4 ms·
> Wrapping perfectly-functional-locally devices with a "cloud service" in order to maintain control needs to be reigned in. The cricut argument here of "[the cl
by curryst 6y ago
> Wrapping perfectly-functional-locally devices with a "cloud service" in order to maintain control needs to be reigned in. The cricut argument here of "[the cloud is needed to] optimize the design and the cutting instructions" is a problem of their own making.
Yeah, this is why it "prior to now had been free". They were basically packaging unlimited uploads into the hardware (which is almost universally a stupid idea). They did bring this on themselves.
I'm curious why the opted for cloud optimization. Is it too hardware intensive for their target audience? My CAD software doesn't struggle too hard unless there are a ton of polygons, but my desktop is probably specced more than the average consumer.
> Of course it was "free"; the thing had already been paid for. This is about as ridiculous as Samsung charging me a subscription fee for unlimited watch-time on my TV, which previously was free, or Apple requiring a subscription for the unlimited use of my Macbook.
Here's the thing, though. It costs Samsung nothing for you to watch TV (they actually might make money if you watch more ads). Likewise, it costs Apple nothing for you to use your Mac. Updates cost them money, but that's a fixed cost. The amount you use the Mac doesn't make it cost more. Cricut is actually paying for these, so it does cost them money. Not saying what they did was right, but these things aren't the same.
One potentially reasonable answer is that their optimizations are a significant part of their value add, and they weren't comfortable letting people run that software themselves. If that's the case, this doesn't bother me as long as they add the ability for it to use an open format.
We need some kind of a consumer protection law that triggers a return window any time the functionality of a device that you have already purchased substantially changes (for a reasonable period of time after purchase). People who bought a Cricut should be able to return them now, and Cricut should have to eat that cost. If it's no longer viable to provide that cloud service for free, give people a version they can run on their desktop or add the ability to print open formats, or accept that a substantial number of customers are going to demand refunds that Cricut will have to process.
- zem 6y agoi would be a lot more sympathetic to the "Cricut is actually paying for these, so it does cost them money." argument if they hadn't also sued third-party software that would let you use your cricut locally without involving their cloud at all.