Ok so were can we report other apps that have done this? Macrumors can you help me out with WeatherPro?? I bought the full app with full functionality, after about 2 years they changed to subscription model and removed half of the features of the app. Couldn’t see daily forecasts, couldn’t use any of the weather maps I previously had access too. Nothing! Is this not against the App Store rules?? I’m now paying 9.99 a year for features I had 2-3 years ago for 2.99 upfront cost. I guess lots of macrumors admins use that app for note taking cos most of the other apps that have done this exact same thing are being ignored! I sent an email to app support and they did nothing.
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.
Notability Changes App Subscription Policy, Promises Existing Users Lifetime Access to Purchased Features
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The real head-scratcher is how they didn't see the reaction they got coming from a thousand miles away. Like, what kind of sociopath do they have running the place that he or she didn't look at this proposal and just immediately say, "Yeah, that's not gonna fly"?
Subscription can be good if the price is not steep, but the price usually goes up significantly after the first year.
It is. In fact, this was the very exact reason Steve Jobs wanted free apps to remain free.
And now this happens.
Then again, most of apps I have on my Mac ARE subscription based, I have Creative Cloud, Setspps, and Microsoft 365. Granted most of these apps have lot of cloud feature so it makes sense to charge subscription.
Somehow, despite this move, I purchased Good Note with the 50% deal, which was not really necessary...
...Nice job Good Note.
...Nice job Good Note.
R.I.P. Notability.
Thank you for having tried to rip us off with this disgusting subscription model.
Hopefully there is a better app available that won't do the same mistake.
GoodNotes forever!
Thank you for having tried to rip us off with this disgusting subscription model.
Hopefully there is a better app available that won't do the same mistake.
GoodNotes forever!
After I moved to Sweden I started using an app to identify plants called PictureThis. I think it might have originally been called something else.
Now, that's not even what I'd call a hobby, it's just, you know, I'm out walking and I see a flower or something and I'm like, "Hey, what's that?" So it's not something I'd want to pay a bunch of money for. Plus, every time I snap a photo of a plant, it nets them data for training their AI or whatever, for telling them exactly where which plants are growing, all that stuff, so it's not like they get nothing out of it.
Over time they have gotten more and more sleazy with the way they present the free-to-use portion of the app, moving the "tap here for the free version" bit around on the screen, trying to trick you into tapping on the giant green CONTINUE button that will start up a subscription. It's just so obviously shady.
I just loaded it up and it launches to the subscription offer page ($30/year) and up in the corner is the word cancel in a tiny white font against a light background, so that it's barely visible. And it's like, maybe if you have to trick people into buying your service, it's not worth all that much to begin with.
Ah the ol' "we're going to pretend like we care about our customers because we were on the verge of losing them all over a quick cash grab" move.
Absolutely pathetic.
Absolutely pathetic.
If I love an App enough to pay for a $5/month subscription, I would much rather pay on $30 fee and end it there. Just 7 months of owning the App would make up for that.
This "Freemium" model needs to be replaced with a Free Trial model, where customers have a chance to try the App as a full-blown service for a week or so, before deciding to pay for it outright or not, instead of using a half-baked version of it or perpetually committing to paying for it every month.
I would rather pay such a useful app $30 and upgrade only when I need to (and therefore pay again for a new version, of course), than being forced to pay something every year because otherwise it would stop working.
I want to decide when I pay for what I need, not the opposite.
I see. Does the $30 option get updates? Or is that version frozen in time?
Otherwise it's 6 years later... and the developer is still providing support and bug-fixes for a 6 year old app... while they continue to work on the current version.
Yeah they got paid more upfront... but they're stuck maintaining that version forever.
The app splits into two development tracks. It adds complexity.
I don’t think subscriptions are/were the issue here. The issue is removing functionality from people who have already paid for it.
It’s bad form, to say the least - not to mention against AppStore policy, to have people purchase your product, then at some point in the future remove that which they have already purchased, preventing you from accessing it, unless your willing to re-pay on a yearly basis, just because your business model changes.
By all means, lock any new developments behind the subscription paywall, but if you’ve already paid for something, you should not be expected to have that taken from you. It’s the equivalent of you paying cash for an iPhone, then a year later Apple saying, in order to keep using this iPhone, you’ll have to pay us $50 a year because we’ve decided to change how we operate.
Not really, traditional software sales have existed for decades on this exact principle. You buy a product, you get updates for it for however long the developers see fit.
Then, a new version is released, you can continue to use the software you own without further updates or payments, or you can upgrade to the new version, often at a discounted price.
I don’t mind if a company wishes to use a subscription basis, though I personally prefer to actually buy software and will always seek out an alternative which lets me do so. Which is why I moved away from Adobe and bought Affinity instead, for instance. Just don’t screw over your customer base if you do decide to switch tactics.
You're right... I was simply addressing the overall disdain for subscriptions in general.
Parallels does it in the clever way:
- either you pay a for a perpetual license for the current major version only,
- or you pay a subscription and you get the updates as long as you feed the pipe.
People don't always need to have the latest version of an app, so they should be able to decide which model best suits them.
Exact, like it used to be. You buy an app for some features, you want more you buy the new version
Yep.
$8 to buy... $4 to upgrade if you own a previous version.
So you can use whatever $8 version you have for as long as you want... and when (if?) you decide to upgrade it's only $4
I like that.
The question then becomes how long the developer will support any particular version. You might have to pay more sometime. But at least it's better than evil subscriptions!
These mobile app subscriptions will just drive people to Microsoft Surface devices since MacOS devices don't have native touch and pen inputs. For example, Clip Studio Paint Pro lifetime is $49.99 on Windows and often on sale for 50% off while mobile has a subscription.
Who cares? Is this big news? Still no reporting on the OLED PWM issues with iPhone displays…
For decades, that’s how software used to be sold, I don’t see the problem.
Pay a rather substantial amount of money, but get a fully functional program that you can use forever and -oh horror- even sell on second hand to someone else if you don’t need it anymore.
As another poster has already pointed out: it might be time to move (back) to a trialware model.
It could be just like the perpetual license of desktop software - free .x feature udpates until the next major x. version release. The user can then choose to pay another perpetual fee for the next major version, or continue to use his previous version in perpetuity.
Last edited:
I am not changing my 1-star review, I am not re-installing the app. They should never have make the decision in the first place. Don't want to have anything from a company that thinks it can treat their customers like that - it should not have taken a backlash to do the right thing.
