Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

53792 readers

81 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

💰 Please help cover server costs.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

136

Apps that shouldn't be Subscriptions (discuss.tchncs.de)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

98 comments fedilink hide all child comments

What is the most useless app that you have seen being given as a subscription?

For me, I tried a 'minimalist' launcher app for Android that had a 7 day trial or something and they had a yearly subscription based model for it. I was aghast. I would literally expect the app to blow my mind and do everything one can assume to go that way. In a world, where Nova Launcher (Yes, I know it has been acquired by Branch folks but it still is a sturdy one) or Niagara exist plus many alternatives including minimalist ones on F Droid, the dev must be releasing revolutionary stuff to factor in a subscription service.

Second, is a controversial choice, since it's free tier is quite good and people like it so much. But, Pocketcasts. I checked it's yearly price the other day, and boy, in my country, I can subscribe to Google Play Pass, YouTube Premium and Spotify and still have money left before I hit the ceiling what Pocketcasts is asking for paid upgrade.

Also, what are your views on one time purchase vs subscriptions? Personally, I find it much easier to purchase, if it's good enough even if it was piratable, something if it is a one time purchase rather than repetitive.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Then the dev needs to build out a range of protocols and API's to enable users to "supply their own server", which can bring a range of additional headaches, like having to provide support for external dependencies outside their control, etc.

What if the users "server" fails? Should the dev waste hours of their life assisting a user with a highly specific Google Drive issue when they spent $5, 3 years ago?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I mean, there are pretty standard protocols for most of the cloud services, like S3 API - the defacto.

Hell, sftp is fine for most stuff. They just want your data.

But the developer doesn’t need to provide support if you opt to use your own data storage and the storage itself fails. And

Google would be the one to contact if Google drive has an issue.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago

But the developer doesn’t need to provide support if you opt to use your own data storage and the storage itself fails. Google would be the one to contact if Google drive has an issue.

Well yes, but that's not how your average user thinks and acts. They will either a) contact you as the developer of the app that doesn't seem to work and when your say it's not your fault give you bad reviews or b) directly give you bad reviews.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'm not putting my data up some random server run by some dev

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Your commenting here is evidence to the contrary