Iāve spent nearly two years contributing ideas in the forum, along with many other users, to improve the app, especially regarding the voices and fixing bugs. I understand that business is business, but not at the expense of ideas that mostly come from the community. Despite our contributions, the response has been an unjust price hike, making us feel like our input has been used against us. Additionally, with the current pricing, there are far more affordable, even free, alternatives. I get that business is business, but not at the cost of community-driven ideas. Iāve decided to remain active in the forum in a critical manner, without sharing any ideas that could further improve the app, until I see real changes.
As you know, the app has launched a premium plus version at an exorbitant price, and weāve been waiting for substantial improvements for years, especially in text handling, simplification, and text-to-speech features. They promised that after the summer, these frustrations would be resolved, but now it seems the solution comes at a steep cost. Iāve previously mention two free alternatives that cover what this new version offers, so Iād like to know what extra benefits the premium + version includes that we canāt get for free elsewhere
we already paid for simplify lessons, but the new policy doesnt allow anymore, you need to repay for what you deserve.
the same goes for transcript lessons.
I like lingq but ā¦ what is next? what about those who paid for a course forever?
Business usually works by satisfying customers. Lack of response on suggestions for the platform means I donāt suggest it seriously to people. Making users happy would normally be the way to make things work for the business too.
Sorry to hear youāre not happy.
I replaced LingQ with the free open source Lute (Learning with Texts) in which I take transcripts and Mp3ās from YouTube and put into Lute and can read and listen and create term lists. What I was paying for LingQ I am now trying Langua to practice speaking. I am now going to remove myself from this forum email list so I am no longer tempted to make anti LingQ posts. I appreciate all the support I received here while I was subscribed.
Thanks a lot for the comment about Lute. I had only seen it briefly in a video, and I have to say I was really impressed by how similar it looks to LingQ.
I also asked Grok to make a comparison between both programs, and this is what it came up with. From what Iāve checked myself, it seems accurate:
Advantages of Lute over LingQ
Free and open-source, no subscription costs
Highly customizable for tailored learning
Import any text for full content control
Saves words and phrases for review without vocab limits
Works offline once installed
Supports external TTS integration, like NaturalReader
Disadvantages of Lute compared to LingQ
No native mobile app, unlike LingQās mobile access
I posted an idea to improve the app in the forum, but honestly, I never received any response.
I felt like nobody was interested.
So Iāve just kept using it despite all the bugs, the unsupported voices, and so on.
As you mentioned, itās really not worth upgrading to such an expensive plan just for slightly better voices.
Because I can just listen on Audibleāthey offer 3 months free, and in some ways, itās a much cheaper alternative.
There are also plenty of completely free options, as you pointed out.
So, I donāt really see the value in LingQās newly released expensive option.
Ultimately, the focus should be on convenience and faster language improvement, but I believe that even if I buy it, my actual ability to acquire the language will remain the same.
Iāve only been using Lute for a week or so, but my thoughts on this: No mobile app is a big deal for most people, but not me, I have time to sit at my desk and use my desktop, I never used the LingQ mobile app. No auto integration: Here is the thing, LingQās auto integration, at least for for YouTube, for example does not work automatically as advertised. , you have use an MP3 converter and import the audio first, if you want the video, yo have to add that second. In Lute, I go to the same MP3 converter, then to a similar YouTube to transcript converter, and then itās simple to create the ābookā in Lute, Limited pre-loaded content: Right, there is none except some samples. Less intuitive interface: Maybe but not by much, itās an opinion. Lacks social features: No, there is an active discord for Lute. No built in tools for speaking or writing: correct. Although I never got around to trying those in LingQ myself. One negative about Lute for some people, it is a command line installation, and a command line to start it every time, so if you are not wanting to do that or have no tech ability, that might not be a go for some people. I created a simple script and desktop icon for myself, so it starts like any app.
If you use calibre to manage your books, you can also use the the Calibre content server to read books through the browser. And maybe in combination with other language learning browser extension it can become similar to having LingQ highlights.
ChatGPT is a very useful tool in that regard. In can guide people through the installation process, help with questions or issues that may occour and can write a bat for the starting process.
Iāve spent nearly two years contributing ideas in the forum, along with many other users, to improve the app, especially regarding the voices and fixing bugs. I understand that business is business, but not at the expense of ideas that mostly come from the community. Despite our contributions, the response has been an unjust price hike, making us feel like our input has been used against us. Additionally, with the current pricing, there are far more affordable, even free, alternatives. I get that business is business, but not at the cost of community-driven ideas. Iāve decided to remain active in the forum in a critical manner, without sharing any ideas that could further improve the app, until I see real changes.