OP, go with the JetBrains model. You can still offer a monthly subscription, but also provide an annual option where you pay up front for a year. After that year, it reverts to a fallback license for the specific version that was current during that period. It’s a good approach.
It's a subscription with extra steps and worse retention.
I personally dislike subscriptions to the point where I’d gladly pay more to own, and as this thread shows, I’m not alone.
So why not offer both?
Some people will take the subscription with extra steps and worse retention and I'm saying the product will be worse off for it. Why not just offer the thing with the simpler messaging*, better retention, and better outlook for actually being supported down the road even if it's not a massive success?
* 1 year = 365 days, not when a new major version is subjectively justified
Honestly anyone who'd over index on people claiming they'd pay except $10 a year is just too much for a major utility or subscriptions are just too exotic for them is doomed unless they learn about conversion rates: I don't get the vibe OP is unaware though based on their comments here.
$10 is too low for a one-off purchase as well, I'm not saying to lowball the price. $29 for a small utility could be reasonable, and that gives you some room to offer discount pricing / sales if you want. As for major version upgrades, I'd be imagining a typical 50% off, $15 to buy an upgrade to v2 if the customer wants it. Of course, not every customer will want that.
You could offer both a subscription and a one-off purchase. It might put off some customers that you're even offering a subscription, but at least then you're offering everyone what they might want. And if you offer both, you'll have real data on what customers actually prefer, if you don't have that data already.
And as others have said - it's their business, they can choose their sales model! Offered only as a friendly suggestion and potential customer feedback.
Regardless of the presentation, $10 a year presumably represents what they want per user, per year, for this to be worth it for them. Don't rush to repackage that very conservative target into a 2nd format for people who won't pay $10 a year for a thing they'll use daily on a Mac in the first place.
> Offered only as a friendly suggestion and potential customer feedback.
And "please don't overindex on that comment OP" is offering an unreasonable response?
Not at all! Apologies if tone isn't coming through as I wanted. Good to have a contrarian view presented. Maybe a subscription really is what their particular market wants.