I’ve only purchased like 3 apps in like 15 years. Every now and then I donate to an open source project. I used to pay for Office, Adobe Cloud, Sony Vegas way back in the day. What happened was the free and open source became far beyond capable than my technical ability and if I needed pay software, it was for work at a company that purchased licenses themselves. It was fast forward in mobile apps. There was already 20 years of open source desktop software being adapted to mobile even if less limited it covered what I and many people would want to do with a mobile device was quickly covered.
Now it’s a matter of getting people to stumble on your software first and get them to pay before they learn of any of the truly free stuff. Cloud services where storage/processing is fully off your device and way better in ways are what can’t be fully replicated as a free service for people. A NAS can work out to be cheaper for storage but way less functional and more hassle for most people
I’m cool with paying a few bucks for an ad free version as long as it’s not a subscription. But it’s annoying that it’s often only available as an in-app purchase that doesn’t work without google play services.
Paying once is fine. Subs are not to be tolerated.
Subs are fine for services. I personally also think they provide a better incentive structure. But they’re often abused
deleted by creator
I blame Apple for setting the standard of $1-$3 for an app with lifetime updates. And also for making it so old apps stop working on newer OSes after just a few years. The business model was broken from the start. It was great at first but the bubble burst in record time.
That was nearly unheard of just 20 years ago.
I understand your sentiment, but a lot of that isn’t right.
Early iPhone apps were going for $10-20. So many developers being okay with just data harvesting plus so many devices out there made the $0.99 / free with ads model dominate – people got used to “free” apps from the big guys (Facebook, Google, whoever).
iOS apps are pretty resilient to OS updates. They usually only totally break when huge changes happen (dropping 32-bit support, etc) and those happen once a decade.
Tons of Windows software didn’t survive the 3.1 to 95 transition. A bunch died on 98 to XP, too. In the Apple world, a lot got left behind on the Mac when they went from PowerPC to Intel processors in 2007, or when they dropped 32-bit libraries.
I think the ideal model is something like 1-time purchase w/ 12 months of updates.
Software does often require ongoing maintenance. So after 12 months, no more updates, and it works as long as it continues to work, without any new features or patches.
deleted by creator
Yes!
Yeah, you can’t expect devs to actively work on an app indefinitely just because you gave them a few bucks that one time. It makes no sense financially if the app isn’t exceptionally successful.
IIRC app stores downrank apps that are not regularly updated too, hence the vague “bug-fixes and improvements” updates in many apps. But seriously, how much could a developer update in a calculator, habit/medicine tracker, sky map, or any other app that is a complete feature?
Even if the app is relatively simple and feature-complete, you need to go back to it at least once a year to make sure it complies with the latest guidelines/restrictions, replace deprecated APIs, and check dependencies for security issues.
Simple enough for a calculator, but if the app needs to do stuff in the background, communicate with web services, play multimedia content, or use the camera, it can become very time consuming.
It may make sense on Macs where users accept making a $10 or $20 one-time payment, but very few mobile users accept paying for apps at all, let alone $5 or $10. In that case, you need a lot of buyers or you’ll end up maintaining it out of pocket.
It could be updated to follow the newest design guidelinestm
Which would also prevent sales from dropping and not solely benefit the user. But in a case like this, i’d argue it’s reasonable to give people who bought v1 a long time ago no free access to v2.
As with anything, nuance exists. Does a monthly / annual donation to a FOSS developer count as a subscription?
I have a few things I’ve paid once for additional function or even banner ad removal that don’t receive updates. Though at a glance I don’t see anything I have installed that has a recurring cost and receives no updates.
I suppose there’s a fine difference between what I consider a subscription, and supporting active development of something I use regularly, but that difference probably varies person to person.
Then use FOSS apps.
Atleast they kindly ask, NOT “BUY THE PAID VERSION OR FUCK YOU, NOTHING FOR YOU, GO TO HELL”.I’d make the distinction between paid app and subscriptions. I think most people don’t mind paying once for something. But every single thing is nowadays a subscription model, it’s ridiculous.
A ‘free’ app the trys to shove either a sub or purchase is the same annoyance.
To a certain extent I get it though. It’s one of the fundamental failings of the App Store. In the olden days you paid for a piece of software and whatever was on the disc is what you got. When next year’s version came out you had to go to the store and pay for that one too. When the App Store came out all of a sudden Apple and their customers expected devs to keep supporting apps on newer platforms with changing APIs. You can’t develop with no income, so developers turned to subscriptions and similar.
There needs to be a better way but Apple makes money off the way it works now.
I don’t know why the micro subscription model hasn’t become a thing. I get that even if you do basically no new features on an app it still needs to be updated from time to time as Android changes. So why not have apps be a buck or two a year?
It seems they’re either free, or a $8+ a month. All the fitness apps are insanely priced considering they have very little development and all the data within is crowdsourced. Plus I guarantee they’re selling your health info.
I would have no issue at all subscribing to dozens of apps if they were super cheap. You get a lot of people chipping in $2 and that adds up quick. I’m guessing the reason they don’t is transaction fees and app store cuts.
Also most people do not want to pay for an app. They simply don’t.
They either don’t mind the ads or just buy a subscription, but don’t even think about spending like 1€ once to never be bothered.
Every single thing is not subscription today
Instead of looking for “free” look for “open source”
Anyway a lot of these developers get it wrong. Don’t bully people into paying with aggressive or misleading tactics as that just alienates your user base. Instead make the app so good to use that people are willing to pay for extra features. The free version should be so good that people stop and wonder how they can support the dev. Then offer a feature that is genuinely useful.
deleted by creator
Then uuuuh stop using them?
One of the things the article is complaining about is that many apps look like they are free in the store with an optional subscription, but once you’ve downloaded them you find out basic features are locked behind a subscription.
Personally the worst trend I’ve started seeing is “free” apps that are great for a few days until you find out they’ve been silently giving you a free trial of the premium subscription and now you’ll have to pay up to keep using basic features. They’re hoping now that you’ve spent some time learning and using the app you’re invested enough to start paying to keep using it. You could be getting yourself into one of these apps and not even know it til a week later, it’s infuriating.
Does the store not have an “in-app fees” subtext on the app page?
If an app doesnt have that flag but still uses them, you can report it.
You can either have 0 of my money forever
Or you can have a reasonable amount of it for lifetime access, at minimum, to the version I purchased
Honestly, these days I use fdroid as my primary app store. It’s been an amazing way to cut through the junk and find great apps.
deleted by creator
I just found out about this interval timer. It works great
Same but with the droidify client. FOSS is life.
deleted by creator
Unpopular opinion: I’m fine with any try before you buy model as long as (1.) it’s clearly stated up front before downloading and also (2.) it allows you to try enough of the app to decide if it does what you want or not
Then don’t use them?
Literally never experienced this. Try fdroid
If it isn’t FOSS, it’s not free.
Notesnook took down a basic Markdown feature as Premium and its foss. I felt like betrayed
Did they!? I’m self-hosting the server and haven’t noticed any functionality disappear. Markdown is a local feature you can toggle in settings, not something you should need a server for.
Edit Oh my god, they did. And ligatures, too. What a way to punch the FOSS community in the face! I think if you set up your own server and connect to it that arbitrary and coercive limitation may disappear.
