8 ms·

Spark email client goes subscription path

32 points by boogdan 4y ago

boogdan 4y ago
Many users are complaining that existing features are not free any longer.
rvz 4y ago
Another one turning to the rent-seeking subscription SaSS grift model for just a basic email client.
- jamespo 4y ago
  If it's that basic just use whatever comes with your OS
danpalmer 4y ago
Subscriptions are uncontroversial when there's a perceived cost to the user of the ongoing usage. In fact I believe it tracks very closely with the "Cost of Goods Sold" (COGS). No one questions whether Dropbox should be a one-off price or a subscription, there's obviously ongoing cost to storing the data. However for apps that don't have this there's always going to be push back. Developers typically point to customer support and maintenance as reasons, but customer support is not typically part of COGS as it's not part of the product, most users won't use it, so counting the cost per user doesn't really work. Any user can justify why they won't use support. As for maintenance, this wasn't a problem when software got new versions every year or so with upgrade pricing. Devs looking for ways to build sustainable business is great, but it's also reasonable for users to reject subscriptions where there's no explicit cost to providing that software.
- barbazoo 4y ago
  For ongoing development there already exists a model where you buy a license that lets you use the current version plus maybe any upgrades happening in the next X months. I'd be happy to regularly pay 5 or 10 bucks for an app I love if it gets updates but that's not what we're seeing I think. The current model is based on subscriptions because of exactly one reason. Hope that the consumer forgets about the recurring charge.
  - pavon 4y ago
    From what I understand the iOS App Store doesn't support that model. I've heard complaints from developers who have used that model with success on the Mac, and are frustrated that they can't do so on iOS.
    - selykg 4y ago
      There are apps using this though. Two that ring a bell for me are Agenda and Hook though only the first one has an iOS app that also utilizes this model. I assume they give each feature a date of availability and compare to the last purchase made via the App Store receipts and make features available or unavailable based on that intersection. Edit: Edited for URLs, I wish this stupid site would support at least basic markdown... So mind-blowing it doesn't.
    - aseipp 4y ago
      It doesn't explicitly support but today people work around it with one-time in-app purchases for all the functionality. Two apps I can think of doing this are Halide and Darkroom. But yes, you can't just pay $X upfront in the App Store directly. The app makes you this offer, not the store. I agree it's not ideal.
  - ad404b8a372f2b9 4y ago
    I think that's a cynical view of the model. People are unwilling to pay a lump sum price that'd justify the development costs, many SAAS companies offer a lifetime license that matches the average life time value of a customer but people don't want that. The long ramp of death for SAAS products is something like 12 to 18 months (if I remember right), without the subscription model I don't see customers paying enough money to sustain the time, energy and risk involved. We're talking thousands of customers paying 100$ licenses just to match a normal software salary and that's not counting the benefits of a normal job, the work-life balance, the stress, the risk factor and so on.
    - nulld3v 4y ago
      Why not have both pricing options?
- jelled 4y ago
  Well said. I never really thought about why some SASS offerings make intuitive sense while others seem unnecessary.
- Veuxdo 4y ago
  > No one questions whether Dropbox should be a one-off price or a subscription, there's obviously ongoing cost to storing the data. I'd wager the data storage costs for Dropbox are less than 1% of what it charges for subscriptions, though.
  - danpalmer 4y ago
    I wouldn't be surprised, but I don't think it really matters. What matters is that customers attribute some cost to the providing of the service, rather than it being entirely free of variable cost.
kitsunesoba 4y ago
Looks like it also went at least partially Electron and gained a lot of weight in the process. The Mac version went from 288.2MB → 598.2MB.
- e61133e3 4y ago
  another great app that switched to a mediocre foundation
haswell 4y ago
