notability new update

[bobbydukearts69]

Notability new updates

I dont know if this is against the rules but i need to ask linus for some help. Notability, a very famus note taking app, just revealed that they will be changing from a one time payment to a subscription based program. They say that the users who paid for the app originally will only get one year of free subscription. It is clear from the comments from Instagram and twitter that the users are not happy about this new update. The subscription based system makes it so that you have to PAY to EDIT notes. I believe that a lot of students who use Notability are screwed as they use Notability as their primary note taking tool. I dont know what linus can do but if they could talk about it even for a bit in the WAN show it would be super useful. I dont think the normal folks have the power to change Notability's mind, but someone who is as prominent as linus may have an effect, even if its little. I really didnt know where else to post this but if the linus group could do anything, im sure a lot of students would be thankful for it.

[8tg]

Who on earth is paying for a notepad is the real concern here

 

[bobbydukearts69]

15 minutes ago, 8tg said:

Who on earth is paying for a notepad is the real concern here

 

youd be surprised, it was a good purchase tbh. but now i wish i could get a refund

[OrganicCompostInTraining]

I'm sorry I haven't really proofread the following I was just feeling passionate about this topic below.

 

I'm honestly really insulted by this move. I felt that I purchased a lifetime license for all the features that notability offered. I was happy with the app as it was. I used it on my phone, Mac, and iPad. I specifically make purchases of one-time payment services cause I recognize that subscription models are not always best financially. 

 

If Linus or anyone from the wan show writing team sees this maybe they could shed some light on the following question.

 

Is it legal/moral for apple store app developers to force their users onto a subscription model if they have already paid a one-time purchase fee for the application's full features?

 

Is it legal/moral for apple store app developers to take away features that legacy users had already paid for?

 

Is there no solution to this issue other than disabling automatic App Store updates and making sure we never accidentally update the application onto the new version of the application? Is it possible exclude specific apps from automatic updates? Is it possible to rollback updates on apps you accidentally update? (This might be a good video idea for Jonathan Horst from Mac address YouTube channel.)

 

I recall that Linus has issues with TeamViewer trying to get him to update to their subscription model and that Linus believes that one-time payment models should at least guarantee the features you paid for at the time of purchase and to expect any updates past that shouldn't be expected.

 

I really think the only remedy for the problem at hand is to leave legacy users alone and not take away the features they already had access to, putting new features behind a subscription is fine but the developer should not take away features from legacy users.

 

Very frustrating situation that ginger labs is creating. Many users liked using the app, and they think they can milk their old users for more money. I can guess the argument they'll bring up that the development team works hard to keep the app high quality, that servers aren't free, they have to keep themselves employed, they use revenues to develop their other apps, etc. I don't have issues with these things if they had been transparent from the beginning when I bought the app. I can afford the subscription but it's the principle of the matter that is frustrating.

 

Their social medias are getting downvoted and blasted for this new update that came out of nowhere, completely insulting legacy users.

[bobbydukearts69]

1 hour ago, OrganicCompostInTraining said:

I'm sorry I haven't really proofread the following I was just feeling passionate about this topic below.

 

I'm honestly really insulted by this move. I felt that I purchased a lifetime license for all the features that notability offered. I was happy with the app as it was. I used it on my phone, Mac, and iPad. I specifically make purchases of one-time payment services cause I recognize that subscription models are not always best financially. 

 

If Linus or anyone from the wan show writing team sees this maybe they could shed some light on the following question.

 

Is it legal/moral for apple store app developers to force their users onto a subscription model if they have already paid a one-time purchase fee for the application's full features?

 

Is it legal/moral for apple store app developers to take away features that legacy users had already paid for?

 

Is there no solution to this issue other than disabling automatic App Store updates and making sure we never accidentally update the application onto the new version of the application? Is it possible exclude specific apps from automatic updates? Is it possible to rollback updates on apps you accidentally update? (This might be a good video idea for Jonathan Horst from Mac address YouTube channel.)

 

I recall that Linus has issues with TeamViewer trying to get him to update to their subscription model and that Linus believes that one-time payment models should at least guarantee the features you paid for at the time of purchase and to expect any updates past that shouldn't be expected.

 

I really think the only remedy for the problem at hand is to leave legacy users alone and not take away the features they already had access to, putting new features behind a subscription is fine but the developer should not take away features from legacy users.

 

Very frustrating situation that ginger labs is creating. Many users liked using the app, and they think they can milk their old users for more money. I can guess the argument they'll bring up that the development team works hard to keep the app high quality, that servers aren't free, they have to keep themselves employed, they use revenues to develop their other apps, etc. I don't have issues with these things if they had been transparent from the beginning when I bought the app. I can afford the subscription but it's the principle of the matter that is frustrating.

 

Their social medias are getting downvoted and blasted for this new update that came out of nowhere, completely insulting legacy users.

i agree man, this is just downright scummy. i also cannot afford the subscription. on another note i also saw a youtuber i follow who made a video about how notability is free and easily accessible to anyone. the company is really trying to milk out every cent that they can get out of their (once loyal) user base

[rrnptx]

This is against section 3.1.2(a) of the App Store guidelines:

"If you are changing your existing app to a subscription-based business model, you should not take away the primary functionality existing users have already paid for. For example, let customers who have already purchased a “full game unlock” continue to access the full game after you introduce a subscription model for new customers"

 

According to this rule, Notability cannot simply remove the functionality we paid for just because they switch to a subscription model.