Marques Brownlee, known as MKBHD, faced backlash over his new wallpaper app, Panels, due to its high subscription cost ($49.99/year) and concerns over excessive data permissions.

Brownlee acknowledged user feedback, promising to adjust ad frequency for free users and address privacy concerns, clarifying that the app’s data disclosures were broader than intended.

The app, which offers curated wallpapers and shares profits with artists, aims to improve over time, despite criticisms of its design and monetization approach.

  • dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but if you want unique wallpapers, consider paying an actual artist, instead of an influencer

    • spongebue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think that’s going to be an unpopular opinion around here. Maybe a little tricky in the logistics of distinguishing between an artist and influencer and finding an artist who you like and can pay for a phone background, but other than that you’re not going to find many Lemmings saying “no, pay an influencer!”

  • mortemtyrannis@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    No sane individual is going to pay for a subscription for phone backgrounds.

    That is absolutely a stupid business idea and the people who came up with it should be publicly shamed.

    • spongebue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Remember when people paid for ringtones? Doesn’t mean it isn’t stupid, especially as a subscription, but people do stupid things and other people take advantage.

      • atrielienz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        And Ringback tones too. For when people called you, so they could listen to your favorite song instead of the ring of the phone while waiting for you to pick up.

        • spongebue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I forgot about that! And most songs sound like ass when you hear it over a phone, especially before whatever they did in the last decade to make voice calls more clear

  • emax_gomax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    1 year ago

    It costs $49.99 per year (or $11.99 per month)

    Why in the hell does the monthly price end with you paying 280% more than the yearly. That is such an absurd discount I don’t even know why someone would pay at all for this app but more so I want to understand where the price justification is and who came up with this plan.

    To be clear I support artists and more than welcome a platform for them to share and sell art if they wish… I don’t get why it needs to be a subscription service and I don’t see how such inflated charges are going to help artists as it’ll just discourage large numbers of people wanting to support them.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also the nature of a wallpaper app, maybe you just want to plop in get a wallpaper and scamper off into the sunset.

        Matter of fact for the $50 a year price I could sign back up for a month twice a year and still come out on top.

      • emax_gomax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        But in the end you get more feature for a higher price. In this case it’s the same app for different prices depending on time frame… not to mention the app has no purpose beyond finding a wallpaper so it only really has 1 feature.

        • EvilBit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          The point is not whether there are more features. The point is to give you an incentive to go yearly, and in this case it’s a huge “discount” even though it’s in no way worth the monthly cost. The monthly plan isn’t meant to sell you the monthly plan. It’s meant to make the yearly plan look good.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I want to understand where the price justification is

      The justification is that people should be yearly subscribers when they can more easily forget to cancel it.

  • WolvenSpectre@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    Marques Brownlee: “Don’t pay for what something will be, pay for what it is now” and “I don’t review what will be, but what a product is now”

    Also Marques Brownlee: “Pay the subscription fee now for the unnamed unspecified features this will have other than just wallpapers now to fund future development”

    Who knew the next company he would “kill” would be his own. The only way to find his app on Android is to use the link from his site because of the generic name.

    BTW Wallpaper Engine, which has an android app, is currently $5 Canadian, and I am told with Proton can also work on Linux PC’s and has an huge amount of modifiable wallpapers.

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think that’s what he’s saying. You have to ask yourself a question: is offering an expensive upfront subscription for an evolving product an endorsement of assessing future value into your purchase. In my view, it isn’t and it’s not what he’s saying.

      What he is saying is that to the minority who will find this a good value or who are okay donating to help them implement new features, go ahead and hit that button. Then separately he’s saying “the price will make more sense to more people as features are added” which is true but is not an endorsement of paying the current price for those promised features. At least from what’s in the article and what I’ve seen.

      It’s the difference between saying that you should buy Minecraft because it will become an awesome game one day versus saying you should buy Minecraft because it’s either worth it to you now or you’re okay with helping to fund the development of future features you’ll receive. Those are very different.

  • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    Paying for ANY wallpaper is just silly, much less a subscription model.

    The only time you should pay for one if it’s an artist you want to actively support and/or thank for that specific work.

  • FergusonBishop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    This guy is no different than every other smarmy “Tech Reviewer” on YT. His reviews have been borderline useless for the last few years. This is just the next logical step that these guys take - hitch themselves onto a tech accessory or app and charge their followers predatory prices - fuck this guy.

  • vxx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wallpapers on phone are useless because apps are always full screen.

    Who would pay for such thing?

  • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I started to get worked up but then i remembered I don’t particularly care. He’s in it to make bank, not necessarily sell you a quality product. If he were, he wouldn’t be selling a wallpaper app.

  • cley_faye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    “curated wallpapers” including random generated stuff, and “shares profits” on a 50/50 basis, for a shitty app developed by what looks like three fivers in a trench coat.