When apps like Ulysses and 1Password went down the subscription route, I had no issue with it because Ulysses has continued to get better and better over time (by adding great new features), and I use 1Password's cloud sync service (and I think there's an argument to be made that password management apps need to continue evolving with the web to maintain usability). I realize Spark is doing a bit more than your run-of-the-mill email client, but I see that as an implementation detail / architectural decision more than I see that as a feature as an end user. The email client space is mostly commoditizated, and the feature set is mostly standardized. I think that's why putting some of these features behind a subscription tier feels so gross to me. Syncing my contacts to some cloud service and doing something special with them? Sure, charge me for that. Running my emails through some special spam service? (not that this is necessary if you use a decent provider), sure, charge for that. Mute Thread and Group by Sender cost $4.99/month? No thank you. I've been a Spark user for a long time, but I have no intention of paying for "Group by Sender", thank you very much.
- evgen 4y ago
  As a long-time Spark user who has become increasingly frustrated that Spark does not have the ability to show full headers and the developers refuse to add this simple feature, this subscription move is the last straw for me. Back to Apple Mail I guess.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
WallyFunk 4y ago
It's the dream of any software vendor to go subscription only. You need recurring revenue. Once off 'lifetime licenses' are not sustainable in the long run, and are subject to piracy and 'cracked' versions of your software distributed on underground warez sites. Look at 1Password. I own a lifetime license of their (old) password manager software, but have since switched to their subscription based offering, since it's a service that does the job well and I want to support them, and I trust them to be a good steward of my data.
jbverschoor 4y ago
Would’ve been fine. But I’m not happy that it automatically created a spark account. Uninstalling, never going back
sfvegandude 4y ago
Unfortunate that people who make more than $100/hr won't pay $60/year for an app they use every day.
- harshalizee 4y ago
  Because the people got there did so by making sensible fiscal choices, maybe? Just because someone decides to slap a subscription onto an email client (whose feature set is pretty standardized across the internet), doesn't mean it's worth it.
- tomjen3 4y ago
  Thunderbird is free, Outlook comes with an office subscription, most people probably just use Gmail. Then there is Apple Mail if you are on Apple. These are all good clients. I have never heard of Spark, is it that much better? Edit: looking through their feature set, the answer is no. It doesn't seem to have a feature Thunderbird doesn't.
  - agiacalone 4y ago
    I used Spark for a while, as it supported Exchange/O365 out of the box which was one advantage over Thunderbird. It also has decent mobile support. But Thuderbird is a superior email client, IMHO
- loriverkutya 4y ago
  I paid for Spark once when I bought it, can't remember how much. It currently have every feature I need. Can you please explain why would I pay on a monthly basis for it, when I don't want new features, I don't want UI redesign just keep the app in a working state while we are going through the regular OS upgrade cycle. My general experience with subscription based apps is that sooner or later they will introduce features I don't care at all, they remove features I use, they redesign the UI, in some cases they release a fully new version which does not even have feature parity with the previous version. (Looking at you 1password) and I simply cannot justify paying to a team who is obligated to do some feature work on a software I consider complete because I'm paying them money and ending up with something with a different look and feature set. Charge me enough once to cover you development cost for the current state of the app, even charge me even for the upgrades needed to make your stuff working on a newer OS version. It is sure a nice thing to get a continuous stream of money for a feature which had a one of cost, but on the consumer side, you will end up with an empty pocket very fast, if you are getting charged for every software/car/TV you use on a monthly basis.
jelled 4y ago
I don't mind paying monthly fees for tools that I get regular value out of. But I hate that feeling of paying for ongoing subscriptions that I rarely use. Plus deciding whether or not to cancel adds to my overall decision fatigue.
akmarinov 4y ago
The only reason I use Spark over Apple Mail is that I get push notifications as I receive emails on my Gmail account. Unless you’re a paying Gmail customer, you can’t get push, only pull email. With Spark you now don’t get priority email, whatever that is, so why would I stay? Back to Apple mail it is
- kitsunesoba 4y ago
  Gmail's bad/nonstandard IMAP is one of the reasons my Gmail account has long been relegated to a spam bucket address. Anything important is going to either Fastmail with a custom domain or iCloud mail.
mutant 4y ago
laughs in Superhuman Puny mortals.
