To a lot of developers : I'm tired of subscribing to your app!

[09872738]

I am writing a mac application right now. I am puzzling on how to get paid for my work. Like many other, I (personally) hate subscription models. On the other hand: continuous development and a more regular income stream would be welcome. Also take into perspective that a lot of money goes to taxes ('apple tax': 30%, government tax: 21%). Apple tax on subscriptions is lower after a year. Personally I'd prefer to keep the price low, especially for 'loyal users'. I do not have to get rich from my work, but I certainly do not want to go bankrupt trying to 'dedicate to making something great for free'. PS: I hate advertising/collecting and selling user data even more than subscription models, so that is not an option for me.

I am reading this thread with lots of interest to get ideas and suggestions on how to find a good balance between user satisfaction and developer satisfaction. Thanks for your suggestions!

I am kind of in the same boat. Hating subscriptions myself I see why people prefer not to have them.
On the other hand, I believe subscriptions are a consequence of the ridiculously low price level particularly in the mobile space. Apps priced at 4 bucks are considered „expensive“ these days; check out App stores and be surprised how many Apps are actually downvoted for being too costly - at a price of 3, 4 bucks. Consumers seem to simply not appreciate the amount of skill and dedication going into apps. People not even thinking about the cost of their daily multiple cups of cappuchino hesitate to spend the equivalent of just one coffee on an app.
For a lot of devs, there is hardly a way to make a decent living off that kind of income. Subscriptions are nothing but desperate attempts to make a living, the alternative being to go out of business. I am certain that most devs prefer to NOT depend on subscriptions, ads or selling user data; question is: do they have a choice?

 

[AZhappyjack]

I am kind of in the same boat. Hating subscriptions myself I see why people prefer not to have them.
On the other hand, I believe subscriptions are a consequence of the ridiculously low price level particularly in the mobile space. Apps priced at 4 bucks are considered „expensive“ these days; check out App stores and be surprised how many Apps are actually downvoted for being too costly - at a price of 3, 4 bucks.
There is no way a developer could make a living off that, subscriptions are, for a large number of indie developers, nothing but attempts to make a living, the alternative going out of business. I am certain that most devs prefer to NOT depend on subscriptions, ads or selling user data; question is: is there choice?

I agree that software, especially mobile phone apps are ridiculously inexpensive. Personally, while I despise the subscription model, I do not mind paying $10, $20 or more for an app that I consider worthwhile. I paid over $50 all told for Tweetbot for my iPhone, iPad and Mac; and make twice that for Fantastical (before they went all stupid with their subscription model)... I do understand that the developers have to earn enough to make development worth their time and effort.

 

[09872738]

Indeed, its a dilemma...

 

[TiggrToo]

I do. But Netflix, cable and wireless phone service all continue to provide something additional - new content - television, movies, and bandwidth to move content from device to device.

But I refuse to participate in the "money grab" that is the subscription model for software. The ONLY software subscriptions that I have is CARROT weather, which charges the subscription to pay for access to weather data - not for the software, support or updates. I also used the Adobe Photoshop suite for a season, which was required and provided by my employer.

Again, if developers want me to re-up, then give me a reason other than "you have to pay every month to use the product that I have already create". Create an update with compelling features and then I can decide if I want to pay again. I refuse to be held ransom by the notion that the developer "may go out of business" unless I let them bleed me dry every month.

Economy of scale. Netflix has a huge pot of money it can use to give you that content. Developers invariably run on a very slim line.

Software also takes time to develop - I've been 3 weeks now re-engineering one single aspect of a module that had a bug in it. Since this application is internal to our business I've zero concerns with this timescale, however you apparently would have developers work above and beyond, just to appease you.

It is your right to spend your money how you wish, but to demand developers shower you with app gifts on a monthly basis simply because you have a subscription is grossly unfair and not rooted in real life.

And you didn't answer the question about your cell service. Like everyone else you're being massively overcharged for that service, and, if you stop paying you stop getting it. And they do not offer anything new, unless it's another fee they can charge to line their corporate pockets.

Why do you feel that is fine and continue to pay for it, but paying for apps via subscription is seemingly nothing more than a cash grab?

