Hacker News Reader

Comment by bossyTeacher | Hacker News Reader

Unfortunately, the Apple Developer account is not a one-time purchase and neither is the recurring payment to keep the server used by the app. People need to stop expecting one-time payments for online services

View on HN

Skip the Apple tax and build a web app. A simple web app like this should not cost a significant amount of money to host.

https://whatthefuckshouldimakefordinner.com

This was just great. I laughed.

Then I got hit with 753 ads and stopped laughing. But still pretty fun.

My favorite restaurant’s rent isn’t a one-time purchase either but they still manage to sell me a meal without an annual subscription.

Bad analogy. You keep paying the restaurant for every meal, whereas you would pay only once for the app.

The argument I was responding to was “The developer has ongoing costs therefore the user can’t expect not to have ongoing costs.”

I might eat at a restaurant only once.

You'd rather pay every time you use it?

This is actually a great idea. Lots of subscriptions just pay for a thing to be available. Netflix will tell you "sleeping giants" who never watch are ok, because the content was made available, but I think that's BS. I'd love to see a system where you're only billed on the months that you use it. Or even just charge me a dollar per use with a monthly cap of ten after which the rest of the month is free.

If the price was reasonable (less than ten cents in this case), absolutely.

I don't think you can charge so little. You'd probably have to buy some amount of runs in bulk.

Another alternative would be you buy access for a block of time, but not an auto renewing subscription. Mullvad VPN works like this, I have to go into the app and re-up if I want to keep using it every month.

However I think this type of app should be a one time purchase anyway. Looks to me like it could work without any server / hosted infrastructure.

A better analogy is the usual "car" analogy: I bought my car in cash as a one time purchase. Even though Toyota needs to maintain their network of dealerships and service centers, finance their factories' operations, and pay their employees, I still don't have to pay a monthly subscription for the car (yet). If I drive it, I pay to put gasoline in it and maintain it every so often, and that's it. If I don't drive it, it sits in my garage and I don't have to pay monthly for it.

This idea that customers should need to pay for all of a business's business costs and overhead as the overhead happens is a new one, and an annoying one.

But you maintain your car don't you ? If you need to fix the car, you're generally on the hook for that (besides manufacturing defects etc). Then there are normal maintenance costs you're always on the hook for.

Generally anything physical you own, you're on the hook for maintaining. But software is different isn't it ? If you pay a lifetime fee for an app, are you expected to maintain it ?

I bet that if manufacturers were also on the hook for maintaining cars they'd sold indefinitely, we'd be on subscription fees there too.

Obviously, some apps have negligible maintenance so i'm not saying a subscription model is the best model for all cases, just that i don't think the analogy with cars fits exactly.

Having to eat food is a lifetime subscription. I guess the point is you would pay for the app once, but visit the restaurant multiple times. I think something like a small initial fee plus donations to keep it running would be good for such an app as this.

You should have started the app on an Android first. An Android developer license is only a one time $25 fee. Once you build it on Android, you can gauge the response and determine how much to charge on other platforms. And build it using a build once, deploy many framework, such as React Native or Flutter, that way porting it to any device would be a sinch! My piece of advice.

I remember reading years ago that people were much more likely to pay for apps (outside of games) on Apple vs Android. I wonder what the current distribution looks like.

why even have a android app? just build it on the web.

on the plus side everyone can use it on any device they would like.

It's almost like so many things are broken at every level...

online services do have inherent costs that need to be paid especially for products that provide value.

i do wonder if for new products they should opt for a webapp instead which would negate the apple/google tax and it would allow android users to also try

Apple dev account costs $99/year. Do you really need to recoup that from the first 6 customers? (5 + 1, since one has to pay for the 15% Apple cut.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com