[husainpatan]

I don't even own a Playbook (or any other tablet) and I'm sick of it as well. These types of people are obviously mentally deficient is some sort of way.

I do tons of research (even without owning a tablet) and I know that the price of apps on the Playbook are the same as apps on iOS / Android tablets for the most part. It's like when Angry Birds came out and people were up in arms about the price.... I seriously couldn't stop laughing reading all the "complaints" about the price.

I thought I m the only one without a T**let.
Though its gonna change soon as my younger bro is gonna get an android tab for gift, ....and everyone can sense who's gonna rip it off first

[kill_9]

If you think a person with little money to spend should get a prepaid credit card is mad. The fees are just too high.

PayPal is free and links to your existing bank account(s), credit card(s), and possibly debit card(s) in some countries.

[kill_9]

See, I too am a pb fanboy, just like you, I'm just frustrated about the lack of content available. In Australia, we can't even access the video store.

We cannot access the video store from Canada, the corporate headquarters of Research In Motion, so do not feel bad in Australia. Remember the MPAA/RIAA, collectively known as the MAFIA, prefer it that way.

[OffTheTangent]

My problem is with the cross-platform...AND the exchange rate (or lack of it).

Angry birds is what? 99 cents or something on iOS. That's 69 pence in Britain.

On Playbook, it's $5 AND RIM don't apply the exchange rate, so its �5 as well. That means i'm not only paying more than someone one iOS or android, i'm paying more than a playbook user in USA...

[OffTheTangent]

The app problem that everybody talks about is the lack of popular apps --- that are 99.99% free anyway (skype, netflix, Instagram...).

Pricing is all of the place --- precisely because Amazon pioneered it with selling the same book to 2 different people AT THE SAME TIME AT THE SAME PLACE for 2 different prices. You can't turn back the clock on this Amazon invention.

The only people who are misled are people who listened to your argument. Technology has given app sellers very precise and timely data on how to price their goods. Rovio would be stupid not to look at the sales data and charge accordingly.

I'd actually say the app problem, though maybe not the one people talk about, is the lack of innovative and useful apps.

I don't give a crap about angry birds. I do care that there a lot of apps are bad versions of what's on other platforms. A lot of developers are lazy, i'm not talking about all of them and I don't want to offend anyone.
My impression is that some developers think, "this type of app, that is on other platforms, isn't on playbook, i'll make that." They'll then make something that basically does what another app does, though rarely as good and without any type of creativity imagination. Just bog standard attempt at filling a gap...and then they charge quite a high price.

The playbook is a different device, it has things specific to it that people could take advantage of...but there's very little that is innovative. As much as people can go on about iPads being rubbish, a fad etc. developers who make for the iPad, think outside the box. And good apps seem to never come to playbook, just the games.

There is a 5mp camera, two microphones, decent video recording. That's the stuff we've got in those playbooks and there's no app that answers the question, "how do we take that forward?"

Another problem with price, and its wider problem with apps, is that unlike in a shop, you can't return these things if they're rubbish. And i've spent way too much on apps that are completely useless to me.

[bobauckland]

It is RIM's fault. It's the fault of the iPad and Android tablets. The PB system is so different that potential PB buyers play with one at the store and immediately call it junk because they can't get it to do what they are accustomed to doing on the wildly popular and known Android tablets and the iPad. RIM, instead of playing it safe and developing a tablet that would be much more familiar to the common buyer, made a bold and intelligent decision about the PB to make it actually different and better. They intelligently designed the PB rather than make it a glorified artistic piece. RIM chose the type of backplate it uses combined with a square side and a very slightly raised front lip that allows the thumb to keep a sure grasp on the front while the fingers adhere to the non-slip rubberized backplate. They chose to put dual stereo speaker on the actual front of the device rather than on the sides or bottom. They chose to put a wide front screen bezel instead of the "oh-my-goodness-idn't-it-beautiful" thin bezel so they could reliably make the swipe UI work.

Everything about the PB screams intelligent and purposeful design. But because the common user nowadays is more accustomed to the iPad and Android way of doing things, they shun a perfectly wonderful system like the PB because of unfamiliarity with it. Could RIM do a better job making people more aware of the PB's way of doing things? Of course. But that doesn't immediately guarantee success when most of those Android fanboys love to bad-mouth anything that isn't Android. Same goes for the iPad fanboys.

