91–100 of 205 posts
The answer might often be to understand the users' needs better in order to design for it. But OP seems to have a clear idea of how the app should work already. So...unclear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you can probably offer them a price that works for both of you There is no such price, because there is no way to sustainably develop a product without subscriptions. You can't go to a local bakery and pay $24 for life to get fresh rolls every day. Every one-time price is a gamble, where somebody is betting on something. It's a way to close your eyes and pretend ongoing costs do not exist.
> there is no way to sustainably develop a product without subscriptions This is clearly incorrect given that there are plenty of software developers who offer lifetime purchases. In fact there was a time that subscriptions for software were virtually unheard of. On a lower level, all that matters is the numbers. If your average customer stays subscribed for 24 months, then charging a lifetime fee equal to 24 months…
Interesting post. I was a bit confused why they were seeking to build rapport with their users. These people pay a few bucks a month. What's the upside to a close, cosy relationship? The answer might often be to understand the users' needs better in order to design for it. But OP seems to have a clear idea of how the app should work already. So...unclear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> there is no way to sustainably develop a product without subscriptions This is clearly incorrect given that there are plenty of software developers who offer lifetime purchases. In fact there was a time that subscriptions for software were virtually unheard of. On a lower level, all that matters is the numbers. If your average customer stays subscribed for 24 months, then charging a lifetime fee equal to 24 months…
Software was always a subscription you bought version two then version three... It wasn't obviously or explicitly a subscription but it still was one.
If I buy version 2 then it's mine and I can continue to use it for as long as I want, if I'm happy with the feature set. I can ignore version 3 or choose to buy it. If I buy it then I now own two products instead of one. Sometimes the older version might even be better (e.g. features I like have been removed or made worse).
With a subscription model I'm forced to pay again and again even if I'm perfectly happy with version 2.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for posting this. I have experienced similar. I have found that nasty bug reports are most effective. Good data, and the people are too cheesed off/embarrassed, to follow up, after you address it. Occasionally, it can actually be turned around, and they can become evangelists. I have integrated a simple feedback form into the app, with the option to send anonymously. That seems to help. > had I known I'd get 1…
All comments here yeah. Almost to 11K views and there were less than 50 before I posted, with a dozen new subscribers to the blog.
I don’t really care whether or not I get many views (spoiler: I don’t -too many words). I write for myself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You have to accept that your pricing model sucks to a group of people (who are likely experiencing subscription fatigue) and decide if it’s worth losing or never getting their money. And for some subscription situations, you can probably offer them a price that works for both of you. There's a 'PhotoSync' app that offers a premium option for either $1/month or $24 for life. Presumably because they looked at the ave…
> you can probably offer them a price that works for both of you There is no such price, because there is no way to sustainably develop a product without subscriptions. You can't go to a local bakery and pay $24 for life to get fresh rolls every day. Every one-time price is a gamble, where somebody is betting on something. It's a way to close your eyes and pretend ongoing costs do not exist.
If it’s sustainable at $1/month, and a customer is willing to prepay $1200 for a 100 year subscription, that sounds sustainable to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The comment is basically doing exactly what it accused OP of doing: behaving as if the commenter has "singularly thought through every problem in an armchair" and knows better than OP who actually tried doing it.
Could be an armchair, could be a toilet, either seems a reasonable standard for a commenter on a messageboard, are we expecting a focus group or something?
Maybe if your product would get more valuable if you were connecting users together and you were moderator of the community, it would've been different, but it is quite different product to sell.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the majority of software I use, I don't really care about continuous upgrades and new features, as long as it works with the feature set I signed up for. A great example for me is the Xodo app on Android. It's by far the best PDF editor that I've found on Android, particularly for annotating with a digital pen. Some features are locked. If I want to unlock them, it's $5 a month. I get nothing out of that which is…
The biggest tension between software and one-off purchases is related to bugfixing, and especially security. It makes sense that you don't expect new features for a product that you paid for once. But, what is the case with bugs? If the product mostly does what it promised to do, but sometimes crashes, do you expect those crashes to be fixed for your version, or not? What it you're using a 10-year old version and a n…
"Your product should be cheaper". That will be your most common feedback no matter what you're selling and at what price. A large percentage of the population dedicate their entire lives to complaining about prices.