How much do you guys suffer about this work life balance, I can't wrap my head around the level of brainwash you guys have been through to use concepts as socialised wealth and wellness as a bad thing
these evil europeans wanting to have a break from work! how dare them!
I’m with the parent on this. I don’t mind subscriptions if a service is provided that justifies the recurring cost. If it’s a local offline app then I don’t see it justified. Price it accordingly or at least give an option for one-time.
But yes, sub vs non-sub model is a very divisive topic. Personally would never subscribe to something like a offline local todo list
One way of looking at is that subscription software helps align developer interests with dedicated users. It's easier to retain users than it is to get new users, so developers are incentivized to build features/make improvements for existing users to keep them as happy users. In a pay once upfront model developers are essentially only incentivized to build features that attract new users.
The issue I see is that for certain apps, such as one I am currently working on and hope to publish soon on iOS, is that they do require a lot of maintenance once published even if there were no server costs. Given the amount of work I already put in it and how much more will be necessary even just to keep the app correctly running in the future, I don't really see what other monetization approach would make sense for me. Actually, I would even argue that selling an app without a subscription might (sometimes) be setting wrong or blurry expectations: if a user accepts to pay today a single time, how long are they expecting updates for? Will it only be basic bug fixes or also major new features? With a subscription, I feel like at least if they are unhappy with my app, they won't really have lost anything and can just unsubscribe, since they had basically accepted, IMO, that the money they put in my app each period of time is only for the service and potential updates in that small period of time and not future changes.
A one time cost is fine if you don’t mind the app breaking next time Apple updates iOS. There is an ongoing cost to ensuring the app continues to work.
The maintenance effort required on iOS is substantial. About a quarter of your full-time year needs to be dedicated to it.
On desktop, you can just publish your software and slowly see it age as you work on your next big release. On iOS, it ages every year at brutal pace, and your new sales will plummet while you work on your next big release, meaning your revenue crashes much faster.
Even worse, the iOS App Store has no notion of paid upgrades, and publishing a new app is basically like starting from scratch as far as discoverability goes. So when you finally have your next big release ready, it's like launching a completely new company.
Apple really wants developers to make subscription apps that ship frequent iterative changes, and other business models just simply don't work well on their mobile platform (on Android it's even worse btw).
I’m not paying for the human that made the app. I’m paying for the app, aka for an advertised thing with an advertised feature set for a specific price. If I deem the value I get for the price worth it, I will purchase the thing from you.
I will however not pay you monthly just because “the dev needs to eat too” if there is no service provided that justifies the monthly ongoing cost.
there are a lot of apps that do this though… eg. git tower. Sketch. Etc. Not saying that I like it or anything. Maybe its the combination of local first + an app that seems to be trivial (I am sure it was not but if you hear "daily planner" I think its reasonable to assume that its less complex than a git client and/or an app like Sketch).
I think someone that can afford to publish on the most expensive app publishing platform can afford food all the time. There are no poor iOS developers.
The developer fee is a business expense for anyone publishing software as an entity on the App Store. This is the same as any other expense someone might require for their profession, it doesn't have anything to do with their financial security.
Since the whole docker thing where people were complaining about having to pay 10USD, I am happy when OSS projects pull the rug, tech bros you're paid to solve your company's issues, nobody in OSS owes you anything, go earn your salary and build the docker image that fix the CVE, or stfu
We all know you don't care about loyalty correctness or anything, you just someone to do the work you're paid for
Spot on. The number of people who are seemingly completely lost without a free DockerHub build is terrifying. Maybe it explains why software quality has degraded so much over the last several years.
are you saying there's a bunch of human centipedes bopping around here who are both the people who would do the minio rug pull as the ones who complain about not getting free services?
It is hardly a rug pull, when they are still giving away the full source + the actual Dockerfile, so you know, you can build the image. In either case, if you are not running your own registry and are unable to build an image, but still complain about this minor issue...you are probably in the wrong business.
I deleted all my socials more than a decade ago and never looked back, to be honest it's expensive, this august I've spent a lot of money going out almost every day, but I also think it's because it's hard to stay in when outside the weather is great, also gym was closed, but I think getting rid of social completely it's the only way to go, when they are engineered to monopolise your time, there is no limiting
