4 ms·

This is a bit naive. Software and especially apps these days are more a stream of updates (like Netflix) than a v1.0 you buy once. Updates are expected from use

by WA 7y ago

This is a bit naive. Software and especially apps these days are more a stream of updates (like Netflix) than a v1.0 you buy once. Updates are expected from users (and app stores). Example: A customer bought your app on iOS 9. It worked perfectly fine. You wrote it once, because you couldn’t expect more revenue from existing customers. It stopped working on iOS 11, because 32-bit support was ended on Apple’s side. Of course, it’s not Apple who gets the blame, it’s you, because your app doesn’t work anymore. But it is supposed to work, because your customer paid good money for it ($4.99). Back in the day, sure, if you bought a software that worked on MS-DOS only, it’s your fault when you got Windows and it didn’t run your software. No expectations, no hard feelings. But iOS is iOS. It’s the thing running average Joe’s smartphones. Software bought for iOS should work on iOS. Forever. Your examples all describe products with an expected expiration date. Software used to have expiration dates. But not anymore. The expectation changed.

lonelappde 7y ago
What's wrong with charging for upgrades? I buy a computer with Mac 9 and some programs, and when I want Mac 10. I buy upgrades.
- Silhouette 7y ago
  What's wrong with charging for upgrades? I hear the big downside is that you have to offer enough improvement over the previous version for your customer to be willing to pay for them. That's just crazy talk!
- WA 7y ago
  Is that true? I bet you wouldn’t – or most people wouldn’t. The OS for them is an intangible thing. Your app/software is what gets the blame if it doesn’t work in a new environment. No way average Joe pays again for the same product he bought before, just because he now as Mac 10 now instead of 9.
Silhouette 7y ago
Software bought for iOS should work on iOS. Forever. What you're glossing over here is that for literally decades, that was a pretty good baseline assumption, because we actually valued backward compatibility. The lengths that Microsoft went to in order to maintain that compatibility in the first several major releases of Windows are legendary. The lengths that Linux developers still go to are also remarkable. It's only in the crazy new world of X-as-a-service and not even controlling the OS on your own devices that anyone thinks deliberately breaking stuff every few years to force the upgrade treadmill is a good thing. And the people who think that are largely the ones who also see you as nothing but a data point in a revenue maximisation model, not the actual users. Ask yourself this: Have you ever met anyone who isn't a software developer who told you joyously about how much they appreciate the endless stream of updates that everything they buy now gets? I haven't. But I have lost track of how many friends and family have bemoaned things being changed that they didn't want, older devices that seemed to be working perfectly well but then got broken by some software update, some service they depend on being broken or switched off, some content on a service they pay for being removed or blocked unless they pay more, etc. This is not progress. This is a failure of regulation, the triumph of capitalist free markets in consolidating so much power in so few places that competition is no longer an effective protector of the customer's best interests.
- yoz-y 7y ago
  Windows has great backwards compatibility but at the cost of acxumulating legendary amount of cruft. It also means that if you develop new entreprise software you have to use ancient frameworks. On Linux retrocompatibility is handled at the source code level. So stuff will work as long as you are ready to compile your own old versions of all libs in a chroot somewhere. Trying to run even a few months old binary will often fail. Mac is similar to Linux but the burden of recompiling is on the developers. Many applications ship an old version that you can run on some Eldritch version of macos. If you introduce a cloud component everything breaks unless you are ready to support multiple versions of your DB. No wonder so many entreprise devs fled to evergreen web apps. Retrocompatibility was a given because it was relatively easy.
- WA 7y ago
  Fair enough. There’s obviously software that goes back decades and we all benefit from the great backwards compatibility of MS or Linux. But: How useful is your copy of Windows 98 these days? Can you collaborate with others with your copy of Photoshop 5.0 or Office 2003? Can you easily install Quake I on a modern machine without hassle? > Ask yourself this... It depends. I see your point and you are right to a certain extend. But then I see lots of people asking for new features or are glad about new capabilities the app now offers. I’d say it depends a lot on the type of software. > competition is no longer an effective protector of the customer's best interests. Why? You still get to buy some software or use your iPhone 3GS. It’s just a security thing. Or did you expect free updates to your OS? The buy-once-use-forever software doesn’t really work, because software is rarely isolated like some Linux CLI tools from the 80s. You need to have security updates or collaborate with people by sharing files. Someone wantsnew features and change, others don’t. At least under the new model, you get to use software for a low price if you don’t use it that much (Adobe cloud is what, 10 bucks a month compares to 600 upfront?).

