Is it now really possible to monetize a snap? I always thought the feature is available(as paid apps are not a new concept in the Ubuntu Software Center) until I found there’s no interface in dashboard.snapcraft.io that can flip the “Free” price field today.
The capability to set prices and thus sell snaps is not complete, which is why it’s not enabled. Much of the underlying code had a re-write since the article you published.
Looks strange to me that from years a company isn’t selling products. Is there any ETA?
Most proprietary apps require you to enter license key or log in to an account so you can manage payments that way.
But on that way, if the payment is external, the store can’t tax it.
I think it’s better to let snappy mature first. I think there are still some problems for the store to start charging price to the publishers who sell software.
Snappy offers as much value as deb if you need theming afaik.
Theming is still not solved if I’m not mistaken. Now, I’m just rambling here but I’d say snaps still don’t offer a complete solution for the proprietary companies to start publishing desktop apps. By this I mean the whole experience for the publisher and the users: for example store experience and app discoverability etc.
But if your target are technical users who will forgive the theming in favor of stability and features, snappy is awesome!
I am interested in selling an app on the snap store. Is there any update on this?
I for right now using my own payment method in app.
which ask users for payment after trial - snapcraft.io/wonderwall
This may work too but it is some overhead in programming as you have to implement it yourself.
yes it is, if your app is in qt i can provide my code to you or anyone who need it.
We don’t have any further updates to the monetization story right now.
whats the update on new snap store ?? is it still being developed ??
Microsoft and Apple Store don’t allow a personal payment system on the app. So, if a developer would like to release his app also to Canonical, it expect something similar. Otherwise he will wait the next IBM acquisition.
I would hope that Canonical would not follow the monopolistic practices of Microsoft and Apple (and android) stores, and would instead allow apps to be included as free but do there own licencing.
If you use Canonical’s payment system then it’s fair that Canonical takes a cut, but you shouldn’t be forced to. Doing so would not be in the spirit of free software context in which Canonical exists.
I agree, I was meaning that a developer should not be forced to develop their own payment system.
It is definitely in the longer term roadmap to provide a payment system and we have been gathering input from publishers to help shape the design. We are not opposed to publishers using an outside payment system currently and we expect that would continue once we have one, allowing for opt-in if our solution offers a better or more convenient service.
allowing for opt-in if our solution offers a better or more convenient service.
This is key, because it will give canonical a great incentive to make there solution as good and convenient as they can.