Maybe the way by which the subscription software becomes better is different: perhaps because the SaaS model provides higher recurring revenues, these businesse

Maybe the way by which the subscription software becomes better is different: perhaps because the SaaS model provides higher recurring revenues, these businesses and products draw more investment, which allows them to develop more quickly and leapfrog the competition. I think your point about non-SaaS being a Ponzi scheme is valid. However, I think it conflates several separate phenomenon, at least in my mind. I’ll use Fitbit as an example, since I have one. I purchased a piece of hardware that has certain capabilities, and links to the Fitbit app, which ought to provide me access to those capabilities. I can only use the app to access those capabilities (at least without some hacking; not sure if anyone has done this). I’d much rather use an open source app and self host the data - Google hosting the data and providing me an app to interface with it isn’t valuable to me except to the extent I cannot access it any other way. The fact that they paywall certain components behind a monthly subscription, when the device I purchased is fully capable of interacting with the app in the same way without me having a subscription, is exploitative, in my opinion. And I would be more than happy to pay money for new software versions if they provided me anything useful. Instead, Fitbit has become more SaaS-y, and I have gotten nothing of value from that. Sorry if that’s not a very cohesive set of thoughts; I think there are a lot of viable reasons for subscription services (I have no issue with Spotify, for instance). At the same time, I do not think worthless software upgrades, holding users’ data captive, and bug fixes are worth a dime, morally nor economically.