- nvrspyx 4y ago
  Isn't Superhuman still limited to Gmail only? If so, meh.
  - HHalvi 4y ago
    They started supporting Outlook accounts a few months back, but still a drop in the bucket considering the no of (email) options you have.
pupppet 4y ago
I wish Apple Mail would fix how it handles attachments. They just get scattered at the bottom of the email haphazardly or hidden behind a dropdown which itself is hidden until you mouseover it.
ulkesh 4y ago
I love the fact they have a Windows client now. However, I cannot seem to get back my side-by-side email view. I prefer to see my list of email headers vertically, and then when clicking one, I see the email to the right. Now they have some full screen nonsense as if my Windows computer is a mobile phone. If they're going to change the design and try to start charging, of which I fully support, at least don't change the design in a way that hinders they're existing user base.
jonashus 4y ago
Compared to eM Client for which you pay once per version and it had ~20 months between last versions. The cost for Spark is more than twice that of eM Client. A subscription model should enable them to set a lower price as their revenue will be more reliable. Make it $9.99/year instead and I'm in.
clairity 4y ago
last time i researched mac email clients a few years ago, i found that spark was one of the worst in terms of privacy and tracking. i settled on canary mail (https://canarymail.io/ https://canarymail.io/) as it was better in that regard, while still supporting gmail (which i no longer use).
jonpurdy 4y ago
Warning for folks using or considering using the Spark client. I downloaded and set up the Spark email client back in 2019, thinking I'd enter my IMAP credentials for local email usage. My fault for not reading how it works, including storing my email credentials (username and password) on their servers, and storing my emails on their servers to send push notifications. What's worse is that I've got almost 1000 email aliases (company@mydomain.com) set up over the years to filter email and block companies that send spam or get hacked. And I started to receive marketing email from Readdle (company behind Spark) to my main email address (which I would never give out to any company). Tl;dr: they store your email credentials and send marketing emails to your main address.
flkiwi 4y ago
Well, that was an easy decision: I just deleted both Spark and Calendars. These are just not products that fit a subscription model. Back to default apps I go, apps that provide 99.5% of the functionality I need, even if they are missing some of the conveniences of the third-party offerings.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
brandon272 4y ago
I went through my credit card statement this month and am cancelling a bunch of things I barely use. The mess of subscriptions most of us are forced into is getting absolutely insane and the "software makers need to do this to be able to eat!" excuses I see here are just silly. I don't want my card dinged every month. I don't want to "manage" dozens of different subscriptions across different companies that all have different systems and methods for managing your "relationship" with them.
- dallen33 4y ago
  Have you thought of switching to yearly?
  - brandon272 4y ago
    Switching to yearly subscriptions wouldn't accomplish much for me other than forcing me even deeper into the relationship (because now I am committed for at least a year instead of having the option to cancel on any given month), and inevitably I will forget to cancel if I don't want the service anymore and then be "dinged" for another years worth of subscription fees at some point.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
KoftaBob 4y ago
https://alternativeto.net/software/spark-e-mail/?license=opensource https://alternativeto.net/software/spark-e-mail/?license=ope...
KoftaBob 4y ago
If an app doesn't have recurring costs involved in serving their product (server costs, etc), it's hard to justify a subscription model vs charging a one time cost to purchase the app. To fund/incentivize continuing development of new features, they can have reasonable in-app purchases to unlock those new features.
- plgonzalezrx8 4y ago
  If you understand how their app ecosystem works, then it will make more sense. They DO have server costs and other ongoing costs in their app. Doesn't mean that I agree with their new pricing system, but they do have said costs.
  - KoftaBob 4y ago
    What would be an example of a functionality that has ongoing server costs? The email itself is hosted by the email provider that they're pulling from, and I don't see any features on their site that would involve any intensive server costs.
N19PEDL2 4y ago
€5.83/month seems to me quite too much for an email app. Airmail for example comes at €9.99/year.

