3 ms·

One time payment? Surely being in this community you understand what maintenance and ongoing feature additions entail? The whole reason the software world turne

One time payment? Surely being in this community you understand what maintenance and ongoing feature additions entail? The whole reason the software world turned to subscriptions is because one time payments don’t fit the model of continuous work. Now saying it should be just cheaper in general, or perhaps more tiers, sure.

johnchristopher 5y ago
It used to be that it was expected/normal to pay for a new major version though (eg: Photoshop 4, 5, 5.5, 6).
- qw 5y ago
  That has several drawbacks for a business: 1. Due to demands from marketing/sales, the supplier tends to increase versions for what is actually a minor feature, just to justify a new payment. 2. A subscription process is the most honest way of selling software. Jetbrains is a good example of this, where you get to keep your "fallback" version when you stop the subscription. 3. You often have to wait a long time for the next release, if you don't want to register in an "early access" program with versions that break constantly (basically providing free test resources). 4. You need to justify the new version to your boss, so that you can get it covered and start the approval process higher up in the hierarchy. 5. Approval processes in large Enterprises are often complex and time consuming. This not only applies to approving the payment, but often need to involve central IT. With a subscription model, this is only done once.
  - owlbynight 5y ago
    1. I don't know, maybe just don't be a piece of shit company. 2. JetBrains charges me $12 a month ($149 annually) for its entire suite of software. You think this tool by itself is worth $120 a year? For a personal license? 3. Developer's problem, not mine. 4. This is not an issue everywhere. You work with penny-pinching mongoloids. 5. This is not an issue everywhere. You work with penny-pinching mongoloids.
    - j0ej0ej0e 5y ago
      >This is not an issue everywhere. You work with penny-pinching mongoloids. Also you >You think this tool by itself is worth $120 a year? For a personal license? Have you considered this is not an issue everywhere?
- arbitrage 5y ago
  even before that, it was expected/normal to pay for a piece of software once, regardless of major revisions or ongoing maintenance. trying to trick people into giving you money forever is a paradigm shift that really needs to be rethunk.
owlbynight 5y ago
I do understand what maintenance and ongoing feature additions entail. That's a problem that FOSS tackles. Asking me, the end-user, to commit to $14 a month in perpetuity for this type of software is a big stretch in my opinion. I understand it for the Team tier, but for the personal tier, it doesn't make sense. $5 a month? Maybe. Maybe it's not for a user like me, who would probably use it twice a month, if that. But I was interested in checking it out but got immediately priced out. For a startup, it seems like an ill conceived practice. But what do I know? I've only been using and paying for software for 30 years or so.

johnchristopher 5y ago

It used to be that it was expected/normal to pay for a new major version though (eg: Photoshop 4, 5, 5.5, 6).

qw 5y ago
That has several drawbacks for a business: 1. Due to demands from marketing/sales, the supplier tends to increase versions for what is actually a minor feature, just to justify a new payment. 2. A subscription process is the most honest way of selling software. Jetbrains is a good example of this, where you get to keep your "fallback" version when you stop the subscription. 3. You often have to wait a long time for the next release, if you don't want to register in an "early access" program with versions that break constantly (basically providing free test resources). 4. You need to justify the new version to your boss, so that you can get it covered and start the approval process higher up in the hierarchy. 5. Approval processes in large Enterprises are often complex and time consuming. This not only applies to approving the payment, but often need to involve central IT. With a subscription model, this is only done once.
- owlbynight 5y ago
  1. I don't know, maybe just don't be a piece of shit company. 2. JetBrains charges me $12 a month ($149 annually) for its entire suite of software. You think this tool by itself is worth $120 a year? For a personal license? 3. Developer's problem, not mine. 4. This is not an issue everywhere. You work with penny-pinching mongoloids. 5. This is not an issue everywhere. You work with penny-pinching mongoloids.
  - j0ej0ej0e 5y ago
    >This is not an issue everywhere. You work with penny-pinching mongoloids. Also you >You think this tool by itself is worth $120 a year? For a personal license? Have you considered this is not an issue everywhere?
arbitrage 5y ago
even before that, it was expected/normal to pay for a piece of software once, regardless of major revisions or ongoing maintenance. trying to trick people into giving you money forever is a paradigm shift that really needs to be rethunk.

owlbynight 5y ago

I do understand what maintenance and ongoing feature additions entail. That's a problem that FOSS tackles. Asking me, the end-user, to commit to $14 a month in perpetuity for this type of software is a big stretch in my opinion. I understand it for the Team tier, but for the personal tier, it doesn't make sense. $5 a month? Maybe. Maybe it's not for a user like me, who would probably use it twice a month, if that. But I was interested in checking it out but got immediately priced out. For a startup, it seems like an ill conceived practice. But what do I know? I've only been using and paying for software for 30 years or so.