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

Subscription Hell

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 610 posts

Re: Subscription Hell

#531

Post by LeoNatan25 »

chii wrote: post #476
sincerely wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, there's a million different competing not-microsoft-word text editors for writers. Whereas there's no real alternatives to adobe or microsoft products if you need them for your career.

> if you need them for your career. if you need 'em for your career, then make the person providing your career pay for it. if you're self-employed, then use an open alternative.

So I guess you’ve never used one of those “open” “alternatives”? Often broken mess, lacking features, incoherent or antiquated UI, etc., ending up costing you more in time needed to ge things done than the paid alternative.

Re: Subscription Hell

#533

Post by nojvek »

vorpalhex wrote: post #528
JauntTrooper wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that model will work, honestly. There's friction anytime you ask someone to spend anything, even if the price is de minimis. Look what happens whenever a city adopts a $0.05 plastic bag tax. When Washington DC did it, plastic bag use dropped by 50% - 70%. I'd see people that just spent $30 bucks at the store with their arms overflowing with stuff rather than pay that extra nickel. I'd expect prompting u…

UI is everything. My purchase of The amount of money I spend with Amazon's one-swipe checkout is obnoxious. Ask me to give you my full address twice and manually enter a credit card, even if you have an item I really want? Nope, probably not doing it.

I feel terrible for all those companies which don’t analyze their shopping funnels. The simplest checkout experience should require the minimum friction. What ends up happening is that they want to collect ridiculous amount of customer data in the hopes they’ll use it some other day.

Those companies deserve to die.

Re: Subscription Hell

#534

Post by [deleted] »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #526
icebraining wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's crap is not exactly a great reason for why one can or can't do something. I'm reading a lot of people with strong opinions, but I'd like to see the reasoning behind them.

A restaurant has some really popular plates, fancy looking things. Owner sees a way to generate revenue, so he sells the plates for $5 and every time you bring the plate back, you can refill it for $10 (which is a discount off normal prices). That's a pretty good deal for everyone, this is good. Alternatively, same restaurant has some really popular plates, fancy looking things. Owner sees a way to generate revenue,…

[deleted]

Re: Subscription Hell

#535

Post by icebraining »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #526
icebraining wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's crap is not exactly a great reason for why one can or can't do something. I'm reading a lot of people with strong opinions, but I'd like to see the reasoning behind them.

A restaurant has some really popular plates, fancy looking things. Owner sees a way to generate revenue, so he sells the plates for $5 and every time you bring the plate back, you can refill it for $10 (which is a discount off normal prices). That's a pretty good deal for everyone, this is good. Alternatively, same restaurant has some really popular plates, fancy looking things. Owner sees a way to generate revenue,…

Why would I want this? What's in it for me?

Why must there be something for you? The thing in it for you is the same as before: the plates. If they're no longer worth it for you, that's fine, but that's the same if the owner had kept the same model but simply raised the prices or reduced the size of portions. I don't see why that's "crap" or "inappropriate".

The only exception I see is people who already bought a plate; I fully agree they should be allowed to keep using it as-is for free, since otherwise that's a breach of an existing agreement. But there's no such agreement between the owner and prospective buyers.

Re: Subscription Hell

#536

Post by cornholio »

maltalex wrote: post #311
cornholio wrote: post #35

I disagree with the author that subscriptions are objectively and inherently the superior model for web monetization. An unsung virtue of the ad-driven web it's is inclusiveness and strong worldwide redistribution effects. Everybody sees the ads, however the actual value of a pair of eyeballs is widely variable, by orders of magnitude so. It's therefore profitable to make the content free and distribute it as far as…

> Once you move to a flat fee, this massive redistribution ceases. No one is saying that the fee should be flat. There are ways of selling roughly the same service for different prices - just look at air travel.

Can you cite an example of such tiered subscriptions used by an important media outlet? Price discrimination is not always possible or efficient.

