I used to pay for Pocket Casts because I wanted to have cross platform interoperability and Premium user can play Pocket Cast on Windows as well. For $12/year, I will gladly pay. The moment they increase the price by doubling it, I relook at the amount of time I spent on Windows listening to podcast and saw that I don’t do that as often anymore and so, I cancelled the subscription.
I much rather developer charge for features. I’d gladly pay $12/year again just to have the convenience of listening to podcast on other platforms. I don’t need the cloud storage - what does it do anyway?
I would happily pay for upgrades . I only remember one breaking change for macOS where devs had to upgrade apps. Maybe there were more I guess.
I bought Alfred/Hazel 4-5 years ago and never was I asked for an additional payment. Same with BetterTouchTool. If these devs would ask, I’d honestly and happily pay it, these are brilliant apps! I did pay for Keyboard Maestro 10 upgrade although I don’t use it that much lol (since I’m all in all Alfred/BTT), just as a token of appreciation for the quality of that app and the upgrade model the dev has. But I do notice that even with that one time fee for KM, the keeps releasing new features in minor releases without charging extra.
Thinking about this more: I assume the price is increasing for the same reason SimpleNote introduced their $200/year supporter plans. The reason being that Automattic is asking their acquired app businesses to look into how they can contribute more to sustaining their development (that’s according to the SimpleNote devs.)
I wonder if SimpleNote is seeing as many signups from that as they wanted. If they were, I wonder if PocketCasts would have tried a similar supporter tier and left the $15/year tier alone. PocketCasts has some appeal as a public good that might’ve appealed (not to people here, of course, as we went over in the SimpleNote thread.)
Or, if PC is finding that most people subscribing aren’t using the paid features, maybe they’re just making the premium tier the supporting tier at a medium level that might retain those who value the utility.
Not saying anyone should or shouldn’t subscribe by posting this.
I have been advised that the new pricing only applies to new customers. Current subscribers will be grandfathered into their respective plans. Due to a glitch, the new pricing is showing for current users but this will be fixed soon, if not already.
Oh yes. It starts out as “well, it’s only the price of one cup of coffee”, but ends up like you don’t have money for one cup of coffee, because you spent everything on software, some of which you don’t even use. And if we’re talking about productivity apps, of course I could be wrong, but it seems to me that for most people it is not an investment and these apps do not lead to the fact that you become more “efficient” and earn more. Probably for people for whom it works that way (like David and his Fantastical and OmniFocus (which are very expensive software in my opinion)) paying for several subscriptions to “productivity” apps is a good idea, but I realize that for me it is not worth it at all, so after trying a lot of subscription based power apps, I switched to mostly standard or free third-party apps (apparently this is a trend now)
First it’s a cup of coffee. Then it’s a cup of coffee for both the dev and their spouse. Then it’s a cup of coffee for the dev and their spouse, plus a sandwich for each. Then it’s a cup of coffee for the dev and their spouse, a sandwich for each, and an ice cream cone for their kid.
All kidding aside though, I continually find it fascinating that it’s just assumed the average person spends over $5 on a cup of coffee every day. I know some people absolutely do - I just find it fascinating.
I think it would be a hilarious promotion for a software company with expensive software to include a coupon for a free jumbo tin of Folgers with the software purchase.
With the way the subscriptions are rising, I am happy to pay for an upgrade if the features makes sense. I will happily pay every major update. But never any subscriptions. Unless it’s a service like Dropbox, Outlook 365 or Backups etc. No upgrades no money spent on software.
Other way an app can get my money is if they let me keep everything up until I remain as a subscriber. Like how Agenda does it. I have funded the app un until I am not a subscriber anymore and would want to retain all those features.
In some cases, I’d prefer a monthly option, even if it comes out to be a little bit more. But also, I’ve noticed some companies lately say, “This is the cost for this license, and it will receive updates until X release. After that, it will still work, but an upgrade fee will apply,” and I think I’d be okay with that, too.
But yeah, I feel like I’m being nickeled and dimed by every piece of software I’ve used for years!
Not surprising, given how much one could easily spend a month.
Subscription is justified where an app has an ongoing cost in delivering the service. For Agenda, as an example, there are no backend server costs if I remain a customer so their upgrade model works well.
Upnote and Drafts on the other hand, store everything on their own cloud and therefore they have to provide you with an ongoing service. That costs them money, even if they stop development.
The problem with these is the perceived value add. I could use a Podcast app that syncs using my own cloud storage, rather than PocketCasts i.e., has no ongoing costs. Or I could use a podcast app that charges less. I don’t know why PC is charging more, but I can guess it’s because they’re not covering costs.
And, of course, apps that charge a mandatory subscription simply to fund future development is much less justifiable.
It’s hard to maintain personal rules about price justification. Over time, people buy the option that benefits them best. Some companies lose money providing, and others are very profitable.
. I only remember one breaking change for macOS where devs had to upgrade apps. Maybe there were more I guess.
