Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pocket Casts, you altered the deal, so I will alter your app

blog.matthewbrunelle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 150 posts

Re: Pocket Casts, you altered the deal, so I will alter your app

#41

Post by carlosjobim »

jszymborski wrote: post #9
wmichelin wrote: post #3

To play devil's advocate here, clearly there are hosting costs and maintenance costs beyond a one time mobile app payment 14 years ago. Kinda sped read the article so apologies if I missed it, but why does the author here feel so entitled to something that clearly the company feels unreasonable to continuously maintain? They're clearly a struggling business, it feels like this author has a personal vendetta against t…

> why does the author here feel so entitled People were promised they just needed to pay one fee to get the app. Then, they went to a subscription fee, but grandfathered in previous purchasers. Now, they've introduced ads. Their overhead is their problem, they sold me something and now they are renegging. It's like the first thing in the article, not exactly burried.

I hope you never hear about free refills that they have in some restaurants.

You're demanding more than a decade of free app updates for a small sum you paid ages ago. Why can't you instead be happy with all the value you got from the app? We aren't born to be small minded and stingy, look up to greater goals and a greater attitude in life. We only have so many years before it is cut from us.

Re: Pocket Casts, you altered the deal, so I will alter your app

#42

Post by vorpalhex »

wmichelin wrote: post #3

To play devil's advocate here, clearly there are hosting costs and maintenance costs beyond a one time mobile app payment 14 years ago. Kinda sped read the article so apologies if I missed it, but why does the author here feel so entitled to something that clearly the company feels unreasonable to continuously maintain? They're clearly a struggling business, it feels like this author has a personal vendetta against t…

What is PocketCasts maintaining?

1. A few kb of playlists and accounts 2. Probably a search service 3. Likely artwork caching

It's not free to run this.. but it's not exactly expensive either.

Many users pay and don't use the app very much. I am sure there are some super users who use a lot.

And most apps continue to sell, make enough income to fund a few devs and keep the services on. Even with a one time payment.

It's not like pocketcasts is paying the podcasters or producing content.

The problem is seeing every single dumb thing as some kind of mega-growth M&A deal when it's not. No, your podcast app won't make you hundreds of millions, sorry.

Re: Pocket Casts, you altered the deal, so I will alter your app

#43

Post by gigel82 »

wmichelin wrote: post #3

To play devil's advocate here, clearly there are hosting costs and maintenance costs beyond a one time mobile app payment 14 years ago. Kinda sped read the article so apologies if I missed it, but why does the author here feel so entitled to something that clearly the company feels unreasonable to continuously maintain? They're clearly a struggling business, it feels like this author has a personal vendetta against t…

It's so sad this view is supported by so many people. So incredibly sad, especially in this community... I feel like we're doomed to become the dreaded "you will own nothing and be happy" society that the technofeudal lords so drool over.

Re: Pocket Casts, you altered the deal, so I will alter your app

#44

Post by [deleted] »

rmunn wrote: post #17
wmichelin wrote: post #3

To play devil's advocate here, clearly there are hosting costs and maintenance costs beyond a one time mobile app payment 14 years ago. Kinda sped read the article so apologies if I missed it, but why does the author here feel so entitled to something that clearly the company feels unreasonable to continuously maintain? They're clearly a struggling business, it feels like this author has a personal vendetta against t…

If you don't honor contracts, then you should go out of business, because nobody will trust you (if they're wise, though there are always some people/companies who will be foolish). If you make a contract that involves you receiving a one-time fee for something that will cost you far more than that fee, then you will eventually go out of business for being stupid. Yes, there are hosting costs and maintenance costs. S…

[deleted]

Re: Pocket Casts, you altered the deal, so I will alter your app

#45

Post by jjulius »

carlosjobim wrote: post #41
jszymborski wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why does the author here feel so entitled People were promised they just needed to pay one fee to get the app. Then, they went to a subscription fee, but grandfathered in previous purchasers. Now, they've introduced ads. Their overhead is their problem, they sold me something and now they are renegging. It's like the first thing in the article, not exactly burried.

