3 ms·

IMHO this part is where the nail is hit right on the head: >Why is AgileBits doing this? · For the same reason that Adobe has been pressuring its customers, fo

by jaclaz 9y ago

IMHO this part is where the nail is hit right on the head: >Why is AgileBits doing this? · For the same reason that Adobe has been pressuring its customers, for years now, to start subscribing to its product, rather than buying each successive version of each app. A subscription business is much nicer to operate than one where you have to go out and re-convince people to re-buy your software. It is the part (common to many other software vendors) where they stress the "I am doing this for your own good" that irks me. You want to change your business model? Fine. Do you believe that this new one is better? Fine. Do you want to convince me that you are changing the "old" model (which BTW you used until a nanosecond ago) becasue it is better for me? Hmmm.

tedmiston 9y ago
The new model is better for you if you want the company to make enough money to be able to support the product and put out new releases to fix bugs and vulnerabilities.
- AlexandrB 9y ago
  Why did the old model suddenly become unprofitable? If it's team bloat I'm not really sympathetic.
  - tedmiston 9y ago
    > "Today, over 95% of our revenues are coming from subscribers" https://blog.agilebits.com/2017/07/13/why-we-love-1password-memberships/ https://blog.agilebits.com/2017/07/13/why-we-love-1password-...
    - cat199 9y ago
      That doesn't explain why the old model became or didn't become unprofitable...
      - tedmiston 9y ago
        The parent comment was a loaded question that there was some sudden change. If the old model did good / better, they wouldn't have switched to a more profitable model. I believe it's well established in our industry that SaaS models are more profitable than one-time software sales. The analogy is equivalent to why Adobe switched Photoshop to a SaaS model and why Microsoft did the same for Office. Recurring revenue is king in the long run.
- jaclaz 9y ago
  Maybe, then they should say so, indirectly better for me. But bugs and vulnerabilities? On a years old, widely tested and used "static" (or almost "static" ) product? How many possible ones they are introducing by completely changing the tool to be on the "cloud"?
  - tedmiston 9y ago
    It's not a static product even if the feature set is relatively static. Take a look at their Mac app changelog for instance. https://app-updates.agilebits.com/product_history/OPM4 https://app-updates.agilebits.com/product_history/OPM4
  - heartbreak 9y ago
    1Password had vulnerabilities disclosed by Tavis Ormandy within the last year regarding the communication between the application and the browser extension. Those vulnerabilities were part of the so-called "static" product, and were not related to the new cloud functionality. [0] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=888 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=88...
    - jaclaz 9y ago
      Yes, I wasn't saying that the one had not bugs, all software may have some of them, I was only saying that the risks of introducing more, new ones when changing completely a software (or rewriting it) are bigger.

by jaclaz 9y ago

tedmiston 9y ago

The new model is better for you if you want the company to make enough money to be able to support the product and put out new releases to fix bugs and vulnerabilities.

AlexandrB 9y ago
Why did the old model suddenly become unprofitable? If it's team bloat I'm not really sympathetic.
- tedmiston 9y ago
  > "Today, over 95% of our revenues are coming from subscribers" https://blog.agilebits.com/2017/07/13/why-we-love-1password-memberships/ https://blog.agilebits.com/2017/07/13/why-we-love-1password-...
  - cat199 9y ago
    That doesn't explain why the old model became or didn't become unprofitable...
    - tedmiston 9y ago
      The parent comment was a loaded question that there was some sudden change. If the old model did good / better, they wouldn't have switched to a more profitable model. I believe it's well established in our industry that SaaS models are more profitable than one-time software sales. The analogy is equivalent to why Adobe switched Photoshop to a SaaS model and why Microsoft did the same for Office. Recurring revenue is king in the long run.
jaclaz 9y ago
Maybe, then they should say so, indirectly better for me. But bugs and vulnerabilities? On a years old, widely tested and used "static" (or almost "static" ) product? How many possible ones they are introducing by completely changing the tool to be on the "cloud"?
- tedmiston 9y ago
  It's not a static product even if the feature set is relatively static. Take a look at their Mac app changelog for instance. https://app-updates.agilebits.com/product_history/OPM4 https://app-updates.agilebits.com/product_history/OPM4
- heartbreak 9y ago
  1Password had vulnerabilities disclosed by Tavis Ormandy within the last year regarding the communication between the application and the browser extension. Those vulnerabilities were part of the so-called "static" product, and were not related to the new cloud functionality. [0] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=888 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/project-zero/issues/detail?id=88...
  - jaclaz 9y ago
    Yes, I wasn't saying that the one had not bugs, all software may have some of them, I was only saying that the risks of introducing more, new ones when changing completely a software (or rewriting it) are bigger.