 

[AZhappyjack]

Economy of scale. Netflix has a huge pot of money it can use to give you that content. Developers invariably run on a very slim line.

Software also takes time to develop - I've been 3 weeks now re-engineering one single aspect of a module that had a bug in it. Since this application is internal to our business I've zero concerns with this timescale, however you apparently would have developers work above and beyond, just to appease you.

It is your right to spend your money how you wish, but to demand developers shower you with app gifts on a monthly basis simply because you have a subscription is grossly unfair and not rooted in real life.

And you didn't answer the question about your cell service. Like everyone else you're being massively overcharged for that service, and, if you stop paying you stop getting it. And they do not offer anything new, unless it's another fee they can charge to line their corporate pockets.

Why do you feel that is fine and continue to pay for it, but paying for apps via subscription is seemingly nothing more than a cash grab?

Cell service is just that, a service. I am paying for the ability to send/receive bits to and from my devices.

I don't expect developers to "shower [me] with app gifts on a monthly basis simply because I have a subscription". But IF I am paying monthly, I expect more than just the status quo. I paid for an app based on what I felt was value to me. I bought it (actually, the license to use it) based on the expectations that it would meet my needs for a specific purpose, and that it would continue to do so in its current form. If the developer wants to give me new features, fine - I will take them. But I honestly do not expect them (unless they were promised from the start). But the example of Fantastical 3 is exactly what I am talking about... I paid for v2 features. Then they forced v3 on me and stood there with their hand out. For what? For access to MY data (calendar events)? Ludicrous that they would even have the gall.

I understand that software takes time to develop. I understand that things happen (like bugs). Price your wares accordingly and let me decide if it's a worthwhile investment for my needs. But don't come knocking on my door every month because you had to spend time finding and fixing a bug that YOU allowed to creep into your software. And don't whine about it. THAT is on you.

I stand by my earlier position. Create a product. I will buy it if it offers commensurate value to me. Then iterate and improve your product. Add new features. Then offer the new version to me for a fair price and I will consider purchasing again. But don't expect me to pay you every month on the thought/hope/promise that you will do more for me in the future. I ain't paying.

 

[TiggrToo]

But don't come knocking on my door every month because you had to spend time finding and fixing a bug that YOU allowed to creep into your software. And don't whine about it. THAT is on you.

So you have no clue about software development then. Got it.

And of course, you have never made a single error in your life. And your professional work is always 100% spot on, right? You've never made a mistake at work and fixed it on your employers dime.

Bugs happen, and they're a devil to catch. One OS upgrade can cause a slew of problems that need to be fixed. But in your world that should be done free of charge, right?

And there is no real difference between an app and cell phone service. They both provide a service in one form or other.

 

[AZhappyjack]

So you have no clue about software development then. Got it.

And of course, you have never made a single error in your life. And your professional work is always 100% spot on, right? You've never made a mistake at work and fixed it on your employers dime.

Bugs happen, and they're a devil to catch. One OS upgrade can cause a slew of problems that need to be fixed. But in your world that should be done free of charge, right?

And there is no real difference between an app and cell phone service. They both provide a service in one form or other.

I am not saying that I've never made an error in my life. Of course I have. But when I do, I don't complain to everyone around me and expect them to incur the cost for any recovery effort. Any piece of software with 100 lines of code (maybe less) probably has bugs, but that is not the issue. You have build a straw man here, and I'm not biting.

And again, no, and app is not the same as cell phone service. I bought a license to use the app. That means I should be able to use it, AS IS, as long as I see the value in what it give me. There is nothing new or ongoing about it. Cell service is an ongoing service. Period.

 

[santa]

Both Luminar and On1 Photo Raw are very good potential alternatives for casual shooters. I tried both and they collapsed under the weight of my 100,000+ photo library, requiring minutes and minutes and sometimes hours to rebuild and rebuild the image previews. For huge libraries there are browsers out there but for a Lightroom type program that lets you manipulate images there is no alternative for people with large libraries. I've held off updating to Catalina in the hopes of replacing Photoshop and Lightroom and I find Affinity Photo up to the task in replacing Lightroom but now am going to bite the bullet and get a subscription to LR and PS and stop throwing good money after bad. I've bought Luminar, Photo Raw and Affinity Photo and will no longer need any of them. Oh well. Live and learn. Someday.

