Apple Introduces App Store Monthly Subscriptions With 12-Month Commitment

[turbineseaplane]

Anytime I come to MR site and see the word "subscription" in a title I think to myself... oh boy lets see the keyboard commandos in the comments.

You know, it really does a disservice to any point you are going to make when you start off with this tone of denigration directed at other forum members.

The rest of your post is great, and worth considering for all of us, but why start it off with the negative?

 

[canadianreader]

Some apps already offer yearly subscription upfront.

 

[J Osborne]

Just what we need. More subscriptions. Not.

Same number. Any app that will offer this choice already has a yearly subscription with one payment choice, and probably a monthly subscription choice.

Nobody is going to go from a non-subscription model to a subscription model just because they can now _also_ offer a year subscription with 12 “easy” payments.

 

[lostPod]

Dang I thought this was a subscription update to the developer license ...

 

[roblognick]

Bet you it’s still going to be more expensive than going to the service directly.

 

[mlayer]

Anytime I come to MR site and see the word "subscription" in a title I think to myself... oh boy lets see the keyboard commandos in the comments.

Subscriptions are not for everyone. I pay for subscriptions on many services. It is all a write-off for my side hustle. Adobe, iCloud, Google Drive and various other apps. So many seems to want to share why subscriptions don't work for them.... umm great.. who cares. There are many people who it works for in the world. Affordability is a key thing for many. I am sure Apple put some research into this topic and many top app developers came forth the idea... or users said hey why not let us pay for a yearly sub over 12 months. No different than what carriers are doing with device payment. Device payment may not be for you... but trust me, someone who worked in the cellular industry for 2+ decades, it works for many and you would be surprised at how many users opt for payments over time.

Personally I don't like racking up subscriptions. Even my upfront cash iPhone is on an annual Mint plan, that's how much I prefer to minimize subscriptions. Yet I get why someone might prefer the convenience of a monthly payment instead. There's so much outrage about this new option when it was in all likelihood borne of a request by both developers and customers to provide another option that prevents the whole "subscribe for only a month" plan that is frankly very one-sided.

The Adobe comparison is popular but isn't the best analogue because Creative Cloud is so freaking expensive and they know it. A few years ago I did a brief subscription for Illustrator that I ended up not using at all, and to terminate it I had to get into a prolonged haggling session with Adobe. *THAT* is what turned me off completely to Adobe products, that they went used car salesman on me in a chat. It seems unlikely that you'll get into that kind of situation with the Apple App Store.

 

[mrochester]

Bet you it’s still going to be more expensive than going to the service directly.

Depends how much the developer chooses to charge for it. I presume it’ll just be the existing one year price.

 

[turbineseaplane]

"subscribe for only a month" plan that is frankly very one-sided.

I don't find it one sided at all.

I think it's very healthy for developers to need to continually earn renewing revenue.

 

[mac.ross]

This tends to be the best of both worlds if you know that you're going to be using something long-term, you get the discounted price for committing to a 12-month contract without having to pay a lump sum all at once like a normal annual subscription.

The problem I foresee is that a lot of people are far too stupid to understand how it works.

I've lost count of how many stories I've read on Reddit where people are ranting about Adobe because they opted to sign up for a 12-month pay-monthly contract to receive the steep discount rather than pay for the far more expensive month-to-month option and aren't allowed to unilaterally break the contract whenever they want.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

This tends to be the best of both worlds if you know that you're going to be using something long-term, you get the discounted price for committing to a 12-month contract without having to pay a lump sum all at once like a normal annual subscription.

The problem I foresee is that a lot of people are far too stupid to understand how it works.

I've lost count of how many stories I've read on Reddit where people are ranting about Adobe because they opted to sign up for a 12-month pay-monthly contract to receive the steep discount rather than pay for the far more expensive month-to-month option and aren't allowed to unilaterally break the contract whenever they want.

