App Subscriptions and Standalone Alternatives

[AZhappyjack]

Thing is: it isn't; however much sense it might make to you.

It's really quite absurd. The idea that I buy a pair of scissors, and then the manufacturer turns up on the doorstep a year later and demands a "subscription fee" because I'm still using the scissors and they have – in the mind of the manufacturer – become a service to me is stark raving bonkers.

I buy the thing. It works. I should not then have to pay again to use the thing that I bought that works. It should keep working. What developers are doing is removing the working product for a money-grab – and for that I blame Apple; they should not permit this.

Now, if the world around the thing I've bought changes – 32-bit app no longer works on 64-bit OS, etc. – then sure, there's a cost to pay. But that isn't what's happening. What happening is that developers are taking the one-time payment, and then later adding a pay-to-play. I genuinely have nothing for contempt for this behaviour – it's theft, imo – and I will never buy another product form a company that behaves in this manner.

The only part you left out was that SOME software uses proprietary formats for the output/storage. Should one stop the subscription, SOME purveyors of this racket don't allow you to access YOUR data.

 

[KALLT]

Thing is: it isn't; however much sense it might make to you.

It's really quite absurd. The idea that I buy a pair of scissors, and then the manufacturer turns up on the doorstep a year later and demands a "subscription fee" because I'm still using the scissors and they have – in the mind of the manufacturer – become a service to me is stark raving bonkers.

I buy the thing. It works. I should not then have to pay again to use the thing that I bought that works. It should keep working. What developers are doing is removing the working product for a money-grab – and for that I blame Apple; they should not permit this.

You are misstating what I said; I have not touched upon this issue you are describing.

It is one thing to stop updating an app and replace it with a new (version of) an app that the user can purchase. It is unacceptable to me as well that developers (can) misuse automatic app updates to disable functionality the user has paid for and demand payment to unlock it again. This is unfair behaviour and it should be disallowed.

Apple has not provided any means to offer paid updates or easy migration if the developer publishes a new version as a new app (there is no direct update path). I am confident that Apple knows this, but refuses to address this. Instead they encourage developers to go the subscription route (as they do themselves).

I think that there is a place for app subscriptions when apps are more and more like services. However, I do think paid upgrades should be possible.

 

[harriska2]

As someone opposed to product subscriptions, I've found – because it wasn't a conscious decision that I sat down and thought about – that I've also stopped buying non-subscription apps. My fear being that the app will go subscription, and I'll be ripped off again (four, so far). So, the paid apps moving to subscription thing is losing sales for non-subscription apps. I really do think Apple should sort this out.

I’ve stopped upgrading Readdle and Goodreader apps because both sound like they are moving to subscription.

 

[Huntn]

I am totally adverse to software subscriptions. I did recently upgrade to a stand alone purchase of 1Password, by downloading it from their site (not from Apple App Store) and looking at purchase options. They still try to penalize you for the stand alone version by allowing only 3 devices. With a subscription there is no limit. Their software is good enough that I will use it on my Mac, my iPad and iPhone, and will take other measures to get passwords on my PC.

I just discovered a new company going subscription- Good Sync. Now they are selling a subscription and I won't be upgrading as long as their current software continues to work and if there are other stand alone purchase options available like SyncMate.

 

[grmlin]

I'm done with buying expensive apps in AppStores of Apple until Apple forbids developers/publishers replacing premium apps with f2p crap versions of the same app.

It's unacceptable and I'm a lost customer now. :/

 

[audero]

This is a tricky one because alternatives to professional, paid apps will have different, or reduced feature sets so it ultimately depends on your workflow and the features you need.

It is one thing to stop updating an app and replace it with a new (version of) an app that the user can purchase. It is unacceptable to me as well that developers (can) misuse automatic app updates to disable functionality the user has paid for and demand payment to unlock it again. This is unfair behaviour and it should be disallowed.

Agreed.

 

[icanhazmac]

This is not exactly an answer to your question, but I always think of MS Office in these discussions because they have mostly moved Office to a subscription-based model. But, I actually don't mind it that much because 1) the price is pretty decent ($70/year for an individual or $100/year for a family), 2) you get a lot more (Skype minutes, 1TB OneDrive, support), and 3) they do still offer a one-time license ($150 for just Word/Excel/Powerpoint), which is why I said "mostly" above.

