New Subscription Service 'Setapp' Will Offer 40+ Popular Mac Apps for $9.99 Per Month

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
49,688
11,006



Setapp, an upcoming subscription service from MacPaw, aims to offer a Mac App Store alternative and change the way customers obtain software for their Macs. Setapp will make 40+ popular Mac apps available to Mac users for a flat monthly fee at launch, and there are plans to continually add new apps as the service grows.

Much like Netflix, Setapp will charge users a flat $9.99 fee per month, giving them access to a wide range of Mac apps like RapidWeaver, Marked 2, Ulysses, iMazing, iStat Menus, Toast Titanium, CodeRunner, Blogo, Pagico, and more. It's an interesting concept that has already attracted quite a few app developers, and could attract many more popular apps should the concept catch on.


Setapp includes continual updates, so users who pay the subscription fee to access apps will not need to pay separately for future updates, nor will they need to make in-app purchases or pay additional money to access full app functionality. Setapp apps will also work offline, when no internet connectivity is available, and will be installed through a main Setapp app.


Much like Apple's own Mac App Store, Setapp pays 70 percent of revenue to developers and takes a 30 percent cut, but it also provides developers with a continuous monthly revenue stream, which could be more appealing than the Mac App Store.

Setapp is rumored to be planning to have a beta testing period in the near future, which will give Mac users a chance to try out the subscription service before it launches. Mac users can sign up to request a beta invite through the Setapp website.

Article Link: New Subscription Service 'Setapp' Will Offer 40+ Popular Mac Apps for $9.99 Per Month
 

Fzang

macrumors 65816
Jun 15, 2013
1,314
1,081
Nope. I'd rather pay once and be done with it. The idea of 'Subscription' has turned into twisted set of rules where you get things momentarily, things that should be owned permanently.
Why do you feel the need to own them permanently? I'm not watching the same movies, playing the same games, listening to the same songs, or using the same apps as I was just a few years ago.

It's essentially "wasted money" unless you have some sort of collector mania.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeminalSage

SoSickSadNslOw

macrumors member
Jul 26, 2016
78
134
United Kingdom
Why do you feel the need to own them permanently? I'm not watching the same movies, playing the same games, listening to the same songs, or using the same apps as I was just a few years ago.

It's essentially "wasted money" unless you have some sort of collector mania.

It's got nothing to do with being a collector. I just don't see the point of paying them every month when I'm sure I won't be using every app offered so why keep on paying them?

I personally like the idea of owning the things I want/need, where I can. So called 'wasted money' won't be nearly as much as you'd end up paying them throughout the months/years you'd keep the subscription.

$120 a year spent on apps, $120 spent on streaming music, $120 streaming movies every year just does not make sense to me. I'd rather spend all that money on owing albums, movies, apps which I really want and can always go back to when desired without the worry of direct debits.

Of course that's my personal opinion and your consumption could completely differ.
 

justperry

macrumors G4
Aug 10, 2007
10,874
6,553
I'm a rolling stone.
It's got nothing to do with being a collector. I just don't see the point of paying them every month when I'm sure I won't be using every app offered so why keep on paying them?

I personally like the idea of owning the things I want/need, where I can. So called 'wasted money' won't be nearly as much as you'd end up paying them throughout the months/years you'd keep the subscription.

$120 a year spent on apps, $120 spent on streaming music, $120 streaming movies every year just does not make sense to me. I'd rather spend all that money on owing albums, movies, apps which I really want and can always go back to when desired without the worry of direct debits.

Of course that's my personal opinion and your consumption could completely differ.
Plus there is another issue with this model, lets say you get 40 Apps for $9,99, but how many you actually use, nobody will use all of them, most of the people probably 5 Apps or less, better to pay for them on a per App base so you own them.
And there's another issue, too few Apps in this offer are probably worth it.
 

RC Mike

macrumors member
Aug 6, 2015
66
72
Subscriptions have ruined so many great software products. I get the desire for a continuous, predictable revenue stream, but... It leads to mediocre products and consumer lock-in.

It's killed the educational software market. My organization spends much less on software than we used to, back when we could purchase it outright.
 

zepfhyr

macrumors member
Dec 13, 2009
40
7
It's got nothing to do with being a collector. I just don't see the point of paying them every month when I'm sure I won't be using every app offered so why keep on paying them?

I personally like the idea of owning the things I want/need, where I can. So called 'wasted money' won't be nearly as much as you'd end up paying them throughout the months/years you'd keep the subscription.

$120 a year spent on apps, $120 spent on streaming music, $120 streaming movies every year just does not make sense to me. I'd rather spend all that money on owing albums, movies, apps which I really want and can always go back to when desired without the worry of direct debits.