by WA 7y ago

lonelappde 7y ago

What's wrong with charging for upgrades? I buy a computer with Mac 9 and some programs, and when I want Mac 10. I buy upgrades.

Silhouette 7y ago
What's wrong with charging for upgrades? I hear the big downside is that you have to offer enough improvement over the previous version for your customer to be willing to pay for them. That's just crazy talk!
WA 7y ago
Is that true? I bet you wouldn’t – or most people wouldn’t. The OS for them is an intangible thing. Your app/software is what gets the blame if it doesn’t work in a new environment. No way average Joe pays again for the same product he bought before, just because he now as Mac 10 now instead of 9.

Silhouette 7y ago

Software bought for iOS should work on iOS. Forever. What you're glossing over here is that for literally decades, that was a pretty good baseline assumption, because we actually valued backward compatibility. The lengths that Microsoft went to in order to maintain that compatibility in the first several major releases of Windows are legendary. The lengths that Linux developers still go to are also remarkable. It's only in the crazy new world of X-as-a-service and not even controlling the OS on your own devices that anyone thinks deliberately breaking stuff every few years to force the upgrade treadmill is a good thing. And the people who think that are largely the ones who also see you as nothing but a data point in a revenue maximisation model, not the actual users. Ask yourself this: Have you ever met anyone who isn't a software developer who told you joyously about how much they appreciate the endless stream of updates that everything they buy now gets? I haven't. But I have lost track of how many friends and family have bemoaned things being changed that they didn't want, older devices that seemed to be working perfectly well but then got broken by some software update, some service they depend on being broken or switched off, some content on a service they pay for being removed or blocked unless they pay more, etc. This is not progress. This is a failure of regulation, the triumph of capitalist free markets in consolidating so much power in so few places that competition is no longer an effective protector of the customer's best interests.

yoz-y 7y ago
Windows has great backwards compatibility but at the cost of acxumulating legendary amount of cruft. It also means that if you develop new entreprise software you have to use ancient frameworks. On Linux retrocompatibility is handled at the source code level. So stuff will work as long as you are ready to compile your own old versions of all libs in a chroot somewhere. Trying to run even a few months old binary will often fail. Mac is similar to Linux but the burden of recompiling is on the developers. Many applications ship an old version that you can run on some Eldritch version of macos. If you introduce a cloud component everything breaks unless you are ready to support multiple versions of your DB. No wonder so many entreprise devs fled to evergreen web apps. Retrocompatibility was a given because it was relatively easy.
WA 7y ago
Fair enough. There’s obviously software that goes back decades and we all benefit from the great backwards compatibility of MS or Linux. But: How useful is your copy of Windows 98 these days? Can you collaborate with others with your copy of Photoshop 5.0 or Office 2003? Can you easily install Quake I on a modern machine without hassle? > Ask yourself this... It depends. I see your point and you are right to a certain extend. But then I see lots of people asking for new features or are glad about new capabilities the app now offers. I’d say it depends a lot on the type of software. > competition is no longer an effective protector of the customer's best interests. Why? You still get to buy some software or use your iPhone 3GS. It’s just a security thing. Or did you expect free updates to your OS? The buy-once-use-forever software doesn’t really work, because software is rarely isolated like some Linux CLI tools from the 80s. You need to have security updates or collaborate with people by sharing files. Someone wantsnew features and change, others don’t. At least under the new model, you get to use software for a low price if you don’t use it that much (Adobe cloud is what, 10 bucks a month compares to 600 upfront?).