To me, this is an example of how to do subscriptions correctly: price fairly, add extras that are actually useful (to many), and still offer the one-time license, even if its price/features make clear that it's not the preferred method anymore.

I'll offer a counterpoint. I believe software like Office is the absolute worst example of a package that is subscription done "right".

Office, short of security updates and/or bug fixes requires no other intervention by the developer so why should I be forced to rent it? Furthermore Office does not really innovate, when was the last time you were waiting on pins and needles for the next version of Office for a feature? They simply stop doing security updates (to their own vulnerable software) which forces you to upgrade.

My last purchase was Office 2007 and it still serves 100% of my purposes to this day and personally I have no compatibility issues YMMV. I understand that 13 years on the same software is highly unusual but my point is that it continues so serve. This is the only reason everyone is switching to the subscription model. How is this different from a well cared for car that lasts longer than anticipated? Upon retirement I will never use office again, I will switch to the apple products or OpenOffice etc.

It is my opinion that the average home user of office (not already on 365) has been using that version for a long time and has no need or desire to upgrade, unless forced. Coupling office with cloud space does not IMHO make a subscription worth it.

Where I see good uses of the subscription model: continuous cost services / software. Examples:

iCloud/Dropbox: The storage and bandwidth costs never go away so paying monthly for the service seems appropriate.
Ant-virus/Malware/etc: Threats change daily if not hourly so developers of these packages are constantly updating.

Where I see the subscription model as a money grab:

Software that performs X service with little or no changes or improvements coming on a regular basis. If you truly innovate and offer feature upgrades I will gladly pay the upgrade fee or buy again.

 

[mj_]

As someone opposed to product subscriptions, I've found – because it wasn't a conscious decision that I sat down and thought about – that I've also stopped buying non-subscription apps.

This is an interesting observation. After reading it I sat down and thought about this myself, and you're right. Now that GoodSync went subscription only and the company does not offer perpetual licenses any longer I found myself looking for alternatives. However, there was this unknown something in the back of my mind that kept me from pulling the trigger, and thanks to you I now know what it was: the fear of getting tricked into yet another purchase that will go subscription only sooner rather than later.

 

[grmlin]

I also think that they should change their policies about it. It's kinda time when we were ordering some great healthcare mobile app development from professional web devs, and then we simply had some issues with Apple AppStores because of it's policies, which should be regulated more accurate for every application group.

they should of course change that. It's one thing if a major system update kills compatibility with an app. Happened to lots of games and applications in the past. That is the same on PCs for example.
But killing my paid app, without my consent, while using it, is unacceptable.

 

[Spacewiz]

I totally agree about the insidious nature of subscription-based apps. I used Adobe CS6 for 8+ years until I was forced to Catalina (long story, Apple replaced a very problemmatic 2018 MBP). During that time, it did all I needed; the "upgrades" were just filled with bloatware and higher cost...so they're gone, never to return. I've since switched to the Affinity Suite and am quite happy with their products.

As for the Quicken software, I knew I was on a 20 month subscription; and knew at the end that I would still keep basic functionality. I was OK with that and thought I'd give it a try...but when the rubber marketing hype hit the road, I was left feeling robbed. Their "Premier" service was pitiful, the online connectivity was sketchy at best...often taking days to update transactions, and not doing so accurately. My subscription expired a few days ago; I now see a window containing an non-dismissible dialog on its border asking me to renew. Could care less about losing the crappy online connectivity, but that "nag dialog" is the scuzziest thing I have ever seen in a program. To add to that, during one of their "update" cycles, Quicken converted my 20+ years of data into their own proprietary file format, making migration to another program impossible (or very very difficult). I'll use a paper checkbook register before those greedy b@$t@rd$ get another penny.

If we stand together and reject the greed of some of these companies, then perhaps things will chnage. We can (and should) pass judgement with our hard-earned money, we have the power to do so, all we need is the collective will.

Oh yeah, got rid of Netflix a long time ago after they hiked their prices yet again...don't miss them either.