It's not really a matter of being _owed_ anything, it's more that a lot of people aren't likely to pay for something unless they know they're going to use it, and 3 notes doesn't seem like enough to really see if it's sustainable. They don't have to have a free tier at all, and likewise no one has to try the product out. However just because we aren't "owed" anything, doesn't mean we should just accept _anything_.

Not offering a free version is totally reasonable, but calling this a trial version would seem more honest.

It doesn't, but it is odd that this is marketed as something usable.

. "Personal Free: Ideal to get started"

A 3-note-limit is not "ideal" for anything.

It would be better advertised as a free trial (purely for evaluating otherwise paid-only service), rather than pretending they have a free plan.

Well from an adoption standpoint it would be nice. I'm not going to even really bother with software that limits its free users so much. I mean I would TRY it but I'm not going to get a true experience out so few notes. And as a result I'm not going to buy it because I wasnt able to try it.

I'm not saying 1000 notes is the answer. Maybe its 50, maybe its 500. But 3 certainly is limiting.

It doesn't.

But I'm not going to bother trying it at "3 notes for free".

Why are customers not free to decide what makes a product worth using?

Nothing but you might as well have no free tier under those restrictions.