6 ms·

It blows my mind that there are people in this thread who think that a business should charge once for a product that requires iteration or continued backend su

It blows my mind that there are people in this thread who think that a business should charge once for a product that requires iteration or continued backend support.

daveoc64 4y ago
That's how a lot of games work (and have done for decades). You buy the game once, then get access to online multiplayer servers. Subscription models encourage constant needless changes to the product.
- cinntaile 4y ago
  That was before the infrastructure to properly support monthly or seasonly subscriptions or passes existed. What are some other business models? Microtransactions, usually a lootbox like system so the gamblers pay for the rest of the players (quite profitable) DLCs I can't think of any other common ones.
- alanfranz 4y ago
  Very few follow that trend, though, and servers sometime get shut down after a while, exactly because they have a price. And expansions, dlcs, seasons, are a way to subsidize such online services. How many games that offer no additional packages keep their online offering working forever?
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    > How many games that offer no additional packages keep their online offering working forever? All the games that actually released binaries for hosting your own servers. That used to be the standard back in the day.
    - cinntaile 4y ago
      I don't think that's coming back, but it would be nice if they released the binaries once they stop providing servers for a game.
      - ekianjo 4y ago
        Something called Minecraft seems to disagree with your conclusion.
        cinntaile 4y ago
        The general trend is clearly towards not providing server binaries. You'll find some exceptions here and there, but that doesn't mean it's coming back.
        ekianjo 4y ago
        > You'll find some exceptions here and there The exception is the most played multiplayer game in the world.
        cinntaile 4y ago
        This is not correct and even if it was it wouldn't affect my point. You used to run your own multiplayer servers, now this is the exception to the rule.
    - alanfranz 4y ago
      Oh, sure. but then they don't keep their online offering; users do. And you need to pay for a VPS instead of a service.
      - ekianjo 4y ago
        You don't need to pay for a service if it's something you run on your own machines, just when you need to play with friends.
- ghaff 4y ago
  >Subscription models encourage constant needless changes to the product. As does the desire to sell paid upgrades.
Brian_K_White 4y ago
If I sold furniture, the designs and manufacturing processes and materials usage all undergo continuous iteration, yet when I sell you your chair, you don't have to keep paying me forever to keep using it. Yes, you also don't get updates to it. That is actually perfectly fine for countless bits of software. I have 30 year old software, and it still does it's original job just fine, if I happen to be ok with all it's original limitations. It's too late to try to say that is an insane idea, since, I already have it in my hands to prove that it's possible. And then there is media. Every provider wants to force everyone onto the perpetual rent, nothing to leave to your kids, model for books/music/video, not just software. What's the "it blows my mind" excuse there? It does not blow my mind at all that there are people on HN trying to excuse and justify this rent-life hell they've created for everyone else. It is the most obvious thing in the world.
- nathan_compton 4y ago
  No one is going to use an unpatched bug in your chair to rob your house.
  - Brian_K_White 4y ago
    What a stunning observation that I totally hadn't considered. /s This is an overused excuse that does not actually justify nearly as much as what it's used for. Also, online services suffer leaks and outtages and 3-letter/police pressure that I have no control or knowledge of that self owned self hosted software does not. None of the excuses for rent hell are actually valid. They are just the excuses used to sell the idea. The fact that services have their own problems does not mean there is no such thing as a valid service, or that the security update issue is not a real thing, it just means that this security update issue is just a thing like a lot of other things, that only really necessarily applies in certain cases, and doesn't apply everywhere, and doesn't override all other concerns, and there are other equally valid issues that are addressed by the opposite sort of model. Ie, it's nothing special and does not excuse or trump anything else.
  - projektfu 4y ago
    No, but if my dehumidifier model causes fires it will be recalled and I'll get my money back to buy a new one. Although, I think some companies use recalls in a dark pattern, specifically baby product companies.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
civilized 4y ago
Lots of software products don't require constant iteration and maintenance. They can work for 10 years, 20 years, or even more. Unless you build in shittiness and planned obsolescence, which the printer industry commonly does. Does software want to become the printer industry?
ratww 4y ago
Not all products need iteration or a custom backend, and those two things are often undesirable features for a lot of users.
jnovek 4y ago
Of course software needs iteration, but what was wrong with paying for occasional upgrades rather than the continuous trickle of a subscription? I loved this model, it clearly linked revenue earned by new versions to the value provided by the upgrade. IMO, subscriptions are intended to shoehorn users who would only upgrade every few years into the equivalent of the “yearly” upgrade cycle. They’re a way of avoiding the accountability that comes with paid upgrades. Personally, I have two subscriptions that I will dump the instant a quality pay-once alternative appears. Locked-in customers are the worst kinds of customers.
- EugeneOZ 4y ago
  Subscriptions are intended to provide a predictable income to pay to the developers so they could keep working continuously.
caeril 4y ago
> or continued backend support This is part of the problem. Give me software that runs locally only, and there's no need for "backend support". This insane integration of local software with unnecessary remote services is absurd. But yes, obviously one should pay for feature upgrades, as it was in the 90s. Everything went to hell when software started having the Internet as a core dependency.

