Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
While this is the absolute right thing to do, it is still very likely that our organization must look for a new app. The gallery feature sure sounds like it violates our states student privacy laws, which would preclude our use of it. Either way, between this and their terribly slow tech support for serious bugs, its time to move on.

Separately, it still boggles my mind why they attempted to paywall icloud sync.
Agreed. I could understand if they went their own cloud like Day One and other applications - but using iCloud costs $0. I'm not sure what "cloud" they're using for their new store template but... that was surprising to me to see an iCloud sync application go subscription.
 
Sadly this shows once again, that it is not wise to get too dependent on any app from the app store, even those with one time purchases.

I was thinking about buying Things 3 for iOS and Mac when it was announced, but I didn't, because I don't want to be bitten again after the 1Password drama.
I hardly even go into the App Store, best way to avoid subscription hell.
 
I already uninstalled it.
Probably just a marketing plot to generate noise.

Good riddance
 
Agreed. I could understand if they went their own cloud like Day One and other applications - but using iCloud costs $0. I'm not sure what "cloud" they're using for their new store template but... that was surprising to me to see an iCloud sync application go subscription.
Oh is that right? Notability only uses iCloud syncing? Well…it that case it seems like having old users grandfathered in won’t cause any issues regarding having to pay for their storage.

(It’s been a long time since I used Notability…)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigMcGuire
My biggest issue with monthly subscriptions for everything is having to keep track of them all, watching for price increases, etc. Having said that, I think they're an inevitable part of our future for pretty much all software out there.
Yes, my biggest issue too is with having to keep track of subscriptions and watching for price increases. That’s a big no-no in my book.

I mean, isn’t one of the worst ways of throwing away money not keeping track of (not being able to keep track of) various subscriptions? One of the first things they tell you for reducing expenses is eliminate any recurring expenses that aren’t necessary (e.g., subscriptions).

I hate hate hate hate hate app subscriptions. Detest them. I much rather pay good money for the upgraded version when I desire to upgrade to the new version. And for things like Scrivener and DEVONthink, that’s exactly what I have done. Each time there’s a major paid upgrade, I’ve decided to pay for it because a) I really enjoy using the application and b) of course want to support the developers. And also, I’m really glad those developers are not stressing me out by moving to the subscription model. I don’t know of a replacement for DEVONthink or Scrivener (Ulysses went to the dark side) and would hate to have to drop it.
 
Last edited:
$15/year is too expensive? What is a good price for a note taking app? (Ulysses thinks $50/year).
The built-in Notes app costs $0 and is perfectly good at taking notes. And it even syncs them with the cloud for $0.
So, I'd say that $0 would be a perfectly reasonable price for a note taking app.
However, if said app were indeed special in one way or another, then I guess I would be willing to pay $15 once. Just once, for the app itself. No subscription. Paying a perpetual fee for a product is dumb. I'll subscribe to services, but never to products.
 
That's nothing compared to what EA did with Tetris a few years ago. I had purchased the game, then apparently EA's deal with the Tetris people expired. You'd think this would result in customers simply no longer being able to purchase Tetris from that point on. But no, my existing paid copy of Tetris on my iPhone CEASED WORKING, they disabled it.
Personal experience.....Apple does exactly the same thing with movies and TV series that you "purchase"... if they loose the rights to the movie then the movie gets deleted from your library.
So "Purchasing" is just a long rental that ends whenever Apple decides and at that point you loose the product you paid for....mind you Apple is happy to keep your money....and they do.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: msackey
I switched to GoodNotes. It’s kind of disappointing because I bought Notability about six months ago but I figure there’s no point if it’s not going to get updated even if they did back down from what they were doing originally. If they made another app that was a subscription model that would’ve been the right thing to do and not try to squeeze money out of people that already paid money. They could’ve simply called it Notability 2.0

I was listening to a popular Apple podcast and the host was saying subscriptions are needed because many of these are small developers trying to feed their families. He also was saying that people who were against subscriptions were idiots. I guess he thinks we are idiots because a quick Google search shows the parent company of Notability, Ginger Labs has $3.85 million in annual revenue. Somehow I don’t think that’s a guy working out of his garage trying to feed his family by making this app ?‍♂️

I’m not against subscriptions but I do try to minimize them because they add up. I’m against a lot of the push towards subscription apps. I also dislike when arrogant people think the average person isn’t smart enough to do a quick Google search.
 
I will never pay for software that is subscription-based.
I think there are places for subscription apps. The obvious one is apps that provide content like music or television. Even a note taking app could be subscription but that’s a totally different clientele. People that bought it off subscription might be just someone that needs to take an occasional note. If you’re buying on subscription and then you probably are someone who needs to do it every day or maybe for work. I often buy apps that I don’t use very much so paying for subscriptions wouldn’t work for me. It has to be something I use every day and that’s not many apps
 
I was listening to a popular Apple podcast and the host was saying subscriptions are needed because many of these are small developers trying to feed their families.
I've got nothing against them trying to feed their families. But I do have a problem when they decide to feed their families by taking me for a sucker. After all, I've got a family as well, and I don't see why I should put their families ahead of mine. I'd rather buy my kid an ice cream, than throw that money down the drain just so somebody else can buy their kid an ice cream.

