51–60 of 61 posts
When apps like Ulysses and 1Password went down the subscription route, I had no issue with it because Ulysses has continued to get better and better over time (by adding great new features), and I use 1Password's cloud sync service (and I think there's an argument to be made that password management apps need to continue evolving with the web to maintain usability). I realize Spark is doing a bit more than your run-o…
I went through my credit card statement this month and am cancelling a bunch of things I barely use. The mess of subscriptions most of us are forced into is getting absolutely insane and the "software makers need to do this to be able to eat!" excuses I see here are just silly. I don't want my card dinged every month. I don't want to "manage" dozens of different subscriptions across different companies that all have…
Looks like it also went at least partially Electron and gained a lot of weight in the process. The Mac version went from 288.2MB → 598.2MB.
Subscriptions are uncontroversial when there's a perceived cost to the user of the ongoing usage. In fact I believe it tracks very closely with the "Cost of Goods Sold" (COGS). No one questions whether Dropbox should be a one-off price or a subscription, there's obviously ongoing cost to storing the data. However for apps that don't have this there's always going to be push back. Developers typically point to custome…
> No one questions whether Dropbox should be a one-off price or a subscription, there's obviously ongoing cost to storing the data. I'd wager the data storage costs for Dropbox are less than 1% of what it charges for subscriptions, though.
Unfortunate that people who make more than $100/hr won't pay $60/year for an app they use every day.
So my carpenter should be happy to keep paying for his drill or his circular saw? He should be grateful for the subscription to the lathe that he inherited from his grandfather?
If an app doesn't have recurring costs involved in serving their product (server costs, etc), it's hard to justify a subscription model vs charging a one time cost to purchase the app. To fund/incentivize continuing development of new features, they can have reasonable in-app purchases to unlock those new features.
Doesn't mean that I agree with their new pricing system, but they do have said costs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So my carpenter should be happy to keep paying for his drill or his circular saw? He should be grateful for the subscription to the lathe that he inherited from his grandfather?
Drills and saws don’t depend on an operating environment that changes constantly. Imagine if your drill and saw relied on an electrical source that got updated, requiring them to update the saw and drills themselves. Would you want to buy it with a one time fee, knowing that it could mean they go bankrupt? You’d end up with a drill and saw that no longer worked — then for no amount of money, subscription or otherwise…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Drills and saws don’t depend on an operating environment that changes constantly. Imagine if your drill and saw relied on an electrical source that got updated, requiring them to update the saw and drills themselves. Would you want to buy it with a one time fee, knowing that it could mean they go bankrupt? You’d end up with a drill and saw that no longer worked — then for no amount of money, subscription or otherwise…
Why should consumers be penalized for programmers breaking their "operating environment" or whatever you want to call rent seeking behavior.
If an app doesn't have recurring costs involved in serving their product (server costs, etc), it's hard to justify a subscription model vs charging a one time cost to purchase the app. To fund/incentivize continuing development of new features, they can have reasonable in-app purchases to unlock those new features.
If you understand how their app ecosystem works, then it will make more sense. They DO have server costs and other ongoing costs in their app. Doesn't mean that I agree with their new pricing system, but they do have said costs.