Lemmy

11867 readers

4 users here now

Everything about Lemmy; bugs, gripes, praises, and advocacy.

For discussion about the lemmy.ml instance, go to [email protected].

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Subscription models for an app that’s not hosting anything is just the dev wanting a constant revenue stream, no matter how they try to word it. (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

81 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Subscription models only make sense for an app/service that have recurring costs. In the case of Lemmy apps, the instances are the ones with recurring hosting costs, not the apps.

If an app doesn’t have recurring hosting costs, it only makes sense to have one up front payment and then maybe in app purchases to pay for new features going forward

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

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (12 children)

As much as I support the developers’ right to profit off their work, I also cannot afford to have everything in my life turn into a reoccurring payment model.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Then don't. Free version barely has any ads and has 99% of the functionality. Y'all a bunch of babies.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (10 children)

I’m not talking about this one specific application. I’m talking about the trend that everything is taking.

One thing in isolation isn’t bad. “ItS oNlY $xx.99/yr” after all.

But when stepping back and looking at the trend you see a different story.
It’s only $10
It’s only $15
It’s only $30
It’s only $5
It’s only $50
It’s only $100
It’s only $60
It’s only $3
It’s only $1599
It’s only $130
It’s only $45
It’s only $99
It’s only $200
It’s only…

[+] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Again you’re missing the point.

This is the future of everything.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's one possible future. Or you could go out of your way to not get subscriptions.

I have two digital subscriptions, Netflix and Disney+, and I'm considering cancelling them.

For music, I just buy what I want to listen to. I watch far less TV shows now because I find them very repetitive and low quality. I don't watch many TV shows because I find video games and books more satisfying. And so on.

If a car requires a subscription, I'm not going to buy that car. If a TV comes with ads or a subscription, I'm not buying that TV. And so on. Unfortunately, the subscription model is very popular, but if enough people push back, alternatives will continue to exist.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m trying, but I see this going the same way as MTX in video games.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Yet there are still a ton of games without MTX.

I can count on one hand the number of games I've played with MTX in the past year, and I've played dozens of games in that time. MTX is mostly in big AAA MP games, so I just don't play big AAA MP games.

In the last year, I've gotten a lot more into indie and AA gaming, but I still occasionally play AAA games. If a game obviously has MTX, I don't play that game. There's plenty more to choose from.

Vote with your eyeballs and your wallet and support companies that don't do that nonsense.

load more comments (8 replies)