I read through your post initially and thought, what a complete load of tosh.
I have to say, I went back over it, and I find I agree with some of what you say.
The PlayBook is the best designed tablet I know of.
Its the perfect size, it feels great in the hand, it has the hardware in it thats everything you could expect from a tablet and more. That side of things has been nailed down brilliant.
The problem is not with stupid customers, or sheep, or whatever the trending insult for the average consumer is.
Its RIM completely failing at defining a target market.
If its the general consumer the tablet NEEDS the apps that are available on other platforms, at least the top key or core apps.
If its a business tablet it NEEDS better PDF support and more work centric apps to help people be productive.
The PlayBook has neither.
It has not been supported app wise at all, so you have this fantastic hardware, the dual cameras for example, and precisely sod all to use them on because you can only chat with other people with PlayBooks, which is pretty much nobody.
The PlayBook has fantastic hardware. The software, including the OS, don't hold a candle to anything else available.
Pre Android player, yes, I was very impressed. With the horrible integration of Android half baked apps, with no way of knowing which apps are Android and which aren't, with a completely different method of multitasking for these apps, thats your fragmentation right there, an inconsistent UI, and an overall bad experience.
Thats not a consumer fault. Its RIMs.

The app problem that everybody talks about is the lack of popular apps --- that are 99.99% free anyway (skype, netflix, Instagram...).

Pricing is all of the place --- precisely because Amazon pioneered it with selling the same book to 2 different people AT THE SAME TIME AT THE SAME PLACE for 2 different prices. You can't turn back the clock on this Amazon invention.

The only people who are misled are people who listened to your argument. Technology has given app sellers very precise and timely data on how to price their goods. Rovio would be stupid not to look at the sales data and charge accordingly.

You'd have a point if this was all down to the developers. But numerous developers have said that RIM make it a pain to price for people in other countries. They also take ages to reflect price changes on the App World.
And best of all, they apply stupid laws from one country to all countries and get apps pulled for no reason after devs put in the time effort and money in making them.
None of that is anyones fault but RIMs, they're so out of touch its not even funny.

I'd actually say the app problem, though maybe not the one people talk about, is the lack of innovative and useful apps.

I don't give a crap about angry birds. I do care that there a lot of apps are bad versions of what's on other platforms. A lot of developers are lazy, i'm not talking about all of them and I don't want to offend anyone.
My impression is that some developers think, "this type of app, that is on other platforms, isn't on playbook, i'll make that." They'll then make something that basically does what another app does, though rarely as good and without any type of creativity imagination. Just bog standard attempt at filling a gap...and then they charge quite a high price.

The playbook is a different device, it has things specific to it that people could take advantage of...but there's very little that is innovative. As much as people can go on about iPads being rubbish, a fad etc. developers who make for the iPad, think outside the box. And good apps seem to never come to playbook, just the games.

There is a 5mp camera, two microphones, decent video recording. That's the stuff we've got in those playbooks and there's no app that answers the question, "how do we take that forward?"

Another problem with price, and its wider problem with apps, is that unlike in a shop, you can't return these things if they're rubbish. And i've spent way too much on apps that are completely useless to me.

Fantastic post.

[samab]

You'd have a point if this was all down to the developers. But numerous developers have said that RIM make it a pain to price for people in other countries. They also take ages to reflect price changes on the App World. And best of all, they apply stupid laws from one country to all countries and get apps pulled for no reason after devs put in the time effort and money in making them.
None of that is anyones fault but RIMs, they're so out of touch its not even funny.

But that's not what you are complaining about.

You are complaining about that apps are expensive --- which has nothing to do with pain in setting prices.

Maybe in New Zealand where you live that certain games are not available in certain countries, but that's not RIM's problems.

Apps gets pulled all the time in the iphone/ipad world --- Apple culled like hundreds of thousands of apps each year.

We are talking about probably 80% of all Playbooks ever produced reside within North America (and most of them are in the home country of Canada). You think that whatever you face in New Zealand has any relevance to RIM itself. RIM is going to live and die --- on whether they can reclaim their US market share, which has nothing to do with your rant about how expensive and how inconvenient New Zealanders have to face.

Edit: Just saw that you listed UK as where you live --- RIM has been gaining market shares in the UK.

[torndownunit]

Android, iOS and PlayBook devices in our home.
Apps are generally more bountiful, longer, and cheaper on all other platforms.
Pricing strategy for non US customers is better on everything other than the PlayBook.
Diversity of apps and quality of them is also better on the whole on other systems other than the PlayBook.
Heck, my 9900 has more functional and diverse apps.
The app situation is killing RIM, and will be a major problem with BB10, people who think ignoring this and pretending like its not a problem are making things worse because RIM is misled and potential customers coming across this site will be disillusioned.

