Re:Why Local-First Apps Haven't Become Popular?
by xmprt on Monday September 22, 2025 @07:04PM
(#45340712)
You're not the average person. You probably also don't have significant credit card debt or rely on buy-now-pay-later for making purchases. Subscriptions are a win-win for the average company and user - users pay less upfront when evaluating the product, and companies can rely on a steady cash flow to continue paying for development and ongoing maintenance costs.
Re:Why Local-First Apps Haven't Become Popular?
by account42 on Tuesday September 23, 2025 @05:38AM
(#45344794)
It's not a win for the user. The user is tricked into paying more than a fair price by deceptive business practices. The word for that is fraud, but somehow it's OK because everyone does it.
Re:Why Local-First Apps Haven't Become Popular?
by xmprt on Tuesday September 23, 2025 @04:54PM
(#45352630)
> paying more than a fair price by deceptive business practices
I see product X is $10/month. I subscribe. I'm not sure where the deception is there? The alternative is likely either the cost of the product is exorbitantly high like $500 for lifetime. Or the developer makes it more affordable but sales peter out and they end up having to go out of business and can't afford to maintain the product after a couple of years. Likely both. And hackernews will complain either way.
The only sustainable model I've seen is lifetime licenses but updates for a single year.
And the price they give me from clicking the ad is a limited-time discount so then I'm turned off from ever coming back later and paying the full price i.e. the sucker's price.
Surely this isn't the optimal business model for many of the products that have adopted it.