Additional benefits to your proposal:
In Objective-C, the syntax makes it far more clear when you are leaving the âoepure Câ realm to do something object oriented. Even with glasses off and the screen blurry, if it looks like a function call, itâ(TM)s a procedural function call and not an OO method invocation.
The object model in Objective C is (subjectively) much more sane and (objectively) going to better align with the expectations of people coming from almost any other OO language other than C++.
Objective-C doesnâ(TM)t conflate structs with classes.
I suspect that $250 may have coming from looking at the "All the IDEs" price?
Used to be that JetBrains licensed each IDE separately. Then they shifted pricing models, where it's $50-150$ for one specific IDE and then $250 for two-or-more. Suboptimal if there are exactly two that you have cause to use, but handy if you already use more than two.
I mean, sure, but that applies to any software purchase - the seller can change the license after it's been agreed upon. But in either case, why would you agree to such new restrictions? Just keep operating under the original license.
I do understand that for ye standard phone-home-for-permission rental situation, new terms like that could be unilaterally enforced by not supplying the "permission granted" response. And, worse, that circumventing such actions could put you in violation of DMCA junk. Which is one of the reasons I don't participate in standard phone-home-for-permission rental situations.
In the unusual case of the Jetbrains perpetual license, however - I don't see any mechanism by which they could effectively require me to re-activate a subscription in order to continue using the product. I have an offline and archived download of the version of software for which I have the license. I have an offline copy of the license file needed to continue using the product. I have firewalls that can prevent unauthorized network communication (such as phoning home). Short of sending armed thugs to my house, I don't see what their options would be for requiring me to do anything before continuing to use the product.
If I wanted to upgrade to a new version, it could absolutely become an issue - new version, new rules. But again, that's a potential issue with any software license, whether sane or subscription.
(Also, for perspective: one of the use cases for which they adjusted the payment model was "I do long-term work at a remote research station without internet access and need all my software to be operable without a network for indefinite amounts of time, so cannot use any software that requires permission even if it's only once a year. Hard to enforce changed terms and requirements on someone like that!)
JetBrains has two versions for both their Python and Java IDEs - a paid "Pro" edition with a bunch of extra enterprisey stuff, and a free (gratis, and I think also Libre) "Community" edition. And it's not a "Pro=core features, Community=crippleware" situation either, but a "Community=core features, Pro=extra special-purpose features" one.
On a paper submitted by a physicist colleague: "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." -- Wolfgang Pauli