6 ms·

I can see how this would elicit quite a negative response, but getting an app onto the App Store requires non-trivial fees. Even just code-signing an app requir

I can see how this would elicit quite a negative response, but getting an app onto the App Store requires non-trivial fees. Even just code-signing an app requires money that could be better spent otherwise. This money would have had to have come from somewhere, and I don't think 9 euros is unreasonable. The strength of projects like LibreOffice is not that they are monetarily free (Google Docs exists), but that the source code is open.

tpxl 4y ago
The difference between 0 and 1$ is bigger than the difference between 1$ and 100$. Edit: That being said, I welcome the additional of an optional charge.
- MonkeyClub 4y ago
  1 > 99? You’re sure about that? Or do you mean that the jump to start charging is the big decision, not the amount?
  - thro388 4y ago
    I think OP meant problems with setting up payment method, dealing with credit card etc.. Most of the world population can not even pay with usual visa card.
    - ghaff 4y ago
      There's that. But there's also a big psychological barrier to paying anything at all (even if you can whip out a credit card and pay in a minute) vs. paying a bit more. Is that barrier greater than an additional $99? I'm not sure in general. But it's probably bigger than paying an additional $3.99 or whatever.
laundermaf 4y ago
> getting an app onto the App Store requires non-trivial fees That's a cop-out. I guarantee they already get at least $99/year via donations by macOS users. If they wanted to charge directly, $0.99 would easily cover those fees, assuming 130 people buy it per year. The reality is that they want to get some money back, and that's ok. Using the Apple fees as an excuse isn't necessary.
- joelhaasnoot 4y ago
  I mean sort of, but you also have to deal with Apple's App Store rules and goons...
- forgotpwd16 4y ago
  >I guarantee Really? How?
  - laundermaf 4y ago
    Just look at how much they’re taking in. The figures can be found online and are in the tens of thousands. I’d think at least 1% of those users are macOS users.
  - nicce 4y ago
    You can’t publish app without paying that $99 yearly.
Lutger 4y ago
A negative response would be ridiculous, as is the clickbait title, and I don't think losing those users will actually be a great loss. LibreOffice is free as in beer. Not only the source, but also the binaries, and also for MacOs, are distributed for free. You can just go to the download page and grab it. The only thing thats being charged is going through the App Store. If this really 'backfires' as some people seem to suggest, I think the project is better off just abandoning the App Store.

tpxl 4y ago

The difference between 0 and 1$ is bigger than the difference between 1$ and 100$. Edit: That being said, I welcome the additional of an optional charge.

MonkeyClub 4y ago
1 > 99? You’re sure about that? Or do you mean that the jump to start charging is the big decision, not the amount?
- thro388 4y ago
  I think OP meant problems with setting up payment method, dealing with credit card etc.. Most of the world population can not even pay with usual visa card.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    There's that. But there's also a big psychological barrier to paying anything at all (even if you can whip out a credit card and pay in a minute) vs. paying a bit more. Is that barrier greater than an additional $99? I'm not sure in general. But it's probably bigger than paying an additional $3.99 or whatever.

laundermaf 4y ago

> getting an app onto the App Store requires non-trivial fees That's a cop-out. I guarantee they already get at least $99/year via donations by macOS users. If they wanted to charge directly, $0.99 would easily cover those fees, assuming 130 people buy it per year. The reality is that they want to get some money back, and that's ok. Using the Apple fees as an excuse isn't necessary.

joelhaasnoot 4y ago
I mean sort of, but you also have to deal with Apple's App Store rules and goons...
forgotpwd16 4y ago
>I guarantee Really? How?
- laundermaf 4y ago
  Just look at how much they’re taking in. The figures can be found online and are in the tens of thousands. I’d think at least 1% of those users are macOS users.
- nicce 4y ago
  You can’t publish app without paying that $99 yearly.

Lutger 4y ago

A negative response would be ridiculous, as is the clickbait title, and I don't think losing those users will actually be a great loss. LibreOffice is free as in beer. Not only the source, but also the binaries, and also for MacOs, are distributed for free. You can just go to the download page and grab it. The only thing thats being charged is going through the App Store. If this really 'backfires' as some people seem to suggest, I think the project is better off just abandoning the App Store.