After years of waiting, I’m so excited to pay forever for yet another app that I paid before. Otherwise suffer from useless buttons and tabs serving ads to me.
Sorry for the sarcasm. I loved the simplicity and one-time payment of this app, which was the major reason I was using it instead of toggl or timery, even when Timelines doesn’t even have iPad support. The dev just killed it.
So what if you’ve already paid? No grandfathering in?
Grandfathered upgrade pricing in the App Store? /
The problem is even the grandfathered annual pricing is more expensive than the original one-time price.
Subscription is supposed to be beneficial to both devs and users. I guess iA is the only indie dev got the right idea.
What was the old price?
I have to say that only allowing three categories in the free tier is a little rough if free is intended to be used as more than a trial. Interested in how he settled on that number.
The app looks quite nice though, and I really like the watch app.
Or possibly IA’s pricing, which they haven’t even instituted yet, will crash and burn for them. It’s a little simplistic to conclude that everyone pricing their subscriptions at a level beyond IA’s is somehow mistaken or greedy or ‘got the wrong idea’.
I’m not saying that.
I just think the transition to subscription needs to be beneficial to both parties for it to be accepted positively. If the update only benefits the dev and actively harms the existing users. I see it as “getting the wrong idea”.
So if one some buyer or buyers is unhappy with new pricing the pricing model is ‘the wrong idea’? No, I don’t buy that at all. Given the advantages of a subscription model in general for customers and developers, discussed ad nauseum previously, so I won’t rehash it - yet given the vocal, adamant refusal of some to accept the idea (while willingly paying for subscriptions ranging from TV to vehicles) - I don’t accept that individual (or vocal minorities of) customers get to determine what the right or wrong idea is.
If the price is acceptable, people will go for it. If enough don’t, and income cannot support continued development (and no one’s sure that the old model was terribly good at that to begin with), devs will change. But as we see, it’s the reverse, suggesting that for some apps or classes of apps it’s the right idea for more people than not.
I’m not sure what you’re arguing for in this case. That I’m the minority? Or that my opinion doesn’t count? I don’t think I’m the minority on the stance about subscriptions.
I’m also not quite sure what substantial benefits you’re talking about for customers. Usually the costs drop, at least within a few years. But in this case the annual cost tripled for new users and increased 50% for existing users. The argument that subscription produces more updates is also not the case for most apps.
So basically I accept we have different opinions. But your opinion that my opinion doesn’t count is pretty shady.
We’ve gone through the benefits of subscription pricing before several times so I’m not going to rehash it in this thread. No, I’m not saying your opinion doesn’t matter, but that one person dissatisfied with a pricing scheme (or a even a noisy minority) does not trump the argument to be able to say it’s the wrong idea for a product. And holding up a tentative pricing alternative that has not even been implemented as somehow being superior for both devs and users is a little naive.
Still, I think it’s the “wrong idea”. You not agreeing doesn’t invalidate my opinion.
I think the dev at iA knows better on selling indie apps, and his article pretty much sums up the whole subscription frenzy.
Using your train of thoughts, I could argue that all you’re saying is just the opinion of a single person. I’m not sure who is naive in this case.
I contacted the developer about an issue and he is a) really nice, b) interested in feedback about the app, including the new pricing. Could be worth letting him know how you feel, especially as an existing customer. (Not to say you shouldn’t post here about it as well!)
You opinion is as valid as any on the internet, but I question the analysis when you don’t seem to even understand benefits of subscriptions and you are willing to speculate that someone’s untested, as-yet unimplemented cheap subscription is somehow the ‘right idea’ for anyone.
You literally didn’t give any counter argument for my argument…
My argument was that this change doesn’t bring any benefits for both new and existing users in terms of costs.
You can’t just deny my analysis, while not giving any real input to the issue I mentioned.
At least you could reference some of the great benefits you mentioned.
I read his blog posts. I think his motivation for changing to subscription mostly came from other devs, instead of user feedbacks.
I’m not sure how much he would value my input as he’s willing to deal with backlash as stated in his post.
You don’t have an argued argument or analysis. You have an opinion based on dislike of subscriptions and one company’s stated intention to, some time in the future, offer a cheap subscription for a different type of app entirely. And that opinion is undercut by ignorance of any counterarguments.
I do have an opinion that is based on if the subscription benefits me at all.
I also have read a substantial amount of info about subscriptions on both sides. I just don’t buy most of those advocating for subscriptions.
I’m not sure how you came to the conclusion that I’m ignorant, if not just because you’re ignorant of what I do know.
Really? Can you quote where this is suggested?
Or is this just an ‘analysis’ with zero support?
I realise that your posts are way out of my baseline for healthy communications as you started with some assumptions on myself. I’ll not participate in this topic anymore.
Yeah, that’s probably for the best (personal experience).