What’s the catch? Paywall blocks the basics — reported by 36 users.
Analyzed automatically from 3 independent signals that had to agree — not a hands-on test, and not human-reviewed.
This analysis describes version 6.6.6 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 6.6.6, updated 2026-09-30.
What the analysis found
The catch list 1
Charges we publish at a strength we stand behind: measured from an artefact, agreed by independent sources, or reported by enough users to clear that charge's own published bar.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 2
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Paywall blocks the basics
Paywall — Used to be simple and fun, now everything is paid. Not worth a subscription.
Cute and fun, but… — I’ve had this app for literally so long and I actually quite like it!! I use it randomly when my friends and I hang out and play games or are debating where to eat. Today I went to use it and all of a sudden you have…
New paywall 🤢 — Used to be a great free simple tool. They decided to add unnecessary features and lock everything behind a paywall… moving on to another app.
Paywall with no way past it
Disappointed — I remember when this app was free. We used it all the time and then they had a paid option and that wasn’t so bad. But now you can’t even use the app at all without paying.
Everything is LOCKED UNTIL YOU PAY — I downloaded this app expecting to try it out, but you can’t even use the basic features without paying first. The advertising makes it seem like it’s free, but as soon as you open the app, you’re hit…
there’s literally no reason for this app to be unusable without a subscription — i’ve been using this app for about 2 years now and there hasn’t been a single ad or subscription mentioned but when i opened it today, i couldn’t use it…
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.