@jsit Personally, I’m fine with both models — most of the time, at least.

I’m okay with paying 29,99 € per year for Ivory. I’m also okay with the 59,99 € one-time purchase of Things. Though, I’m _not_ okay with the sketchy practices of companies like Adobe.

In general, If I had a choice, I’d pick the one-time purchase every time. I used to be a 1Password customer (back when you had to pay for each major update) and switched to another password manager when they adopted the subscription model.

@jsit I’ve paid over $60 for permanent licenses of mobile apps. Fuck yes I’d rather that than subscriptions. And any old-timers will tell you that almost none of that 90s boxed copy revenue went to them, thanks to printing, shipping and retail costs. At least now you only pay 30%+ any transaction fees.

Absolutely every piece of software I use that offers a permanent license, I have paid for. (And in case anyone’s wondering, I use *zero* pirated software)

@jsit the key there, I think, is the box and the brick and mortar store. Both add significant costs. Paying $20 for a decent app with some upgrades is not a problem. It’s being tied to a plan that is annoying.

We discussed this briefly on another thread but I think I’d be more comfortable with subscription if it didn’t automatically renew. Then I could evaluate if I’m still using an app come renewal time. Or then just have paid upgrades for a new version, like in the old days.

@jsit It’s not the price. I have more than one app where I would have bought updates but refused subscriptions.

It’s the missing incentive to build something the current users want.

With customers, you needed to come up with features that made the customers want to buy the new version.

Once your users are subscribers, they have to buy each and every update, even if they only like the old features. (That’s a bargain?)

With subscriptions there’s no reason to make it better for existing users.