Hacker News Reader

Comment by ryanisnan | Hacker News Reader

This looks great! The only thing I'd really advocate for is not pricing the app ridiculously. I tried Opal for a while, but their pricing model per month is a bit ridiculous. Effectively a subscription service for what should be a single-purchase app demonstrates developer greed.

Edit: I'm a bit disappointed to see monthly fees here. Can you help justify to me why an app like this demands ongoing cost?

View on HN

I hear that. The truth is that it's not solely about generating revenue, but aligning interests and making sure we're building the right thing over time. When customers are consistently paying, if we don't consistently deliver the value they're paying for, they leave. It means we're in a tighter feedback loop with users about what's working and what isn't.

It also lets us plan for the long term since we have a decent idea of what our revenue will be. Particularly in this space that's going to be important - we'll have to continuously evolve to changes in the platforms we're operating on and the apps themselves that we're helping restrict. Basically we think it's mission-critical that the technology protecting your attention to be as well built as the tech trying to exploit it, and we see this as * probably * the most effective way to accomplish that.

Thanks for the reply. Ultimately my willingness to pay would come down to how things improve for me using it. I'll perhaps give the paid plan a try.

One possible thing I'd recommend on a trial is to have more of a real(?) experience. Curious how the one-app limitation ends up conveying in terms of realized value. Will report back.

Thanks again, and nice looking product.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com