I had an experience a couple of days ago with exactly this type of thing (I downloaded the comment form, and I'll send it in).
In this case, it nearly cost the app maker a sale (I doubt they'll go out of business on the loss of my sale. As it happened, they didn't actually lose the sale).
I wanted to ID some of the plants in my yard, looking for native vs. introduced, so I downloaded a couple of apps. One was a good one, but was really a "crowdsourced" one. I had to sign up for an account, and participate in a community. Not a showstopper; but not really what I was looking for. I'm into instant gratification.
The other one was an ML-type app that would analyze photos in realtime.
When I started it up, it immediately wanted me to get the in-app purchase to the "premium" version, which is actually a yearly subscription.
The dark pattern, was how they did that. They obfuscated and deprecated the navigation to the free variant. It was almost impossible to see the buttons behind the premium banner, and it was difficult to actually touch them.
At first, I immediately shitcanned the app, as I assumed that you were required to get a subscription before using it at all.
I did a bit more research, and everyone was saying it was a decent app, and that it could be used without the subscription.
So I tried it again. This time, I squinted, and found the links.
It worked really well. I'll be getting the subscription.
The moral of the story is that they were so big on a dark pattern, trying to force new users to start paying immediately, that they actually drive off sales. The app works well. They don't need to hide it. That's what apps that suck do. This app does not suck.
Have you tried Seek (https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/seek_app)? It's from iNaturalist, which might be the community-based one you found, but you can easily ignore the community stuff and use it without an account. Works pretty well, I recommend it.
I should also mention that this app is a battery hog, the likes of which I have never before encountered (and I include the Facebook app in that generalization). Just running it for about three minutes, knocks 2% off my battery.
>> The moral of the story is that they were so big on a dark pattern, I'll be getting the subscription.
> Yeah thanks for rewarding them for that.
That was not a nice thing to do -altering a quote, to make it appear as if I said something I didn't. I am leaving your response in its unmodified entirety, above.
Look, you have your opinion, I have mine, but It's a decent app. I will be providing feedback to them -as a paying subscriber, there's a good chance my feedback will be heard.
But the thing I have against dark patterns, is the same thing I have against what you did -it's dishonest.
Well, the only reason why the throwaway user was dishonest was because they didn't use ellipsis to indicate snipping content in between.
They're technically correct. The app used a dark pattern and you responded by subscribing. From their intents and purposes, the dark pattern did its job rather well.
That was not intended to be read as a literal quote or an attempt to make it appear as if you said something you didn't. That's a fairly common way of picking a message apart to make a point, on some parts of the internet. Sometimes people paraphrase instead of literally copying words (esp. if there's no good short sequence of words to borrow), but quote marks are still used. I wish we had a better notation for this. I'm sorry to have caused confusion.
Anyway, the point was just to express my disappointment in that people keep supporting a company even after complaining about their horrible dark patterns. And I don't really mean to single you out personally, it's everywhere: people complain and then keep using and rewarding the service(s) they complain about. IME this rarely leads to them becoming better over time, they just get worse over time because they can get away with it. Abuse users until the very end. It seems to work, we have so many users and more are rolling in!
Of course if you're actually giving them feedback, all the power to you. I respect your opinion too.
To give you an idea where I stand, a few days ago I was thinking of buying a keyboard for my workshop PC. I have a couple Planck EZs and they're decent keyboards. So I went over to the ZSA site, started reading about their new keyboard (Moonlander), and... MODAL POPUP ADVERTISING A MAGAZINE[1]! Now I remember the time when browsers started adding popup blockers built-in, and everyone (except scummy advertisers) rejoiced. So I find it disturbing, disgusting, and extremely disrespectful to bring back popups in the form of modals. I kinda try to put my money where my mouth is, so my reaction was to unsubscribe their magazine (the way they presented it when I bought my plancks wasn't so bad) and take my shopping elsewhere.
> That's a fairly common way of picking a message apart to make a point, on some parts of the internet. Sometimes people paraphrase instead of literally copying words (esp. if there's no good short sequence of words to borrow), but quote marks are still used.
Among people who can’t make their point with an accurate representation of someone else’s words. All the descriptive words for this behaviour are negative, for good reason. I suspect you know this, hence the throwaway account.
> I wish we had a better notation for this.
The better notation for this is not to do it, that’s why there is no notation for it.
> I'm sorry to have caused confusion.
I’m not sure HN is for you. Don’t do this again if you’re really sorry.
I believe that, as a software developer, I am constantly encountering the classic "Do $20,000 worth of work for me for free." If I refuse, it can sometimes get quite unpleasant.
As it so happens, I actually do a great deal of free software. The users can sometimes be a bit on the "knucklehead" side, but they usually respect my boundaries.
The people that don't, tend to be business owners. I sort of expect it, as a good business owner is always looking for every advantage they can. I can sometimes get rather peeved by their attitudes. Around these parts, business owners tend to be especially aggressive, and NY is known for a hyper-aggressive environment and culture.
The people that wrote the app do a valuable service. They trained up a fairly effective neural network. The apps are...OK. Not outstanding, but OK. They do get their primary function done pretty effectively. That took time and skill.
They want to be paid, and I don't begrudge them. I believe that supporting paid software is a moral imperative for me. I won't go about laying my values on other people, but I choose to have this attitude, and I like to follow it with action.
Sure. I think we mostly stand on the same line here.
I just tend to take hard stance against anything I find user hostile. Nagging, dark patterns, exploiting addictions, attempts at leeching personal information, lock-in, etcetra will quickly put you on my no buy list.
I think those things are evil at worst and a waste of time and resources (in a global, zero-sum way) at best, and long term we'd be better off if everyone rejected such behavior and put their money towards business that focuses solely on providing superb service without the abuse. Unfortunately these abusive practices tend to work as far as profit is concerned.. it's like tragedy of the commons, in a way.
I want to get paid too, and live in a nicer world.
For the record, there is a way to highlight changes. An ellipses denotes that material was left out. Brackets denote that something was changed. In either case, the intent should never be to alter what was said. Using yours as an example:
> That was not intended to be read as a literal quote...[It was intended to] paraphrase instead of literally copying words (esp. if there's no good short sequence of words to borrow), but quote marks are still used. I wish we had a better notation for this. I'm sorry to have caused confusion.
In this case, it nearly cost the app maker a sale (I doubt they'll go out of business on the loss of my sale. As it happened, they didn't actually lose the sale).
I wanted to ID some of the plants in my yard, looking for native vs. introduced, so I downloaded a couple of apps. One was a good one, but was really a "crowdsourced" one. I had to sign up for an account, and participate in a community. Not a showstopper; but not really what I was looking for. I'm into instant gratification.
The other one was an ML-type app that would analyze photos in realtime.
When I started it up, it immediately wanted me to get the in-app purchase to the "premium" version, which is actually a yearly subscription.
The dark pattern, was how they did that. They obfuscated and deprecated the navigation to the free variant. It was almost impossible to see the buttons behind the premium banner, and it was difficult to actually touch them.
At first, I immediately shitcanned the app, as I assumed that you were required to get a subscription before using it at all.
I did a bit more research, and everyone was saying it was a decent app, and that it could be used without the subscription.
So I tried it again. This time, I squinted, and found the links.
It worked really well. I'll be getting the subscription.
The moral of the story is that they were so big on a dark pattern, trying to force new users to start paying immediately, that they actually drive off sales. The app works well. They don't need to hide it. That's what apps that suck do. This app does not suck.