32 points by boogdan 4y ago

boogdan 4y ago

Many users are complaining that existing features are not free any longer.

rvz 4y ago

Another one turning to the rent-seeking subscription SaSS grift model for just a basic email client.

jamespo 4y ago
If it's that basic just use whatever comes with your OS

danpalmer 4y ago

Subscriptions are uncontroversial when there's a perceived cost to the user of the ongoing usage. In fact I believe it tracks very closely with the "Cost of Goods Sold" (COGS). No one questions whether Dropbox should be a one-off price or a subscription, there's obviously ongoing cost to storing the data. However for apps that don't have this there's always going to be push back. Developers typically point to customer support and maintenance as reasons, but customer support is not typically part of COGS as it's not part of the product, most users won't use it, so counting the cost per user doesn't really work. Any user can justify why they won't use support. As for maintenance, this wasn't a problem when software got new versions every year or so with upgrade pricing. Devs looking for ways to build sustainable business is great, but it's also reasonable for users to reject subscriptions where there's no explicit cost to providing that software.

barbazoo 4y ago
For ongoing development there already exists a model where you buy a license that lets you use the current version plus maybe any upgrades happening in the next X months. I'd be happy to regularly pay 5 or 10 bucks for an app I love if it gets updates but that's not what we're seeing I think. The current model is based on subscriptions because of exactly one reason. Hope that the consumer forgets about the recurring charge.
- pavon 4y ago
  From what I understand the iOS App Store doesn't support that model. I've heard complaints from developers who have used that model with success on the Mac, and are frustrated that they can't do so on iOS.
  - selykg 4y ago
    There are apps using this though. Two that ring a bell for me are Agenda and Hook though only the first one has an iOS app that also utilizes this model. I assume they give each feature a date of availability and compare to the last purchase made via the App Store receipts and make features available or unavailable based on that intersection. Edit: Edited for URLs, I wish this stupid site would support at least basic markdown... So mind-blowing it doesn't.
  - aseipp 4y ago
    It doesn't explicitly support but today people work around it with one-time in-app purchases for all the functionality. Two apps I can think of doing this are Halide and Darkroom. But yes, you can't just pay $X upfront in the App Store directly. The app makes you this offer, not the store. I agree it's not ideal.
- ad404b8a372f2b9 4y ago
  I think that's a cynical view of the model. People are unwilling to pay a lump sum price that'd justify the development costs, many SAAS companies offer a lifetime license that matches the average life time value of a customer but people don't want that. The long ramp of death for SAAS products is something like 12 to 18 months (if I remember right), without the subscription model I don't see customers paying enough money to sustain the time, energy and risk involved. We're talking thousands of customers paying 100$ licenses just to match a normal software salary and that's not counting the benefits of a normal job, the work-life balance, the stress, the risk factor and so on.
  - nulld3v 4y ago
    Why not have both pricing options?
jelled 4y ago
Well said. I never really thought about why some SASS offerings make intuitive sense while others seem unnecessary.
Veuxdo 4y ago
> No one questions whether Dropbox should be a one-off price or a subscription, there's obviously ongoing cost to storing the data. I'd wager the data storage costs for Dropbox are less than 1% of what it charges for subscriptions, though.
- danpalmer 4y ago
  I wouldn't be surprised, but I don't think it really matters. What matters is that customers attribute some cost to the providing of the service, rather than it being entirely free of variable cost.

kitsunesoba 4y ago

Looks like it also went at least partially Electron and gained a lot of weight in the process. The Mac version went from 288.2MB → 598.2MB.

