298
Apps that shouldn't be Subscriptions
(discuss.tchncs.de)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
298 points (97.2% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54746 readers
403 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The problem with one time purchases is that you might be investing time in an app that later will go out of business. Keeping an app up to date requires real constant work, before you even think of adding features and fixing bugs. People got used to paying 2 bucks for an app and keep it forever. That's completely unsustainable.
But yeah, sure, some companies push it.
On the flip side, this is one of the reasons open source projects can be really great. When a community of people can contribute to something to make it better over time and when people can fix their own problems with an app you can get something really great that can get updates sustainably without a subscription model... Everybody just kind of contributes what they can to get what they want. Of course, maintaining an open source project is work and has its own problems and volunteer contributions aren't necessarily sustainable either and aren't great for large chunks of work... But there is something nice about the model of "everybody contributes to this thing a little to make something better than we'd be able to make on our own," even if that's a bit idealistic in practice, haha.
Yup. I used FOSS apps whenever possible and have contributed to several in the past, both with code and tips. I don't mind having way less "features" as long as the core functionality is there.
It's not like the entire foundation of software and computing and essentially all of Silicon Valley was built upon a non-subscription model. It's completely unsustainable.
Yes, you are totally right. The specific thing we have lost is the right to buy a specific version of an app and forgo future updates.
It was built on yearly releases of software instead, also known as yearly subscriptions.
Those are two blatantly different things. There's nothing wrong with selling new versions of software.
There's everything wrong with removing the ability to use software you paid for unless you continue to actively pay for it.
Except using software without updates nowadays is a very bad idea because of the Internet and security being a real concern.
Yeah, so many really nice apps that were abandoned since the 99 cent app doesn't pay the development bills.
I don't know much about app design so what work does it take to keep an app up to date and is it possible just to not update it?
On the low end, yearly OS upgrade compliance.
On the high end, dealing with the Kafkaesque whims of the App and Play stores randomly deciding to nuke your app (and thus business) from orbit as an "oopsie"
Specially in mobile, if you don't update your app yearly, it will probably be removed from the store soon. Google and Apple can randomly Review your app and decide that it failed review even if it passed in the past. And fixing it to pass review is often not trivial and can take weeks of work.
Also, with each new version of Android and iOS, your app can stop working or become outdated. The platform API changes frequently.
Finally, if you use any third party libraries in your app, vulnerabilities might be found in the that you'll want to have patched ASAP.
Oh and of course, you need to pay 99$ a year for Appstore access.