Your wording is interesting, given how often I hear that tired old justification from developers saying that a subscription is no more than a cup of coffee a day/week/month!
Entitlement latte indeed.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Highlights Benefits of App Subscriptions With New Developer-Focused Video
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Your wording is interesting, given how often I hear that tired old justification from developers saying that a subscription is no more than a cup of coffee a day/week/month!
Entitlement latte indeed.
Subscriptions will sink or swim based on the value that it has to the individual user.... it is a simple as that. I don't think developers need to justify anything, you pay or you walk. BAM!!!
Wrong.
I’m a single user who much prefers ongoing subscriptions to up front costs.
And from other responses here and elsewhere it seems I’m not the only one.
Please stop pushing your world view onto other people.
Right, Apple’s position on paid upgrades is unfortunate. I’m still not sure why they are so stubborn about it. My guess is they’re trying to force everything to the subscription model because it brings in more revenue so that they can take their cut. I don’t buy Schiller’s “too difficult” excuse.
Helping? It looks to me like they are the ring leader.
"Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance". George Bernard Shaw
That doesn't work either - just watch these forums when any app receives a paid upgrade. "I only paid to upgrade 2 years ago, and now I have to pay again? DISGUSTING GREEDY DEVELOPERS".
App development is not a once off process. It's an ongoing process. For every app you use, teams of developers and working around the clock, constantly. It isn't possible to release software that requires no ongoing work. New devices need to be supported, new OS' need to be supported, vulnerabilities need to be patched, bugs need to be fixed, and apps need to constantly be polished and improved due to fierce competition. With a subscription model, you're paying for a service (software development), not a product. I don't pay my local cafe once for infinite coffee. I don't pay my mechanic once for infinite maintenance. I don't pay my builder once for infinite houses. So don't expect to pay once for infinite use of software.
Apple told designers that the application demonstrate is changing, with paid applications speaking to only 15 percent of aggregate application deals, a number that is declining. Effective applications, Apple stated, need to center around memberships and customary commitment from clients instead of one time deals. Apple this evening shared another "Bits of knowledge" video on its designer site that is intended to feature the advantages of utilizing App Store memberships as an installment technique for apps.The video centers around the engineers behind Elevate, Dropbox, Calm, and Bumble and how these applications "make extraordinary client encounters by proceeding to offer some benefit all through the membership life cycle.""The esteem for a client is that you're not simply purchasing this one thing at this one point in time, you're really purchasing something that is advancing," said Elevate designer Jesse Germinario. In you want to make custom iOS app or want to monetize it then check revglue(.)com/bespoke "If you're a membership business, your motivating forces are very lined up with your clients, since they have to keep on getting an incentive out of the item so as to continue buying in, which implies that you need to keep improving the application," said Calm developer Tyler Sheaffer.
So how about an app that USED to be single-pay but now forces you to pay forever for content you already own? Or a basic app with no ongoing services whatsoever which forces you to pay forever just for the privilege of launching it? That’s being force fed a tall glass of crap, and apparently Apple is the maître d’. They seem to have the stones to suggest that we’ll appreciate an app more by having to pay for it forever, so what’s happening is that devs of simple apps with NO added value are trying to get in on the action and force on us subscriptions to nothing but the app itself. No ongoing service, no revolving content, not even a promise of a meaningful update. Just pay-to-use. This isn’t a subscription by any definition I’ve ever known. It’s extortion. What happened to putting the customer first and working backward, as a Jobs famously said?? I love Apple, but this is a massive freaking party foul.
Great this article came up. I tipped MR awhile ago.
And still I love Apple, uhhm. Yes
But it’s still because of Steve and the hardware.
I hate subscriptions too.
My 1$/month for iCloud is ok, but no, not for apps.
DayOne want’s me to pay for subscription and released the last 3 upgrade like a beta. Have they learned the greed game from Apple? Yes.
I use the sharing feature a great deal. And that text was #&@(=%? Yuk, yuk, yuk.
I hate when devs want to use us for free beta-testing.
Thankfully I don’t subscribe. Will stay out of it.
Yes, devs like everyone wants money. Those who deserve it, gets mine.
It will always be devs that play a more fair game.
Exactly, this started with Apple’s greed.
Apple want to make money, so they help the devs to make more money.
And still I love Apple, uhhm. Yes
But it’s still because of Steve and the hardware.
I hate subscriptions too.
My 1$/month for iCloud is ok, but no, not for apps.
