3 ms·

> I had been considering paying for a family account Your consideration doesn't pay for dev time. No one cares about pushing free users or 'considering' users

by mlloyd 5y ago

> I had been considering paying for a family account Your consideration doesn't pay for dev time. No one cares about pushing free users or 'considering' users off the platform at monetization time. Shit or get off the pot. That said, no one blames you for doing comparison shopping at monetization time either.

falcor84 5y ago
>Your consideration doesn't pay for dev time. But rather than asking users to pay for newly developed premium functionality, they asked long term users to pay for things that they already had and had always been provided for free. >Shit or get off the pot. In this metaphor, they started charging people for using a previously freely accessible pot while they were in mid-shit.
- kevinmgranger 5y ago
  > had always been provided for free IIRC, mobile usage _was not_ free, but later became free.
  - batch12 5y ago
    It was free when I signed up.
    - supernovae 5y ago
      its 10 bucks a year for family... The change was years ago too. I think its time to get over it.
- mlloyd 5y ago
  Economics change and companies change. IIRC the company has been sold twice and maybe the new company can't underwrite the ongoing maintenance or just refuses to? Do users have a right to exist under legacy covenants when things at the company have changed? Again, this is why I advocate for shopping at monetization time. The company has altered the deal, maybe you should alter it further?
  - falcor84 5y ago
    Yeah, I absolutely agree with that. I personally moved my family to Bitwarden and am very happy so far.
batch12 5y ago
Removing features to force conversion is a shady practice and I want no part in a company that finds this acceptable. If they find this acceptable, there is nothing preventing them from doing this again when I am not premium enough. I would rather shit in a pot that won't disable my ability to clean up after I have started.
- Tarq0n 5y ago
  I think it actually is fine within a product category like password managers where data is highly portable and switching costs are low. Platforms with lock-in doing this however...

by mlloyd 5y ago

falcor84 5y ago

>Your consideration doesn't pay for dev time. But rather than asking users to pay for newly developed premium functionality, they asked long term users to pay for things that they already had and had always been provided for free. >Shit or get off the pot. In this metaphor, they started charging people for using a previously freely accessible pot while they were in mid-shit.

kevinmgranger 5y ago
> had always been provided for free IIRC, mobile usage _was not_ free, but later became free.
- batch12 5y ago
  It was free when I signed up.
  - supernovae 5y ago
    its 10 bucks a year for family... The change was years ago too. I think its time to get over it.
mlloyd 5y ago
Economics change and companies change. IIRC the company has been sold twice and maybe the new company can't underwrite the ongoing maintenance or just refuses to? Do users have a right to exist under legacy covenants when things at the company have changed? Again, this is why I advocate for shopping at monetization time. The company has altered the deal, maybe you should alter it further?
- falcor84 5y ago
  Yeah, I absolutely agree with that. I personally moved my family to Bitwarden and am very happy so far.

batch12 5y ago

Removing features to force conversion is a shady practice and I want no part in a company that finds this acceptable. If they find this acceptable, there is nothing preventing them from doing this again when I am not premium enough. I would rather shit in a pot that won't disable my ability to clean up after I have started.

Tarq0n 5y ago
I think it actually is fine within a product category like password managers where data is highly portable and switching costs are low. Platforms with lock-in doing this however...