The only time I can see someone arguing this point is if they haven't had an iOS device (or an Android device). The thing with the Playbook apps is developers can charge more for a certain type of app because they rarely have any competition. For any given type of application on iOS, there are generally 3-4 other really great options in the same price range. And I am sure it's the same situation with Android.

To use internet radio apps as an example, Nobex is really the only app out there right now for Playbook. It costs $3.99 a month for the premium versions. You can get Tunein Radio or several other really great similar apps (actually better IMO) for iOS for a one time $1.99 (or less) price. This is just one example, but I find a similar situation when researching other apps.

I want to support Playbook apps, and I do buy one's that I think are good (eg the TabletTv developer is going a very good job, and is active on this forum). But I am just not going to pay a significant amount more for an app that isn't as good as the Android or iOS options. Especially with the unfortunate situation of their being fewer trial versions available for Playbook than iOS.

[samab]

And good apps seem to never come to playbook, just the games.

The Playbook doesn't have apps because RIM hasn't released Cascades yet --- and app developers don't want to spend time and energy on an AIR app (especially for only 1.1 million users) and then promptly have to kill the whole app to make a native app 6 months later.

Games don't require Cascades, that's the Playbook has tons of big 3D games that are often released the same day as on the Sony Xperia Play (which usually has a short term android exclusive).

[homer1475]

RIM is going to live and die --- on whether they can reclaim their US market share

RIM can do very well for itself and be a very profitable company without the NA market. There's this thing called globalization, there's so much more to the consumer market that's not NA.

Love how most NA residents think there's nothing outside of the NA consumer market, and if you dont have that market your dead in the water.

Not picking on you per se', just pointing out how most think on this board.

[Spencerdl]

Interesting thread, me personally if i like a game or app I buy it, if i don't like it, I don't buy it......my only complaint is there should be a trial period for every app or game so I get a better idea if I like the app or game. Yes, I have purchased apps and games that I didn't like or that had a lot of "bugs" and I felt cheated. Human nature makes people complain by default.....prices on anything is always to expensive not just apps and games for our electronic devices, but life in general

[kbz1960]

RIM can do very well for itself and be a very profitable company without the NA market. There's this thing called globalization, there's so much more to the consumer market that's not NA.

Love how most NA residents think there's nothing outside of the NA consumer market, and if you dont have that market your dead in the water.

Not picking on you per se', just pointing out how most think on this board.

Well yes they can but all you ever see and hear is that RIM has lost the North American market and to survive it needs this market. So don't blame NA people for thinking this. We don't all think we are the bomb and no one else matters.

Why don't you ask RIM why they need the NA market instead of being happy with the rest of the world.

[homer1475]

RIM has already said they are pretty much pulling out of the NA consumer market. Not done with it, but certainly not focusing on it. There main focus is going back to their roots, business type people(BES), and businesses that buy in huge lots and deploy to their workers, and not the fickle consumer market that changes there likes and dislikes more then most people change their underwear.

Pretty sure this more then proves that RIM has succeeded that they have lost the NA consumer market and are not focusing on it to move themselves forward as a profitable company.

[OffTheTangent]

The Playbook doesn't have apps because RIM hasn't released Cascades yet --- and app developers don't want to spend time and energy on an AIR app (especially for only 1.1 million users) and then promptly have to kill the whole app to make a native app 6 months later.

Games don't require Cascades, that's the Playbook has tons of big 3D games that are often released the same day as on the Sony Xperia Play (which usually has a short term android exclusive).

Okay then. Let's take away the part where I blame lack of developer innovation and put it back on RIM. We can blame RIM for not making Cascades available. We can blame them for leaving developers in a limbo between two different ways of building apps. We can blame RIM for discouraging developers from making apps, which is what you're suggesting.

There's still the same problem, there's not much innovative on the playbook and not much taking advantage of the better aspects of the playbook.

[kbz1960]

RIM has already said they are pretty much pulling out of the NA consumer market. Not done with it, but certainly not focusing on it. There main focus is going back to their roots, business type people(BES), and businesses that buy in huge lots and deploy to their workers, and not the fickle consumer market that changes there likes and dislikes more then most people change their underwear.

Pretty sure this more then proves that RIM has succeeded that they have lost the NA consumer market and are not focusing on it to move themselves forward as a profitable company.

They have a problem there also since so many are doing byod. They are going to have to do both or they are not going to grow. Right now how many that have a choice with byod are choosing a bb?

[bobauckland]

But that's not what you are complaining about.

You are complaining about that apps are expensive --- which has nothing to do with pain in setting prices.

Maybe in New Zealand where you live that certain games are not available in certain countries, but that's not RIM's problems.

Apps gets pulled all the time in the iphone/ipad world --- Apple culled like hundreds of thousands of apps each year.