DayOne want’s me to pay for subscription and released the last 3 upgrade like a beta. Have they learned the greed game from Apple? Yes.
I use the sharing feature a great deal. And that text was #&@(=%? Yuk, yuk, yuk.
I hate when devs want to use us for free beta-testing.
Thankfully I don’t subscribe. Will stay out of it.
Yes, devs like everyone wants money. Those who deserve it, gets mine.
It will always be devs that play a more fair game.
So you want to rent all your music (foolish), you want to never own a car or own a house. That tv hanging on your wall-you don’t want to buy and own, you’d rather rent it because they are always working to improve them?
Subscription based software is nothing but greedy BS. Develop the software, sell it at the correct price. That’s where your new development money comes from.
Paying for something and owning it isn’t entitlement. Buy a dictionary.
[doublepost=1536666795][/doublepost]
No one is asking for all free apps. Develop it and test it properly, sell it at what it’s worth, and then work on a newer version.
The problems seems to be many developers do not understand business at all. When you sell your finished product, the price should reflect time and other expenses put into developing it.
Yes and no: it looks like the market lost sense of the real cost of software since the race to the bottom hit the App Store.
The consequence starts to appears: a few big companies will sell few high quality apps with subscriptions or pay-to-play, and hobbyists will sell or give mostly subpar apps, with nothing in between.
I agree. It costs money to add new features. Plus, if it provides a service like syncing between devices or need a server to connect multiple people, I understand needing a subscription.
However, I also agree with this. Apple seems to want a cut of the money, even if it has nothing to do with the app's service. Delivering updates is okay with me, but why would an app that doesn't offer any online services, and isn't updated often (say, Flappy Bird) need to have a subscription, much less pay a certain % to Apple every month/year?
I'd like to see a "Trial" version of some apps, and then pay once for it. If there's an update that adds features, have a system to pay for it. Bug-fix only updates should still be free.
[doublepost=1536673299][/doublepost]
While some people might agree with you, and will love something or hate it. For me, I prefer not to be totally black or white. Sometimes things are green (proverbially). I find that a lot of people I work with like explanations for decisions. They'd walk without an explanation, and might stay with an explanation they understand. IMO, just know your customers and do what's best for everyone involved.
Brilliant post.
I’d add that there’s probably a ‘subscription ceiling’ of how many subs regular consumers will take.
When you take your mobile/cell line, Netflix etc & then throw regular apps into the mix... not to mention, mortgage/rent, utility bills...
Well, that starts to feel a lot per month.
Plus some of us (me!) like to keep their fixed monthly outgoings to a minimum. So I’m not exactly looking to add to that by subscribing to a ‘nice to have’ productivity app, if I really don’t have to.
In the end, I feel that this is more about Apple being able to smooth out the revenue per month of their services division then anything else.
And as you say, because Apple was ok about loads of free apps being added to the App Store to help the iPhone grow in the early years, they’re left with a big problem.
Consumers expect apps for free. And app makers are in turn ok about harvesting usage data and serving out ads.
I kinda think that Apple should’ve always kept a minimum 99¢ price for all apps to help avoid all of this. But it’s too late now.
I wouldn’t mind resonable annual subscriptions for apps I use. Like a $5 app, if I used it I’d pay $5 a year. Don’t add “crap” just to make it be $30/yr.
But I’m monthly subscription-ed out. I’m over it.
[doublepost=1536673943][/doublepost]And I actually have a subscription for a school thing I got as a great deal. It’s $10/year. I don’t use it, but for $10 I renew in case I do, and to support the developer.
But I’m monthly subscription-ed out. I’m over it.
[doublepost=1536673943][/doublepost]And I actually have a subscription for a school thing I got as a great deal. It’s $10/year. I don’t use it, but for $10 I renew in case I do, and to support the developer.
I hate subscriptions for apps. I do subscribe to Netflix and spotify but I do so through their sites so apple doesn't get a cut which I feel is pretty crappy for them to take. For just a standard phone app i'll never subscribe. There's just no value for me to do so.
If the app is worth it I will happily pay for a one time purchase. But ongoing subscriptions for a variety of apps? Hell no.
If the app is worth it I will happily pay for a one time purchase. But ongoing subscriptions for a variety of apps? Hell no.
You are not even 0.01% of users.
[doublepost=1536677466][/doublepost]
Wow. It’s almost as if the developers are forcing you to pay them.If you don’t like it, don’t use the app.
