Re: MacHeist
Phill Ryu wrote me a thoughtful response and counterargument with many valid points. It seems that I was wrong to assume that MacHeist’s deal was still a flat fee for developers. They offer percentages to some, especially for the larger apps. For that false assumption, I apologize, and I have edited the original post to remove the inaccurate statements in the second paragraph.
I’m not interested in arguing the specifics of the MacHeist deal with developers. I’m sure that nobody will argue the core of it: these applications are being sold at a steep discount.
My point is whether it’s a good idea, as conscientious consumers, to accept such steep discounts on the products that we use and love.
My argument is that it’s not.
Others feel differently. “It’s just a business.” “We shouldn’t be responsible for making sure developers get a good deal.” “It’s a great deal for consumers.”
If you feel that way, then we must respectfully disagree.
Marco Arment is a good engineer, but he goes way off the deep end here. It’s not your place or my place to decide for the developers of said software what the right business decisions are. No one but the developers have the data to make an informed choice.
It’s surprisingly presumptuous of Marco to suggest that we as consumers need to start dictating to developers what advertisements are good business decisions. The market does that just fine without any histrionics about ethics. MacHeist makes a lot of money, and they donate a lot of money to charity. They seem like a very successful and clever business with an advertising model that has led me personally to discovering software vendors I’d never heard of.
The question I’d love to ask Marco is, “Why do you think you know better than the people selling the software? What gives you a special insight that they don’t have?” These people are independent businessmen and women who sought out MacHeist and put their product on it, and MacHeist isn’t some fly-by-night organization anymore. There’s a contract, explicit terms and previous performance to evaluate it by.
