As long as it’s implicit right and is a reasonable price I 100% will be getting it. I am willing to pay someone else to securly hold my (e2ee) data.
Makes sense., something as huge and expensive as Signal can’t run entirely on donations.
Sure it can, just look at Wikipedia. But it’s probably a good idea to have some alternate forms of revenue generation.
Wikipedia has a lot more donors, but also their costs are probably cheaper than Signal. They mostly host text and decently compressed images, Signal uses way more bandwidth and people share high quality videos and other huge files. The servers are very expensive, there were articles estimating their cost to be around $50M per year.
Wikipedia has way more donors, since it’s basically the only one of its kind. There is no Big Tech alternative to Wikipedia, so everyone just uses it by default. There are lots of other messengers though, so Signal isn’t the default choice.
As long as they leave the local backup option that sounds like a good idea to me.
That’s a pretty good idea for monetization.
Good to see they have some reasonable revenue streams lined up.
I don’t mind paying a fair price, for a service, so they should go for it. I use both Signal and Telegram, and I would pay for Telegram too, if the price was more fair…
Price is fair but features aren’t worth it.
You contradict yourself. You can’t say that the price is fair, for something that doesn’t have the features that the price should cover.
All I am saying is that this price for premium would be fair for me if the features are valuable enough. Sometimes premiums are just too expensive even if they are good, so I boycott them.
I agree on that part. Greed is a bad thing, and I don’t support that either.
