4 ms·

sounds like UaaS (upgrade as a service). sounds nice. any cons? it seems to me like a company might try to withhold some features until the next release so you

sounds like UaaS (upgrade as a service). sounds nice. any cons? it seems to me like a company might try to withhold some features until the next release so you upgrade. Or is that expected out the gate and any "updates for a year" are just for bugs?

iudqnolq 6y ago
Jetbrains seems to take a broader view of life. They do lots of things that don't immediately benefit them. For example, their open source Rust plugin gets new features much more often than once a year, and I'm not even paying for it.
Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
With Sketch, the 'cons' are that if you withhold from upgrading, then after some time the app will get increasingly less useful: plugins are generally supported only for the latest version, and it is rare when you can get old versions of plugins. Design resources too always seem to be available for the latest versions only. So if you work completely independently from external world, it migth not affect you much, but if you are not, it is cheaper to buy upgrades. Maybe not every 12 months, but every 18 months or so. But anyway Sketch is that good that we pay it's price gladly.
rudi-c 6y ago
It would be quite challenging to make such a business model work with collaboration-centric features. Features such as multiplayer editing, in addition to requiring some carefully designed technology, require the two clients to be running the same version of the code. As soon as you introduce a new feature -- e.g. a new type of object that you can insert into the document, you need all clients connected to the same file to be able to understand that object. This is just one of many types of edge cases that can crop up. It's kind of like database migrations except a lot of work happens client-side too. You could put the onus on the user to deal with making sure everyone you're sharing a file with has the same version (or whatever asset is involved in a particular tool, this is not design-tool specific). But the friction to sharing raises considerably. Even if your whole team is on the same version, what happens if you try to share a file with an external client, etc. You'll be making tons of tradeoffs in engineering time and feature design to deal with the fact that users don't get the latest version of your app just by loading the page. Your tool, though it might still be excellent in other regards, probably won't end up having collaboration as a central selling point.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

iudqnolq 6y ago

Jetbrains seems to take a broader view of life. They do lots of things that don't immediately benefit them. For example, their open source Rust plugin gets new features much more often than once a year, and I'm not even paying for it.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago

With Sketch, the 'cons' are that if you withhold from upgrading, then after some time the app will get increasingly less useful: plugins are generally supported only for the latest version, and it is rare when you can get old versions of plugins. Design resources too always seem to be available for the latest versions only. So if you work completely independently from external world, it migth not affect you much, but if you are not, it is cheaper to buy upgrades. Maybe not every 12 months, but every 18 months or so. But anyway Sketch is that good that we pay it's price gladly.

rudi-c 6y ago

It would be quite challenging to make such a business model work with collaboration-centric features. Features such as multiplayer editing, in addition to requiring some carefully designed technology, require the two clients to be running the same version of the code. As soon as you introduce a new feature -- e.g. a new type of object that you can insert into the document, you need all clients connected to the same file to be able to understand that object. This is just one of many types of edge cases that can crop up. It's kind of like database migrations except a lot of work happens client-side too. You could put the onus on the user to deal with making sure everyone you're sharing a file with has the same version (or whatever asset is involved in a particular tool, this is not design-tool specific). But the friction to sharing raises considerably. Even if your whole team is on the same version, what happens if you try to share a file with an external client, etc. You'll be making tons of tradeoffs in engineering time and feature design to deal with the fact that users don't get the latest version of your app just by loading the page. Your tool, though it might still be excellent in other regards, probably won't end up having collaboration as a central selling point.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]