 

[s66]

So you have no clue about software development then. Got it.

And of course, you have never made a single error in your life. And your professional work is always 100% spot on, right? You've never made a mistake at work and fixed it on your employers dime.

Bugs happen, and they're a devil to catch. One OS upgrade can cause a slew of problems that need to be fixed. But in your world that should be done free of charge, right?

Let's see if Ford makes a mistake and their cars quit running after 5 min, what happens: warranty, calls action lawsuit, recall, and a fix for free. OR Ford is bankrupt.

Why doesn't Ford release such bad cars: well they know there's a big punishment if they do. So they put whole building full of engineers to make it as good as they possible can, they put together cars they will never sell just to run them continuously in all possible environments from death valley to the highest mountain, from the heat to the cold, they abuse the crap out of those cars to find every single last thing they could find.

If civil engineers would do bridge building like software crafters do their job ... there would be a mountain of debris where the bridge should have gone. What's different ? The design of the bridge is perfected on paper (or in a computer), tested and validated, cross checked with other engineers so that they get as close as they possible can to a 100% certitude that iff they build this bridge in that location in this fashion it WILL be up to the job. Only then come in the workers with steel and concrete, and they are supervised, their work is checked multiple times before it ever comes to be a permanent part of the bridge. Does it ever go wrong: sure it does. Every so often some mistake is not caught by the engineering process, those responsible will face consequences. I remember a course at the university where the professor made us watch all sorts of such collapses. He stated one thing every time after about half the slides: "The engineer responsible for this is not working anymore as an engineer" In case of the other slides: something truly new has been discovered that could happen to materials that was unknown before. But those things are not repeated: once you know about a failure mode, you make sure it never ever happens to you.

And there is no real difference between an app and cell phone service. They both provide a service in one form or other.

Nope, the problem is lack of liability when faulty software is released to the public. And hence you expect to be paid to fix your own mistakes.

 

[TiggrToo]

Let's see if Ford makes a mistake and their cars quit running after 5 min, what happens: warranty, calls action lawsuit, recall, and a fix for free. OR Ford is bankrupt.

Why doesn't Ford release such bad cars: well they know there's a big punishment if they do. So they put whole building full of engineers to make it as good as they possible can, they put together cars they will never sell just to run them continuously in all possible environments from death valley to the highest mountain, from the heat to the cold, they abuse the crap out of those cars to find every single last thing they could find.

If civil engineers would do bridge building like software crafters do their job ... there would be a mountain of debris where the bridge should have gone. What's different ? The design of the bridge is perfected on paper (or in a computer), tested and validated, cross checked with other engineers so that they get as close as they possible can to a 100% certitude that iff they build this bridge in that location in this fashion it WILL be up to the job. Only then come in the workers with steel and concrete, and they are supervised, their work is checked multiple times before it ever comes to be a permanent part of the bridge. Does it ever go wrong: sure it does. Every so often some mistake is not caught by the engineering process, those responsible will face consequences. I remember a course at the university where the professor made us watch all sorts of such collapses. He stated one thing every time after about half the slides: "The engineer responsible for this is not working anymore as an engineer" In case of the other slides: something truly new has been discovered that could happen to materials that was unknown before. But those things are not repeated: once you know about a failure mode, you make sure it never ever happens to you.


Nope, the problem is lack of liability when faulty software is released to the public. And hence you expect to be paid to fix your own mistakes.

You forgot a TL;DR, so I’ll supply one for you:

TL;DR I also don’t know anything about programming so I’m posting a random diatribe comparing writing programs to building cars or bridges instead.

News flash: Ford and other car manufacturers have plenty of problems that owners end up paying through the nose for.

Only the most serious get recalls, most of them are up to the owner to handle.

Nissan, for example, have been pushing their CVT for a decade now and it’s still utterly appalling and costs owners money to fix.

How’s your car analogy working out for you now?

