3 ms·

Licenses imply Software-As-A-Service and that's a ridiculous model. If I buy a tool at a hardware store, I don't need to 'renew the license' on a monthly or yea

Licenses imply Software-As-A-Service and that's a ridiculous model. If I buy a tool at a hardware store, I don't need to 'renew the license' on a monthly or yearly basis in order to keep using that tool. It's also designed to reduce the useful lifetime of hardware, as old software versions that work with old hardware lose support fairly quickly. That's why I quit Microsoft Office after they moved to a subscription model, for example. Open-source tools may have fewer bells and whistles, but they can be run on essentially any hardware that Linux can run on, there's always a minimalist solution, they don't have all the telemetry overhead, etc. As far as the economics, well, it's not a cash cow for investors, certainly, but individuals can make a living within the open source world by providing paid technical assistance.

soiler 4y ago
I don't love the proliferation of SAAS, but your analogy isn't very solid. You don't pay upkeep on your hammer because it doesn't change. If it gets damaged, you do pay for repairs (although you probably don't go to the manufacturer). And if the manufacturer came out every X months to replace the head with some new alloy, you'd have to pay for that, too. The point is that it's difficult to get software that is static anymore. The reason it's considered a service isn't _because_ it has a subscription model, it's because a product owner and an engineering team are constantly making bug fixes, improvements, security updates, etc. The problem with the model isn't that it exists - the problem is that we don't have a choice. When security is not an issue (like with MS Word), I'd take the single purchase almost every time.
- mathgladiator 4y ago
  > You don't pay upkeep on your hammer because it doesn't change You do. Hammers rust, the handle may break. Practically all things have some kind of upkeep.
  - 9dev 4y ago
    And so what; the hammer manufacturer comes around and gives you fresh handles and a nice rust treatment every other month? That’s precisely the difference between tools that you buy once and SaaS subscriptions, and why the analogy is flawed.
  - soiler 4y ago
    Yes, that's a good rewording of the next sentence I wrote.
j1elo 4y ago
The thing is, most software nowadays is expected to integrate well with the outside world. A simple calculator or a full-fledged photo editor can and probably should run in its own bubble isolated from the world, so a single full-value price makes sense; but a lot of progress and innovation (and creation of new needs, aka. new software) is happening at a level where systems need to talk with each other. It does make sense to pay recurring money if the tool needs to be constantly updated to keep up with 3rd-party services. I agree that a text processor does not make sense, though; albeit they are probably justifying themselves due to the online features it provides (whatever they are; I haven't used MS Office in 10 years)

soiler 4y ago

I don't love the proliferation of SAAS, but your analogy isn't very solid. You don't pay upkeep on your hammer because it doesn't change. If it gets damaged, you do pay for repairs (although you probably don't go to the manufacturer). And if the manufacturer came out every X months to replace the head with some new alloy, you'd have to pay for that, too. The point is that it's difficult to get software that is static anymore. The reason it's considered a service isn't _because_ it has a subscription model, it's because a product owner and an engineering team are constantly making bug fixes, improvements, security updates, etc. The problem with the model isn't that it exists - the problem is that we don't have a choice. When security is not an issue (like with MS Word), I'd take the single purchase almost every time.

mathgladiator 4y ago
> You don't pay upkeep on your hammer because it doesn't change You do. Hammers rust, the handle may break. Practically all things have some kind of upkeep.
- 9dev 4y ago
  And so what; the hammer manufacturer comes around and gives you fresh handles and a nice rust treatment every other month? That’s precisely the difference between tools that you buy once and SaaS subscriptions, and why the analogy is flawed.
- soiler 4y ago
  Yes, that's a good rewording of the next sentence I wrote.

j1elo 4y ago

The thing is, most software nowadays is expected to integrate well with the outside world. A simple calculator or a full-fledged photo editor can and probably should run in its own bubble isolated from the world, so a single full-value price makes sense; but a lot of progress and innovation (and creation of new needs, aka. new software) is happening at a level where systems need to talk with each other. It does make sense to pay recurring money if the tool needs to be constantly updated to keep up with 3rd-party services. I agree that a text processor does not make sense, though; albeit they are probably justifying themselves due to the online features it provides (whatever they are; I haven't used MS Office in 10 years)