3 ms·
Its not huge price jump for everyone. Its just different pricing model. Companies pay per user instead of ranges like; 1-100 user, 100-500 user, 500-1000 user.
by gressquel 9y ago
Its not huge price jump for everyone.
Its just different pricing model. Companies pay per user instead of ranges like; 1-100 user, 100-500 user, 500-1000 user.
So with the old model if you had 101 user, you would pay the same price as someone with 499 users. Thats unfair.
- crb002 9y agoMassive problem in Fortune 500s. If they have to Atlassian, Git, and Microsoft ecosystems then bean counters cut off access to large sections of the company. Programmers are then siloed away from the rest of the organization. There needs to be a casual read access tier.
- TeMPOraL 9y agoOh yes, per-seat licensing can be a huge problem. I experienced a case in which a customer, for which most of the projects of our company were done, was requiring us to use a particular tool with paid licenses. They provided 2 or 3 floating licenses for the entire team of 30+ people, making that tool a huge bottleneck for us. They kept arguing that licenses are like 1k EUR each, but I don't think they ever realized they were wasting more money each month by slowing our work down.
- strictnein 9y agoIt's $1 a month per user after 250 users. If that's not "casual read access tier" pricing, I'm not sure what is.
- joemaller1 9y agoIf you've got 250 users, you've probably got someone to manage these costs too. If you've got 12-40 users and much tighter operating budgets, read-only users get kind of costly.
- pbreit 9y agoA $1/month service is not a "massive" problem for anyone.