Can someone remind me, doesn't Apple also make developers give it a "favored nation" status? IE, if people can download/subscribe to app XYZ on another website, the version on Apple's store has to be the lowest price?
You’re using the wrong analogy. For most software, the correct one is that of a tool. You pay for a hammer once, it’s yours and you use it as is until it breaks. If you ever need a better one, you sell your old one and upgrade. I have been using photoshop cs6, the last perpetual license version of photoshop, for the last decade or so. It has done everything I need. I have been bombarded with adobe emails saying I should hop on their cloud subscription and update. If I had done so, I would have lost a lot of money and received updates that are of no value to me. And I’d have to keep paying forever or else lose access to the software.
There are exceptions like the ones I mentioned in my earlier post, where subscriptions are the only viable choice. But for most that is simply not the case, as much as developers would love that stable income. I understand things (you?) developers continue to make it better. But that doesn’t mean customers need it. Some might. They should have a choice.
As for the complainers, no one is forcing them to upgrade. Those are the entitled that I mentioned.
Wow. Wonderful advice. Now suppose they implement this “subscription” model on an app I already own. You read that part, right?
How do subscriptions dig more money out of people? The percentage taken is the same. Apple takes a 30% when someone buys an app. Apple takes a 30% cut when a user subscribes, although that number drops after a year now so one could say that Apple is actually being LESS greedy with subscriptions.
As an developer with a few apps in the App Store, I simply cant justify a subscription model with the type of apps they are - it makes no sense.
It works for Apps which rely on behind-the-scenes hardware/services or that would otherwise be very expensive as a one off purchase.
Taking my $5 apps and charging people $5 every year for them would actually LOSE customers. It would also mean they’d be more demanding with respect to updates when nothing actually neeeds to be updated. How else will they feel they’re getting their money’s worth?
Despite my app offering much more than the alternatives, and only being $5, people still think it’s too expensive. But they’ll happily go and buy a $5 coffee. Meanwhile, my income from them doesn’t come close to covering costs. Luckily it’s not my day job.
It works for Apps which rely on behind-the-scenes hardware/services or that would otherwise be very expensive as a one off purchase.
Taking my $5 apps and charging people $5 every year for them would actually LOSE customers. It would also mean they’d be more demanding with respect to updates when nothing actually neeeds to be updated. How else will they feel they’re getting their money’s worth?
Despite my app offering much more than the alternatives, and only being $5, people still think it’s too expensive. But they’ll happily go and buy a $5 coffee. Meanwhile, my income from them doesn’t come close to covering costs. Luckily it’s not my day job.
Ah, subscriptions, the hated future of third party software!
I think a lot of people here are bad at math. Or they never ever upgrade anything. Adobe CC used to cost $2500 to buy. It now costs around $600/year as a subscription. So it takes over 4 years of subscribing to spend the same amount as one used to spend to buy it outright. Even if you skipped a major upgrade release, chances are you did not skip more than one. And if you did, let's be honest, you aren't a professional. You're a hobbyist and probably account for less than 5% of CC customers.
The two problems I see with subscriptions are frequency and cost. I hate paying monthly. It's irritating and makes me feel like I'm being nickel and dimed. But I have no problem paying annually. I subscribe to several services and apps this way.
Cost is the big one for me. Take 1Password. I've used it for years and have recommended it to many people. But now that they've gone subscription, I'm out. It's simply not worth $3/month forever when iCloud Keychain does 75% of what 1Password does for free. And, unlike CC, where Adobe continues to add a lot of worthwhile features for professionals using their software, how much can AgileBits actually add to 1Password? It's pretty mature. Look at the latest version. It didn't bring much new to the table other than the new pricing plan.
1Password used to cost $50. They raised the price to $65, then went subscription at $3/month. Whereas it takes over 4 years of paying Adobe to equal the old purchase price of CC, it takes less than 2 years with a 1Password subscription. To me that is ridiculous! Adobe's products are infinitely more complex and infinitely more useful, yet AgileBits thinks their product is somehow worth more. I see this a lot with smaller developers of one tricky pony apps and I don't subscribe to any of them. Price your product fairly and I have no issue with the subscription model. Subscriptions makes a lot more sense on many levels, but the price has to be fair.
[doublepost=1536693410][/doublepost]
Except that it doesn't always bring in more revenue. A 30% cut is a 30% cut. And Apple drops their cut on subscriptions after one year. Apple could make more or less depending on how the developer prices the subscription versus how often the developer releases new paid upgrades (assuming Apple offered upgrades and took the same 30% cut). That said, I don't buy Schiller's excuse either.
