3 ms·

Paying once for a service doesn't sit right with me, it may not be rational but I feel that I can't trust that it will stick around. I'd rather pay a smaller mo

by hnarn 6y ago

Paying once for a service doesn't sit right with me, it may not be rational but I feel that I can't trust that it will stick around. I'd rather pay a smaller monthly fee to keep the lights on, than a one time fee and constantly fear I might just be cut off one day. And even if it's not technically a service, but say some closed source software or whatever, the same idea still applies for future bug fixes and maintenance, at least in my mind. At least for anything semi-critical.

StavrosK 6y ago
This is true, and I would normally make it a yearly subscription, but this is https://www.deadmansswitch.net/ https://www.deadmansswitch.net/, where you leave messages to send to your loved ones after you die, and I didn't want people to have their messages lost because they're too old/unable to renew a credit card or something similar.
- hnarn 6y ago
  That's definitely one of the situations where it does make sense.
- ecpottinger 6y ago
  Interesting service.
cgriswald 6y ago
I would rather pay 1.2 * $X now than $X/months per month over the lifetime of a product. It's not about the money for me, it's about having a fixed cost rather than an indefinitely recurring one that I have to continually decide if it is still giving me $X/mo in value and remember to cancel when I'm done. It's also about the sense of ownership I get over the product versus "this is something I'm renting" which, for me, is a big deal. I get that it is difficult to price in the cost of bug-fixes, but I consider that not my problem. That said, support as a subscription (or alternatively, pay-per-issue) is totally fine by me. I'm also fine if new features are added to Version 2, and I later have to decide whether to upgrade or not. And although it is not about the money for me, it frequently does pay off. I usually opt for the longest recurring subscription (if lifetime is not available) which usually has steep discounts and in the case of my XM radio... still enjoying that lifetime subscription.

by hnarn 6y ago

StavrosK 6y ago

This is true, and I would normally make it a yearly subscription, but this is https://www.deadmansswitch.net/ https://www.deadmansswitch.net/, where you leave messages to send to your loved ones after you die, and I didn't want people to have their messages lost because they're too old/unable to renew a credit card or something similar.

hnarn 6y ago
That's definitely one of the situations where it does make sense.
ecpottinger 6y ago
Interesting service.

cgriswald 6y ago

I would rather pay 1.2 * $X now than $X/months per month over the lifetime of a product. It's not about the money for me, it's about having a fixed cost rather than an indefinitely recurring one that I have to continually decide if it is still giving me $X/mo in value and remember to cancel when I'm done. It's also about the sense of ownership I get over the product versus "this is something I'm renting" which, for me, is a big deal. I get that it is difficult to price in the cost of bug-fixes, but I consider that not my problem. That said, support as a subscription (or alternatively, pay-per-issue) is totally fine by me. I'm also fine if new features are added to Version 2, and I later have to decide whether to upgrade or not. And although it is not about the money for me, it frequently does pay off. I usually opt for the longest recurring subscription (if lifetime is not available) which usually has steep discounts and in the case of my XM radio... still enjoying that lifetime subscription.