Besides: you pay for parts, consumables, gas etc. on a car perpetually.

A lot of bridges...you pay tolls to use them each time.

You really didn’t think about this very well - both analogies are utterly laughable.

And how much does a car cost to design and build? Tens if not hundreds of Millions.

Bridges? Some can be billions.

A mobile app? Anywhere from $50k to perhaps $1m.

Huge stonking difference....

 

[hanske68]

Let's see if Ford makes a mistake and their cars quit running after 5 min, what happens: warranty, calls action lawsuit, recall, and a fix for free. OR Ford is bankrupt.

Why doesn't Ford release such bad cars: well they know there's a big punishment if they do. So they put whole building full of engineers to make it as good as they possible can, they put together cars they will never sell just to run them continuously in all possible environments from death valley to the highest mountain, from the heat to the cold, they abuse the crap out of those cars to find every single last thing they could find.

If civil engineers would do bridge building like software crafters do their job ... there would be a mountain of debris where the bridge should have gone. What's different ? The design of the bridge is perfected on paper (or in a computer), tested and validated, cross checked with other engineers so that they get as close as they possible can to a 100% certitude that iff they build this bridge in that location in this fashion it WILL be up to the job. Only then come in the workers with steel and concrete, and they are supervised, their work is checked multiple times before it ever comes to be a permanent part of the bridge. Does it ever go wrong: sure it does. Every so often some mistake is not caught by the engineering process, those responsible will face consequences. I remember a course at the university where the professor made us watch all sorts of such collapses. He stated one thing every time after about half the slides: "The engineer responsible for this is not working anymore as an engineer" In case of the other slides: something truly new has been discovered that could happen to materials that was unknown before. But those things are not repeated: once you know about a failure mode, you make sure it never ever happens to you.


Nope, the problem is lack of liability when faulty software is released to the public. And hence you expect to be paid to fix your own mistakes.

This is an understandable, but faulty comparison. Software is hugely complex and should not be compared to mechnanics, or concrete building. Software should (and mostly is) being tested. And even then lots of issues pop op.

You do have a point that in many cases software could (and should) have been tested more thoroughly. The problem is: this takes time and a lot of effort. The end user always pays for this, be it up front or afterwards. Personally I think software should be priced much higher, to allow for all this. Not $20, but $200, maybe even $2000 in some cases. Can you hear the screaming "way too expensive yet?"

Although I am not in favor of subscription software myself, I do get it that "continuous" development is less expensive, and more focussed on incremental improvements. This will in many cases improve quality, reduce development costs and provide for a more fluent user experience. On the other hand: it is often more expensive.

 

[yellow8]

I would like to add my humble contribution, as a developer and as a cutomer:

- As a customer, I don't like the subscriptions either, I prefer one-time licences
- As a developer, it is really, really difficult to earn money with one-time licences. Users are not keen to pay much for app nowadays. Which is the core of the problem. Prices for apps are too low and do not reflect the amount of work required to create the app and the added value for the customers.
- To try to compensate that too low revenue, developers look for alternative. Subscriptions surely help. Subscriptions are honest for software in continuous development, which constantly bring improvements, new functionalities, ...
- A car (mechanic) is a one-time purchase, and the customer has to pay for the maintenance. Software needs maintenance. And yes, a software should not come with bug. Personally, I focus a lot on testing and bug finding but all developers do not do this. But, and this is important, there are external factors for the maintenance of a software: an OS update that can break compatibility, an unforeseen input given to an app (example: a corrupt PDF file given to an app thats uses PDF files), a broken framework, ... All this give a lot of work (count in days, not hours) to developers. That's why the subscription model kind of fit for apps under continuous development.
- For my apps, I chose subscriptions only for those with a planning of new features ahead, or for big apps with heavy maintenance. For simpler apps or with easy maintenance, I chose the lifetime licences (one-time purchase) model. And for some of them, I even make them free... I'm not that good at business .

I hope this helped the conversation!

 

[s66]

You forgot a TL;DR, so I’ll supply one for you:

TL;DR I also don’t know anything about programming so I’m posting a random diatribe comparing writing programs to building cars or bridges instead.

