5 ms·

The OP is a being a little sensitive. Though are lots of little tricks like this to get people to go up a level. They learnt it from restaurant menus and wine

The OP is a being a little sensitive. Though are lots of little tricks like this to get people to go up a level. They learnt it from restaurant menus and wine lists. My pet hate currently is opaque “credits” and value based billing. I saw an ETL tool earlier which charges on a per column basis. I’m sure that backfired over flat tiered plans.

newsbinator 5y ago
OP preempts this (whether you agree is another matter): > One might argue I am being overly sensitive – I beg to differ. I suspect this company’s intentions were not pure. > The product does not make sense for a hobbyist to use (it’s a tool for businesses). More likely, they’re hoping I will tell myself, “I’m not a hobbyist, I’m a real business!” and proceed to select a more expensive plan than I actually need.
- dahfizz 5y ago
  It can simultaneously be true that the company's intentions were not pure, and that OP is being overly sensitive to the naming of pricing tiers.
- yreg 5y ago
  I think any tool can find a hobbyist use. I think the developers could go even further – ask business customers to use the Startup tier or above. They could even offer the exact same features for Hobbyist and Startups and differentiate them by the declared purpose of use only.
CaveTech 5y ago
ETL's are a hell hole. Another ETL charges per unique primary key synced, ignoring the fact the systems with append-only databases could move the exact same _volume_ of objects as another system, but cost 100 or 1000x more because of an arbitrary uniqueness constraint. Not to mention they also use a credit system which not only uses different tiers of pricing per credit, but ALSO credits have a sliding scale of value where syncing less rows has a higher marginal cost than syncing more.. You need a constraint solver to figure out pricing, it's madness.
- nicoburns 5y ago
  I don't really understand the appeal of ETL as a service. I can't see what value they can provide over implementing it yourself. And I can see that it would become a royal pain if you want to do something they don't support.
  - cyberge99 5y ago
    Large scale ETL is not trivial.

newsbinator 5y ago

OP preempts this (whether you agree is another matter): > One might argue I am being overly sensitive – I beg to differ. I suspect this company’s intentions were not pure. > The product does not make sense for a hobbyist to use (it’s a tool for businesses). More likely, they’re hoping I will tell myself, “I’m not a hobbyist, I’m a real business!” and proceed to select a more expensive plan than I actually need.

dahfizz 5y ago
It can simultaneously be true that the company's intentions were not pure, and that OP is being overly sensitive to the naming of pricing tiers.
yreg 5y ago
I think any tool can find a hobbyist use. I think the developers could go even further – ask business customers to use the Startup tier or above. They could even offer the exact same features for Hobbyist and Startups and differentiate them by the declared purpose of use only.

CaveTech 5y ago

ETL's are a hell hole. Another ETL charges per unique primary key synced, ignoring the fact the systems with append-only databases could move the exact same _volume_ of objects as another system, but cost 100 or 1000x more because of an arbitrary uniqueness constraint. Not to mention they also use a credit system which not only uses different tiers of pricing per credit, but ALSO credits have a sliding scale of value where syncing less rows has a higher marginal cost than syncing more.. You need a constraint solver to figure out pricing, it's madness.

nicoburns 5y ago
I don't really understand the appeal of ETL as a service. I can't see what value they can provide over implementing it yourself. And I can see that it would become a royal pain if you want to do something they don't support.
- cyberge99 5y ago
  Large scale ETL is not trivial.