Shared publicly  - 
Michael Neese's profile photoAyman Suleiman's profile photoPetrut Belingher's profile photoTablified Apps's profile photo
Way too heavily monetized for a chat client. $1.49 for G-talk and 0.99 cents for each additional service? Trillian, IMO and others do it for free. So what am I paying for? It can't be for just the ability to float the app. You've gotta be kidding. That's as bad as the Freemium model in how crappy it treats the end user. My free chat clients do the job just fine. Thanks.
Nobody's forcing you to buy it. Choice is good. If nobody's willing to pay for it, you can bet the price will soon drop.
Instead of paying for an app like IM+ (which is $4.99 and probably gives you a bunch of services you dont need) with LilyPad, you can just buy what you need. If you're an avid Facebook & GTalk user then the app will cost you no more than $2.49. But if you want to unlock all the options, then you can do so with a flat fee via in-app billing.
Look guys, +Ayman Suleiman +Calum Benson those are valid points. No one is forcing me to buy it and paying only for the services you need is valid too. My point is this: There are so many free apps, like IMO or less costly apps, like IM+ that do the job (in comparisson if all of the services on LillyPad are needed). If a user needs all of the services (not me), the cost for this app seems to be way out of line by comparison. It could conceivably be more than some of the more expensive games out there and they have to support many developers, hardward and facilities. I'm all for supporting the devs. I donate for good apps. I pay the small developers before I go to the big ones. I get it. It just seems that the only additional benefit with this app is that it floats. For that much money, I would hope there is other functionality besides that. Maybe I missed something in the list of features. +Calum Benson - I hope you are right. I hope that the price drops to fit the user base. I intend to keep watching this app and others like it to see how it goes but right now, the price structure just doesn't seem to be a good fit for what one would expect. Maybe they could at least do a bundle (Price x for each service and Price y [x minus a discount] for all the services bundled together. It's just a thought.
Add a comment...