4 ms·

I like that you mentioned Office 365 because I see that as "subscription done right." You can still buy perpetual licenses for the components of Office, you ca

I like that you mentioned Office 365 because I see that as "subscription done right." You can still buy perpetual licenses for the components of Office, you can easily store the data you created with those components locally, and if you stop paying for Office-as-a-subscription the same programs still let you view (but not edit) your data. Carrot Weather App is another good one. Pay $5 once to get a really polished weather app with some basic "cloud" functions thrown in, like notifications to a phone device, some fun "achievements," and a pretty good weather data feed. If you want the super-accurate feed or if you want more advanced notifications and mobile device access (e.g. repeatedly on your Apple Watch), pay up for the subscription because it costs the dev more. And, if you stop paying, that $5 you initially paid is still valuable because the underlying app still works.

wernercd 8y ago
Jetbrains also has it done "right" I think... yearly license fee... and the version at the time of payment is "perpetual" while you get to continue getting updates as long as your license is "current". Stop paying? When you aren't "current" you can either pay up... or downgrade to your perpetual version "owned".
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
gergles 8y ago
Conversely, I find Carrot Weather ridiculous when Dark Sky is $4 one time and uses the exact same data source. They (DS) don't try to gouge you for Apple Watch features, which I interpret as "they're probably rich so why not?" $4 a year (or $10, if you don't dismiss the 'ultrapremium club' popup and buy that by mistake) plus the $5 one time is not remotely what I would consider worth paying for a weather app unless Carrot was out in the wild building weather stations. You'll also note that Carrot's website nor App Store description even mention the existence of this buy-up (except on the support page - but why would I look at the support page for an app I was thinking about buying?) or the pricing. They also deceptively show a photo of the Apple Watch showing weather, which is technically correct (the best kind of correct) - but the Apple Watch doesn't update in the background (or give you weather notifications) unless you pay for a subscription. Because weather apps that don't update are really useful. Also, it doesn't "cost the dev more" to send updates to a watch instead of the phone (they're going through the phone anyway,) so I don't buy your justification for paying more for it. It's just a way to market segment and try to scam more money from people who have already paid above market for a weather app. You get Weather Underground data with the 'cheap' sub... but only on the phone. If you want it on the watch, you have to get the expensive sub. This also makes no sense. There's no way in hell wxug is charging extra based on the target device.

wernercd 8y ago

Jetbrains also has it done "right" I think... yearly license fee... and the version at the time of payment is "perpetual" while you get to continue getting updates as long as your license is "current". Stop paying? When you aren't "current" you can either pay up... or downgrade to your perpetual version "owned".

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

gergles 8y ago

Conversely, I find Carrot Weather ridiculous when Dark Sky is $4 one time and uses the exact same data source. They (DS) don't try to gouge you for Apple Watch features, which I interpret as "they're probably rich so why not?" $4 a year (or $10, if you don't dismiss the 'ultrapremium club' popup and buy that by mistake) plus the $5 one time is not remotely what I would consider worth paying for a weather app unless Carrot was out in the wild building weather stations. You'll also note that Carrot's website nor App Store description even mention the existence of this buy-up (except on the support page - but why would I look at the support page for an app I was thinking about buying?) or the pricing. They also deceptively show a photo of the Apple Watch showing weather, which is technically correct (the best kind of correct) - but the Apple Watch doesn't update in the background (or give you weather notifications) unless you pay for a subscription. Because weather apps that don't update are really useful. Also, it doesn't "cost the dev more" to send updates to a watch instead of the phone (they're going through the phone anyway,) so I don't buy your justification for paying more for it. It's just a way to market segment and try to scam more money from people who have already paid above market for a weather app. You get Weather Underground data with the 'cheap' sub... but only on the phone. If you want it on the watch, you have to get the expensive sub. This also makes no sense. There's no way in hell wxug is charging extra based on the target device.