3 ms·

You could almost use this argument to convince me for a complex software like the Adobe products that is constantly getting new, major updates, but for a Pomodo

You could almost use this argument to convince me for a complex software like the Adobe products that is constantly getting new, major updates, but for a Pomodoro app? Honestly, $1 seems reasonable.

runako 2y ago
I should have been clearer. Apps from big publishers were more expensive than the indies in the 1980s. And indie shops that were charging ~$40 ($100 in 2024 dollars) for their titles. This is a direct comparison to the type of pomodoro app mentioned in the upthread comment. The thing is, all software constantly needs new updates. If not platform-driven, then security, bug fixes, etc. The more niche (like a pomodoro app), the fewer users over which to amortize the dev costs. A lifetime fee of $1, sold to a huge audience of 100k paid users, will pay for ~1 year of a single dev in the US, perhaps 2-3 years of a developer in a low-cost country. And then where does the money come from for updates in year 4 and beyond? Subscription payments recognize the realities that a) development never ends for most apps that are in use and b) developers are not going to be free in the future just because the publisher only charged once.
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  > A lifetime fee of $1, sold to a huge audience of 100k paid users, will pay for ~1 year of a single dev in the US, perhaps 2-3 years of a developer in a low-cost country. And then where does the money come from for updates in year 4 and beyond? I challenge you to demonstrate the Pomodoro app that has a full time dev effort for a year, and then requires anything more than piecemeal bug fixes or maybe a recompile in that four years of support...
  - eropple 2y ago
    That application is also probably not selling 100,000 units, so adjust your expectations downward accordingly.
  - rexf 2y ago
    Apple Watch app, widgets, Live Activities, new phone sizes... there are always things Apple wants you to add over time. Do you want meaningful updates or abandoned software? It doesn't take a full time job, but it's significantly more than $1 per install
  - runako 2y ago
    Let me put it a different way. You have already been paid everything you will ever get paid for work you did in 2021. Next year, I want you to do an unpredictable amount of work to support the 2025 iOS. How much will you charge me? Where will I get the money to pay you? Why would I spend it on this instead of something else where I might see a return?
- IIsi50MHz 2y ago
  > Apps from big publishers were more expensive than the indies in the 1980s. And indie shops that were charging ~$40 ($100 in 2024 dollars) for their titles. Similarly, in the 1990s, things like Myst and Sim City 2000 were $40 each. Shareware at the time (mostly indie) were usually $20 or less; often $5, and sometimes fun/silly things like postcardware or beerware.
CodeWriter23 2y ago
Adobe was $600 per update. Per app.

You could almost use this argument to convince me for a complex software like the Adobe products that is constantly getting new, major updates, but for a Pomodoro app? Honestly, $1 seems reasonable.

runako 2y ago

I should have been clearer. Apps from big publishers were more expensive than the indies in the 1980s. And indie shops that were charging ~$40 ($100 in 2024 dollars) for their titles. This is a direct comparison to the type of pomodoro app mentioned in the upthread comment. The thing is, all software constantly needs new updates. If not platform-driven, then security, bug fixes, etc. The more niche (like a pomodoro app), the fewer users over which to amortize the dev costs. A lifetime fee of $1, sold to a huge audience of 100k paid users, will pay for ~1 year of a single dev in the US, perhaps 2-3 years of a developer in a low-cost country. And then where does the money come from for updates in year 4 and beyond? Subscription payments recognize the realities that a) development never ends for most apps that are in use and b) developers are not going to be free in the future just because the publisher only charged once.

FireBeyond 2y ago
> A lifetime fee of $1, sold to a huge audience of 100k paid users, will pay for ~1 year of a single dev in the US, perhaps 2-3 years of a developer in a low-cost country. And then where does the money come from for updates in year 4 and beyond? I challenge you to demonstrate the Pomodoro app that has a full time dev effort for a year, and then requires anything more than piecemeal bug fixes or maybe a recompile in that four years of support...
- eropple 2y ago
  That application is also probably not selling 100,000 units, so adjust your expectations downward accordingly.
- rexf 2y ago
  Apple Watch app, widgets, Live Activities, new phone sizes... there are always things Apple wants you to add over time. Do you want meaningful updates or abandoned software? It doesn't take a full time job, but it's significantly more than $1 per install
- runako 2y ago
  Let me put it a different way. You have already been paid everything you will ever get paid for work you did in 2021. Next year, I want you to do an unpredictable amount of work to support the 2025 iOS. How much will you charge me? Where will I get the money to pay you? Why would I spend it on this instead of something else where I might see a return?
IIsi50MHz 2y ago
> Apps from big publishers were more expensive than the indies in the 1980s. And indie shops that were charging ~$40 ($100 in 2024 dollars) for their titles. Similarly, in the 1990s, things like Myst and Sim City 2000 were $40 each. Shareware at the time (mostly indie) were usually $20 or less; often $5, and sometimes fun/silly things like postcardware or beerware.

CodeWriter23 2y ago

Adobe was $600 per update. Per app.