It blows my mind that there are people in this thread who think that a business should charge once for a product that requires iteration or continued backend support.

daveoc64 4y ago

That's how a lot of games work (and have done for decades). You buy the game once, then get access to online multiplayer servers. Subscription models encourage constant needless changes to the product.

cinntaile 4y ago
That was before the infrastructure to properly support monthly or seasonly subscriptions or passes existed. What are some other business models? Microtransactions, usually a lootbox like system so the gamblers pay for the rest of the players (quite profitable) DLCs I can't think of any other common ones.
alanfranz 4y ago
Very few follow that trend, though, and servers sometime get shut down after a while, exactly because they have a price. And expansions, dlcs, seasons, are a way to subsidize such online services. How many games that offer no additional packages keep their online offering working forever?
- ekianjo 4y ago
  > How many games that offer no additional packages keep their online offering working forever? All the games that actually released binaries for hosting your own servers. That used to be the standard back in the day.
  - cinntaile 4y ago
    I don't think that's coming back, but it would be nice if they released the binaries once they stop providing servers for a game.
    - ekianjo 4y ago
      Something called Minecraft seems to disagree with your conclusion.
      - cinntaile 4y ago
        The general trend is clearly towards not providing server binaries. You'll find some exceptions here and there, but that doesn't mean it's coming back.
        ekianjo 4y ago
        > You'll find some exceptions here and there The exception is the most played multiplayer game in the world.
        cinntaile 4y ago
        This is not correct and even if it was it wouldn't affect my point. You used to run your own multiplayer servers, now this is the exception to the rule.
  - alanfranz 4y ago
    Oh, sure. but then they don't keep their online offering; users do. And you need to pay for a VPS instead of a service.
    - ekianjo 4y ago
      You don't need to pay for a service if it's something you run on your own machines, just when you need to play with friends.
ghaff 4y ago
>Subscription models encourage constant needless changes to the product. As does the desire to sell paid upgrades.

Brian_K_White 4y ago

If I sold furniture, the designs and manufacturing processes and materials usage all undergo continuous iteration, yet when I sell you your chair, you don't have to keep paying me forever to keep using it. Yes, you also don't get updates to it. That is actually perfectly fine for countless bits of software. I have 30 year old software, and it still does it's original job just fine, if I happen to be ok with all it's original limitations. It's too late to try to say that is an insane idea, since, I already have it in my hands to prove that it's possible. And then there is media. Every provider wants to force everyone onto the perpetual rent, nothing to leave to your kids, model for books/music/video, not just software. What's the "it blows my mind" excuse there? It does not blow my mind at all that there are people on HN trying to excuse and justify this rent-life hell they've created for everyone else. It is the most obvious thing in the world.

nathan_compton 4y ago
No one is going to use an unpatched bug in your chair to rob your house.
- Brian_K_White 4y ago
  What a stunning observation that I totally hadn't considered. /s This is an overused excuse that does not actually justify nearly as much as what it's used for. Also, online services suffer leaks and outtages and 3-letter/police pressure that I have no control or knowledge of that self owned self hosted software does not. None of the excuses for rent hell are actually valid. They are just the excuses used to sell the idea. The fact that services have their own problems does not mean there is no such thing as a valid service, or that the security update issue is not a real thing, it just means that this security update issue is just a thing like a lot of other things, that only really necessarily applies in certain cases, and doesn't apply everywhere, and doesn't override all other concerns, and there are other equally valid issues that are addressed by the opposite sort of model. Ie, it's nothing special and does not excuse or trump anything else.
- projektfu 4y ago
  No, but if my dehumidifier model causes fires it will be recalled and I'll get my money back to buy a new one. Although, I think some companies use recalls in a dark pattern, specifically baby product companies.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

civilized 4y ago

Lots of software products don't require constant iteration and maintenance. They can work for 10 years, 20 years, or even more. Unless you build in shittiness and planned obsolescence, which the printer industry commonly does. Does software want to become the printer industry?

ratww 4y ago

Not all products need iteration or a custom backend, and those two things are often undesirable features for a lot of users.

jnovek 4y ago

Of course software needs iteration, but what was wrong with paying for occasional upgrades rather than the continuous trickle of a subscription? I loved this model, it clearly linked revenue earned by new versions to the value provided by the upgrade. IMO, subscriptions are intended to shoehorn users who would only upgrade every few years into the equivalent of the “yearly” upgrade cycle. They’re a way of avoiding the accountability that comes with paid upgrades. Personally, I have two subscriptions that I will dump the instant a quality pay-once alternative appears. Locked-in customers are the worst kinds of customers.

EugeneOZ 4y ago
Subscriptions are intended to provide a predictable income to pay to the developers so they could keep working continuously.

caeril 4y ago

> or continued backend support This is part of the problem. Give me software that runs locally only, and there's no need for "backend support". This insane integration of local software with unnecessary remote services is absurd. But yes, obviously one should pay for feature upgrades, as it was in the 90s. Everything went to hell when software started having the Internet as a core dependency.