3 ms·
Yearly subscriptions for a standalone app? I understand the motivation for continuous income. What's wrong with the old method of releasing a paid 2.0? Admitt
by pfranz 14y ago
Yearly subscriptions for a standalone app? I understand the motivation for continuous income. What's wrong with the old method of releasing a paid 2.0? Admittedly, it's a bit hairy in the Apple App Store world since you can't have paid updates, but why not a separate app? That way you can have maintenance releases in the old version and charge for the new one. Although, the rub is you can't give discounts for upgrades.
Like it's stated in the article, you pay a fixed price for a song that's released. Why should my software stop working if I don't want new features?
- marcomonteiro 14y agoI think another challenge with this approach would be marketing/awareness. With app updates, current users are notified that there is a new version. If you put out a new version separate from the previous one then your existing user base is unaware that there is a new (and better?) version of XYZ app. It's just messy. Paid upgrades directly supported by the App Store/OS would be much better IMO.
- cageface 14y agoThis way you have two forks to maintain which is a big headache. Apple needs to allow app demos so devs can charge higher prices without scaring away customers and they need to allow for paid upgrades. The truth is that it's too hard to make money at app store prices.