I completely agree with the "freehold" principle, and it's how I exclusively release any of my work however how we get back there for the majority I just don't know. The only apps I know that are a success in the modern day that are using that model is Goodnotes that saves repurchase for significant updates which I think is acceptable, and Affinity design apps. I sense many feel their business model is better suited to subscriptions and the lapsed subscription fee is also valuable. It's likely a societal change whereby many are not happy to spend significant upfront costs on software now. Even a small amount on an app can be thought of as too much.
> I sense many feel their business model is better suited to subscriptions
Self-plug, but sometimes the developer just straight up needs income for a basic living. My terminal emulator [0] is in Early Access, meaning fans throw me $5/mo. Each month they get a new version and the binary is 100% offline (theirs to own.)
I sincerely want to respect the customer's wallet/privacy, yet I don't know what else to do while staying indie: my direct competitors either have VC funding [1] or the author's a wealthy retired CEO [2].
However, once I reach a 1.0 stable release I'll switch to a one-off payment system. I'm also not against a Business Source License when the time comes.
> significant upfront costs on software now. Even a small amount on an app can be thought of as too much
My experience with google play store is that useful apps have in app purchases, but you don't know ahead of time if the feature you need is free or addon. An app store that requires disclosure and filtering by paid features would help there, as users may be ok with paying ahead of time if the can actually find them.