We are talking about probably 80% of all Playbooks ever produced reside within North America (and most of them are in the home country of Canada). You think that whatever you face in New Zealand has any relevance to RIM itself. RIM is going to live and die --- on whether they can reclaim their US market share, which has nothing to do with your rant about how expensive and how inconvenient New Zealanders have to face.

Edit: Just saw that you listed UK as where you live --- RIM has been gaining market shares in the UK.

Im complaining about extremely poor value in apps on the PlayBook versus every other ecosystem.
Its made worse by the fact that apps like Devcellents Shutup Camera fill a gap no other app does, then get pulled for being illegal when they're not, outside the States.
RIM asked the developer to pull the app for all markets, not just the States, but for all markets. Thats ridiculous given the app has no legal constraints outside the States.
Thats all on RIM, you can try and deflect the blame but it falls squarely on RIM.
If you were a dev that put in the time and came up with a brill app and RIM pulled that, would you make many more apps? I wouldn't. Cascades is not whats holding devs back. RIM and their pathetic developer relations team is.
The core apps are not missing from RIMs products because of prices, market share, because of anything other than the fact that RIM is utterly awful at dealing with devs that matter. Otherwise, said apps wouldn't be on Windows Phone, which has less market share than most of RIMs products.

[samab]

RIM can do very well for itself and be a very profitable company without the NA market. There's this thing called globalization, there's so much more to the consumer market that's not NA.

Love how most NA residents think there's nothing outside of the NA consumer market, and if you dont have that market your dead in the water.

Not picking on you per se', just pointing out how most think on this board.

Yes, from the perspective of RIM's business --- the rest of the world is very profitable.

But we are not talking about mere dollars and cents --- we are talking about the availabilities of apps in the platform. App developers simply don't have an interest in the number of Indonesians having blackberries.

Okay then. Let's take away the part where I blame lack of developer innovation and put it back on RIM. We can blame RIM for not making Cascades available. We can blame them for leaving developers in a limbo between two different ways of building apps. We can blame RIM for discouraging developers from making apps, which is what you're suggesting.

There's still the same problem, there's not much innovative on the playbook and not much taking advantage of the better aspects of the playbook.

You can't blame the app developers --- if RIM doesn't give them the tools to take advantage of the better aspects of the playbook.

Im complaining about extremely poor value in apps on the PlayBook versus every other ecosystem.
Its made worse by the fact that apps like Devcellents Shutup Camera fill a gap no other app does, then get pulled for being illegal when they're not, outside the States.
RIM asked the developer to pull the app for all markets, not just the States, but for all markets. Thats ridiculous given the app has no legal constraints outside the States.
Thats all on RIM, you can try and deflect the blame but it falls squarely on RIM.
If you were a dev that put in the time and came up with a brill app and RIM pulled that, would you make many more apps? I wouldn't. Cascades is not whats holding devs back. RIM and their pathetic developer relations team is.
The core apps are not missing from RIMs products because of prices, market share, because of anything other than the fact that RIM is utterly awful at dealing with devs that matter. Otherwise, said apps wouldn't be on Windows Phone, which has less market share than most of RIMs products.

So essentially the only problem you can think of is the pervy silent camera app --- that's going to be the fall of the whole RIM empire because of this pervy silent camera app.

Devcellent continues to sell other apps on the Blackberry AppWorld. If Devcellent isn't pissed, why are you?

[Real Estate Appraiser]

Apps are always one of those things people will nickle dime on. I have a friend that will blow $200 bucks a night at the bar, buy himself new shoes and new cell phones on a monthly basis, but complains about $1.99 cost of an app.

Apps are cheap, really cheap. The most expensive one I bought was like 6 bucks for the splashtop, which was worth every penny. I've also spent about 30 bucks on about 10-15 games for my daughter. She has spent hours upon hours entertaining herself with these games. A DS or leepfrog game is about 20 bucks for one of them and the games aren't much better than the 2 dollar ones I buy in app world.

[rupam95]

Well, do you know how hard someone from another country have to work to get that 2 bucks?


I guess not.

[Zidentia]

Whilst I agree with the OP to a degree, I do have some comments. I have no idea what the average salary in the US is but here in the UK, it's about �26,000 a year. The OP is hoping to recoup that figure (I'm using RIM's $1=�1!) for about 4-5 months work. It's just a different prespective on things. I'm fully aware that the OP will have to account for taxes, holiday pay etc. I'm not saying the OP is not entitled to earn that sort of income just giving an alternative view.....

And the point is? If someone does the work they should recoup profit.

