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.

        • Yggstyle
          link
          fedilink
          English
          106 months ago

          If you know an artist doing commissions that cheap they are depressed, desperate, or want to fuck you.

        • MagnyusG
          link
          fedilink
          English
          196 months ago

          For a single piece sure.

          I presume the idea here is that you have access to their full library. Personally, I fail to see why I would change my wallpaper enough to warrant even a free app to change it, let alone 50 bucks.

          • Yggstyle
            link
            fedilink
            English
            186 months ago

            Nah it’d be cheaper to commission the artist for a dozen or so pictures for 45 bucks:

            First you need to blow some ungodly amount of money on breaking the time/space barrier… Then travel back to the 1920s and find a starving artist. Then pitch him 45 bucks for some art. Easy! 45 bucks to them is like 800 of our today dollars.

            Sarcasm aside- it seems people really are disconnected on how much a commission or art costs. Sure you can buy prints reasonably priced but any commission that isn’t a speedy doodle is going to clock in a helluva lot higher.

      • @Deceptichum@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I’m an artist who has uploaded many of my works to wallhaven entirely for free online, alongside the games I put out and any other creative venture I’ve pursued over the years.

        That part is problematic not relevant.

      • JustEnoughDucks
        link
        fedilink
        English
        76 months ago

        Did he disclose an amount?

        5% to artists is very different than 40% to artists.

        Or is he adopting the Spotify bottom line?

        Only pay artists after X downloads and only pay a few cents after thousands of downloads and use the rest for profits

          • JustEnoughDucks
            link
            fedilink
            English
            06 months ago

            50% is quite decent and is 20% higher than most other “decent” services including physical stores. Building and keeping an app up to date with ever changing content requires at least a part time developer which is expensive.

            • @morrowind@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              46 months ago

              Well the baseline is that most wallpaper apps, which don’t pay artists afaik, charge like $5 a year, so if you’re gonna charge me 50, I expect 90% to go to artists

  • @FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    406 months 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.

    • A Wild Mimic appears!
      link
      fedilink
      English
      06 months ago

      I agree, although i DID spend 5€ on wallpaper engine and i am very happy with it. (just know that our chinese friends are using the steam workshop for WPE to upload/download porn because most porn sites are great-firewalled lol, so take care regarding your filter settings)

      • @FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        36 months ago

        I actually do have WPE… it was in a bundle one time, so I got it for free. Tried it once, but I’m conceptually not a fan of running extra software on my gaming PC to run fancy wallpapers.

        Supposedly it’s not TOO power hungry and can turn itself off when gaming. How’s your experience been with that?

        • A Wild Mimic appears!
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I’m currently running 2 displays at 1080p (one HDMI, one DP) on a 3070TI. Idle TDP with just plain color is 37-40W, 2 different scenes with features like audio reactivity and mouse input @15FPS are 55-60W. They get paused automatically when a window is maximized (per display), the secondary display pauses additionally when i run a fullscreen/borderless window on the main display.

          It is absolutely useless eye candy. I love it lol

          ETA: They DO have over 15000 curated wallpapers, if you stick to that you can avoid the questionable content easily. if you look at it from this perspective, that’s worth the price of a small meal.

    • @ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      206 months ago

      For the last 30 years, they’ve been trying to charge for dumb shit like wallpapers, screen savers, mouse cursors.

      Who are these people who buy them? And what’s wrong with you?

        • @jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          66 months ago

          Yeah, that was a cash cow for a few years and now everybody has their phone on vibrate.

        • @FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          8
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I still have PTSD from the era of the ‘polyphonic ringtone’ hype. Those were the ‘fancier’ ringtones that weren’t just your usual beep or bell.

          Usually you’d buy them by sending a text message to some expensive number and it would be sent to your phone. If you were dumb, you could get basically scammed into a ‘subscription’ so you’d get sent these expensive ringtones frequently. Many a teen got yelled at for that mistake in the late 90’s.

          If you were a tech savvy lad, you could hook your phone up to your Windows PC and upload shitty ringtones yourself as well as wallpapers and such.

          These days, who gives a shit? My iPhone ringtone is still the default ring. I honestly don’t care what it is, as it’s usually just annoying anyway.

        • @ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          36 months ago

          I remember watching the rich kid in middle school buy a ring tone right in front of me, flexing that his device could play a 12-second loop of Tubthumping by Chumbawamba.

          • @locuester@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            26 months ago

            Yeah, that rich kid Danny. He plays the songs that remind him of the good times and sings the songs that remind him of the better times. Oh Danny Boy, Danny Boy, Danny Boy

      • @BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        206 months ago

        When toy story came out, i saw this toy story pc game. I put all my money together just to then find out that it wasn’t a game, it was a cd rom with like 12 wallpapers on it.

  • FergusonBishop
    link
    fedilink
    English
    456 months 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.

    • @Toribor@corndog.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      316 months ago

      It’s kind of a paradox when you think about it. Good reviewers are often just regular people with a passion for tech but as they become more popular and prolific they become part of the industry itself. Once that happens even if they try to stay objective and critical their perspective is so different from regular people that reviews are just part of the sales and marketing strategy rather than pro tips from an enthusiast.

      • @LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        96 months ago

        Yeah, I imagine him getting shipped products over and over and then likely being paid to try them out and then paid to review them would dampen the authenticity. That said, I haven’t watched much of his content so I couldn’t tell you if he really was really bias or changed over time.

        • @overload@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          36 months ago

          He’s on the better side of tech reviewers IMO. I think sometimes he’s more focussed on describing what sets a product apart in the market, rather than judging whether that niche is worth filling or not.

          Definitely doesn’t feel scammy/overly ad driven.

  • @emax_gomax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    666 months 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
        86 months 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
        26 months 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
          96 months 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
      186 months 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.

  • dinckel
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1546 months 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

    • @Telodzrum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      86 months ago

      What? He’s in the pocket of all the major OEMs. He’s had zero credibility for years because of this, but he’s never been more deferential to Apple than he has been to Samsung or Google.

    • @Squizzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      326 months ago

      He is quite harsh on Apple for someone who gets exclusive access. In this video he is talking about how nothing has changed, barely considered an update and that the new things dont even come with the phone.

    • @TORFdot0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      96 months ago

      MKBD covers all major manufacturers at this point. Unless you want him to say that Apple sucks, don’t see what the complaint is?

  • @cley_faye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    236 months 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.

  • @franiis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    76 months ago

    I think I would like the idea (and at first this my understanding) if you could buy one wallpaper for $1 (or a pack of few for $3) and the 70-90% would go to the artist. Also app would have to limit tracking to just some basic stuff. I know you can get wallpapers free, but supporting something that looks great on your screen would be a nice option.

    Of course subscription service for this is mad.

  • @OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    146 months ago

    Wow I had no idea the subscription was that much. He mentioned it in a video without saying the price and I still wouldn’t do it.

  • @vxx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    456 months ago

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

    Who would pay for such thing?