Of course that's my personal opinion and your consumption could completely differ.
To play devil's advocate for a moment, many apps these days become obsolete after two or three OS upgrades, so buying one to keep forever is unlikely to pay off in the long run. Buying the new version of six $40 apps every other year isn't significantly cheaper, and many are unlikely to keep using the old version they own if it won't work on the latest OS.
 

vertical smile

macrumors 603
Sep 23, 2014
5,033
5,977
Subscriptions have ruined so many great software products. I get the desire for a continuous, predictable revenue stream, but... It leads to mediocre products and consumer lock-in.
I was going to mention this too. I think sub-based software might lead to infrequent improvements and a lack of major updates that used to have to pay for, usually at an upgrade price.

I could be totally wrong though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sinsin07

konqerror

macrumors 68020
Dec 31, 2013
2,298
3,688
I was going to mention this too. I think sub-based software might lead to infrequent improvements and a lack of major updates that used to have to pay for, usually at an upgrade price.

I could be totally wrong though.
Enterprise and specialty software and hardware like Cisco routers are licensed in a hybrid fashion, you pay an initial fee, then you maintain tech support, warranty and upgrades with a yearly support contract. If they don't provide value, you cancel the contract.

Pure subscription software (Office 365, Adobe CC) and such makes a lot of sense for businesses. The monthly fees can be immediately and completely expensed, and you can pass them directly to projects/clients, something that is difficult to do with purchased software.
 

MacDarren

macrumors newbie
Mar 16, 2004
6
6
My two issues with subscription Apps is first keeping on top of all the subscriptions...so in theory something like this service or apple's own App Store appeal to me as one stop, one password, one credit exposure appeal to me.

My other bigger issue is what about old apps....or old versions of apps. I have documents I still open in very old versions of apps that were never updated or are totally non existent now. This is a thing that has concerned me for years....If I didn't migrate say my Appleworks to ClarisWorks to Pages, Numbers, etc (there was no drawing equivalent so those are gone) and I need to look at some old file it becomes a major pain....adding apps disappearing from some App Store just makes it worse...at least now if I still have the old and and hardware that can still run the app I can access my data.

I don't know how but the whole IT industry needs to look at this issue or we will start loosing things that may seem unimportant now but that might not be true later....at least books can or have been scanned or transcribed but other things just get lost. I try to PDF documents when practical but how long will that last and some things just can't be preserved that way. It becomes an all consuming labor to just constantly be sure when I shift to a new system that I do not loose access to older things...that means conversion if possible or translation or recreation and as time goes on there are more and more things that just get left behind...now maybe some of that is good, getting rid of the old junk, but not always.
 

Starfia

macrumors 6502a
Apr 11, 2011
691
370
Why do you feel the need to own them permanently? I'm not watching the same movies, playing the same games, listening to the same songs, or using the same apps as I was just a few years ago.
Wow, not me. I seldom buy apps, and when I do, it's almost always because I've really done enough homework on them to believe I'm going to be using them for years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: terryzx

jlc1978

macrumors 68030
Aug 14, 2009
2,851
1,169
I was going to mention this too. I think sub-based software might lead to infrequent improvements and a lack of major updates that used to have to pay for, usually at an upgrade price.

I could be totally wrong though.
While it could, a steady revenue stream would give a developer an incentive to keep improving the app as well as a regular income so they can actually make a living off of it, rather then bumps every few year when they release a new version.

I'm curious as to the impact on bundle. Some of the apps are often in bundles, will developers move away from that to protect subscription revenue.

On a side note, I wonder how they will curate the apps? They have Clean My Mac on the teaser screen...
 

0098386

Suspended
Jan 18, 2005
21,574
2,908
It's got nothing to do with being a collector. I just don't see the point of paying them every month when I'm sure I won't be using every app offered so why keep on paying them?

I personally like the idea of owning the things I want/need, where I can. So called 'wasted money' won't be nearly as much as you'd end up paying them throughout the months/years you'd keep the subscription.

$120 a year spent on apps, $120 spent on streaming music, $120 streaming movies every year just does not make sense to me. I'd rather spend all that money on owing albums, movies, apps which I really want and can always go back to when desired without the worry of direct debits.

Of course that's my personal opinion and your consumption could completely differ.
Yup, I'm cancelling my Apple Music subscription next month (because it costs too much for what it provides). I don't agree with renting media too. It hit home recently when I was on the road and parts of my phone had logged off. I needed to log back in but I hit an area of no reception and lost the 'right' to play media I owned. I had music to keep me occupied but that isn't the point, it reminded that I don't own this stuff. I'm just borrowing it until they see otherwise.

It's the same with buying any digital media. If it's not DRM free then you don't own it and the moment the service that does manage it goes down - there goes your media too.

But. Folk like to rent everything these days. I'm sure it makes those who rent out this stuff a lot of money. I can see why they do it.
 

mlody

macrumors 65816
Nov 11, 2012
1,068
693
Windy City
Doesnt this sound like a cable tv model that most people hate and wished it was al carte? A lot of people hate pying for bundless only to find out that they watch 1-2 channles out of 100+ channel bundle that is requred to purchase
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.