3 ms·
Side note -- although it's noted by many people here -- to say that I'm very pleased to see ... some? seeming pushback against subscription-based models. The o
by gregsadetsky 3y ago
Side note -- although it's noted by many people here -- to say that I'm very pleased to see ... some? seeming pushback against subscription-based models.
The other example that comes to mind for a very polished and well loved app is Koala (a great audio sampler/sequencer) [0], which sells for a flat $4.99.
Subscriptions have advantages of course, such as providing developers with a more sustained income vs one time purchases which necessarily mean a diminishing hourly rate when you take into account indefinite support.
But still. I'm hopeful.
[0] https://www.koalasampler.com/ https://www.koalasampler.com/
- SSLy 3y agoAnother iPadOS app with ridiculous price to capabilities ratio is Drambo.
- awfulneutral 3y agoThat's so cheap though, you'd have to sell hundreds of thousands of copies per year to even support a few developers, in the USA anyway. The app store model is driving companies towards subscriptions and micro-transactions, because otherwise like you say users pay a low price once, and get new development and support forever for free. IMO it would be better to raise prices and charge for new versions of apps every year or so, like we used to do, but the app store and user expectations make that unfeasible.