I have never used Adobe's subscription software, but they were apparently doing something dirty in that, enough that the DOJ and FTC sued them for it. I wouldn't call the users stupid in that case.

Adobe settled for $150 million, and the CEO stepped down the next day.

Adobe reaches $150 million settlement of US lawsuit over termination fees, subscription cancellations

Adobe reached a $150 ‌million settlement to resolve a U.S. government lawsuit accusing the Photoshop and Acrobat maker of harming consumers by concealing hefty termination fees and making it difficult to cancel subscriptions, the Department of Justice said on Friday.

www.reuters.com

 

[mac.ross]

I have never used Adobe's subscription software, but they were apparently doing something dirty in that, enough that the DOJ and FTC sued them for it. I wouldn't call the users stupid in that case.

Adobe settled for $150 million.

Adobe reaches $150 million settlement of US lawsuit over termination fees, subscription cancellations

Adobe reached a $150 ‌million settlement to resolve a U.S. government lawsuit accusing the Photoshop and Acrobat maker of harming consumers by concealing hefty termination fees and making it difficult to cancel subscriptions, the Department of Justice said on Friday.

www.reuters.com

It wasn't great before but they made a bunch of changes to how it works years ago and made it incredibly obvious exactly what is happening and people *still* complain about it despite it literally spelling it out below each subscription option.

 

[mlayer]

I don't find it one sided at all.

I think it's very healthy for developers to need to continually earn renewing revenue.

I hear a lot of recommendations for the app Flighty. In the praise a lot of people say to subscribe for only a month and then quit when your trip is done. For some that may be a healthy customer-developer relationship. It is a far cry from "renewing revenue."

 

[ginkobiloba]

I like that! What’s the model called? Another comment mentioned ‘hybrid subscription’. Will keep an eye out and try to support devs who offer it.

I’m not sure what the model is called, but it’s indeed like a hybrid subscription … Out of my head , examples of software that use it :
- Agenda by Momenta ( appstore )
- Curio by Zengobi ( amazing app, like OneNote on steroids ! ) , (not on the Appstore )
- Devonthink (not on the Appstore )
- Tinderbox by Eastgate

I know there are many others, it’s just the ones that i know of and use. But yeah, this is a model that I’m willing to support. Your subscription buys you a year of updates and you keep the app if you stop paying, not a year of renting access to the app then locking you out of it if you stop paying.

 

[haemolysis]

Why is it that almost no company offering subscriptions actually (meaningfully) updates their software. Like what do you mean we are asked to pay an ongoing fee every month when the app hasn't actually changed since like 2017?

We hear "support the devs" but the devs clocked-out a decade ago. But hey, its now easier than ever to support the bank account of whoever is left owning the IP now! Fantastic.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Why is it that almost no company offering subscriptions actually (meaningfully) updates their software. Like what do you mean we are asked to pay an ongoing fee every month when the app hasn't actually changed since like 2017?

We hear "support the devs" but the devs clocked-out a decade ago. But hey, its now easier than ever to support the bank account of whoever is left owning the IP now! Fantastic.

This is exactly why I don't support subscription software.

 

[Take Flight]

The annual figure is what applies in this instance. Monthly subscriptions can be cancelled at any time. This subscription cannot until 12 payments have been made.

Yeah its the dumb cable subscription model all over again! If you want to pay monthly just pay the extra dollar and retain the right to say bye bye and not be roped into BS you don't want be on the hook for a year.

That is literally why the monthly option is there. 🤦‍♂️

 

[mrochester]

Yeah its the dumb cable subscription model all over again! If you want to pay monthly just pay the extra dollar and retain the right to say bye bye and not be roped into BS you don't want be on the hook for a year.

That is literally why the monthly option is there. 🤦‍♂️

Consumers will have the option of both.

 

[ginkobiloba]

Why is it that almost no company offering subscriptions actually (meaningfully) updates their software. Like what do you mean we are asked to pay an ongoing fee every month when the app hasn't actually changed since like 2017?

