[inexcf]

>As I said in a different thread[0], the fact that some subscriptions are predatory doesn't mean subscriptions are necessarily predatory.

"Some" is doing a lot of work in that sentence. Subscriptions are structurally designed to extract payment for non-use. the whole point of the model is to be predatory.

You pre-pay for some allotment of resources but get nothing back for unused resources. And the main profit comes from the gap between what you paid for and the actual usage. And that's just in the best case scenario there the company is not running at a loss just to squeeze you later even harder. The entire model only works if people throw their money into the void.

If a provider genuinely wanted to cover the costs my usage imposes on them, they would bill me for usage. That's the honest version: you used X, here's the bill for X. Instead, subscriptions deliberately decouple what I pay from what I consume, and they always decouple it in the vendor's favor, never mine. I never (well i think Kagi[0] actually is different, one outlier) get a refund for the month I didn't watch anything or the API calls I didn't make.

[0]: https://getlago.substack.com/p/why-kagi-launched-no-use-no-p...

[Brendinooo]

>You pre-pay for some allotment of resources but get nothing back for unused resources.

I dunno. This just doesn't quite compute to me as some universal principle.

I paid $30 for a year of Strong (an iOS fitness app), for example. What do you see as the "allotment of resources" there? They're delivering maintenance upgrades and feature releases periodically that I'll use any time I log a workout; the app runs on a phone that I own; the data is presumably sitting on a server of theirs, so it needs to be ready for whenever I want to use it.

I've logged ~40 workouts so far, so let's hope I stay consistent and end up with 80 for the year. That's ~38 cents per workout.

I just don't feel ripped off here, especially since I moved off of a fitness app that I liked less and cost $50/year, the price has stayed the same over four years while improving steadily, and I'm not aware of anything that does what I want for a better price. I'm not sure I'd even want some kind of metering system; psychologically I don't like the idea that I'd have to spend a second thinking about if I want to pay more to log more workouts.

[OkayPhysicist]

Why does a fitness tracker need continuous development? How on earth is something whose main competition is a $5 notebook and a $1 pen worth $50/yr?

A fitness tracker is exactly the sort of software I would expect to pay once for. It doesn't need some compute-heavy backend. It shouldn't need any backend at all. The entire application is window dressing for a SQLite database.

[Brendinooo]

Like I said, I'm paying $30 a year, not $50.

A pen and notebook do not provide a database of exercises with video instructions; they don't organize/aggregate my data to show records, chart progress over time, and do the 1RM math for me. They don't track my heart rate (via my watch, which live syncs to my phone when desired) and report health data to a service where I like to see it all aggregated. They don't run timers and they don't operate on a platform that can play music, which means they must be an extra thing I carry around and keep track of.

If you think a pen and notebook are the best solution for how you want to track workouts...great! And if you think you could match those features for a lesser cost, post it up and hopefully I'll find it! What I have is certainly not an essential good; one can definitely lift without it. But it provides services that I find worth the cost.

[morgoo]

You're actually using Strong as an example? It's practically abandonware nowadays!

[Brendinooo]

What do you mean?

[drivingmenuts]

Why is your data stored on their server where they have access to it at any time for any purpose they choose? For that, they should be paying you, no the other way around.

[Brendinooo]

It's stored there so I don't have to think about managing it.