hosts file themselves. personally i just push the sames hosts file from my desktop seems to work quite well infact its the one reason i rooted and s-off'd my Desire HD
as for adfree being in the market yeah it is surprising because google makes alot of revenue from ads so its surprising they allow apps to block these revenue sources i guess however its just goes to show how hands off google is with user apps compared to say ....apple
and lets face it the average user wouldnt be pushing files and gaining root access ect to do it (none of my friends have) i think its a select few who will actually go to the trouble to actually remove the ads probably not enough to impact revenue from ads however if someone is redistributing a apk with ads removed then its probably going to do more harm.
one things for sure my DHD is staying ad free (its not so much ads in apps but ads in webpages that bother me)

Piracy: How to protect an app?

Hello guys,
are you one of the android developers pissed off by piracy?
I have about 4000 active illegal users (70%), but my app is without any security checks.
Have you found a solution? I gave up on google security checks, it was too easy to hack. There is something more secure?
I've done a lot of research, but I am searching also for some real experience by xda users.
Thank you!

Well, if you chose to implement in-app purchasing, then I suppose that might solve your problem.

taomorpheus said:
Hello guys,
are you one of the android developers pissed off by piracy?
I have about 4000 active illegal users (70%), but my app is without any security checks.
Have you found a solution? I gave up on google security checks, it was too easy to hack. There is something more secure?
I've done a lot of research, but I am searching also for some real experience by xda users.
Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have your own server you could crosscheck the user's google account with your purchase list.
Do it hidden, in multiple places and act delayed if you find out about a pirated version, then it's really hard to crack.
If you talk about your facebook app you could be kinda bad mannered and post that they are using an illegal app on their wall
Of course you'd have to be absolutely sure then

octobclrnts said:
Well, if you chose to implement in-app purchasing, then I suppose that might solve your problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't because a lot of people have already purchased the app in the classic way!
superkoal said:
If you have your own server you could crosscheck the user's google account with your purchase list.
Do it hidden, in multiple places and act delayed if you find out about a pirated version, then it's really hard to crack.
If you talk about your facebook app you could be kinda bad mannered and post that they are using an illegal app on their wall
Of course you'd have to be absolutely sure then
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually this is a really cool idea, can I access to my google account using google api?

superkoal said:
If you have your own server you could crosscheck the user's google account with your purchase list.
Do it hidden, in multiple places and act delayed if you find out about a pirated version, then it's really hard to crack.
If you talk about your facebook app you could be kinda bad mannered and post that they are using an illegal app on their wall
Of course you'd have to be absolutely sure then
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like this.

taomorpheus said:
Actually this is a really cool idea, can I access to my google account using google api?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have a look at this:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2245545/accessing-google-account-id-username-via-android

superkoal said:
Have a look at this:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2245545/accessing-google-account-id-username-via-android
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Kaspersky Anti-Virus programm says that it is a fishing site.
However, it is STACKOVERFLOW!!!

nikwen said:
My Kaspersky Anti-Virus programm says that it is a fishing site.
However, it is STACKOVERFLOW!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kaspersky :silly:

taomorpheus said:
I can't because a lot of people have already purchased the app in the classic way!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent
In my opinion, create some sort of pop up that says "Attention pirated user, I'm glad you love my app as much as I loved making it, but I need to make money off of it. Please officially purchase this app "
Then have an In app purchase option in the pop up. This would make me want to purchase the app if I pirated it. I don't really believe that fighting piracy with DRM does anything but cause harm. You should just try and make the pirated users feel bad and encourage them to buy the app.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app

v3nturetheworld said:
Sent
In my opinion, create some sort of pop up that says "Attention pirated user, I'm glad you love my app as much as I loved making it, but I need to make money off of it. Please officially purchase this app "
Then have an In app purchase option in the pop up. This would make me want to purchase the app if I pirated it. I don't really believe that fighting piracy with DRM does anything but cause harm. You should just try and make the pirated users feel bad and encourage them to buy the app.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahah yeah that's a good solution!
I've noticed that most of the pirated users come from Burma, where google play doesn't work. So I think that I will leave the app in this way and create another pro version for the nations that have google play issues!

