Until its delisted from the store and potentially your own device upon internet connection
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 Tests App Store Bundle Subscription Discounts
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Until its delisted from the store and potentially your own device upon internet connection
The digital world now reflects real world abusive capitalism
Boots theory - Wikipedia
Just give us upgrade pricing!
This is why people want alternative App Stores. Apple’s idea of innovation is to add more features to subscriptions.
This is why people want alternative App Stores. Apple’s idea of innovation is to add more features to subscriptions.
The digital world now reflects real world abusive capitalism
Boots theory - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
This is exactly correct. Just like the new TV app and so many things. Why sell me one season of a show I love to watch over and over for $50 or even $100 when you can rent it to me forever for $11 per month.
People with money have always had the advantage. They make interest rather than paying it, in every aspect of life. Now even the possibility of ownership is starting to be taken away. Can’t let people build any equity if they don’t own anything.
And you’ll be accused of being cheap by commenters when we are literally proposing to pay more up front
Now paying more up front just gets you a discount on the annual subscription
We’ve been there for much longer than you think. What do you think a car lease is? I don’t personally lease but it’s effectively a subscription when you think about it.I am pretty sure we aren't headed there, we are already there
The digital world now reflects real world abusive capitalism
Boots theory - Wikipedia
Not even remotely the same thing.
For a developer, they can grow their userbase with a price of $10 per month vs $120 a year or $500 one time. Consumers are always going to choose the cheapest option or the EASIEST option to get what they want.
For a consumer, I am more likely to buy this app for $10 then spend $100 because i am looking at the short-term (it's cheaper now) than the long-term.
Two prime examples:
1. I pay monthly for hulu and up until recently Netflix (It's now bundled with my cell plan).
Theoretically it is cheaper if i just pay by the year but that's more money upfront......vs just paying the $11 bucks a month. I can more than afford it, i just chose the short term cheaper way.
2. I have tried to explain to my mother just to buy her phones straight out. She brought a new Pixel (and returning it because she hates the 8 and is getting an iPhone) on a leasing plan. She makes way more than I do and can afford it but in her mind paying $800 for a phone is crazy when she can pay whatever tax is needed today and walk out with it.
Nah, it’s bad for consumers. Professional products are expensive because they enable people to make money. If you couldn’t afford it most likely you didn’t need it. Non professional software is not needed by definition, so it you can’t afford it just don’t buy it. If you can’t afford 200 one time you definitely can’t afford an ongoing outgoing of 10 a month. You might be tricked into believe you can, but you definitely can’t. Otherwise it should be no problem to spend 200 one off, and in fact you’d prefer it. Unless it’s a software you only need to use once, in which case it’s just better to pay someone to do the job as they most likely at least know how to use the software (very difficult to become proficient in some professional software in a month).
Also the Affinity apps to avoid the Adobe subscriptions. They are capable alternatives to Photoshop, InDesign and Illustrator.
Not exactly the same as you have more control and flexibility with a subscription than a lease. And especially in terms of cars, Car subscriptions run shorter than leases.
And that is not your place to tell anyone what they can't and can't buy
If people stayed within their means we wouldn't have half the financial issues we have in the world. I think if someone wants to try a product they shouldn't be beholden to a higher price tag. if there is a way to get it AND BUDGET then they are entitled to that.
It's not much different than Layaway. The person is making payments overtime to purchase an item.....ithey make their little bi weekly or weekly payments towards the total.
In this case, the user is paying a significantly smaller fee to access the product.
That puts goods and services into hands and accessibility of more people who otheriwse could not use this.
It's very elitist of you to say "it's no problem to spend $200 one off" and "if you can't afford to do it one off, you don't need it."
It looks like Apple is anticipating future sideloading and alternative app store competition on iOS and is starting to test ideas to try to make the App Store more enticing to users and developers.
It may reduce per subscriber revenue but can potentially increase total overall revenue by bringing in additional customers who wouldn't have otherwise signed up for a particular app. It could especially be a boost to low volume apps if partnered up with large volume apps.
Car leasing still typically gives a person the option to buy and own the car at the end of the term if they want to.
However, yes, "subscriptions" have been popular for many types of products for a long time including numerous newspaper and magazine subscriptions, cable/satellite television subscriptions, premium channel subscriptions, record/cassette/CD music club subscriptions, movie club subscriptions, video store membership subscriptions, tennis/racquetball/golf/fitness club subscriptions, "XXXX of the month" subscriptions, and more.
My thought when I saw this news was Setapp (or similar service, existing or not yet in existence).
One App Store subscription to a master app and contingent (free? $0.01?) subscriptions to others in the ‘bundle’.
Call me cheap then; I have zero app/service subscriptions. The only streaming service I have is Netflix, and just because it comes with my cellphone service.
People can do as they wish, and I don't' fault developers for moving to subscriptions...I just don't care for them.
Last edited by a moderator:
Personal feature request; native Sketch-like subscription licenses, i.e. a renewable charge to start access and get updates. If the user doesn't renew, they keep the last update they paid for with no other penalty. I'm sure there's some hacky way to implement this now, though.
For all the nonsense that subscriptions are infamous for nowadays, specifically the lack-of-ownership problem, ever-increasing charges with little warning given to customers, and overusage throughout the tech industry in general, it's an very good way to keep long-term software development funded, so I'd like to find ways to keep it fair (if/when I actually release something for mobile lmao)
For all the nonsense that subscriptions are infamous for nowadays, specifically the lack-of-ownership problem, ever-increasing charges with little warning given to customers, and overusage throughout the tech industry in general, it's an very good way to keep long-term software development funded, so I'd like to find ways to keep it fair (if/when I actually release something for mobile lmao)
I think you mean you rent the right to use whatever you subscribe to.
Crossover lets you keep the version you bought and subscribers get a discount on updates which seems very very very fair
I’m in the middle, I understand subscriptions support developers, and I do subscribe to a few Paste, 1Blocker thought their annual subscription plan. I get value, and its annual cost is reasonable. To me it feels like buying the next version every year. However I’ve stopped all streaming video subscription, besides YouTube premium, because the value just isn’t there for me. I have Apple Music family for my family, but even that I would love to get away from.
Speaking as an Apple developer, I have seen the subscription model get severely abused over the past few years. Subscriptions used to be for apps that actually offered enough new content and/or new updates to offer the customer value for their subscription. Now I’m seeing way more apps lock users into subscriptions as a way to unlock something that should have definitely been a 1 time purchase. No updates for years at a time and definitely no new content.
In today’s economic climate, I wish more small developers would concentrate on offering value and quality. In my end, I’m sticking to paid apps and one time in app purchases.
In today’s economic climate, I wish more small developers would concentrate on offering value and quality. In my end, I’m sticking to paid apps and one time in app purchases.