3 ms·

Not. Free. Another stupid subscription. $1 here, $5 there. Every dang month. There is no way any of these monthly services deserve that money.

shartshooter 7y ago
Then don’t use it. No one is forcing you to buy anything.
- TrueDuality 7y ago
  The existing users already paid for it.
- awill 7y ago
  That would make sense if this app had always been a subscription. But they acquired the customers who hate subscriptions and then flipped. Not great.
  - shartshooter 7y ago
    Agreed, not great. I paid for Pocket Casts about a year ago and don't love that they're switching to subscriptions. However, the parent commenter was complaining that the app wasn't free and that they don't deserve our money. For pocket casts anyways, I'd have to say the money has been well spent. I personally enjoyed the app and will definitely look into whether a subscription makes sense assuming paid folks aren't grandfathered in.
- subsAreBS 7y ago
  NoBoDy iS FoRcINg YoU! Time and time again companies are screwing us by charging us for software and then switching to a subscription model. Companies must love you, willing to hand them money for no damn reason. What a joke.
sdan 7y ago
I don't like having all these companies having their own subscription models. At the same time, they need some constant revenue stream and a one-time buy isn't going to give them a pump into your bank account.
- subsAreBS 7y ago
  How did all the existing companies make it without subscriptions? Oh. Right. They sold software! For money? Then made _actual_ upgrades and charged for that. Subs allow companies to rake in money without doing a damn thing, and that's what 75% of them do.
  - nthnclrk 7y ago
    You're right—in the past they could. But App Store economics and subscription services have reset expectations on pricing and have forced downward pressure on upfront pricing. So now even if a company (possibly like Shifty Jelly) wanted to retain that model it becomes close to impossible.

shartshooter 7y ago

Then don’t use it. No one is forcing you to buy anything.

TrueDuality 7y ago
The existing users already paid for it.
awill 7y ago
That would make sense if this app had always been a subscription. But they acquired the customers who hate subscriptions and then flipped. Not great.
- shartshooter 7y ago
  Agreed, not great. I paid for Pocket Casts about a year ago and don't love that they're switching to subscriptions. However, the parent commenter was complaining that the app wasn't free and that they don't deserve our money. For pocket casts anyways, I'd have to say the money has been well spent. I personally enjoyed the app and will definitely look into whether a subscription makes sense assuming paid folks aren't grandfathered in.
subsAreBS 7y ago
NoBoDy iS FoRcINg YoU! Time and time again companies are screwing us by charging us for software and then switching to a subscription model. Companies must love you, willing to hand them money for no damn reason. What a joke.

sdan 7y ago

I don't like having all these companies having their own subscription models. At the same time, they need some constant revenue stream and a one-time buy isn't going to give them a pump into your bank account.

subsAreBS 7y ago
How did all the existing companies make it without subscriptions? Oh. Right. They sold software! For money? Then made _actual_ upgrades and charged for that. Subs allow companies to rake in money without doing a damn thing, and that's what 75% of them do.
- nthnclrk 7y ago
  You're right—in the past they could. But App Store economics and subscription services have reset expectations on pricing and have forced downward pressure on upfront pricing. So now even if a company (possibly like Shifty Jelly) wanted to retain that model it becomes close to impossible.