[bvlaar]

Great point. I guess we can draw parallels to other purchases we make. When I purchase a car, I get the car I paid for in that current state, they wont 'update' it for free, nor do we as consumers expect that. The app industry has created a covenant of sorts that says, pay for the software, and we will update it for x period of time going forward. Which is great for consumers but to be frank, kind of a bad deal for developers (considering most apps we buy are relatively inexpensive). Either developers have to adapt the more common pay for updates model (Sparrow 1 = 4.99, Sparrow 2 = 8.99) or it will be a pure 'create the best x' keep adding features so they can amass more and more users.

[jasonlotito]

> When I purchase a car, I get the car I paid for in that current state, they wont 'update' it for free, nor do we as consumers expect that.

That's not entirely true. I buy a car knowing that if it needs repairs, I can repair it. Or at least go somewhere else to get it repaired. It will cost money, but so be it. I would not buy a car I had to rely on the manufacturer to fix. There are slow attempts at that in the industry, but by and large, cars are much more open than something like Sparrow ever was.

And yes, I consider carefully my choice in software the same way. I don't mind paying for software.

I also consider the business model. Does it make sense what they are doing? Does it make sense in the long term? Will they be around to support their own business?

The App Model doesn't make sense (and so I generally don't invest in it, at least for nothing critical).