I think the trial is to establish if it’s right for you and you have some confidence to go further. It’s not a period to completely master it. So, with that in mind, 7 days should be plenty. And this community will play a huge part in that, too.
2 Likes
sorry i went a bit off topic, to bring it back on topic i do agree that the 7 day trial isnt long enough, i came pretty close to dropping the software because 7 days was enough to work out what i needed to do was going to be a PITA but not long enough to actually overcome that hurdle of getting the ball rolling. It was long enough though to get a hold of concept of the program and while i am unable to execute well on it so far i can see the appeal and vision. I was literally having an aha moment the exact moment my trial ended and if it wasnt for that i likely would have switched to visual studio.
I’m going to chime in here because I think it’s a pretty good discussion.
Many of us here were part of the beta program, so we had a long period to learn the software, and we had input on how it was developed. Back then, the product was no where near it is now as far a capabilities. I can say with 100% certainty that if this was my first exposure to the software and I only had 7 days, there is no way I could make a purchasing decision or a commitment in time and effort in that time.
So put yourself in the place of someone never have seen this software before. Looking over the documentation, watching the awesome videos from Ben, or Ken’s excellent set of videos and then diving in to the software, no way 7 days is long enough. Who has 7 solid days in a row these days to set aside to learn about a piece of development software, not learn how to use it but just learn enough about it to determine if you want to make the time and effort commitment to learn it? What if you start the trial on Wednesday? Does anyone have 7 days in a row to devote to it including the weekend?
Wappler’s challenge is that it is not as well known as some of the other low-code tools out there. You can do a lot of reading and researching and determine if you want to go with some of the other tools without even doing a trial. There is very little data out there about Wappler other than the You Tube videos, so you need to keep that in mind as well.
So to the Wappler team, shouldn’t you be so sure of your software that you wouldn’t mind a few more days to allow people to dive deep into it? Why be so quick to charge someone for using it? If they are allowed to have a little more time to dig into it and really see the power of it, you may get more paying users. Just a thought, I don’t know what your turn rate is. And remember for a user, it’s not the cost, it’s the time and effort that is the biggest expense of using something new like this.
2 Likes
If the only option after the trial was a year’s license then I might think 7 days isn’t enough but I do think that it’s plenty enough to establish if it’s at least worth a one-month license to dig even deeper and get properly into a project.
As I said previously in this thread, I invested before it was released and all I had to go on was a 2-minute video and a presentation by Joseph Lowery. Just seeing what could be done with it was enough to decide it was worth the money. Actually learning it is not supposed to be done during the trial, the trial is purely to help decide if you want to go for it.
In fact, I would buy at least a month just on the basis of seeing some of the sites in the Showcases in this forum.
1 Like
Imagine that you met a new tool today other than Wappler, you would pay a monthly fee to try to learn this tool knowing that it doesn’t bother to have updated documentation and gives you only 7 days of trial where you spend half the time trying to find it any updated information about something that is on the screen and doesn’t exist in the documentation or something that exists on the screen and is now gone because it has been moved to another location or replaced and doesn’t exist in the documentation?
I met Wappler 2 weeks ago and I’ve been studying since then, I signed up but honestly I’ve been seriously considering giving up because it seems that the tool is designed to please people who have been following it since the beginning and not new users.
I think this makes the tool and the community restricted to a few people and that’s not good for both sides.
3 Likes
Have you tried any of the courses? @mebeingken’s course should get you up and running pretty quickly.
Actually, it doesn’t really matter much if you have 7 or 30 days trial. Because people have to make time to really test the software and they usually postpone that to the last moment.
So by rushing you to just 7 days, we actually encourage you to make time and look seriously to Wappler and if it suits your needs.
If you have had 30 days you will probably, just look from time to time and the days will fly by anyway and eventually you will be spending less time in Wappler hat if you had just 7 days.
But that said we do plan to increase the trials to 14 days when Wappler 5 gets released, together with many improvements in our subscription services.
We will be also improving the onboarding of new users so that you can get acquainted with Wappler more easy, with more inline tours.
7 Likes
yes i have bought courses on wappler but still, it’s all outdated, i understand the tool is constantly changing and some things are changed for the good of the tool but why not document these new updates? There are tools like GitBook made just to help easy document your applications.
I hope the team and community take this as constructive criticism I don’t know if Wappler has a marketing team to but I think it would be interesting to think about it.
The tool seems to have huge potential but as I mentioned above seems to be made for a restricted group has been here since the beginning, but maybe the focus is really on keeping it more restricted so if that’s it, disregard what I wrote.
Thanks for that! 
Did you guys get sidetracked?
This indeed was my experience, I set aside a week to learn the program. I think your point about keeping the time restricted has good grounding as that was my experience. An additional 7 days is likely to be a better sweet spot than where it is currently.
