OS X Mavericks Adds Auto-Renew Subscriptions for Mac App Store

Discussion in 'Mac Blog Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jun 28, 2013.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    While iOS apps like Evernote and Instapaper are able to provide users with in-app auto-renewing monthly subscriptions for services, the same functionality is not available in the Mac App Store at the current time.

    For example, Evernote is able to offer a renewable monthly subscription to its premium service via iOS, charging $5 per month. On the Mac App Store, however, Evernote cannot offer a subscription, instead requiring users to sign up each month or purchase a year of service in advance.

    As 9to5Mac notes, that is set to change in OS X Mavericks, with the introduction of Auto-Renewable Subscriptions for Mac Apps.

    With the release of Mavericks, Mac developers will be able to provide services on an ongoing monthly basis with charges routed through the App Store's in-app purchase system. As with the iOS App Store, developers will be able to offer both ongoing subscriptions and subscriptions that expire after a set time, automatically charging a user's iTunes account.

    Mac App Store subscriptions in Mavericks will be managed in the Mac App Store's account information panel, which has been updated with a new subscription management setting.

    OS X Mavericks was previewed at Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference in June. It is currently available for developers, and is expected to be released to the public in the fall.

    Article Link: OS X Mavericks Adds Auto-Renew Subscriptions for Mac App Store
  2. monkeybagel macrumors 65816

    Jul 24, 2011
    United States
    Hmmmm... All we need is another way for software companies to encourage subscriptions instead of perpetual licenses.
  3. appleguy123 macrumors 603


    Apr 1, 2009
    15 minutes in the future
    Good for companies, not so good for consumers.
  4. Icaras macrumors 603


    Mar 18, 2008
    California, United States
    Why? It would save me the trouble of remembering when to renew and to manually do it.

    Good addition IMO.
  5. macs4nw macrumors 601


    Hey, why not get on the cash-cow bandwagon, right? :mad: Let's not give them any ideas.
    Unfortunately, too late now. That train has left the station.....
  6. ArtOfWarfare macrumors G3


    Nov 26, 2007
    How about supporting paid updates? I know some developers like Microsoft and Adobe aren't so fond of those, since they require adding useful, pay worthy features to existing apps, thus why they're moving to subscription models, but they're relatively popular with consumers, I think.

    IE, if I want to majorly improve an app right now, my options for funding that are:

    #1 - Don't. Everyone gets a free update and I go broke.
    #2 - Sell it as an entirely seperate app. Many consumers won't discover it ever.
    #3 - Charge subscription fees. Annoying to users who feel they're paying repeatedly for something I did once.
  7. nutmac macrumors 68040

    Mar 30, 2004
    It's just a matter of time before Apple starts subscription-based plans itself. As a user of many Apple software, I personally would welcome the move. But those using just a few would probably hate it.
  8. Dulcimer macrumors 6502a


    Nov 20, 2012
    I agree completely. There also needs to be a way to sell educational discounts on an individual basis.
  9. RaggieSoft, Jun 28, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2013

    RaggieSoft macrumors member

    Nov 17, 2010
    In the Land of the Evil Empire(TM)
    As a College Student, I would gladly submit documentation (for example, my student email address) to be tied to my Apple ID. With my DreamSpark account, I have to renew yearly to prove that I'm still a student.

    For developers who chose to offer Educational Discounts, the price could be automatically shown since Apple would recognize that my Apple ID is a registered student.

  10. maxosx macrumors 68020

    Dec 13, 2012
    Southern California
    Either you work for Apple, or simply love giving them more and more of your money. :D
  11. scottsjack macrumors 68000

    Aug 25, 2010
    I think you have a point there. The more stuff people buy from Apple the more Apple is encouraged to sell. At this point I think the content is more important to Apple than their hardware.

    I try to buy software, music and movies from other sources so as not to encourage the walled garden effect.
  12. 3282868 macrumors 603

    Jan 8, 2009
    I'm still in disbelief with Adobe's move to subscription based app's. Not so much for monetary reasons, but the concept of "renting" applications doesn't sit well. I thought it may be to deter pirating, but I've already seen some download the app's and use the well known hosts modifications.

