> Everybody hates subscriptions There is no evidence that suggests that or even hints at that. You´d be ecstatic to pay $5 for something that nets you multiple

> Everybody hates subscriptions There is no evidence that suggests that or even hints at that. You´d be ecstatic to pay $5 for something that nets you multiple X of that in value. The issue is, most applications AND sites do not even offer enough value to justify a measly $5 price tag so they have to rely on other business models in order to compensate for their lack of product-market fit. > SaaS companies use subscriptions and explain it by saying they have servers to run. SaaS companies don´t need to explain "it" or justify "it". The user isn´t paying you so that you can cover your cost. They are paying you because you are offering them good value in return for that cash. If your costs are covered or not, the user is mostly indifferent to that as long as he gets what is promised. If better options are presented to the user that are cheaper or better (read better product-market fit) then the user will most likely move in that direction. > Desktop software that tries the same gets lambasted, even though the big cost is continuous development and not servers. This is mostly a misunderstanding on the part of desktop app developers and I can say that with authority considering that I have built multiple desktop software products/companies that have successfully generated great revenue and exited. > How do you charge for a desktop application in 2019? Ask for money in return for your product offering. There is no magic sauce. If your product is of value people will pay, if it is not, no one will. That said, if you have a good product developed that you need help figuring out how to monetize, feel free to reach out to me and I´ll try my best to help you out (email in profile)