Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikepurvis | Hacker News Reader

Honestly, even non-game apps. I was looking for a white noise generator to use with a Bluetooth speaker recently and was appalled at several of the top picks in that category having subscriptions— and not just any subscription, but like $5-10/mo. For some looping sound files.

I ended up going with Noisli; it may not have all the features, but it's at least simple and straightforward and had a modest one time fee to unlock all functionality.

View on HN

Depending on what you need, iOS does have a background noise generator.

Settings -> accessibility -> audio / visual -> background sounds

You can even add them to the quick control panel or whatever it's called.

I did try that out and it's better than nothing, but I like Noisli's selection of sounds, and that you can create little blends of them— like bonfire + running water + crickets for a camping scene, or train tracks + rain + cafe for a journey scene.

It also being on my homepage vs buried in a settings menu was worth a few dollars to me.

This is a great tip! On vacation I just went through the hell of looking for white noise apps that were all subscription. I ended up using a spotify track on loop. I sure wish I knew this existed already on my phone. Thank you.

I like Noizio for this. $10, no BS.

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/noizio-calm-meditate-sleep/id9...

While unpopular, I do understand the rationale for the subscription model. Even if it's "just some looping sound files," an app project like that is never really "done" because of Apple's ever evolving operating system demanding revision on the developer's part, or the software will stop working. And that's not even going into the cost of running a server, which the majority of apps, even simple ones, require for cross-device functionality.

I understand the bitterness on the part of users, especially with so many subscriptions (including this one, IMO) being quite egregiously priced. But at the same time, the app market on both platforms is extremely competitive and it's difficult to get an app to a level of popularity where advertising or lower charges can fund the effort involved to keep maintaining it.

I don't really have an answer here, unfortunately. I think the availability of free apps for phones for decades based on the hand-wavy ad-tech "we'll monetize user data later" has created the impression among phone users that just because software runs on their phone and not their PC, that it has basically no worth. It's not as if the code is easier to write for a smaller screen.

Part of the issue here is Apple doesn't support the "old school" model of paid apps with discounted upgrade pricing for existing owners.

They basically point developers at subscriptions to replace this model.

Yeah, I get that, and definitely once they're operating a backend for me I'm 100% on board with paying a few dollars a month to keep that service alive.

Obviously these devs have done the math and it works better for them to charge 1000 users $10/month each than to find 20000 users who will pay $6/year.

Part of me just reacted against the slimy, mattress-store level marketing copy trying to shame me into spending $10 a month because "can you really put a price on a good night's sleep?"

I refuse patently to support or purchase anything using manipulative marketing like that. Hard pass. If you want to sell me something, show me the benefits/let me try it, and sell me that product like I'm a human being you have an ounce of respect for.

If an app is a front end to a service that by its nature must be a service, a subscription model makes sense. Outside of that, though, a subscription model is a showstopper for me. I may subscribe to a service if it's important enough to me, but I will never rent software.

I understand that view, but it's just not that simple. Firstly you don't "own" any of the apps you've bought: you've not bought the executable, you've bought a license to use the executable, a license which may be terminated for any number of reasons: some by the developer, some by Apple. Second, due to Apple making changes to their OS, that app you've bought will require updates and I've chosen my word very carefully there, it will require them. Those updates take work; believe me I've held a few apps in maintenance mode in my time, it is not idle work. It involves a lot of testing of new iOS builds and updating projects/implementations of Apple's code, on and on. It is not a nothing job.

So you has my theoretical customer who've bought an app for a fixed one-time purchase would presumably have something to say to me in the form of an email if Apple drops a new iOS update, and the app no longer works, right? Because you paid your money and you want to use this software. And I totally agree! I want to update it and keep it working for you. But the one-time purchase model is not conducive to this relationship, because it's effectively infinite time investment for me, and a one-time payment for you. And the amount of money I can make to justify that time investment has a natural ceiling: people only need to buy my app once to use it on all their devices, and no matter how good it is, there's a natural ceiling in terms of sales I can achieve, because only so many people are going to want it.

Again, I don't really have a solution to this. The economics of app development are tricky.

> but it's just not that simple.

It is for me, and when it comes to what I'm going to spend my money on, that's all that matters.

> you don't "own" any of the apps you've bought

I'm sure that you know what I mean here. I "own" it meaning that I am in possession of an installable that isn't dependent on an outside service, and that can't be modified or removed without my permission.

> due to Apple making changes to their OS, that app you've bought will require updates

I don't use Apple devices, and if Apple platforms are that unstable, then that's a good reason not to!

> I want to update it and keep it working for you

So you charge for the update. You don't charge an ongoing monthly fee.

This stuff isn't actually that complicated. The industry worked it out pretty well a long time ago -- it's just that all of that knowledge has been disregarded in favor of a subscription model that allows a deeper soaking of customers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com