Subscription models for an app that’s not hosting anything is just the dev wanting a constant revenue stream, no matter how they try to word it. (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 1 year ago by spiritedpause@sh.itjust.works to c/lemmy@lemmy.ml

95 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Subscription models only make sense for an app/service that have recurring costs. In the case of Lemmy apps, the instances are the ones with recurring hosting costs, not the apps.

If an app doesn’t have recurring hosting costs, it only makes sense to have one up front payment and then maybe in app purchases to pay for new features going forward

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

I think it started when software stopped being distributed physically. It's hard to push a bunch of updates to your users when they've need to physically have floppies sent to them versus doing it over the network.

I remember a time when software being "Gold Master" meant it was literally written to a gold master disk, from which copies were made. With that kind of release you had to make damn sure things were finished.

[-] NotAGoodUser@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The difference is that software nowadays is interconnected. Sync doesn't exist on its own, nor does Lemmy. And if one of these links changes, chances are, that something else needs to change to keep up. You're talking about standalone software that that exists entirely on its own. But that's not what this post is about.

this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023

25 points (60.5% liked)

Lemmy

11948 readers

2 users here now

Everything about Lemmy; bugs, gripes, praises, and advocacy.

For discussion about the lemmy.ml instance, go to !meta@lemmy.ml.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

nutomic@lemmy.ml