I think a lot of people here are bad at math. Or they never ever upgrade anything. Adobe CC used to cost $2500 to buy. It now costs around $600/year as a subscription. So it takes over 4 years of subscribing to spend the same amount as one used to spend to buy it outright. Even if you skipped a major upgrade release, chances are you did not skip more than one. And if you did, let's be honest, you aren't a professional. You're a hobbyist and probably account for less than 5% of CC customers.
The two problems I see with subscriptions are frequency and cost. I hate paying monthly. It's irritating and makes me feel like I'm being nickel and dimed. But I have no problem paying annually. I subscribe to several services and apps this way.
Cost is the big one for me. Take 1Password. I've used it for years and have recommended it to many people. But now that they've gone subscription, I'm out. It's simply not worth $3/month forever when iCloud Keychain does 75% of what 1Password does for free. And, unlike CC, where Adobe continues to add a lot of worthwhile features for professionals using their software, how much can AgileBits actually add to 1Password? It's pretty mature. Look at the latest version. It didn't bring much new to the table other than the new pricing plan.
1Password used to cost $50. They raised the price to $65, then went subscription at $3/month. Whereas it takes over 4 years of paying Adobe to equal the old purchase price of CC, it takes less than 2 years with a 1Password subscription. To me that is ridiculous! Adobe's products are infinitely more complex and infinitely more useful, yet AgileBits thinks their product is somehow worth more. I see this a lot with smaller developers of one tricky pony apps and I don't subscribe to any of them. Price your product fairly and I have no issue with the subscription model. Subscriptions makes a lot more sense on many levels, but the price has to be fair.
[doublepost=1536693410][/doublepost]
Except that it doesn't always bring in more revenue. A 30% cut is a 30% cut. And Apple drops their cut on subscriptions after one year. Apple could make more or less depending on how the developer prices the subscription versus how often the developer releases new paid upgrades (assuming Apple offered upgrades and took the same 30% cut). That said, I don't buy Schiller's excuse either.
Last edited:
Developers such as yourself are definitely stuck between a rock and a hard place. On one hand, there’s a public perception that mobile apps cost nothing or next to nothing (that may have even spilled over into desktop applications). On the other, Apple doesn’t allow paid upgrades and instead pushes subscriptions which doesn’t make sense for a lot of apps/developers. I feel for you.
My hope is that with iPads becoming used more for work that public perception about mobile apps changes and people see their true value. I suppose people will eventually see once developers stop making apps because they can’t make a living but I hope it doesn’t get to that point. But another crucial key is Apple needs to allow paid upgrades in their App Stores. Pushing subscriptions across the board is not the answer.
[doublepost=1536693988][/doublepost]
Well my argument is that generally subscriptions bring in more revenue than paid upgrades because it forces everyone to upgrade every month/year (to the disadvantage of the consumer who may not need the constant upgrades), which is why Apple and so many developers are trying to adopt that model. How much more revenue, I don’t know, but I’d be willing to bet it’s a lot, enough to make even Apple’s drop to 15% worth it.
Last edited:
I can understand why you feel that way. It's a logical argument and may very well be true. It depends on a number of factors. What did the software package cost to buy? What does it cost to rent? How often were paid upgrades released? How much did they cost? And, most importantly, how often did the user pay to upgrade?
As I said in my previous post, CC used to cost $2500. Now it's a little under $600/year to rent. In the 4+ years it takes to pay the same amount of money to Adobe under the new model versus the old, Adobe definitely released at least one paid upgrade. How much did that upgrade cost? I don't know, probably around $1000. Did you pay to upgrade? Or were you, like many customers, on an every other version cycle? If you upgraded every time a new version was released, the subscription model is actually a better deal. If you upgraded every other version, it's less in your favor.
I think subscriptions can work well if they are fairly priced. Users don't have to pay (sometimes very) large upfront costs and developers can count on a steady revenue stream, which probably helps them tax-wise in addition to making it easier to predict future income. The other major advantage of a subscription is that one can cancel it or activate it only when needed. Imagine paying $2500 for CC and then not using it nearly as much as you thought. Under the subscription model, you just cancel and save a ton of money. Or let's say you only need to use certain Adobe apps for specific projects. You activate, spend a few weeks using the app, then cancel. That's a lot cheaper than buying it outright.