What is the most useless app that you have seen being given as a subscription?

For me, I tried a ‘minimalist’ launcher app for Android that had a 7 day trial or something and they had a yearly subscription based model for it. I was aghast. I would literally expect the app to blow my mind and do everything one can assume to go that way. In a world, where Nova Launcher (Yes, I know it has been acquired by Branch folks but it still is a sturdy one) or Niagara exist plus many alternatives including minimalist ones on F Droid, the dev must be releasing revolutionary stuff to factor in a subscription service.

Second, is a controversial choice, since it’s free tier is quite good and people like it so much. But, Pocketcasts. I checked it’s yearly price the other day, and boy, in my country, I can subscribe to Google Play Pass, YouTube Premium and Spotify and still have money left before I hit the ceiling what Pocketcasts is asking for paid upgrade.

Also, what are your views on one time purchase vs subscriptions? Personally, I find it much easier to purchase, if it’s good enough even if it was piratable, something if it is a one time purchase rather than repetitive.

  • tsonfeir@lemm.eeEnglish
    455·
    9 months ago

    But if the server side element is just cloud storage, you should be able to supply your own server.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2611·
      9 months ago

      Then the dev needs to build out a range of protocols and API’s to enable users to “supply their own server”, which can bring a range of additional headaches, like having to provide support for external dependencies outside their control, etc.

      What if the users “server” fails? Should the dev waste hours of their life assisting a user with a highly specific Google Drive issue when they spent $5, 3 years ago?

      • tsonfeir@lemm.eeEnglish
        284·
        9 months ago

        I mean, there are pretty standard protocols for most of the cloud services, like S3 API - the defacto.

        Hell, sftp is fine for most stuff. They just want your data.

        But the developer doesn’t need to provide support if you opt to use your own data storage and the storage itself fails. And

        Google would be the one to contact if Google drive has an issue.

        • ShrimpsIsBugs@programming.devEnglish
          142·
          9 months ago

          But the developer doesn’t need to provide support if you opt to use your own data storage and the storage itself fails. Google would be the one to contact if Google drive has an issue.

          Well yes, but that’s not how your average user thinks and acts. They will either a) contact you as the developer of the app that doesn’t seem to work and when your say it’s not your fault give you bad reviews or b) directly give you bad reviews.

      • iopq@lemmy.worldEnglish
        69·
        9 months ago

        I’m not putting my data up some random server run by some dev