Subscriptions have always been coupled with price increases, so when people object to them, it's hard to know whether it's the price increase they're objecting

Subscriptions have always been coupled with price increases, so when people object to them, it's hard to know whether it's the price increase they're objecting to. Would you object to a subscription of 49 cents a year, for example, instead of a few dollars one-time? I conducted a Twitter poll, where I asked people to choose between a $2 upfront payment, and a dollar a year, assuming that in both cases, they lose interest in the app and uninstall it after two years. I mentioned that with a subscription, any new features added will be available at no additional charge, but with the upfront payment, it will be an in-app purchase. Four people responded, and all four chose the subscription. BTW, to people insisting on an upfront payment, would you be okay if: 1) A new feature got added to the app the day after you bought it, and you're asked to pay again to use that feature? After all, you didn't pay for that feature. 2) A new version of the app got released the day after you bought it, and it's listed as a separate app, requiring a second purchase? After all, you didn't pay for those features. 3) The app you bought has a particular feature, like a low-light mode in a camera app. The developer improves the feature, but brands it as a separate feature in order to charge you again, like calling it LowLight+. (This is different from (2) because in that scenario, the camera app didn't have any low light mode when you bought it.) 4) An OS update makes the app crash, or annoying to use, and the fix is listed as a separate app, requiring a separate payment. After all, you didn't pay for it. 5) After you buy the app, the developer abandons it and chooses to invest time in creating a new app since that will bring in more money. Would you be okay with it? Upfront payment seems fine instinctually, but when you get into the details, there are many problems.