3 ms·
These kinds of software used to be always kind of subscription based - as new language features came out, new IDE features got added, the platform got updated t
by torginus 4y ago
These kinds of software used to be always kind of subscription based - as new language features came out, new IDE features got added, the platform got updated to support new OSes, you would find that Company X would release IDE 2.0
Even if for some reason you didn't need all of this, IDE 1.0 would eventually stop getting updated and the bugs would stop getting fixed, so you would naturally need to update.
Considering people naturally want the latest and greatest, and devs hate maintaining legacy stuff, a subscription makes sense in this case.
- xg15 4y agoThat's moving the goalposts. "Paying for updates" is not the same as a subscription. A subscription is if I pay automatically, no matter what - and usually, I will get some negative change to the status quo once I stop paying: I might lose access to the service immediately, I might be downgraded to a previous version, etc etc. > Considering people naturally want the latest and greatest They often don't. Especially with updates, those are often far more in the interests of the developers than of the users. That's why so much development effort has gone into auto-updating schemes. Remember how much effort Microsoft had to invest to get people off Windows XP. A large part of their userbase would have been perfectly fine with staying on XP for all eternity. It was Microsoft who wanted them to update to Vista, not the users.