I hope you never hear about free refills that they have in some restaurants. You're demanding more than a decade of free app updates for a small sum you paid ages ago. Why can't you instead be happy with all the value you got from the app? We aren't born to be small minded and stingy, look up to greater goals and a greater attitude in life. We only have so many years before it is cut from us.

>You're demanding more than a decade of free app updates for a small sum you paid ages ago.

I mean... that was the agreement between both parties. Really not that hard to grasp.

Re: Pocket Casts, you altered the deal, so I will alter your app

#47

Post by anon-3988 »

hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #37
rmunn wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't honor contracts, then you should go out of business, because nobody will trust you (if they're wise, though there are always some people/companies who will be foolish). If you make a contract that involves you receiving a one-time fee for something that will cost you far more than that fee, then you will eventually go out of business for being stupid. Yes, there are hosting costs and maintenance costs. S…

Well, does anyone actually have a copy of the contract from 14 years ago? Usually there are clauses hedging against this kind of thing. Example: I recently wrote the T&S for my Finnish dictionary app (still working on it), and I make it clear in advance that the license was a one time fee for perpetual use for that major version . [1] I can do this because the app is almost entirely offline, and because for the parts…

IIRC they advertised themselves as "pay once, use forever" in their marketing. So why shouldn't they uphold that?

Re: Pocket Casts, you altered the deal, so I will alter your app

#48

Post by foxglacier »

danpalmer wrote: post #20
forrestthewoods wrote: post #5

> You were a pay-once app. Released in 2011, pay once each for Android, iOS, and Web and keep for life. You know. I approve the pushback on enshitification. But there’s something weird about righteous fury over an app which literally costs money to run didn’t provide free updates for literally decades on what probably cost like $5. I dunno. It just kinda rubs me the wrong way.

It's reasonable to feel that reneging on the deal is wrong, while also recognising that $5 for 14 years (and counting) of value is far too low a price. There's no good answer here. The company is stuck in a bad place where the most loyal users, probably those getting the most value out of it in the long run, aren't paying for it. Subscriptions for newer users are one way, or trying to upsell existing users, but this…

Selling one version is fine if you're clear about that up front. But selling "Pocket Casts" then later selling "Pocket Casts 2" as a separate product is a little bit sneaky if you gave the impression it would include updates. I remember some company that did a similar trick selling licenses with free updates forever. Then one-day they renamed updates to upgrades, which weren't free anymore and pissed off their existing customers.

Re: Pocket Casts, you altered the deal, so I will alter your app

#49

Post by NaOH »

WD-42 wrote: post #27

I switched to Pocket Casts because the official Apple app changed their UI to a recommendation feed instead of a plain timeline. I only listen to podcasts on a single device, anyone have suggestions for alternatives? I don't mind paying a one time fee, but this should really be a mostly (completely?) cloud-less app.

I've been satisfied using Downcast for a long time now. US $3 (though I have used the tipping feature because it's provided me ample value). In particular, its sorting organization matches my preference, which is a list of podcasts that I can sort based on unplayed episodes (among other sorting options). Unless you're viewing the distinct section of the app for adding episodes, there's no portion of the interface trying to promote shows. That's not a presentation I ever want, so it's good that it's easily avoided.

Most beneficial for me is its customizations that can be applied to all shows or configured for individual shows. For example, all episodes for all shows can be set to play at 1¼x speed, but one show could be set to play at 1x speed. For me, the interview format can be at the faster speed, but the music podcast is better at regular speed. Similarly, users could set all shows' episodes to start at the 30-second mark because of, say, opening ads, but a specific show could be set to start at a different time because its opening is unlike the others.

I listen to enough shows that these configuration options make the app great for me. It's been a long time since I tried alternatives, but none of them ever stuck for more than (at most) a few days because the presentation or lack of customizations were less satisfying or convenient.

Truthfully, just writing this has compelled me to give the developer another in-app tip. It's been years since I did that and I must average at least 20 hours of use a week.

Post reply on HN