Wrong assumption about me. But it's not about me, it's about the industry that's gotten used to start writing code before they even have analysed the task properly, it's about an industry that as a whole starts to write code first, before designing a solid foundation that by design will not fail. All too many who call themselves software engineers are more like artists: once it works (for them), they go "it's done" even if they have no clue why it worked now while their previous dozen attempts were futile. Any engineer worth their salt would want to know why it worked, and dig in to learn. And fix the problem fundamentally.
Take a look at security issues: there's only a handful of sorts of errors that that represent 99% of the security vulnerabilities in all software made out there. Yet those errors are repeated every single time over and over. Ever single example out there on the website frequented by developers is riddle with security issues. Every single question on stack by those learning to program (or programming) is riddled with overly obvious security issues, and they care absolutely zero about it.
These errors are all very easy to avoid, but not if start by throwing code together.That's the wrong approach to get a good quality product.

There's but one solution to fix software so it's taken a bit more seriously: product liability. Yes the costs will go up, so will the quality. And those not in a low wage country that cares non about privacy of the users, or intellectual property: you should be highly in favour of better quality as that's your only way of staying ahead of the low end of the market (where your cost of living makes it impossible to live off of apps).

 

[hanske68]

Wrong assumption about me. But it's not about me, it's about the industry that's gotten used to start writing code before they even have analysed the task properly, it's about an industry that as a whole starts to write code first, before designing a solid foundation that by design will not fail. All too many who call themselves software engineers are more like artists: once it works (for them), they go "it's done" even if they have no clue why it worked now while their previous dozen attempts were futile. Any engineer worth their salt would want to know why it worked, and dig in to learn. And fix the problem fundamentally.
Take a look at security issues: there's only a handful of sorts of errors that that represent 99% of the security vulnerabilities in all software made out there. Yet those errors are repeated every single time over and over. Ever single example out there on the website frequented by developers is riddle with security issues. Every single question on stack by those learning to program (or programming) is riddled with overly obvious security issues, and they care absolutely zero about it.
These errors are all very easy to avoid, but not if start by throwing code together.That's the wrong approach to get a good quality product.

There's but one solution to fix software so it's taken a bit more seriously: product liability. Yes the costs will go up, so will the quality. And those not in a low wage country that cares non about privacy of the users, or intellectual property: you should be highly in favour of better quality as that's your only way of staying ahead of the low end of the market (where your cost of living makes it impossible to live off of apps).

You've got a good point here. I agree that in general software should be of higher quality (at a higher price). If only things like the app store would focus on quality instead of quantity. Worse even: Apple is focussing heavy on their 'consumer platform' (IOS) and seems to lack interest in their 'pro platform' (macOS). Merging these (which seems to be the road Appel is taking) would flood the macOS platform with huge loads of cheap and low quality 'crap', making things worse.
I totally agree that any software that is published should be tested seriously well with proper attention for security and respecting user privacy. Why doesn't anybody seem to care about that any more (or take lack hereof for granted, which is even worse)?

 

[TiggrToo]

product liability

These mobile applications were dealing with here for Pete’s sake. The way you go on this is life and bloody death. And there’sa reason you pay as little as you do.

You want perfection? Cough up. Let’s start with paying $5,000 for your calendar app, and I’ll give you your silly warranty.

Enough with this idealistic crusade of yours. You’ve taken this to a laughable and hideously ridiculous extreme.

And I still maintain you don’t know what you’re talking about.

I do.

I develop software.

I’ve lost count how many times a bug has appeared due to an issue in an underlying library, or the system the app or program is running on, or an external sensor going haywire or...

If you had the first clue about this you’d stop with this rather uneducated crusade. You don’t ergo you witter on.

I’ve no more interest in dealing with this so this will be my last post here with you on the matter.
[automerge]1594382053[/automerge]

Why doesn't anybody seem to care about that any more (or take lack hereof for granted, which is even worse)?

They do. They want to stay in business to continue to support you.

Try developing applications for a living before just up and whining about developers.