e61133e3 4y ago
another great app that switched to a mediocre foundation

haswell 4y ago

When apps like Ulysses and 1Password went down the subscription route, I had no issue with it because Ulysses has continued to get better and better over time (by adding great new features), and I use 1Password's cloud sync service (and I think there's an argument to be made that password management apps need to continue evolving with the web to maintain usability). I realize Spark is doing a bit more than your run-of-the-mill email client, but I see that as an implementation detail / architectural decision more than I see that as a feature as an end user. The email client space is mostly commoditizated, and the feature set is mostly standardized. I think that's why putting some of these features behind a subscription tier feels so gross to me. Syncing my contacts to some cloud service and doing something special with them? Sure, charge me for that. Running my emails through some special spam service? (not that this is necessary if you use a decent provider), sure, charge for that. Mute Thread and Group by Sender cost $4.99/month? No thank you. I've been a Spark user for a long time, but I have no intention of paying for "Group by Sender", thank you very much.

evgen 4y ago
As a long-time Spark user who has become increasingly frustrated that Spark does not have the ability to show full headers and the developers refuse to add this simple feature, this subscription move is the last straw for me. Back to Apple Mail I guess.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

WallyFunk 4y ago

It's the dream of any software vendor to go subscription only. You need recurring revenue. Once off 'lifetime licenses' are not sustainable in the long run, and are subject to piracy and 'cracked' versions of your software distributed on underground warez sites. Look at 1Password. I own a lifetime license of their (old) password manager software, but have since switched to their subscription based offering, since it's a service that does the job well and I want to support them, and I trust them to be a good steward of my data.

jbverschoor 4y ago

Would’ve been fine. But I’m not happy that it automatically created a spark account. Uninstalling, never going back

sfvegandude 4y ago

Unfortunate that people who make more than $100/hr won't pay $60/year for an app they use every day.

harshalizee 4y ago
Because the people got there did so by making sensible fiscal choices, maybe? Just because someone decides to slap a subscription onto an email client (whose feature set is pretty standardized across the internet), doesn't mean it's worth it.
tomjen3 4y ago
Thunderbird is free, Outlook comes with an office subscription, most people probably just use Gmail. Then there is Apple Mail if you are on Apple. These are all good clients. I have never heard of Spark, is it that much better? Edit: looking through their feature set, the answer is no. It doesn't seem to have a feature Thunderbird doesn't.
- agiacalone 4y ago
  I used Spark for a while, as it supported Exchange/O365 out of the box which was one advantage over Thunderbird. It also has decent mobile support. But Thuderbird is a superior email client, IMHO
loriverkutya 4y ago
I paid for Spark once when I bought it, can't remember how much. It currently have every feature I need. Can you please explain why would I pay on a monthly basis for it, when I don't want new features, I don't want UI redesign just keep the app in a working state while we are going through the regular OS upgrade cycle. My general experience with subscription based apps is that sooner or later they will introduce features I don't care at all, they remove features I use, they redesign the UI, in some cases they release a fully new version which does not even have feature parity with the previous version. (Looking at you 1password) and I simply cannot justify paying to a team who is obligated to do some feature work on a software I consider complete because I'm paying them money and ending up with something with a different look and feature set. Charge me enough once to cover you development cost for the current state of the app, even charge me even for the upgrades needed to make your stuff working on a newer OS version. It is sure a nice thing to get a continuous stream of money for a feature which had a one of cost, but on the consumer side, you will end up with an empty pocket very fast, if you are getting charged for every software/car/TV you use on a monthly basis.

jelled 4y ago

I don't mind paying monthly fees for tools that I get regular value out of. But I hate that feeling of paying for ongoing subscriptions that I rarely use. Plus deciding whether or not to cancel adds to my overall decision fatigue.

akmarinov 4y ago

The only reason I use Spark over Apple Mail is that I get push notifications as I receive emails on my Gmail account. Unless you’re a paying Gmail customer, you can’t get push, only pull email. With Spark you now don’t get priority email, whatever that is, so why would I stay? Back to Apple mail it is

kitsunesoba 4y ago
Gmail's bad/nonstandard IMAP is one of the reasons my Gmail account has long been relegated to a spam bucket address. Anything important is going to either Fastmail with a custom domain or iCloud mail.

