3 ms·

I had to read this very carefully to determine if it was parody or not. This seems just like the old system of selling software. Get a free demo, sell the actua

I had to read this very carefully to determine if it was parody or not. This seems just like the old system of selling software. Get a free demo, sell the actual software, 12 months later add more features rinse and repeat. There will always be hold outs content with their feature set but there will always be people on the leading edge and it all balances out but this doesn't seem like anything particularly new or novel.

albertgoeswoof 8y ago
Yea this is the way a lot of enterprise software has been sold for decades... especially useful if there's a cost to the software company for delivering upgrades (e.g. shipping CDs and installing it), you only have to support for 12 months and after that you're off the hook, if the client doesn't pay up.
danpalmer 8y ago
In this model the user continues to get bug fixes (and likely new OS support) even after their licence expires.
- nodamage 8y ago
  Bug fixes make sense, but I wonder if it is reasonable to expect/provide perpetual OS support based on a single purchase?
  - JumpCrisscross 8y ago
    How does one differentiate fixes and feature? For example, suppose a new TLS standard is adopted. This requires work to implement. Is the change a fix or an upgrade? Will the team be indefinitely required to issue updates to the old TLS? I like the agenda-pricing concept. But it feels like a poor-man’s compromise for a subscription. Why not permit downloads of an executable any time a sub is valid?
    - jarfil 8y ago
      Easy: what's the feature you're selling? Is it "TLS 1.0" or "secure connections"?
cortesoft 8y ago
The key difference is that it is NOT a twelve month cycle of adding features. The features are added throughout the year, and you get one year's worth of new features from whenever you buy it. This helps with two things; one, you don't have to have all the new features released at once. You can release them as you go, and people (who paid) will get them as you release them. Second, it stops the timing issues that you have with the traditional once-a-year upgrade. If you are a consumer, you don't want to buy the previous version if the new version is coming out soon. And as a seller, it means all of your sales are packed into right after you release the new version. This seems like a good way to smooth out that cycle, for both buyers and sellers.
megaman22 8y ago
Yeah, maybe I'm old, but this just seems like how enterprise software is sold. We've been doing it this way forever.

albertgoeswoof 8y ago

Yea this is the way a lot of enterprise software has been sold for decades... especially useful if there's a cost to the software company for delivering upgrades (e.g. shipping CDs and installing it), you only have to support for 12 months and after that you're off the hook, if the client doesn't pay up.

danpalmer 8y ago

In this model the user continues to get bug fixes (and likely new OS support) even after their licence expires.

nodamage 8y ago
Bug fixes make sense, but I wonder if it is reasonable to expect/provide perpetual OS support based on a single purchase?
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  How does one differentiate fixes and feature? For example, suppose a new TLS standard is adopted. This requires work to implement. Is the change a fix or an upgrade? Will the team be indefinitely required to issue updates to the old TLS? I like the agenda-pricing concept. But it feels like a poor-man’s compromise for a subscription. Why not permit downloads of an executable any time a sub is valid?
  - jarfil 8y ago
    Easy: what's the feature you're selling? Is it "TLS 1.0" or "secure connections"?

cortesoft 8y ago

The key difference is that it is NOT a twelve month cycle of adding features. The features are added throughout the year, and you get one year's worth of new features from whenever you buy it. This helps with two things; one, you don't have to have all the new features released at once. You can release them as you go, and people (who paid) will get them as you release them. Second, it stops the timing issues that you have with the traditional once-a-year upgrade. If you are a consumer, you don't want to buy the previous version if the new version is coming out soon. And as a seller, it means all of your sales are packed into right after you release the new version. This seems like a good way to smooth out that cycle, for both buyers and sellers.

megaman22 8y ago

Yeah, maybe I'm old, but this just seems like how enterprise software is sold. We've been doing it this way forever.