But... how about implementing a solution like ROM Manager does? I mean, with a separate app and a pirate popup as suggested above? I'm clueless on what technology use to create a licensing APK, but it would be easier even for those people that haven't got Play Store, maybe
Tiwiz

I guess the main app checks if the Lisence app is installed and if installed it checks the key from a database of the license app and checks for the validity of Lisence on the cloud
Sent from my GT-S5302 using Tapatalk 2
Hit Thanx Button if i helped you!

taomorpheus said:
Have you found a solution? I gave up on google security checks, it was too easy to hack. There is something more secure?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Piracy is a "fact of life" for software. And most anti-piracy measures tend to hurt legitimate paid customers (and the dev) more than the pirates.
If you have a good, useful app, those guys in China can hack almost anything. (No offense to China; no Play there, lower income and an anti-IP culture.)
There are a FEW successful devs who have gone to extra-ordinary lengths at the JNI level. I tested, but never turned any JNI anti-hacking code on, because with thousands of paid users on many weird phones and ROMs, I felt it would break for enough people to not be worth it.
If you have an app that needs a server connection, or data updates, and you have some kind of independent registration system, you have a chance too. But that can be a lot of work.
I'd rather spend my time making my app better and supporting customers. My app price is higher than many would like (but I have virtually no paid competition). And because my app is support intensive, I've taken the view that I'm selling support and convenient updates, not an app, so much.
I mostly verify people are customers before supporting them, do as good a job as I can, get good reviews, and people see there is value there for their money. And yes, I get tons of support requests from pirates. Some of them I've converted to customers.
And... regular updates to an app provides value. If pirates want the latest, they keep having to go look for it. (Or do I recall some pirate update service ?) Updates via Play are easy and that ease has value.
All the above said, I do get angry from time to time, mostly at people stealing my time IE support. And the idea of finding a highly effective anti-piracy measure is fascinating.
But almost none of us is without some sin in our life regarding music, movies or software downloading... So I think it's good to consider the pirates' perspectives. Effective antipiracy definitely drastically reduces the user base and the Internet knowledge base and familiarity, and its' questionable as to how much revenue might increase, if at all.
IE, piracy can be seen as free advertising, and an opportunity to show some pirates there are valid reasons why going legitimate might benefit them, or even reduce their guilt level. I've had a few people buy my app and apologize...

mikereidis said:
Piracy is a "fact of life" for software. And most anti-piracy measures tend to hurt legitimate paid customers (and the dev) more than the pirates.
If you have a good, useful app, those guys in China can hack almost anything. (No offense to China; no Play there, lower income and an anti-IP culture.)
There are a FEW successful devs who have gone to extra-ordinary lengths at the JNI level. I tested, but never turned any JNI anti-hacking code on, because with thousands of paid users on many weird phones and ROMs, I felt it would break for enough people to not be worth it.
If you have an app that needs a server connection, or data updates, and you have some kind of independent registration system, you have a chance too. But that can be a lot of work.
I'd rather spend my time making my app better and supporting customers. My app price is higher than many would like (but I have virtually no paid competition). And because my app is support intensive, I've taken the view that I'm selling support and convenient updates, not an app, so much.
I mostly verify people are customers before supporting them, do as good a job as I can, get good reviews, and people see there is value there for their money. And yes, I get tons of support requests from pirates. Some of them I've converted to customers.
And... regular updates to an app provides value. If pirates want the latest, they keep having to go look for it. (Or do I recall some pirate update service ?) Updates via Play are easy and that ease has value.
All the above said, I do get angry from time to time, mostly at people stealing my time IE support. And the idea of finding a highly effective anti-piracy measure is fascinating.
But almost none of us is without some sin in our life regarding music, movies or software downloading... So I think it's good to consider the pirates' perspectives. Effective antipiracy definitely drastically reduces the user base and the Internet knowledge base and familiarity, and its' questionable as to how much revenue might increase, if at all.
IE, piracy can be seen as free advertising, and an opportunity to show some pirates there are valid reasons why going legitimate might benefit them, or even reduce their guilt level. I've had a few people buy my app and apologize...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, this is my philosophy. I usually reply to all emails, build the app around the feedback from the community and try to fix all the issues. This permits to create a loyal group of users, and it's the reason why apps like Facebook Home are hated so much: they talk about building apps around people, but for them people is the product, so it's a fail from the beginning
After some considerations I have abandoned the idea to build an antipiracy system, the reason is in part related to your thoughts but also because the 60-70% of pirated versions come from nations like Burma, indonesia, etc etc. So I don't feel that someone is stealing, google play can't provide a service, so people react. The good thing is that despite the lack of a service, they try to use my apps, so that's good, right?
So, at the conclusion, the best antipiracy system is to not use an antipiracy system. Clearly it will be hard to be supported only by paying customers, but the majority accepts some ads if the product is good ( the important thing is to not include spammy and intrusive services, one banner or a full screen on time a day is sufficient).
Thank you for this reply, it's really important to know that there are good developers around! :highfive:

Have you tried google licensing?
taomorpheus said:
Hello guys,
are you one of the android developers pissed off by piracy?
I have about 4000 active illegal users (70%), but my app is without any security checks.
Have you found a solution? I gave up on google security checks, it was too easy to hack. There is something more secure?
I've done a lot of research, but I am searching also for some real experience by xda users.
Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
I am new to android development but I've read about google licensing services which checks for user account whether the app is actually purchased from that particular account associated with the user. If authentication fails then user gets a blocking dialog to either exit the app or purchase it from play store.

dbroid said:
Hi,
I am new to android development but I've read about google licensing services which checks for user account whether the app is actually purchased from that particular account associated with the user. If authentication fails then user gets a blocking dialog to either exit the app or purchase it from play store.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cracker can easily remove IF and your won't ask to buy it.
There should be VMProtect or Themida like tool for android

GR0S said:
Cracker can easily remove IF and your won't ask to buy it.
There should be VMProtect or Themida like tool for android
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was hacked not long after its launch.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2010/0...on-easily-circumvented-will-not-stop-pirates/

taomorpheus said:
After some considerations I have abandoned the idea to build an antipiracy system, the reason is in part related to your thoughts but also because the 60-70% of pirated versions come from nations like Burma, indonesia, etc etc. So I don't feel that someone is stealing, google play can't provide a service, so people react. The good thing is that despite the lack of a service, they try to use my apps, so that's good, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. Most pirates can't afford the app or wouldn't buy it anyway. I also think that many pirates and those who felt "forced" to buy a protected app are bad customers. They will spread their bad feelings about the app and the "greedy dev".
And many have a sense of entitlement, so they make demands, expect lots of support, complain and write bad reviews. They project their own faults on others, and always assume others are trying to rip THEM off. Some have told me they were "testing" my app, because they were worried about getting ripped off if it didn't work (despite my free version and anytime cancel policy).
Better not to have such customers. These are the same people who think they are more important than everybody else and cheat in traffic and lineups etc.
taomorpheus said:
So, at the conclusion, the best antipiracy system is to not use an antipiracy system. Clearly it will be hard to be supported only by paying customers, but the majority accepts some ads if the product is good ( the important thing is to not include spammy and intrusive services, one banner or a full screen on time a day is sufficient).
Thank you for this reply, it's really important to know that there are good developers around! :highfive:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For most of us small devs, yes. Things may be different for certain apps, such as those that need a backend server, and for multi-person companies.
You can also promote that your app is "DRM free". That's definitely a plus, especially to custom ROM users who may avoid using Google Play.
I tried ads for a few months in 2011. The "CPM" rates started good, but quickly dropped to almost nothing. I think it's very hard to make money from ads, unless your app has a million users, and they are more "average" people who might click on the ads, accidentally or not.
I think it's usually better to raise app price as high as you can. I experimented a lot for many months between $1 and $10, usually keeping price constant for at least 2-3 weeks. I, and some others, have found that total income remains somewhat constant no matter what the price, LOL.
Now I've left price at the high end, so I can provide the best support possible, by limiting sales quantity. Some people think we should "make it up in volume", but that's a self-serving wish of the person who wants it cheaper. High volume might be viable if you provide zero technical support though.

What I'd say in terms of pirate stuff is to not try too hard on the software level (though I might write a guide on a few useful methods and pieces of code to prevent the usual circumvention methods) but on the upload level. When you release a new version, wait a couple of days and then search for a pirate version of your app. If you find one, report it, they're usually down in about 5 minutes. The more often you do this, the more likely people are to search, find all the links are "dead" and then just think "stuff it, I'll just buy it". However, this will only work on people who can buy it and are using pirate versions because they wish to, not because they have to

