Hope they don’t do that with Pixelmator Pro (on macOS)!
Even if they did would seem we would be grandfathered in, as with photo.
I think this is the first “going to subscription” article that I’ve read that notes the benefit (revenue) provided by occasional users. I find myself in that group regularly. In fact there are quite a number of apps that I’d buy at $5, $10, $15 (one-time) that maybe I’d use once or twice a year. Theoretically I could subscribe for a month to get the same use, but that doesn’t actually happen in practice. Often I just do whatever task I’m trying to do another way, or with another app.
Anyway, just thought that was interesting that they brought that up.
MacStories wrote an article about this, in which they mention a $54.99 lifetime purchase option (that I don’t see in the Pixelmator blog):
I’m a user of Pixelmator Pro and hope they don’t go to subscription model on Mac. Im getting tired of getting $10/“monthed” by every service.
2 Likes
Yes, this is a lot of “coffee”, I could not drink over the day…
3 Likes
I feel like this is something they will do in the coming year, if Photo’s move is successful. All of their reasoning for moving Photo to subscription pricing equally applies to Pro. 
I love Thom Hogan’s take on things. In this case it applies to more than just cameras and photography.
… in the best Internet practices three-choices fashion, we have the usual Pro Monthly (sucker), Pro Yearly (best deal), and Lifetime (don’t like subscriptions and want to pay more) confusion.
1 Like
I hope they could build a DAM out of this subscription money. I like using Pixelmator to edit photos but using the built-in iOS photo library is a pain.
And actually offering monthly subscriptions is useful. A number of services at least (thought I remembered apps too - but not sure) quote “monthly” pricing, but then won’t let you do less than a full year.
It honestly irks me that everybody uses the “cup of coffee” analogy, for two reasons…
Second, it’s a completely nonsense comparison. The price of a cup of coffee has absolutely zero to do with the value of any given app - especially if the app is in a category where it should have a documentable value. Comparing a $5 game to a cup of coffee is one thing, since the value / ROI of a game is next-to-impossible to quantify. Comparing a cup of coffee to a productivity app - which has a calculable ROI - is another thing entirely.
And second, it just implies the existence of a large stack of money that you could be giving them if you wanted to (“skip your coffee, buy X” - I’ve actually seen that logic before). Not everybody has a $10/day coffee habit to mine for spare change, and even if they do there are dozens of apps / services trying to mine it.
Yeah. “No immediate plans” doesn’t mean “no plans”. 
Not to mention the highly-malleable definition of “lifetime” in recent years. “Oh, you thought we were serious? We’ve improved the app, and we just realized it’s not economically viable to give you what you thought you were paying for. But here - have a discount for a year or so on our new higher-priced subscription.”
2 Likes
This is my main grievance I think. Every app that does this seems to forget that they’re not the only app asking this of you. It’s not “only $10 a month!”. It’s “there’s 10 apps asking this so $100 a month and I’m going to have to leave services”.
I’m far from a heavy user of photo editing apps, but I do think this is a poor choice, simply because this market is SO FULL. If you’re going to pay $10/month, you are surely going to shop around, and at that point I feel these “weaker” players miss out. Many customers keen enough to pay that much for photo editing are going to surely start “going pro” and picking up Adobe or Procreate.
1 Like