Hacker News Reader

Comment by outcoldman | Hacker News Reader

It is not a perpetual license. "One year of free updates included." means subscription. Especially considering product depends on third party API, which rapidly evolves, you cannot really stick with the old version, because some new model will not be embedded in the one year old version of the app you have. So, in reality you pay $40-80 a year for this product. Plus your ChatGPT API Key usage. In that case I would just suggest pay for the OpenAI.

If you are looking for an alternative of the app for the ChatGPT - I would suggest https://www.typingmind.com I have been using it since it was released. It is also available with Setapp subscription, which gives you some free usage of the OpenAI with Setapp embedded API key.

View on HN

Technically it's perpetual fallback license, which was popularized by the Jetbrain team [0]

> A perpetual fallback license is a license that allows you to use a specific version of software without an active subscription for it. The license also includes all bugfix updates, more specifically in X.Y.Z version all Z releases are included.

After 1 year, you can continue to use the app without having to upgrade. You won't receive new features, but will continue to receive bug fixes for the features released previously.

So I can argue it's not "subscription".

Plus, renewal cost 50% less, so it's not $40-$80 a year, but only $20-$40 a year after the first year.

And lastly, the app fetch model lists from OpenAI API so there is no need to "support new models".

I believe this is a sustainable pricing model for an indie developer like me. And I believe it's fair for everyone.

[0]: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What...

I feel like if you have to specify “technically”, you agree with me that it is basically a subscription.

As an Indie developer myself I do not support subscription based licensing (or your version of license) for B2C products. You can offer B2B subscription based licensing, but B2C should always be perpetual licenses. Sure it is ok to ask for the upgrade to new version, which has significant features.

And to clarify, we are talking about the product that does not have any outgoing server spending.

That is my opinion.

> I feel like if you have to specify “technically”, you agree with me that it is basically a subscription.

No, I am not. The "technical" part here is the "fallback" in "perpetual fallback license".

Appreciate your opinion and I'm sure many think the same way.

But selling perpetual licenses just won't work for me. It's not sustainable, especially for this kind of app.

that's no different than pay the full price for new version that comes out every year. do you remember how perpetual licenses use to work?

I feel like Sublime Text showed the best of it. You purchase the new license every new major version. Affinity apps are the same. Acorn. Alfred. And a lot more. There are certainly some apps that release a major update every year. But in that case you pay for work already done. In case if you pay for subscription, you are going to see minor updates “bug fixes”.

I don’t see a reason for an indie developer to charge subscription, if there is no server cost. New versions should just make the app interesting for more users, so the income should be flowing constantly every month.

Anyway, I just personally don’t support subscription based apps and never will.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com