 

[960design]

There is a "deadly" trend among developers: subscribe, subscribe !!
We cannot afford to pay your monthly rent!
I understand you need to live, make an app and I will be happy to pay for it because you put hours of work on it.
But once.
Are you going to add more value to your app? Then you will have n. 2 and if we find it's valuable we'll buy it.
What are you going to give me every month?! Who knows
You are going to take my money first, and fix bugs that shouldn't have been there.
Please, become less greedy 💰💰💰💰 and I will be your customer.

As a developer I completely share your opinion. I hate subscriptions even though the CPA likes them. ( constant income is better in their opinion VS the ups and downs of single purchase.
Here is my point of view:
Application stays entirely on the device -> single purchase
Application uses monthly server bandwidth -> subscription to cover the server costs

 

[hanske68]

This whole discussion makes little sense. I suspect many users are more greedy than the developers putting countless hours into developing apps. Exceptions exist though: don't purchase apps.

I am convinced that in most cases the subscription model is not about "getting more money" but about "providing more value", spending less time on maintaining multiple versions, and more on developing a continuously updating app.

That aside, as a user I am not fond of "subscriptions for everything, just because we can". I am willing to consider if I really like the app and.or I think the developer is genuinely trying to offer 'value for money'. If I can choose, I tend to choose to pay once. Personally, I make an exception for indie developers, trying to make a living out of their software product.

 

[manny88]

Our app is on a different online market place and comes with a 7 day free trial. Recently one user within the free trial period requested support for their store which took us over 2 hours to do. Now this support is free, whether inside or outside of the free trial. But from the start his emails were very rude, for example his subseqent email rudely accused us of ignoring him just because we hadn’t responded to his support request within the hour (we’re a team of 2).

Regardless he didn’t remove the app before the 8th day, and on the 9th requested a refund. I replied we have a strict no refund policy, and I gladly took his money. He replied with some bs of how he was not going to recommend our app to his 40,000 subscribers or something, which I doubt he would of done having uninstalled it anyway.

But yes we do have a strict no refund policy because of reasons like this, 7 days is plenty enough to test our app and receive support for any issues, and we go the extra mile (like we did with this guys requests). And if you still don’t like the app or support we give, and uninstall it before the free trial ends, hey guess what, there’s no charge, however many hours we put in to making things work for your need. And yes we use to offer refunds as goodwills, before I realised what our value was. You won’t get many people in other sectors who would not charge for hours of work.

But let’s be honest, a lot of people are just cheapskates. You can easily spend $5 in one day on McDonald’s, but hell if you want to spend that on an app once a month which benefits you or use regularly.

RoadWarrior increased their charge from $4.99 to $9.99 a month. Good for them. I use it for my second job and it helps a hell of a lot to mark all the destinations for deliveries, I’ll gladly pay that price. My app is only a supplemental income, and wouldn’t even be that if it was a one off payment.

Everyone wants something for nothing, you’ll spend your money elsewhere without a second thought, but are up in arms to spend it on something you use regularly.

Shame on all your cheapskates, put effort into creating your own app, or stop using the app and live without, you’re just part of a self entitled generation, who throw their rattle out the pram screaming waaa waaa waaa I want it I want it I want it.

Because some of us have families to feed and bills to pay and really don’t care about your entitlement.

 

[BiggAW]

As a user, I've pretty much stopped buying software as much as I can. Most of what I need is available for free, although I have licensed copies of Windows, Office, and Lightroom.

In general, the world we live in is that no one wants to put the resources forward to making good software, so virtually all software is some level of incomplete/buggy/doesn't really work properly. I've seen all sorts of web-based systems that are total disasters or sometimes don't work at all. We've tried to make too many things electronic way too quickly, and we're paying the price now for layers upon layers of cut corners. Meanwhile, every company wants to re-invent the wheel and do things their own way, or customize things because they think they know better than everyone else, and the result is that the wheels are squarish and don't roll well or at all.

I think the future is open source software, although even that's not perfect, and we've found over and over again that some open source code hasn't been reviewed for years or decades.

 

[icanhazmac]

Everyone wants something for nothing, you’ll spend your money elsewhere without a second thought, but are up in arms to spend it on something you use regularly.

