>Grammarly is $150/year!! How is that not egregious?
I don't personally find Grammarly useful. But I know people who swear by it and, if it's an application that helps you write maybe every day, $150/year is nothing.
I pay more than that for Lightroom which I also use a lot.
More than that for The New York Times which I read daily.
Etc.
There's definitely a subscription version of "Does it bring you joy?" But there seems to be almost a moralistic pushback on paying for software/services things that you find useful.
I paid three month for grammaly when I was writing my MS thesis. It was useful for the extensive usage. But I canceled afterwards because it is not worth keeping.
TFA literally ends with them saying they canceled Grammarly! I feel like half of y'all are out here flagellating the author for decisions where the whole point of the article is that they made some bad decisions and fixed them.
150/yr doesn't sound to egregious for an app you actually use. Of course, it depends on your income, for some people it could be insane, but there are many people earning high 6 figures in tech (no, not me, not yet at least :) or even 7 figures - for them $150/year is like rounding error in their paystub, why would it be egregious? Of course, provided it is really useful for you, otherwise there's no point even for $15/year or 1.5$.
> but I didn't think my list was particularly egregious
Grammarly is $150/year!! How is that not egregious?
My only significant subscriptions are:
1. Netflix 2. Amazon Prime 3. Youtube Premium
All shared with other people.
This guy was paying $40/year for a weather app and was surprised he was spending a ton on subscriptions. How?