1 Like
Yes - priorities 
1 Like
Damn priorities. Always getting in the middle!
I have to laugh at the absurdity of this thread. I’m in the same boat as the OP. I started the 7-day trial, then got sidetracked by various other business priorities and now the trial is over. I really don’t care about paying the $39, it’s like whatever. However, I also feel that the justification for the 7-day trial is completely ridiculous.
Could someone, starting from scratch, use Wappler to build a fully functioning web application in 30 days? I guess it’s possible, sure. But then what? They’re never going to change anything to the application in the future? No need to ever add any new fields, or create a new page? They’ll just live with this app, frozen in time forever, right? Or they’re going to manually edit the code each time? It’s just a silly argument. The value of Wappler is not just in the ability to build a site, it’s also in the ease of maintaining and adding to the site over time. If someone is using it for a commercial application that’s making money, then of course they’re going to buy a license, regardless of whether the trial is 7 days, 30 days or 90 days. They’re going to buy the license because the time saved using Wappler to maintain the application versus manually editing code would be massive. It would make no commercial sense to not buy the license.
@George, you could quell this endless debate by simply making it a 30-day trial, which is the industry standard that virtually all competing products offer. I guarantee you, it would not cost you a dime in lost revenue, and it would go a long way toward enhancing good will for new users.
14 day trial should be enough and it’s also industry standard.
4 Likes
Even Adobe is only 14 days. And that is for the entire Creative Cloud Suite!
Unfortunately, since Wappler projects are not tied to accounts like competing products, there is too many ways to beat the system.
Longer trial periods would have to have a limited feature set. Which obviously is not ideal either.
Fact is there is always people that will try and beat the system with trials. 7 days is enough of a deterrent to cut at least some of that down.
The number of trial days (7, 14, 30, 60, 90, 365) is arbitrary. The only downside to a longer trial period is that it creates a lag between the time a user first starts using a product and the first payment date. This lag is the ONLY reason to not offer a long trial period. Arguably, the longer the trial period, the greater the chance of acquiring and retaining a customer. This is why nowadays, every mattress company offers 365 day trial periods. The more a customer uses your product, the more dependent they become on it, and the less likely they are to switch to a competing product.
In this case, with a 7-day trial period, Wappler is losing a lot of customers who on principle, refuse to pay for the product before they’ve had the chance to fully evaluate it. Extending the trial period to 14 days would help. Extending it to 30 days would be even better. Extending it to 365 days would be better yet, but as I mentioned, this would create a one-year cash flow gap, thus it’s unrealistic. Also, the marginal rate of return decreases with each extension of the trial period. Thus, 14 days would be a lot better than 7 days, 30 days would be better than 14 days, but not as much of an improvement as going from 7 to 14, etc…
Your statement that “14 day trial should be enough” begs the question, enough for what? It’s certainly better than 7 days, but almost certainly not optimal in terms of maximizing revenue.
Not sure what you mean about “beating the system”. The only “system” here is the use of the software product. Once the trial expires, you can no longer use it. Thus, you get to keep whatever code you created, but you have no way of improving or updating the code in the future. As I mentioned, this is an unrealistic proposition for a commercial entity that’s using the code to generate revenue. If your website is making you money, of course you’re going to pay the yearly subscription in order to continue adding features and updates to maintain or increase that revenue.
I meant enough to trial all important features. Since I started with Wappler a few years ago I’ve seen the number of features double so it makes sense to increase the trialing period.
Regarding the financials I am assuming the team is doing what is best to keep everything heathy.
industry standard is more 30 days and a lot of SaaS follow a freemium model so except the boomers, most people expect not to be rush to trial anything. Thinking that users will do what you want because you decided it’s how it should be is not the way things work. Hire a decent marketing and product team and make choices based on users feedback (and not the guys here since beta) + make decisions on data not feelings. My 2 cents. This topic is very closed from the documentation / courses topic : old story and no real improvements… I would love someone here to explain me how having a longer trial will change your financials… most important KPI here are user acquisition cost and Churn / LTV… Having a longer trial period will not have any cost impact as your software does not consume any server ressources but for sure will help to convert…
1 Like
Agree on improving the documentation when new updates release. I believe most of people coming here because Wappler are promoting as ‘Visual Web App Creator’, which more make sense more non-coders user here are looking for more detailed & updated documentation.
I saw recent update are coming with use case documentation, however some people still can’t get the idea if it apply to different use case.
I saw very good suggestion here if you are open the documentation suggestion update to community also, I belive many wappler ambassador here would love to help Wappler team keep update the documentation.
Or maybe wappler can add something like tooltip that contain short explanation and link to the references. Saw it on some feature here, but not all.