Shame on all your cheapskates, put effort into creating your own app, or stop using the app and live without, you’re just part of a self entitled generation, who throw their rattle out the pram screaming waaa waaa waaa I want it I want it I want it.

Because some of us have families to feed and bills to pay and really don’t care about your entitlement.

I am really sick and tired of hearing about the plight of the poor, starving developer. I am also sick and tired of having the same starving developers call the rest of us cheap and entitled. I buy my software, I don't want to rent it.

Write better software, innovate and have a cash flow gameplan.

I am going to again tell my tale of MS Office. I bought Office 2007 and still use it on my PC. This does NOT make me cheap! I just have literally ZERO reasons to upgrade. If Microsoft doesn't innovate why would I upgrade? They know damn well that the Office Suite is for the most part a static product, IMHO the average user has not seen a worthwhile, needed or game changing feature in a new version in a VERY long time. Microsoft knows this and says "how can I FORCE people to upgrade?" we will cut off security support for the old versions (which is BS as they are fixing their exploits in their own poor coding) and make the only new standalone versions have way less functionality and a high cost as compared to our subscription model. Oh and tie it to some cloud support that most people probably don't want anyway.

How about this... if you INNOVATE and offer users something they want and don't have they will upgrade/buy.

 

[yellow8]

How about this... if you INNOVATE and offer users something they want and don't have they will upgrade/buy.

Yup, for which they'll want to pay 1.99$, while you spent 6 months 7d/7 developing it correctly.

 

[icanhazmac]

Yup, for which they'll want to pay 1.99$, while you spent 6 months 7d/7 developing it correctly.

Well, perhaps you chose the wrong profession, I hear the trades are hiring, perhaps you can learn to plumb?

#learntoplumb

 

[BigMcGuire]

Gone are the days when one had to shell out $40-$60+ for a piece of software that you got on a CD Rom at the computer store. Now days, people expect their application to work on all devices, all platforms, and to sync between them all for little to no $.

I can program, but I definitely don't have the skill or time to manage several platforms and/or a syncing service to keep this up - along with the support required to handle that.

I know a developer who popped out some really great (yet small) iOS games/applications but it's really hard to make a living off of those because so few people actually spend $.

I have no problem subscribing to applications I find I use a lot, but a subscription definitely keeps me from trying a lot of the applications out there.

A $1.99-$3.99 application? I'm a LOT more inclined to try those just because I like supporting small devs and because I don't feel obligated to use the application because of a "subscription" - I can file it away as a useful tool and use it when I want to.

 

[AZhappyjack]

Gone are the days when one had to shell out $40-$60+ for a piece of software that you got on a CD Rom at the computer store. Now days, people expect their application to work on all devices, all platforms, and to sync between them all for little to no $.

I can program, but I definitely don't have the skill or time to manage several platforms and/or a syncing service to keep this up - along with the support required to handle that.

I know a developer who popped out some really great (yet small) iOS games/applications but it's really hard to make a living off of those because so few people actually spend $.

I have no problem subscribing to applications I find I use a lot, but a subscription definitely keeps me from trying a lot of the applications out there.

A $1.99-$3.99 application? I'm a LOT more inclined to try those just because I like supporting small devs and because I don't feel obligated to use the application because of a "subscription" - I can file it away as a useful tool and use it when I want to.

I have absolutely no problem paying for an app. I've paid over $40 for multiple apps. But I refuse to participate in the monthly shake down. I get it that developers deserve to be paid for their work. But no handouts here. Do the work. If it's something that benefits me, I will gladly pay. Then keep developing. If the next version gives me what I perceive to be value, I will gladly pay again. If not, I won't. But don't coming knocking every month for a payment via subscription. I am not your daddy. And I already give to plenty of charities. Earn my business, and I will gladly be your customer.

Oh, yeah, don't even think of trying to hold my data hostage.

 

[icanhazmac]

Unfortunately this seems the natural progression of things. Like many other fields where labor can be farmed out coding is now (and has been for a while) outsourced to markets where the labor rate is low. I have seen a few references from devs that state even if you have a great app it is very quickly copied by <insert cheap labor country here> devs and given away free or for pennies and your scraped data is then collected and sold.