Re: Subscription Hell

#537

Post by TimJYoung »

This is good. We need to get back to letting prices do their thing and provide the proper signals to the publisher/producer and the reader/customer. Pricing helps producers clarify who they want to their customers to be, and it helps customers clarify exactly what they do or don't actually want.

Someone already mentioned software subscriptions and Adobe Photoshop, in the context of professionals vs hobbyists. If Photoshop is too expensive, then someone will create an alternative that is cheaper. That's basically what happened with shareware in the 80s and 90s. When proper price signals are in place, the market will adjust and new opportunities will be created for entry-level players that want to address gaps in the product offerings.

Finally, in terms of accessibility: remember that there are insitutions called libraries that are the great equalizers when it comes to accessing paid content. For many years now one can go in and read any magazine or newspaper that one could want, without paying a dime. If you find yourself complaining about content subscriptions, you might be better served by making sure that your local library is fully-funded.

Re: Subscription Hell

#538

Post by gergles »

jwr wrote: post #487
techsupporter wrote: post #33

At the time of this writing, all of the comments here are focused on content, but I want to touch on the author's bit about software: > It’s not just Bloomberg and media — it’s software too. I used to write everything in Ulysses, a syncing Markdown editor for OS X and iOS. I paid $70 to buy the apps, but then the company switched to a $40 a year annual subscription, and as the dozens of angry reviews and comments ill…

> the company switched to a $40 a year annual subscription, and as the dozens of angry reviews and comments illustrate, that price is vastly out of proportion from the cost of providing the software As a software (SaaS) developer, I find this comment outright bizarre. I find it is hard to make a living with $50/month subscriptions, if you write niche software (and believe me, you DO write niche software, you are not…

Have you considered that perhaps a fucking text editor doesn't need a team of five employees? This isn't a brain-surgery guidance program, it's a Markdown text editor that uses a sync system written and operated by somebody else.

Users are balking at the price because it's garbage to expect them to support some gigantic business for a simple thing. This is very common (1Password has over 75 employees!!!) and the sense of entitlement developers have to try to force their users to support a grandiose business, no matter how bloated and unnecessary the people are, isn't sustainable.

Re: Subscription Hell

#539

Post by pc86 »

always_good wrote: post #58
techsupporter wrote: post #33

At the time of this writing, all of the comments here are focused on content, but I want to touch on the author's bit about software: > It’s not just Bloomberg and media — it’s software too. I used to write everything in Ulysses, a syncing Markdown editor for OS X and iOS. I paid $70 to buy the apps, but then the company switched to a $40 a year annual subscription, and as the dozens of angry reviews and comments ill…

One-time payments for software amount to a pyramid scheme where you benefit from the money of future users. That's not without its downsides either, where your userbase grows indefinitely yet doesn't pay for its own support-email rent. There's obviously a middle ground, like being able to at least use the version you paid for indefinitely but having to pay a smaller price to upgrade. But which direction a pricing str…

IMO except for highly priced products, paying once for software does not entitle you to support unless it's the user forum/SO type. John Doe giving a company $50 three years ago does not give him the right to email people at the company asking for tech support.

Many many companies still allow this, but I think if you want support you should be paying a support fee (e.g. monthly subscription).

Re: Subscription Hell

#540

Post by wilsonnb »

gaius wrote: post #500
gkya wrote: post #154

> Today’s consumers though have significantly higher standards than the original users of the web. Consumers want immersive experiences, well-designed pages with fonts, graphics, photos, and videos coming together into a compelling format. Citation needed. This comes up quite often, and people like to assume they know what users want all the time. But is there actual, scientific evidence that, given the same content,…

Designers design for other designers. They are barely aware of users, and wouldn’t care even if they were.

This is a ridiculous generalization. There are good designers and bad designers in the world. The fact that I have 20 apps pinned to my task bar in Windows that I find enjoyable to use on a daily basis is proof that some designers are capable of making things that their users like to use.
Post reply on HN