    The App Store needs to support upgrade pricing. A lot of companies and developers offer discounted pricing for major updates, which the Mac App Store doesn't support.
  13. springsup, Jun 28, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2013

    springsup macrumors 65816


    Feb 14, 2013
    The subscription model is a curse. Too many good companies' products get aped because the finance guys running them can't withstand the allure of recurring monthly revenue.

    I've worked at plenty of companies that (still) do this.

    EDIT: Should clarify, that doesn't include us! Sterling doesn't have subscriptions :p
  14. theBB macrumors 68020


    Jan 3, 2006
    It should be relatively easy to tell them about your new app in your scenario #2 through a splash screen. If the message comes up once every three months or some other infrequent interval, it will not be all that annoying.

    For a basic app #3 would be annoying, but if it is a more complicated app with frequent updates and improvements along with some customer support beyond self-help options, subscription pricing is not all that bad.

    In any case, discounted upgrade pricing is the best option for at least some apps, so it would be nice if the app store supported that business model. It would give the customers the confidence that the little known developers will get paid extra only if they actually update their apps rather than at pre-set time intervals based on a vague promise of updates.
  15. Pakaku macrumors 68000


    Aug 29, 2009
    Would #4 - an in-app purchase for a major new feature be a bad idea?
  16. furi0usbee macrumors 68000


    Jul 11, 2008
    I don't "rent" my software, so no harm no foul in my eyes.
  17. WhackyNinja macrumors 68000


    Jul 6, 2012
    Kissimmee, FL
  18. ValSalva macrumors 68040


    Jun 26, 2009
    Burpelson AFB
    Unfortunately Adobe is making a killing with CC. People aren't exactly voting with their wallets.
  19. Dagless macrumors Core


    Jan 18, 2005
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    That's what I thought, Doctor.
  20. ArtOfWarfare macrumors G3


    Nov 26, 2007
    I feel like that potentially leads to spaghetti code, having to check that the feature has been paid for on a regular basis. It's easier to just make the assumption that if they're running the version of code you're writing, it means they paid for the features already. But maybe you're right and I should revisit IAP (when I last tried using it about 2 years ago I found it was a huge headache and most users didn't bite. Since then I've just avoided IAP like the plague...)
  21. RaggieSoft macrumors member

    Nov 17, 2010
    In the Land of the Evil Empire(TM)
    Throw my name in the hat for "I would support paid updates."

    Hypothetical Example: 1.0 to 1.1 would be free, and it fixes bugs. Then, 2.0 comes out. Major new features. Yes, I'd pay. I also wold support an upgrade discount too :)
  22. sexiewasd, Jun 29, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2013

    sexiewasd macrumors regular

    Mar 14, 2012
    Back in Your Head
    It's nice to see more payment options, maybe Adobe will revisit the App Store with it's creative cloud apps. It would be fantastic to see those two models working together in harmony. I wonder if apple's 30% cut will keep them away, it's not like Adobe really needs the exposure.

    For those who dislike the subscription model, yes generally the company will get more of your money, but it is really easy for a user to decide, ok they aren't updating this enough, or to think hey look that program xyz is doing something better, and the recurring payment makes it a really easy choice to switch. It won't take that long for the company to realize, oh 5#!+ we just lost half of our now much lower monthly profits! It works out to be better at keeping a developer interested in innovating than does a larger almost lump sum spike in sales after a yearly release because that recurring monthly -$50 is in front of the user every month. This is why adobe has a two year creative cloud contract. It's those minimum subscription contracts that you should boycott, that is what isn't ok, and will hurt innovation, and users.
  23. GermanyChris macrumors 601


    Jul 3, 2011
    On the windows side it was cracked and function 3 days after the announcement. They didn’t deter piracy thay pissed off customers.

    FWIW, if software requires a subscription I won’t buy it. I will also not recommend it my bosses when they ask. I’m just one guy and no one cares but at some point a line has to be drawn.
  24. monkeybagel macrumors 65816

    Jul 24, 2011
    United States
    Well said.
  25. 3282868 macrumors 603

    Jan 8, 2009
    Ugh :(


    Agree. I wish there was the ability to have both, buy the suite or individual app's and/or use the subscription model. Forcing consumers into one model seems extreme.

    PS I'm jealous you're in Germany. I miss Europe. If you are adopting lol

Share This Page