Lifecraft
Lifecraft
2.3.2

2.5

Lifecraft free download for Mac

Lifecraft

2.3.2
29 July 2019

Journal and life manager.

Overview

Lifecraft is a fun and engaging journal. Use it to tell your story, capture your thoughts, and discover your dreams. Lifecraft works its magic by encouraging you to self-reflect and focus on your life. In short, Lifecraft will help you reinvent yourself, conquer your setbacks, leap tall buildings in a single bound, and live boldly!

What's new in Lifecraft

Version 2.3.2:
  • The Share Extension for clipping text, photos and URLs from other apps is now available

Join over 500,000 subscribers.

Subscribe for our newsletter with best Mac offers from MacUpdate.

3 Lifecraft Reviews

Rate this app:

Jimw
25 August 2017

Most helpful

This is a subscription based product that costs $15/yr. and uses iCloud to sync platforms. Given it also handles photos the potential for requiring more iCloud space is present as photos can take up a lot of space. Developers claim that a subscription model is the only way developers can make money and reduces bloatware and they need this model due to the need to release bug fixes and updates. Like most other developers that use subscription models, the actual cost of the product requires research on their website to find it instead of being upfront about it in the description and features page that the website lands you on. Additionally their is no information regarding subscription price increases for existing customers in the future. As such their is no reason that the developer cannot double or triple the price of the subscription to existing customers a few years down the road after they have committed years of data to it. So before purchase, potential buyers need to ask themselves, Is the app useful enough that would you be still willing to continue with a subscription if the cost doubled or tripled 3 years from now? My opinion differs as I am of the opinion that if a developer charged a fair price for an app after spending the time, money, and effort to do a proper QA before release, their would be little need to release constant bug fixes and patches. Additionally a released product should be self sustaining to the point of continuing to attract new customers for its features if it is worth its cost. The developer claims that no data will be lost if a subscription is not renewed. However some functionality will be. So if you paid for a subscription to get this functionality and the company goes out of business or sunsets the App, you then lose that functionality which may be why you paid for the product in the first place. If you feel I am overly concerned about this, ask yourself just how many companies that released less than 5 products are around after 10 years? One of the critical factors in such a subscription model is how easy it is to export the data into a popular format in order to migrate to a different app if the company goes under or you become dissatisfied with the product. That factor does not seem to be addressed anywhere on their website. When faced with subscription models the above comment contains many of the issues that concern me about such paradigms. I believe that when entering into such a contract, a prospective customer should be made aware of all these concerns up front so that they can make a fully informed decision. My perspective on subscription based software is that they may benefit the developer by insuring a continuing revenue stream whether or not the developer enhances, fixes, the product or provides support, their is little benefit to the customer from this business model. Supporters of such a product need to ask themselves: would you purchase a mop that required you to pay a fee for a new mop head every month you owned it for the rest of your life in order to to clean your floors with it, and if you didn't, given that the mop head disintegrates after 45 days, would you be satisfied by just owning the handle?
Like (1)
Version 1.0.6
Dmitriusa
13 January 2019
so, again (and again) - why is this listed as FREE? This BS by MacUpdate has to stop somehow. If there is ANY price on an app - it has to say so, before we download it and get disappointed to find out we do have to pay to use it.
Like (1)
Version 2.0.3
2 answer(s)
Gazman
Gazman
28 January 2019
My understanding is that the basic functionality of the app will work without a subscription (i.e. for FREE), the 'Pro' features are unlocked with one.
Like
Jimw
Jimw
07 February 2019
Only the paid version will allow syncing across multiple devices.
Like
Gazman
27 August 2017
I'm a long-time journaler. Prior to viJournal shutting down I journaled in that, pretty much daily, for over 8 years. Since it's untimely demise, I've struggled to find a journalling app that fits my usage as well. Even though I own outright several competing journal applications (Day One, MacJournal, Capture 365), at the moment my loyalties are divided between two subscription-based services - this app (Lifecraft) and Dyrii. Dyrii has many useful features, such as templates, that I find useful. However, for simply sitting down and writing about my day, I'm increasingly finding myself using Lifecraft. As for the subscription model, I could use this software for four years for the same price that I paid for Day One on all my devices. And the thing is, Day One, at least on the Mac, has a terrible UI for just writing. From memory, Lifecraft has many features that can be used without a subscription, so give it a go. All of your entries can be exported as rich text documents if, after a while, you find you no longer want to use it.
Like
Version 1.0.6
1 answer(s)
Filou53
Filou53
25 July 2019
Hi Gazman.
Did you test the import from Day One to Lifecraft ?
It's a must for me.
Thanks in advance
Like
Jimw
25 August 2017
This is a subscription based product that costs $15/yr. and uses iCloud to sync platforms. Given it also handles photos the potential for requiring more iCloud space is present as photos can take up a lot of space. Developers claim that a subscription model is the only way developers can make money and reduces bloatware and they need this model due to the need to release bug fixes and updates. Like most other developers that use subscription models, the actual cost of the product requires research on their website to find it instead of being upfront about it in the description and features page that the website lands you on. Additionally their is no information regarding subscription price increases for existing customers in the future. As such their is no reason that the developer cannot double or triple the price of the subscription to existing customers a few years down the road after they have committed years of data to it. So before purchase, potential buyers need to ask themselves, Is the app useful enough that would you be still willing to continue with a subscription if the cost doubled or tripled 3 years from now? My opinion differs as I am of the opinion that if a developer charged a fair price for an app after spending the time, money, and effort to do a proper QA before release, their would be little need to release constant bug fixes and patches. Additionally a released product should be self sustaining to the point of continuing to attract new customers for its features if it is worth its cost. The developer claims that no data will be lost if a subscription is not renewed. However some functionality will be. So if you paid for a subscription to get this functionality and the company goes out of business or sunsets the App, you then lose that functionality which may be why you paid for the product in the first place. If you feel I am overly concerned about this, ask yourself just how many companies that released less than 5 products are around after 10 years? One of the critical factors in such a subscription model is how easy it is to export the data into a popular format in order to migrate to a different app if the company goes under or you become dissatisfied with the product. That factor does not seem to be addressed anywhere on their website. When faced with subscription models the above comment contains many of the issues that concern me about such paradigms. I believe that when entering into such a contract, a prospective customer should be made aware of all these concerns up front so that they can make a fully informed decision. My perspective on subscription based software is that they may benefit the developer by insuring a continuing revenue stream whether or not the developer enhances, fixes, the product or provides support, their is little benefit to the customer from this business model. Supporters of such a product need to ask themselves: would you purchase a mop that required you to pay a fee for a new mop head every month you owned it for the rest of your life in order to to clean your floors with it, and if you didn't, given that the mop head disintegrates after 45 days, would you be satisfied by just owning the handle?
Like (1)
Version 1.0.6
2 answer(s)
Gazman
Gazman
27 August 2017
I'm the opposite. I'm actually much more likely to put my faith into a developer who offers a subscription service because they're more likely to keep updates coming to keep their users subscribing. I was caught out when a journaling app I used for years, viJournal, shutdown with no notice.

