s users of iPhone apps, we are very frustrated with the trend in the Apple App Store where many apps have transitioned to a subscription model. Even simple apps like to-do lists, calendars, camera apps, or those that produce only sounds, expect up to $100 per year as rent. Even if one is willing to pay for the first year, what justifies the same high payment after a year? The new features added in that year? Adjustments for a new iOS version? Hardly. Only a few apps have ongoing costs. In the case of renting an apartment, the monthly payment compensates the landlord for the use of their property. But for a product that can be replicated infinitely and has no material form? What is the monthly rent paid for in this case?

The common response is: development cannot be funded without this subscription model. But can financing the livelihood of a development team truly be a valid response? Shouldn't the benefit of the app for the user be the primary focus and the sole basis for pricing?

We despise advertisements in an app. The media is already saturated with ads, and we don't need to see more of them.

If one complains, they must show that they can do it better.

Therefore, we began developing "Switch TV ON": an app centered around one of our favorite topics, TV shows and movies.

The app is free, with no subscription required, contains no ads, and no one needs to log in and leave behind their data that could potentially be sold to third parties.

As we've always been fond of the shareware idea, our only source of income is actually just an in-app purchase as a voluntary tip.

By doing so, we align our own expectations as users with those as developers and contribute our part to potentially reversing the tide once again.

The subscription model for alternatives like justwatch or reelgood are, afaik due to the fact that they license the official data and aggregate them (and also, have native apps for Apple TV and Android and the web and even Tizen if anyone still uses it). They have free tiers, and Trakt, Plex, and Kodi are all to varying degrees on the same mixed model.

Mostly, the odd thing about this app is that it's not an tvOS app, at the very least. I don't watch TV on my phone. It's literally the smallest screen I have. Although, in fairness, I use the service that allows me to watch sports on time and beyond that, Criterion Channel. I have cable only because I live with someone who watches cable, but the guide works fine for her.

I know that I'm an edge case by large, but I'm in a Discord chat where over a thousand others are also pretty much sports only watchers. It's a childhood obsession turned into an adulthood obsession, but then again, every major league baseball team have hired someone - sometimes more than one, from the community. There's no sports-only niche streaming aggregation app, but justwatch covers all of the streaming sports available to me (except minor league baseball, but no app lets me set up a multi-view from the platform itself without me doing it with the remote anyway) The main players and platforms are well covered at this point. There's a range of services from the easy but not-private to the less-easy but self-hosted. Is there really that big of a iPhone only market? As a Mac/iPad user who nevertheless has an Android phone and a Samsung projector, it's awkward, that's all.