mutant 4y ago

laughs in Superhuman Puny mortals.

nvrspyx 4y ago
Isn't Superhuman still limited to Gmail only? If so, meh.
- HHalvi 4y ago
  They started supporting Outlook accounts a few months back, but still a drop in the bucket considering the no of (email) options you have.

pupppet 4y ago

I wish Apple Mail would fix how it handles attachments. They just get scattered at the bottom of the email haphazardly or hidden behind a dropdown which itself is hidden until you mouseover it.

ulkesh 4y ago

I love the fact they have a Windows client now. However, I cannot seem to get back my side-by-side email view. I prefer to see my list of email headers vertically, and then when clicking one, I see the email to the right. Now they have some full screen nonsense as if my Windows computer is a mobile phone. If they're going to change the design and try to start charging, of which I fully support, at least don't change the design in a way that hinders they're existing user base.

jonashus 4y ago

Compared to eM Client for which you pay once per version and it had ~20 months between last versions. The cost for Spark is more than twice that of eM Client. A subscription model should enable them to set a lower price as their revenue will be more reliable. Make it $9.99/year instead and I'm in.

clairity 4y ago

last time i researched mac email clients a few years ago, i found that spark was one of the worst in terms of privacy and tracking. i settled on canary mail (https://canarymail.io/ https://canarymail.io/) as it was better in that regard, while still supporting gmail (which i no longer use).

jonpurdy 4y ago

Warning for folks using or considering using the Spark client. I downloaded and set up the Spark email client back in 2019, thinking I'd enter my IMAP credentials for local email usage. My fault for not reading how it works, including storing my email credentials (username and password) on their servers, and storing my emails on their servers to send push notifications. What's worse is that I've got almost 1000 email aliases (company@mydomain.com) set up over the years to filter email and block companies that send spam or get hacked. And I started to receive marketing email from Readdle (company behind Spark) to my main email address (which I would never give out to any company). Tl;dr: they store your email credentials and send marketing emails to your main address.

flkiwi 4y ago

Well, that was an easy decision: I just deleted both Spark and Calendars. These are just not products that fit a subscription model. Back to default apps I go, apps that provide 99.5% of the functionality I need, even if they are missing some of the conveniences of the third-party offerings.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

brandon272 4y ago

I went through my credit card statement this month and am cancelling a bunch of things I barely use. The mess of subscriptions most of us are forced into is getting absolutely insane and the "software makers need to do this to be able to eat!" excuses I see here are just silly. I don't want my card dinged every month. I don't want to "manage" dozens of different subscriptions across different companies that all have different systems and methods for managing your "relationship" with them.

dallen33 4y ago
Have you thought of switching to yearly?
- brandon272 4y ago
  Switching to yearly subscriptions wouldn't accomplish much for me other than forcing me even deeper into the relationship (because now I am committed for at least a year instead of having the option to cancel on any given month), and inevitably I will forget to cancel if I don't want the service anymore and then be "dinged" for another years worth of subscription fees at some point.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

KoftaBob 4y ago

https://alternativeto.net/software/spark-e-mail/?license=opensource https://alternativeto.net/software/spark-e-mail/?license=ope...

KoftaBob 4y ago

If an app doesn't have recurring costs involved in serving their product (server costs, etc), it's hard to justify a subscription model vs charging a one time cost to purchase the app. To fund/incentivize continuing development of new features, they can have reasonable in-app purchases to unlock those new features.

plgonzalezrx8 4y ago
If you understand how their app ecosystem works, then it will make more sense. They DO have server costs and other ongoing costs in their app. Doesn't mean that I agree with their new pricing system, but they do have said costs.
- KoftaBob 4y ago
  What would be an example of a functionality that has ongoing server costs? The email itself is hosted by the email provider that they're pulling from, and I don't see any features on their site that would involve any intensive server costs.

N19PEDL2 4y ago

€5.83/month seems to me quite too much for an email app. Airmail for example comes at €9.99/year.