I want to support this developer but not this way. Uninstalling :(
I want to support this developer but not this way. Uninstalling :(
and then pay for parts of your computer to NOT talk to the internet on a monthly basis!
App wise would this lock features since developers would have no means of shipping X versions of an app
I wonder , once the EU opens up the App Store will devs have to deal with cracked apps. Probably the full end of offline apps
Are non-paying customers no longer eligible for support?
Yeah, basically. "If you pay nothing, you get nothing."The last paragraph is brilliant foresight. I guess apps will need to move towards the AAA gaming market where Internet connection is required to verify license, plus a bunch amazing anti-cheat/-hack stuff. Assuming EU does crack open the app stores (pun intended), it sounds like a great small business to offer some libraries that mobile app devs can use for these new needs.
Isn't it possible that an app is simple enough that doesn't justify getting a full salary out of it?
Again, I'm not trying to be a dick here, I'm just trying to figure out what is the reasoning behind the subscription model.
I'm a freelance web developer. When I'm done with a project I have to move to something else. Is it unreasonable to expect app developers to do the same?
And I know, not all apps are created equal, some apps require constant work. I get that. For some apps is reasonable to expect a subscription. But for all apps? I'd say no.
And this developer, from what I can see, is doing the "right thing" by working on multiple products. Which is great.
I think like many things it’s not one size fits all.
In this particular case, I think that keeping a firewall utility up to date with changes to macOS and emerging threats would require a modest sustainable income source to make it worthwhile for the developer.
- October 12, 2022 - May 2, 2022 - April 25, 2022 - November 17, 2021
Just to grab the most recent. Reading the change notes a solid % is bug fixes which is expected.
This looks like a “traditional” piece of software. Doesn’t require constant new features that could be eventually bundled in a major paid release and the updates are primarily big fixes.
And in fact the non mini version of little snitch is not a subscription. As it should.
I agree with you that if an app has running costs (cloud storage or other services) or it requires constant work then a subscription is justified. But these days developers are trying to convert everything into a subscription.
Every minor utility app wants to be a subscription. Which is just insane.
I've made a living from non-subscription app sales for a decade, and revenue is pretty constant. As long as your app stays useful, people will continue to buy it.
That being said, I do like the license model that JetBrains uses for their products: if you pay for the subscription for more than 12mo, when you stop, you get to keep a perpetual license for the latest version that was released during the last 12 months of paid subscription (I hope I got it right).
Currently everyone and their mother want to sell you a subscription. Netflix, Amazon, Apple, Spotify, $NUM of app developers, Disney, $FORMER_TV_STATIONS
That's the problem with subscriptions. They pile up.
The software that can't be released free often has users that require features that need constant maintenance. API integrations, for instance.
These features aren't really optional anymore to be competitive.
Personally, I refuse to use subscription services out of principle. I much prefer to pay once and have it off my mind.
Longer licensing agreements are also available. ;)
So you're selling a more expensive subscription?
Just seems needlessly limiting to act like this out of principle.