We hear "support the devs" but the devs clocked-out a decade ago. But hey, its now easier than ever to support the bank account of whoever is left owning the IP now! Fantastic.

Once they can lock you out of your app if you skip the month’s rent, there is zero incentive to keep updating the app.

 

[BigQJohnson]

This is what Adobe does. And everyone cries a river when they get hit with “cancellation fees” not understanding they signed up for a year.

Also there is too much stuff that requires a subscription. Just let me pay for the app once.

 

[kalsta]

People hate subscription, but if it is a one-off purchase, why would the sellers be motivated to spend more time to keep the software most up to date and add features? This is why I have come around on subscription model.

It doesn’t have to be one or the other. There are better models out there, like…

Why can’t the Appstore just let devs charge an upgrade to apps, just like you could do with Mac/Pc software for decades ?

Yeah, who knows. I never understood Apple’s philosophy on that.

Or another option that looks like a subscription but more fair : you buy the app for an initial price, then you get all new incremental updates for a year. After that you can buy another subscription for a year during which you get all incremental updates released within it. If you don’t renew the subscription, you’ll keep all updates you got so far, and your app still works, you just don’t get any new updates . A number of apps in the Appstore use this model, and it’s much more fair.

Exactly what I was thinking. That model is about the best one there is IMO. It serves both user and active developer. The key difference to a subscription is that you don’t lose access to the app the moment you stop monthly payments. It’s actually closer to the first model you mentioned, except the user gets to decide when they want a ‘new version’.

 

[kalsta]

I like that! What’s the model called? Another comment mentioned ‘hybrid subscription’. Will keep an eye out and try to support devs who offer it.

I’m not sure what the model is called, but it’s indeed like a hybrid subscription

I’m not sure if it has a name either. I asked Claude the following question:

Apple’s App Store seems to have largely killed the old software purchasing model, where you would buy an app and then choose whether to upgrade to the next version when it came out. Is that fair to say?

The model I like now is the one that Panic Nova uses, where you purchase the app and get 12 months of free updates. After the 12 months runs out, you can choose to subscribe to further updates, but either way, you still get to keep the version you paid for. Does this model have a name?

It’s reply:

Your characterisation is broadly fair. The App Store's combination of race-to-the-bottom pricing, the removal of paid upgrade pricing (which Apple only partially restored in 2017 via "in-app purchases"), and the heavy promotion of subscriptions did largely kill the classic "pay once, upgrade optionally" shareware/boxed-software model for most developers.

The model Panic uses with Nova is sometimes called a perpetual licence with a maintenance window, or more colloquially a "buy once, updates for a year" model. You'll also see it described as:

• Timed updates / time-limited updates — you bought a perpetual licence, but free updates are bounded by a period
• Maintenance subscription — after the free window, continuing updates are framed as an optional maintenance fee rather than a mandatory subscription
• Hybrid perpetual/subscription model

There isn't one universally agreed-upon marketing name for it, which is part of why different companies describe it differently. The closest industry term is probably "perpetual licence + optional maintenance", borrowed from the enterprise software world where this has been standard for decades (think JetBrains before they controversially went full subscription, or how many CAD and audio tools are sold).

The model has grown in popularity among indie Mac developers specifically as a response to user fatigue with pure subscriptions. Sketch uses a very similar approach, as does Setapp in a different way. It threads a needle that many users appreciate: you're never held hostage to a subscription to keep using what you paid for, but the developer still has a sustainable ongoing revenue stream from users who want to stay current.

Looks like the model needs a new, more catchy name!

 

[Chizo]

Oh great... another subscription model for apps that end up costing more than the "savings" and affordability it promises consumers. Apple,I love you with all my heart but you need to sit down and shut up this time so you can take a good look around the room and truly see that this does nothing to help developers and their apps become more accessible to consumers!