Lemmy

12440 readers

3 users here now

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

For discussion about the lemmy.ml instance, go to [email protected].

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

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 [email protected] to c/[email protected]

68 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

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can see both sides of this. I don't usually update an app unless I'm having problems that are fixed in a later update.

Ongoing development of an app can be for various things. For things like bugfixes to existing code, I don't think we should necessarily pay for that. For brand new features that weren't promised before and didn't exist before there could be a case for paying for that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Honestly, there's no such thing as bug free. I'm not in support of never ending bug support fixes for life. It just isn't possible. Especially with new versions, etc. If you don't give them upgrades, it now creates more work as you're supporting multiple branches. This is why OSes have end of support. There will always be bugfixes.