From a developer's point of view I completely get the subscription model. Apple brings out a new OS every year, often with changes to the underlying frameworks and/or UI, forcing developers to update their apps on a regular basis. Apple can get away with providing this constant development for 'free' in the hope that it drives hardware sales. Software developers, on the other hand, have only the one source of income. Even the biggest developers, in terms of Microsoft and Adobe, have turned to subscription-based models because in today's market it's the one that leads towards the most longevity.

However, subscription-based models need to be fair. I was a long-term subscriber to Evernote. but after their recent price gouge I've migrated years worth of notes over to Bear. Bear isn't a complete Evernote replacement, but it's the best I've found so far.
Like
Jimw
Jimw
27 August 2017
What you say is correct - in theory, but in the real world, as you have already experienced, there is little protection for the customer. With a purchased (no subscription) product, if the app is sun-setted or the developer just abandons it, the customer still has a fully operational product so long as it stays compatible with the OS that they are running, Should it become incompatible, the customer still has the option of booting from a compatible OS and continue to use it or possibly migrate ALL the data to another app. With a subscription paradigm, such data is at greater risk in a similar situation. If the developer jacks up the subscription price, the user may have to pay it at least once to retrieve their data. It this scenario, subscription based software mimics ransomware. If it gets abandoned, the user faces the possibly of losing all of their data. If data storage is not involved, such as a word processor the customer may no longer be able to access their documents or convert them aside from the fact that they have invested a large amount of money in the subscription to the app and now have to start from scratch and buy a different one all over again.

My point is that while I agree that a subscription paradigm is great for the developer it has little benefit for the customer as the only protection the customer has is to hope that the developer has integrity and does not take advantage of the paradigm.

You are correct about the large companies you mention, all of which have a reputation of squeezing as much profit out of the customer as they possibly can. A subscription paradigm gives them a greater opportunity to do that.

If an independent poll were taken to determine the attitude of subscription based paradigms from the non-enterprise customers perspective, it would be very interesting to see what percentage of customers would agree that a subscription based paradigm benefits the customer..
Like