5 ms·

Because it strips away your right to "own" software. Transmit 4 still works, and I can choose to pay for an upgrade if I wanted to. Transmit 5 is faster, nicer

Because it strips away your right to "own" software. Transmit 4 still works, and I can choose to pay for an upgrade if I wanted to. Transmit 5 is faster, nicer looking, and has more features, but I don't suddenly lose access to Transmit 4 by not upgrading. Charge me and upgrade fee and make versions, don't do a subscription.

tehwebguy 9y ago
So does Transmit 3, which I still use when appropriate!
sushisource 9y ago
Generally speaking subscription software that isn't SaaS doesn't lock you out when it's over. It just locks you out of updates.
- zippergz 9y ago
  Not true of two big (and expensive) ones I use: Adobe and Autocad. I used to upgrade every couple of versions. This has ended up costing me way more. But I still pay it because I need the software. So I guess they win...
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    Another way to look at it is that they were going to raise the cost anyways, at least now you get updates when they're production ready instead of every two years.
    - scott_karana 9y ago
      Bug fixes always came out immediately for "major version" standalone license software. There's 0 technical correlation between update delivery model and billing model.
      - Consultant32452 9y ago
        But we're not just talking about bug fixes, we're talking about "major version" releases also.
        scott_karana 9y ago
        Buying a product once and expecting subsequent updates is greedy, and I didn't see anyone suggesting that. I don't think that really applies to the thread here, honestly. :/
        Consultant32452 9y ago
        This is the post I originally responded to: >I used to upgrade every couple of versions. This has ended up costing me way more. But I still pay it because I need the software. So I guess they win... So my post makes perfect sense. They were going to raise the price on you anyways, so you were going to pay more either way. With the new pricing model you're paying more and getting versions you might have otherwise missed.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
appleiigs 9y ago
> Transmit 5 is faster, nicer looking, and has more features. That's refreshing... more often than not, latest versions are slower, uglier, and bloated. One more reason to be able to own the previous version.
danudey 9y ago
In fairness, a lot of "digital distribution platforms" or online services do this as well. Prime examples I've seen: Google closing someone's account for using not their real legal name on Google+, locking away access to his music, documents, e-mail, and photos, all of which he'd migrated to his Google account. Steam closing someone's account and basically cancelling a thousand dollars of "purchased" games because he broke their ToS, which makes you wonder what the difference is between purchasing and purchasing (via Steam) when the price is the same but your recourse is not.
nkristoffersen 9y ago
You generally don't "own" any software anyway. If you read the terms of use/service, you'll probably see it is simply a license from the actual owner. (this is the same with movies and music btw)

tehwebguy 9y ago

So does Transmit 3, which I still use when appropriate!

sushisource 9y ago

Generally speaking subscription software that isn't SaaS doesn't lock you out when it's over. It just locks you out of updates.

zippergz 9y ago
Not true of two big (and expensive) ones I use: Adobe and Autocad. I used to upgrade every couple of versions. This has ended up costing me way more. But I still pay it because I need the software. So I guess they win...
- Consultant32452 9y ago
  Another way to look at it is that they were going to raise the cost anyways, at least now you get updates when they're production ready instead of every two years.
  - scott_karana 9y ago
    Bug fixes always came out immediately for "major version" standalone license software. There's 0 technical correlation between update delivery model and billing model.
    - Consultant32452 9y ago
      But we're not just talking about bug fixes, we're talking about "major version" releases also.
      - scott_karana 9y ago
        Buying a product once and expecting subsequent updates is greedy, and I didn't see anyone suggesting that. I don't think that really applies to the thread here, honestly. :/
        Consultant32452 9y ago
        This is the post I originally responded to: >I used to upgrade every couple of versions. This has ended up costing me way more. But I still pay it because I need the software. So I guess they win... So my post makes perfect sense. They were going to raise the price on you anyways, so you were going to pay more either way. With the new pricing model you're paying more and getting versions you might have otherwise missed.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

appleiigs 9y ago

> Transmit 5 is faster, nicer looking, and has more features. That's refreshing... more often than not, latest versions are slower, uglier, and bloated. One more reason to be able to own the previous version.

danudey 9y ago

In fairness, a lot of "digital distribution platforms" or online services do this as well. Prime examples I've seen: Google closing someone's account for using not their real legal name on Google+, locking away access to his music, documents, e-mail, and photos, all of which he'd migrated to his Google account. Steam closing someone's account and basically cancelling a thousand dollars of "purchased" games because he broke their ToS, which makes you wonder what the difference is between purchasing and purchasing (via Steam) when the price is the same but your recourse is not.

nkristoffersen 9y ago

You generally don't "own" any software anyway. If you read the terms of use/service, you'll probably see it is simply a license from the actual owner. (this is the same with movies and music btw)