• gustofwind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    19 days ago

    You can either have 0 of my money forever

    Or you can have a reasonable amount of it for lifetime access, at minimum, to the version I purchased

  • MinFapper@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    19 days ago

    Honestly, these days I use fdroid as my primary app store. It’s been an amazing way to cut through the junk and find great apps.

  • HugeNerd@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    19 days ago

    I’m especially tired of websites dressed up to look like the official place to get (insert free program) and are SEOd to show up first and try to extract money from you.

      • BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        Did they!? I’m self-hosting the server and haven’t noticed any functionality disappear. Markdown is a local feature you can toggle in settings, not something you should need a server for.

        Edit
        Oh my god, they did. And ligatures, too. What a way to punch the FOSS community in the face! I think if you set up your own server and connect to it that arbitrary and coercive limitation may disappear.

        Another edit
        I see the code changes in 3.3.0. The “good news” is that being open source means you can reverse those aggressively anti-user anti-features if you feel up to it. Search for markdownShortcuts in the code. It seems like the gating mechanism is very simple and should be easy to flip on or off. See this https://github.com/streetwriters/notesnook/blob/v3.3.5/packages/common/src/utils/is-feature-available.ts#L118

    • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      19 days ago

      Good blog post, thanks for sharing. I like the point about companies double dipping by trying to extract both our data and our money; I feel like I’m probably going to use that at some point when I’m on my soapbox and complaining about big tech.

    • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      19 days ago

      I blame Apple for setting the standard of $1-$3 for an app with lifetime updates. And also for making it so old apps stop working on newer OSes after just a few years. The business model was broken from the start. It was great at first but the bubble burst in record time.

      That was nearly unheard of just 20 years ago.

      • becausechemistry@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        19 days ago

        I understand your sentiment, but a lot of that isn’t right.

        Early iPhone apps were going for $10-20. So many developers being okay with just data harvesting plus so many devices out there made the $0.99 / free with ads model dominate – people got used to “free” apps from the big guys (Facebook, Google, whoever).

        iOS apps are pretty resilient to OS updates. They usually only totally break when huge changes happen (dropping 32-bit support, etc) and those happen once a decade.

        Tons of Windows software didn’t survive the 3.1 to 95 transition. A bunch died on 98 to XP, too. In the Apple world, a lot got left behind on the Mac when they went from PowerPC to Intel processors in 2007, or when they dropped 32-bit libraries.

        • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          18 days ago

          Hmm, maybe I’m thinking more iPhone 3G era than original iPhone era? I recall a time when there weren’t many apps yet and you could put out anything marginally-functional for 99¢ on the app store and get some quick cash from it. I don’t remember $10-20 being the norm but maybe that was before I was onboard.

          I’ve certainly been burned by apps either breaking with iOS updates or no longer being available to download on the App Store (so you could keep using them, but only on existing devices that already had them installed).

    • morrowind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      19 days ago

      Subs are fine for services. I personally also think they provide a better incentive structure. But they’re often abused

      • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        19 days ago

        Yeah, server dependent stuff makes sense. Like emails and streaming services that don’t function without the servers run by them.

    • artyom@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      19 days ago

      I think the ideal model is something like 1-time purchase w/ 12 months of updates.

      Software does often require ongoing maintenance. So after 12 months, no more updates, and it works as long as it continues to work, without any new features or patches. Updates are an optional fee for like 10-20% of purchase price.

      • loutr@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        19 days ago

        Yeah, you can’t expect devs to actively work on an app indefinitely just because you gave them a few bucks that one time. It makes no sense financially if the app isn’t exceptionally successful.

        • Yaky@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          19 days ago

          IIRC app stores downrank apps that are not regularly updated too, hence the vague “bug-fixes and improvements” updates in many apps. But seriously, how much could a developer update in a calculator, habit/medicine tracker, sky map, or any other app that is a complete feature?

            • huppakee@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              19 days ago

              Which would also prevent sales from dropping and not solely benefit the user. But in a case like this, i’d argue it’s reasonable to give people who bought v1 a long time ago no free access to v2.

          • loutr@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            19 days ago

            Even if the app is relatively simple and feature-complete, you need to go back to it at least once a year to make sure it complies with the latest guidelines/restrictions, replace deprecated APIs, and check dependencies for security issues.

            Simple enough for a calculator, but if the app needs to do stuff in the background, communicate with web services, play multimedia content, or use the camera, it can become very time consuming.

            It may make sense on Macs where users accept making a $10 or $20 one-time payment, but very few mobile users accept paying for apps at all, let alone $5 or $10. In that case, you need a lot of buyers or you’ll end up maintaining it out of pocket.

      • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        19 days ago

        Yeah, no subs. I prefer editions. Like Microsoft Office 2020. And then when Microsoft Office 2026 comes out you can still use 2021 or buy 2026 if you want the newer features.

    • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      19 days ago

      As with anything, nuance exists. Does a monthly / annual donation to a FOSS developer count as a subscription?

      I have a few things I’ve paid once for additional function or even banner ad removal that don’t receive updates. Though at a glance I don’t see anything I have installed that has a recurring cost and receives no updates.

      I suppose there’s a fine difference between what I consider a subscription, and supporting active development of something I use regularly, but that difference probably varies person to person.

    • VoxBunn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      19 days ago

      One of the things the article is complaining about is that many apps look like they are free in the store with an optional subscription, but once you’ve downloaded them you find out basic features are locked behind a subscription.

      Personally the worst trend I’ve started seeing is “free” apps that are great for a few days until you find out they’ve been silently giving you a free trial of the premium subscription and now you’ll have to pay up to keep using basic features. They’re hoping now that you’ve spent some time learning and using the app you’re invested enough to start paying to keep using it. You could be getting yourself into one of these apps and not even know it til a week later, it’s infuriating.

    • frongt@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      19 days ago

      Yup. Even if you don’t change anything in your app, it still requires maintenance to run on newer devices.

  • Ilandar@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    19 days ago

    Okay, but what is the solution? I see a lot of whining from consumers about how expensive and enshittified everything is, yet very few people seem to be willing to donate to/pay for the few alternatives that exist. They vote for the same entrenched political parties in their countries (or don’t vote at all). They don’t get involved in activist movements. Why are we expecting the system and/or the outcomes to magically change when all we are willing to contribute is crying on social media?