this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2023
296 points (97.1% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54716 readers
217 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
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

What is the most useless app that you have seen being given as a subscription?

For me, I tried a 'minimalist' launcher app for Android that had a 7 day trial or something and they had a yearly subscription based model for it. I was aghast. I would literally expect the app to blow my mind and do everything one can assume to go that way. In a world, where Nova Launcher (Yes, I know it has been acquired by Branch folks but it still is a sturdy one) or Niagara exist plus many alternatives including minimalist ones on F Droid, the dev must be releasing revolutionary stuff to factor in a subscription service.

Second, is a controversial choice, since it's free tier is quite good and people like it so much. But, Pocketcasts. I checked it's yearly price the other day, and boy, in my country, I can subscribe to Google Play Pass, YouTube Premium and Spotify and still have money left before I hit the ceiling what Pocketcasts is asking for paid upgrade.

Also, what are your views on one time purchase vs subscriptions? Personally, I find it much easier to purchase, if it's good enough even if it was piratable, something if it is a one time purchase rather than repetitive.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RatzChatsubo@lemm.ee 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I'm a big fan of the way Plex does it. I paid like 100 dollars a decade ago and all my apps stay up to date forever

What's great about it is that it's optional and not forced on you. I'm a Plexamp power user so it makes sense to me with my expansive music collection

[–] WashedOver@lemmy.ca 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (9 children)

This seems to be the model I've witnessed with many apps over the years. Free at first to get traction and users, then ads, then pay one time fee to get rid of ads, then subscription to keep using the app.

Then there are those that wouldn't even pay a single fee and get upset at the thought as everything should be free.

The part that is upsetting is the contributions the early community made is monetized when they were ~~they~~ there for the benefit of the community.

I do see there are costs to maintaining and updating these apps so I can understand a need to keep revenue flowing for these future costs. The one time payment is a hell of a deal for years with updates to accommodate the revisions needed for each system update let alone functionality improvements.

In the old days we would buy software for our PC and that was it. There wasn't really any updates or further support for newer versions of Windows. The software would become very insecure or just stop functioning altogether with enough changes to windows.

It's hard to find the right balance. I know I only want to pay once, or heck never, but I want these upgrades and updates too.

[–] Thorned_Rose@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Enshittification :(

[–] Pirasp@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I have a photography program, that is a "buy once" model, but if you bought it, you can get a subscription for updates on-top. Once you unsubscribe the updates stop, but aren't retracted. I find that to be a very reasonable solution.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 9 points 11 months ago

All of them

[–] speeding_slug@feddit.nl 9 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Might be a slightly unpopular opinion, but Volumio (software for a raspberry pi to run it as a headless audio system). It's good, it's relatively well maintained and works. But paying 7,50 a month for this software to get multiroom audio, Tidal integration and some other stuff is ridiculously expensive. That's nearly 90 euro a year and the only thing that is actually an addition server side is syncing settings across devices and the Tidal integration (requires license fees iirc).

And sure, I can't buy multiroom speakers for that kind of money, but damn, is it expensive.

[–] vortexsurfer@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I tried Volumio recently, and was prepared to maybe get the paid version if it was as great as it seemed. But the user interface was so god-awful! Absolutely unusable for me. Would never pay for it.

Instead I googled a bit and found Moode - a million times better, and free. Don't remember if it does multiroom audio, but personally I don't need that currently.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] nhgeek@beehaw.org 8 points 11 months ago

I generally hate them in consumer-targeted apps. Theoretically, there's nothing wrong with the model. Devs have to keep the lights on, especially if there is a cloud service behind the app. It's all about what pricing model they set. However, pricing is hard. A lot of companies really screw this up right at the start. I also think a lot of businesses cannot resist the temptation to boil the frog and ask for more and more over time, until their pricing is way out of alignment with value delivery.

[–] Hiro8811@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Don't remember the name but there was a magisk module manager that had ads and didn't even install the modules. Just downloaded them after an ad. It asked money for removing ads

[–] beto@lemmy.studio 5 points 11 months ago

There's was a scanner app that I loved, for Android. Turned into a subscription, even though most people use it less than once a month and even though the app was basically complete and never got updates.

[–] Anders429@programming.dev 5 points 11 months ago

Companies are using subscription models because it has proven to be far more profitable than a one-time purchase. Why sell the product to each person just once when you can sell it to them over and over again? You no longer have to constantly develop new products and versions, and you now only have to maintain your existing product.

And it works because people buy it.

[–] NuraShiny@hexbear.net 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No app should be a subscription

[–] Scrollone@feddit.it 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Keeping an app up to date takes time and work. Especially if it needs cloud services (e.g. multiplayer games).

Good luck trying to maintain an app forever if people just pay it once.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LeylaLove@hexbear.net 4 points 11 months ago

Adobe CC. They've added new features recently to justify a subscription, but it's still not that good of a pitch. Some editors will have offline PCs so that their software doesn't get fucked up by anything (SUPER common in music), so having a subscription model works against professional users of their software.

[–] blakeus12@hexbear.net 4 points 11 months ago

a VR app called "Supernatural" that was a fitness based beat saber clone

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›