[sleepngbear]

I'd like to know what these kids would be thinking had they been around when there were no tabs or smart phones but just desktop computers, before there was a concept of shareware and free trial versions. If you could find something for $10, it was probably an obsolete version or written for an obsolete OS (MS DOS 3.1, anyone?). The average price for a decent PC game was maybe $30, $50 or more for a premium game. Real productivity software was in the hundreds of $$$, much as it still is today on a real computing platform. Back then you'd buy a couple of programs a year, because that's just the way it was. It makes me laugh uncontrollably when these kids complain that they have to fork over $1 - $5, or better yet, that they think the software they don't pay any $$$ for is actually free. And yes, they'd have to be kids, because any adult knows exactly what I'm talking about, and the few $$$ you pay today for any of the hundreds of thousands of mobile apps is peanuts.

We also learned long ago that if we couldn't afford it today, we either have to wait until we could or simply go without; either way the world was/is not going to end.

[torndownunit]

I'd like to know what these kids would be thinking had they been around when there were no tabs or smart phones but just desktop computers, before there was a concept of shareware and free trial versions. If you could find something for $10, it was probably an obsolete version or written for an obsolete OS (MS DOS 3.1, anyone?). The average price for a decent PC game was maybe $30, $50 or more for a premium game. Real productivity software was in the hundreds of $$$, much as it still is today on a real computing platform. Back then you'd buy a couple of programs a year, because that's just the way it was. It makes me laugh uncontrollably when these kids complain that they have to fork over $1 - $5, or better yet, that they think the software they don't pay any $$$ for is actually free. And yes, they'd have to be kids, because any adult knows exactly what I'm talking about, and the few $$$ you pay today for any of the hundreds of thousands of mobile apps is peanuts.

We also learned long ago that if we couldn't afford it today, we either have to wait until we could or simply go without; either way the world was/is not going to end.

It's not an issue of affording it for me. I don't like paying more for an app where either (a) the same app is cheaper on another platform, or (b) an 'equivalent' app for Playbook that is nowhere near as functional as alternatives on other platforms but costs much more (see my Nobex example earlier). So, I just don't buy them. I also don't really 'complain' about it, but I think it's ridiculous and I haven't ever seen a good justification for why there is such a difference... only users posting who take exception to anyone who brings up ANY valid criticisms of the Playbook app situation and feel the need to ridicule them.

[OffTheTangent]

You can't blame the app developers --- if RIM doesn't give them the tools to take advantage of the better aspects of the playbook.

That's what I said...

Though to be honest...I think I can blame developers for a general lack of innovation in most apps. It's generally very simple, fill-the-gap productions that fill up the playbook. They see a gap in the market and fill it with something, just something.

At the end of the day, it does come down to RIM though. If apps aren't good enough, RIM needs to encourage because the success of the platform will ultimately rest on whether consumers feel it will fulfil their needs.

They've made a device that is very different to other devices, that's good. But they need to get apps that make it stand out as well, because the basic features being different is no good if the functionality isn't.

[Khameleon05]

I'd like to know what these kids would be thinking had they been around when there were no tabs or smart phones but just desktop computers, before there was a concept of shareware and free trial versions. If you could find something for $10, it was probably an obsolete version or written for an obsolete OS (MS DOS 3.1, anyone?). The average price for a decent PC game was maybe $30, $50 or more for a premium game. Real productivity software was in the hundreds of $$$, much as it still is today on a real computing platform. Back then you'd buy a couple of programs a year, because that's just the way it was. It makes me laugh uncontrollably when these kids complain that they have to fork over $1 - $5, or better yet, that they think the software they don't pay any $$$ for is actually free. And yes, they'd have to be kids, because any adult knows exactly what I'm talking about, and the few $$$ you pay today for any of the hundreds of thousands of mobile apps is peanuts.

We also learned long ago that if we couldn't afford it today, we either have to wait until we could or simply go without; either way the world was/is not going to end.

So you're comparing large scale PC programs with simple tablet apps that, depending on the app of course, can be banged out in a day? Sorry, no. App development time/work is nowhere near the level of real software production. Also, how many options were there for software vs. apps now? You want Office? Well there was Office and....Office. You pay a premium because that was your only option.

And we're not talking about "back in the day", we're talking about NOW.

[DevSteven]

Every Developer has to make the same choice when submitting an app. Of course we all want everything to be free we also all want to have a lot of money. When I published my app I wasn't publishing for the money but for a user base. Only because of this did I make the app free. I have ads on my site so i felt that I could manage that way.

I do agree though that apps are more expensive on Blackberry, but the user base is smaller so $.99 won't cut it for the developer.