Quinny899 said:
What I'd say in terms of pirate stuff is to not try too hard on the software level (though I might write a guide on a few useful methods and pieces of code to prevent the usual circumvention methods) but on the upload level. When you release a new version, wait a couple of days and then search for a pirate version of your app. If you find one, report it, they're usually down in about 5 minutes. The more often you do this, the more likely people are to search, find all the links are "dead" and then just think "stuff it, I'll just buy it". However, this will only work on people who can buy it and are using pirate versions because they wish to, not because they have to
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because they'd PREFER not to spend money, if possible. In most areas of life, that's what most of us do.
Last I looked, this was the best Android cracking site: http://androidcracking.blogspot.ca/ . I read everything there twice before I started experimenting with protection code. If nothing else, it gives a glimpse of how hard it is to protect a popular app well.
I sent DMCA takedown requests to a few sites some time ago, but it's an endless task, and IMO not worth it, unless your app is VERY niche/has relatively few users. I've been "honored" to have my app included in several Torrents full of Android apps. Some of those Torrents are updated regularly.
I will still notify XDA admins if there's a link or offending ROM on XDA. XDA mods take it seriously.
Some companies will put out their own "pirate" fake or crippled versions of movies, and app devs could do the same. Perhaps have endless popups offering to buy the app legitimately. I personally wouldn't bother (at this time) but it could work. I agree that making piracy a hassle may improve sales a bit.
LOL, I just re-looked and see 3 on isohunt that are my app alone, but they are older. If I have time for "fun" later this year I should (1) start my own torrents, (2) collect IP addresses, and... I dunno; don't seriously want to be a copyright troll; rather design & develop.

If you were to spend 1000$ on marketing for your new app

Where and how will you spend them?
I recently launched my new app, and are receiving dozens of emails from review sites ive never heard of, claming they have hundred thousands of readers each month.
I paid 99$ for a featured review, and sent out a press release through PrMac/pc, so far nothing measurable.
So, what are the actions that REALLY works to get more downloads?
Care to colaborate on this subject?

appfactory said:
Where and how will you spend them?
I recently launched my new app, and are receiving dozens of emails from review sites ive never heard of, claming they have hundred thousands of readers each month.
I paid 99$ for a featured review, and sent out a press release through PrMac/pc, so far nothing measurable.
So, what are the actions that REALLY works to get more downloads?
Care to colaborate on this subject?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess you're trying to promote paid android app... Is that right?

anuloid said:
I guess you're trying to promote paid android app... Is that right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, thats correct, and its that sort of app that isnt suitable with ads all over, otherwise i would for sure have made a in app ad vers of it...

appfactory said:
Yes, thats correct, and its that sort of app that isnt suitable with ads all over, otherwise i would for sure have made a in app ad vers of it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe it'd be prudent to have a free version, so you can measure the demand of your app, plus use some marketing strategies to promote your app, and after then ask money for the full version (maybe via free app). Having only one app in your account will probably make people think deeper before buying, let alone bugs that might be in the app itself.
If you sure you've developed a great bug-free app that is unique and will be of a great help for users, than you can invest in promotion of the app, but I must warn you that it's some kind of tricky thing and you may lose more money than till now.
Anyway for paid apps and monetization purposes iOS is better based upon my experience. Is your app available at iTunes?

anuloid said:
Maybe it'd be prudent to have a free version, so you can measure the demand of your app, plus use some marketing strategies to promote your app, and after then ask money for the full version (maybe via free app). Having only one app in your account will probably make people think deeper before buying, let alone bugs that might be in the app itself.
If you sure you've developed a great bug-free app that is unique and will be of a great help for users, than you can invest in promotion of the app, but I must warn you that it's some kind of tricky thing and you may lose more money than till now.
Anyway for paid apps and monetization purposes iOS is better based upon my experience. Is your app available at iTunes?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, ive been considering that myself, its amazing how cheap people are, even with "useful" apps for .99 bucks.
A bugfree app is essential free or paid, naturally... It has been going through extensive testing for 8 months, a new vers is currently in the que at Apple, but no crash bugs have been discovered so far, this vers only fixes a problem when words are split in two after a line shift, nothing else.
iOS is here, i have some promocodes if you would like to try it out
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/medicall-app/id878350761?ls=1&mt=8

appfactory said:
Yes, ive been considering that myself, its amazing how cheap people are, even with "useful" apps for .99 bucks.
A bugfree app is essential free or paid, naturally... It has been going through extensive testing for 8 months, a new vers is currently in the que at Apple, but no crash bugs have been discovered so far, this vers only fixes a problem when words are split in two after a line shift, nothing else.
iOS is here, i have some promocodes if you would like to try it out
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/medicall-app/id878350761?ls=1&mt=8
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Send via pm, will try.

So what are your stats so far as for download in the App Store and on Google Play ?