The difference between 0 and 1$ is bigger than the difference between 1$ and 100$.

Edit: That being said, I welcome the additional of an optional charge.

1 > 99? You’re sure about that?

Or do you mean that the jump to start charging is the big decision, not the amount?

I think OP meant problems with setting up payment method, dealing with credit card etc.. Most of the world population can not even pay with usual visa card.

There's that. But there's also a big psychological barrier to paying anything at all (even if you can whip out a credit card and pay in a minute) vs. paying a bit more. Is that barrier greater than an additional $99? I'm not sure in general. But it's probably bigger than paying an additional $3.99 or whatever.

A negative response would be ridiculous, as is the clickbait title, and I don't think losing those users will actually be a great loss.

LibreOffice is free as in beer. Not only the source, but also the binaries, and also for MacOs, are distributed for free. You can just go to the download page and grab it.

The only thing thats being charged is going through the App Store. If this really 'backfires' as some people seem to suggest, I think the project is better off just abandoning the App Store.

> getting an app onto the App Store requires non-trivial fees

That's a cop-out. I guarantee they already get at least $99/year via donations by macOS users. If they wanted to charge directly, $0.99 would easily cover those fees, assuming 130 people buy it per year.

The reality is that they want to get some money back, and that's ok. Using the Apple fees as an excuse isn't necessary.

I mean sort of, but you also have to deal with Apple's App Store rules and goons...

>I guarantee

Really? How?

Just look at how much they’re taking in. The figures can be found online and are in the tens of thousands. I’d think at least 1% of those users are macOS users.

You can’t publish app without paying that $99 yearly.