Comment by a-ve
14 hours ago
I think that’s a fair question.
My thinking is pretty simple: most people will probably choose the basic 2-device plan, which works out to about $0.85 per month. For an app like this, I think that is a reasonable price.
Another reason is that a lot of Mac apps charge a one-time fee upfront, but then require paid upgrades later. In practice, that often ends up being similar to paying for a few years of ongoing support anyway.
I also think a low-cost subscription sets a clearer expectation that the app will continue to be maintained and kept working as macOS changes. For software like this, where OS updates can easily break things, that felt like the more honest model.
Adding on to this, apps that hook into window management and multi-monitor behavior can break in subtle ways over time. I ran into some of that with uBar on my setup, especially around multi-monitor use and waking from sleep, and I wanted boringBar’s pricing to match the expectation of continued support and fixes.
I 100% understand why you are using a subscription-based model. It makes sense, and I agree it's the most honest model given that you have to continually support it and you don't want to have to either over-promise on extended support, and offer refunds if you can't fulfill that promise.
I just hate managing subscriptions.
If you gave me the option to require manual subscription renewal, rather than auto-renewal, I would 100% buy this right now. Basically allow me to purchase for 1 year then click a button to confirm that I'm still getting value out of the product. If I don't click that button then you should assume I'm no longer interested and cancel my subscription.
(I don't like using my mac but sometimes I have to use it for work, and I wish I had this.)
I've added a perpetual license - $40 for 2 devices and 2 years of updates.
Fair point. The billing part of it is managed via Stripe - I'll put up the update/cancel subscription part on the Customer Billing panel soon.
6 replies →
Thank you for replying. I understand your perspective — the subscription is a signal that you will maintain the app long-term, and to provide the revenue for it. Also, it looks cheap. A few counter-points, while we’re talking:
> For an app like this, I think that’s a reasonable price.
Except that it’s not a price, it’s an access fee, and those are very different. If it were a price I’d have the thing I paid for — a binary to use as a like. Instead what I have is a token that you can revoke at any time for any reason, including you getting hit by a car or getting bored with the app.
> a low-cost subscription sets a clearer expectation that the app will continue to be maintained …
Forgive the bluntness, but it does no such thing. This app just launched. No one has reason to believe the little business behind it will still exist in 12 months. Death rate for products like this is very high. A subscription from me is a bet that you will still be around in a year, and you have zero track record.
Alright - that's fair.
I've taken the feedback here and added a perpetual personal license for 2 devices at $40 - it includes 2 years of updates and the app will keep on working after that.
I don't think anyone is trying to have you get rid of the subscription option in order to have the non-subscription option. Same with defendending the good value - whether it's subscription or not is orthogonal with whether it's priced reasonably.
Low cost subscriptions as the only options can also give multiple vibes, not just one intended one, as well. The one you highighlight is somewhat optimistic takeaway "the publisher is fair with this price and I only need to pay for however much I actually use - what a great guarantee this will be good for the long run".
Another valid takeaway is basically the opposite "It's not clear if the publisher is committed to this software. The only payment option they think they can sell is for just $10 and are only showing commitment in being around for up to just 1 year - are they really confident in the product or value"? Even more doubtful are those suspicious of new dealings "It's fair enough now but do I really want to get used to it for a year and then the price is jacked up by renewal?" (this can be solved with more than a non-subscription option too. E.g. longer term subscriptions, only if you truly are trying to advertise "years of support to come" can help provide the feeling of commitment).
Even in the case one wants to start/stick with the subscription having a lifetime and/or versioned option only adds more to all of the things you listed as reasons for offering a subscription alone. E.g. seeing that "lifetime is equal to at least x years" or "y year term subscription" and then the user going with the 1 year subscription is strictly better signaling to them than just having a 1 year subscription.
The only thing suspicious from your comment is the current subscription option is 1 year, the ask was for longer/perpetual options, and the justification given was the price per month seems great. Other than the absolute value of the price per month is lower and sounds easier to defend, there doesn't seem to be anything about your product, the subscription for it, or the context made the cost per month the relevant interval for a user to consider the value.
Price-wise it's reasonable but the general feeling I and others have is subscription fatigue. It's no one subscription's fault, but in aggregate a lot of us are done with it. App looks nice, good luck.