If you’re buying on subscription and then you probably are someone who needs to do it every day or maybe for work. I often buy apps that I don’t use very much so paying for subscriptions wouldn’t work for me. It has to be something I use every day and that’s not many apps
It's not about how often you use it. A product is a product, no matter how often you use it. If I buy a hammer, I expect to be able to use it every single day if I so wish, without having to pay a perpetual fee to Harbour Freight for the rest of my life.
In order to justify asking for a subscription, the seller must offer a service. Perpetual access to content like music or television is a service, which is why I have no problem subscribing to that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: russell_314
I've got nothing against them trying to feed their families. But I do have a problem when they decide to feed their families by taking me for a sucker. After all, I've got a family as well, and I don't see why I should put their families ahead of mine. I'd rather buy my kid an ice cream, than throw that money down the drain just so somebody else can buy their kid an ice cream.


It's not about how often you use it. A product is a product, no matter how often you use it. If I buy a hammer, I expect to be able to use it every single day if I so wish, without having to pay a perpetual fee to Harbour Freight for the rest of my life.
In order to justify asking for a subscription, the seller must offer a service. Perpetual access to content like music or television is a service, which is why I have no problem subscribing to that.
The counterpoint to your argument would be that the hammer you buy at Harbor freight isn’t updated every month. If harbor freight came out every month and adjusted it to make it better then they would have to charge for that.

When I said people that use it every day I meant for example like professional photographers that use Adobe pay a subscription. They don’t care because it’s just part of doing business and they pass the cost down to their customers. If you’re someone that takes pictures once a month for a hobby paying that same subscription just doesn’t make sense at least I don’t think so.

The last subscription app I had was Pillow for sleep tracking. I had it for a few months but then realized I’m paying five dollars a month to see how many hours I sleep. There’s an app I use every day but it still didn’t make sense because knowing I slept poorly for a few hours just wasn’t worth paying $5 every month to me
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vlad Soare
The counterpoint to your argument would be that the hammer you buy at Harbor freight isn’t updated every month. If harbor freight came out every month and adjusted it to make it better then they would have to charge for that.
Fair enough. But I'm not demanding that they update the app free of charge forever. I have no problem with paid updates. All I demand is that I can use whatever I've bought for as long as I wish (or as long as it is technically possible to do so - e.g. until a major change happens in the operating system that breaks its functionality).
One of my favorite apps on macOS is Mailplane. They offer free minor updates, but you must pay if you want an upgrade to the next major release number. And I find that fair. I've always paid for every major upgrade, because I love that app.

When I said people that use it every day I meant for example like professional photographers that use Adobe pay a subscription. They don’t care because it’s just part of doing business and they pass the cost down to their customers.
That's also not right. Adobe was the first, or among the first, who took this shameless step of forcing customers to subscribe to their product. I will never accept that. Even if I were a professional photographer, I would buy and use something else just to spite them, because I despise their business model.
The fact that many professional photographers don't care, because they can afford to transfer the costs to their customers, doesn't make it right.

We have a clear example of this product/service dichotomy right in iOS, in the Music app. If we want unlimited access to unlimited music, then we have to subscribe to Apple Music. Maintaining the servers, paying the licence fees for all that music, syncing it with our phones, etc. are perpetual costs, which Apple must recoup. I'm fine with that. They're offering a service.
However, for the app itself we've only paid once (if we consider it included in the price of the phone). If we're happy to use the app locally, and to listen exclusively to locally stored MP3 files ripped from CDs, then we don't have to pay anything extra. Because the app itself is a product, not a service.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: russell_314
Really cool of Notability to reverse course and shows they actually listen and care about their customers. Been using Notability for 5 years and will continue to do so.
I'd say if they cared about their customers they wouldn't have tried to do it in the first place. It's more like they got such an angry response from people who bought software and got told it was only rented. It seems like an excellent app but that was a dirty trick they tried to do
 
  • Like
Reactions: SegNerd
I'd say if they cared about their customers they wouldn't have tried to do it in the first place. It's more like they got such an angry response from people who bought software and got told it was only rented. It seems like an excellent app but that was a dirty trick they tried to do
Which shows they A. Listen to their customers, and B. Care about their customers. Otherwise, they would have left it as a subscription model.
 
Or C. Realized that what they wanted to do would break the AppStore rules, and possibly the law as well.
I don’t know the App Store rules or laws well enough to have an opinion. I just know they offer a great app and reversed course which shows they listen and care enough so as not to lose more customers.
 
So, they piss off their customer base, & are forced to backtrack, & Apple rewards them with an App of the Day recommendation a day OR so later.

Is that the way it's supposed to work ?

Is Apple really that messed up ???

Apparently so !
 
So, they piss off their customer base, & are forced to backtrack, & Apple rewards them with an App of the Day recommendation a day OR so later.

Is that the way it's supposed to work ?

Is Apple really that messed up ???

Apparently so !
I imagine all that stuff is automated - based on activity. My guess is that there's a lot of Notability users and it created a lot of activity on the App Store. (My guess).
 
I had totally missed this. Today I experienced some pretty serious Notability issues (essentially the whole organisation in topics and subjects vanished in the air; now I just have hundreds of disorganised notes) and while searching, I came across this.

So basically, they just tried to downgrade paying customers to a low-tier category and expected to get away with it ? This is unbelievable. :( Thankfully, they reversed that step, but now that they tried this stunt, my confidence in them has dropped very low and I am not sure what to expect: lower support in the future ? support for a new version of the OS only for subscription users ? existing features disappearing, replaced by "a better implementation, for subscription users only" ?

Experience has shown that, when a company starts to push for subscription models, no statement that they are not going to totally screw the other uses should be believed. Remember Adobe ? When they created the cloud option the standard one was supposed to stay like, forever. Just a couple of years later, they were silently discontinuing it (and basically leaving in the dust long time users who had all their libraries and file edits).
I know the rhetorics that software company need to make money but, ironically, when I see such moves, I feel less and less ready to pay anything for software as anything you pay may just turn out useless shortly thereafter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vlad Soare
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.