5 ms·

"Greedy"? Software is something that needs to be continuously developed and maintained. Charging a one-time fee is a fundamentally unsustainable approach. We a

by jwr 9y ago

"Greedy"? Software is something that needs to be continuously developed and maintained. Charging a one-time fee is a fundamentally unsustainable approach. We all have to face reality and start paying for software as a subscription. Now, that will likely end the bubble of "I can buy 100 apps, most of which I'll never use", which we have been in for the last 20 years or so. But perhaps the few apps that people will pay for will become better as a result. I'm hoping for it.

sangnoir 9y ago
> Software is something that needs to be continuously developed and maintained. Not always. Sometimes software is "done" and warrants no further changes or maintenance. I have run into this issue with mobile apps that worked perfectly to my satisfaction until the authors decided to "redesign" or "improve" it. I think subscription is a valid use case for customers who want active maintenance, but it should be opt-in. I detest the forced-subscription model that JetBrains attempted ("Didn't pay the latest subscription? We'll brick the application you've installed and are running on your hardware").
- cdelsolar 9y ago
  Do they actually brick it? I thought they just stopped upgrading it.
  - sangnoir 9y ago
    Reposting links I added in another reply. Yes they announced the bricking plans (http://bytecrafter.blogspot.com/2015/09/how-jetbrains-lost-years-of-customer.html http://bytecrafter.blogspot.com/2015/09/how-jetbrains-lost-y...) and then backtracked (https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/18/final-update-on-the-jetbrains-toolbox-announcement/#more-7340 https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/18/final-update-on-t...) - which is why I said "attempted".
- FooBarWidget 9y ago
  Sometimes, sure. But nowadays software is more often than not something that isn't simply done and needs continuous updates, in the face of security vulnerabilities, changing requirements (people using the software for changing use cases), platform updates (new version of macOS or Linux that breaks compatibility), etc.
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  " I detest the forced-subscription model that JetBrains attempted ("Didn't pay the latest subscription? We'll brick the application you've installed and are running on your hardware")." They never attempted that. You were always able to use the version you paid for, even if you stopped your subscription.
  - sangnoir 9y ago
    > They never attempted that Oh, but they did[1]. You might have missed the initial drama as it transpired because of their quick U-turn (to their credit). I have reason to doubt the subscription plans they published which clearly stated that failure to keep up with the subscription would lead to bricked IDEs. JetBrains only backtracked[2] after receiving sustained pushback. There were HN posts for the initial bricking plan[3] and the backtrack[4]. 1. http://bytecrafter.blogspot.com/2015/09/how-jetbrains-lost-years-of-customer.html http://bytecrafter.blogspot.com/2015/09/how-jetbrains-lost-y... 2. https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/18/final-update-on-the-jetbrains-toolbox-announcement/#more-7340 https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/18/final-update-on-t... 3. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10170089 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10170089 4. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10278285 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10278285
qrbLPHiKpiux 9y ago
The public does not give two shats what it costs you. In thier eyes they want it faster cheaper better.
scaryclam 9y ago
Quite honestly, I don't mind paying a subscription for updates. But I detest having to pay a subscription when all I want is a single copy and don't require rolling updates and support. Charging a one time fee works just fine for lots of folks out there making software. It's especially good for anyone who's doing it in their spare time as they don't have to provide updates for every little niggle someone may find. Some offer a subscription alongside the one-off model, which is the best of both worlds if the developer(s) are continuously working on it. Others ask you to purchase the major upgrades but give minor upgrades for free. There are lots of payment models out there, and the developers should pick what works for both them and their customers. There's no way most of my colleagues who have a license would have purchased sublime if it was a rolling cost, so that model seems to be working in their favor right now, at least for single developer purchases.

by jwr 9y ago

sangnoir 9y ago

> Software is something that needs to be continuously developed and maintained. Not always. Sometimes software is "done" and warrants no further changes or maintenance. I have run into this issue with mobile apps that worked perfectly to my satisfaction until the authors decided to "redesign" or "improve" it. I think subscription is a valid use case for customers who want active maintenance, but it should be opt-in. I detest the forced-subscription model that JetBrains attempted ("Didn't pay the latest subscription? We'll brick the application you've installed and are running on your hardware").

cdelsolar 9y ago
Do they actually brick it? I thought they just stopped upgrading it.
- sangnoir 9y ago
  Reposting links I added in another reply. Yes they announced the bricking plans (http://bytecrafter.blogspot.com/2015/09/how-jetbrains-lost-years-of-customer.html http://bytecrafter.blogspot.com/2015/09/how-jetbrains-lost-y...) and then backtracked (https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/18/final-update-on-the-jetbrains-toolbox-announcement/#more-7340 https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/18/final-update-on-t...) - which is why I said "attempted".
FooBarWidget 9y ago
Sometimes, sure. But nowadays software is more often than not something that isn't simply done and needs continuous updates, in the face of security vulnerabilities, changing requirements (people using the software for changing use cases), platform updates (new version of macOS or Linux that breaks compatibility), etc.
s73ver_ 9y ago
" I detest the forced-subscription model that JetBrains attempted ("Didn't pay the latest subscription? We'll brick the application you've installed and are running on your hardware")." They never attempted that. You were always able to use the version you paid for, even if you stopped your subscription.
- sangnoir 9y ago
  > They never attempted that Oh, but they did[1]. You might have missed the initial drama as it transpired because of their quick U-turn (to their credit). I have reason to doubt the subscription plans they published which clearly stated that failure to keep up with the subscription would lead to bricked IDEs. JetBrains only backtracked[2] after receiving sustained pushback. There were HN posts for the initial bricking plan[3] and the backtrack[4]. 1. http://bytecrafter.blogspot.com/2015/09/how-jetbrains-lost-years-of-customer.html http://bytecrafter.blogspot.com/2015/09/how-jetbrains-lost-y... 2. https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/18/final-update-on-the-jetbrains-toolbox-announcement/#more-7340 https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/18/final-update-on-t... 3. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10170089 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10170089 4. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10278285 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10278285

qrbLPHiKpiux 9y ago

The public does not give two shats what it costs you. In thier eyes they want it faster cheaper better.

scaryclam 9y ago

Quite honestly, I don't mind paying a subscription for updates. But I detest having to pay a subscription when all I want is a single copy and don't require rolling updates and support. Charging a one time fee works just fine for lots of folks out there making software. It's especially good for anyone who's doing it in their spare time as they don't have to provide updates for every little niggle someone may find. Some offer a subscription alongside the one-off model, which is the best of both worlds if the developer(s) are continuously working on it. Others ask you to purchase the major upgrades but give minor upgrades for free. There are lots of payment models out there, and the developers should pick what works for both them and their customers. There's no way most of my colleagues who have a license would have purchased sublime if it was a rolling cost, so that model seems to be working in their favor right now, at least for single developer purchases.