Solutions that do not require to have an account look more robust and stable

Kacper Raubo
2 replies
In the past when we bought an app, which then was on a CD, it felt like you really *have* this. It felt like it really *belongs* to you. Now, when the current form of getting services works as a subscription, we, in fact, do not own the app itself, but the app's account. In my opinion, the feature that makes this is the need to sign up for the apps' accounts because in this way what we really buy today is not the app itself, but just an access to it. To notice this fact and its effects we should look closer to things that may be seen as opposite: to use a physical a notebook or an MP3 player we do not need to register anywhere. For listening a radio we just need to have one and a dishwasher works without taking any of our data. To me, the services that for working require an account neither look robust nor stable. I do not trust Notion the way I trust my native text editor. I do not trust Figma with my files stored on somebody's computer the way I trust Gimp with my files stored on my hard drive. What is more, I do not even feel like they are *my* apps (in contrast to e.g. Gimp). I just have an access to it. Because of that, since I am not emotionally attached to it, switching to a different one is super easy.

Replies

Christian C
Manipulist for MacOS
Manipulist for MacOS
good point and agree on that! but as there are more and more integrated apps, guess the question is, what's a good revenue model? In-app subscriptions? Paid apps?
Tarun Karthikeyan
You technically didn't own game CDs even back in the day. You only owned a license to play it because well, the company owns the software. The downside was if you broke/lost the disc or CD key and needed to install, you're basically out of luck and have to buy it again. Modern sub apps can be used anywhere without needing any hardware, just need login creds. That said, I see where you're coming from. I'm personally debating about this myself for my app - I can offer it as a one-time pay option at a more expensive price than a yearly sub. Currently leaning towards sub over purchase. The open secret is that subs are (probably) better for revenue because they're recurring, can be increased in price and well, people forget to cancel. I agree with you overall, but it is what it is.