6 ms·

This has not been my experience at all with SaaS. I find SaaS products, including ones I have paid for, disappear at a much greater rate than the rate at which

by jehb 3y ago

This has not been my experience at all with SaaS. I find SaaS products, including ones I have paid for, disappear at a much greater rate than the rate at which the desktop tools they replaced stop working. There's also next to nothing I can do as an end user when they do disappear. If I'm very lucky, I get a limited window to be able to export a portion of my data. But we've eroded data formats to the point where even if I can export my data, there might be nothing to plug it into. What good is a CSV, even, when what I need is a tool that processes the data in the CSV? There's no option for me to keep an old machine or a VM around and self-support on a discontinued piece of SaaS. That's to say nothing of the price hikes. $10 a month today becomes $14.99 next month, $17.99 in a year, and before you know it the proprietary system you've locked yourself into now costs five times what you originally paid. Sure, they might add some more features, but since it's SaaS, in many cases you have no choice to seek out a different vendor to provide the same feature, as again, your data is locked up in a format you can't easily extract and work with elsewhere.

steveBK123 3y ago
SaaS from established firms seems to be more durable & maintained. The problem is all the flash in the pan ZIRP VC funded never-profit SaaS startups out there. Hopefully these get shaken out over the next couple years finally. For example, I've used Adobe products for a very long time, and they get a lot of flack. I was an extensive user of Photoshop (PS) and Lightroom (LR) for a long time. However, the old model was - PS pay $600 once, then $200 for updates every 2 years or so. LR was $200/100 as I recall. So your run-rate for both was over $150/year (factoring in the initial $800). This was in like year 2000 dollars. For $150 2023 dollars.. I get constant feature updates, cloud storage & sync, licensed to run on at least 2 machines, etc. Inflation adjusted this is nearly half the price of paying $150 in 2000. I'm also intrigued by how many very wealthy people are unwilling to pay $10/mo to stream music/video and/or share passwords, when I recall paying $20/CD at the record store in 1998 dollars. You can listen to basically every song you want for the year for the price of (inflation adjusted) 2.5 CDs purchased by my mallrat teenage self back then. I think we are all just very spoiled..
- AlexandrB 3y ago
  > The problem is all the flash in the pan ZIRP VC funded never-profit SaaS startups out there. The thing is those startups sometimes make very useful software while they're around. I ran Sparrow (an email client from > 10 years ago) for years after the company that made it was shuttered and acquired by Google. If Sparrow was a SaaS product it would be gone 30 days after the acquisition was announced. > SaaS from established firms seems to be more durable & maintained. I'm sure many other users have noticed this too. I wonder if it makes breaking into the software space as an upstart firm harder than "in the old days".
- vbezhenar 3y ago
  If I'm buying a lifetime thing, it's an investition. I spent money and got thing that will never get old. As time goes on, I'm getting more things and I need to spend less. If I'm buying a subscription, it's an obligation. I'll have to spend money from now until I die or I'll get reduced QoL. Even if today I have spare $200/month, that might not be the case tomorrow. Maybe I'll get fired. Maybe government turn my cash into paper. Maybe I'll have to pay everything I have to doctors to save my live or health. I'll still have bought songs, but I'll no longer have access to the streaming service.
  - steveBK123 3y ago
    Lifetime thing is a rather large statement, especially with software though isn't it? Most of the pre-subscription model compares were never lifetime purchases. Software that needed paid purchase update every 3-5 years to get OS support / features. No software I used in 1995 will run on my current computers. Even 2005 or 2010 is dubious in some cases. Content constantly changed delivery mechanisms and people had to buy new media/devices every 5-10 years VHS/Betamax -> Laserdisc -> DVD -> Bluray / HD-DVD -> Bluray 4K Vinyl -> 8 track -> Cassette -> CD For many things there are cheap/free alternatives or you can opt for the fixed cost up front version. Paper books/eBooks/CDs/DVDs/MP3s can still be purchased outright. Streaming services have ad supported free tiers. You can go to the library, turn on the radio or tune into over the air TV signal. You can buy an old version of photoshop/lightroom put it on an old computer, and don't expect updates. Etc.
j45 3y ago
Part of the issue with SaaS is when they're rushed to build using the "fastest" technologies or platforms. Then, when they get bigger, they end up having a much higher break even burden. Building with boring technology on the other hand can remain very low in monthly costs and still provide a lot of scale and capacity for users.
zzzzzzzza 3y ago
supabase model of open source + saas might be better?
jwells89 3y ago
Proprietary file formats are also a problem. Sure, you can get versions of your data that are technically usable/readable by other software out of Google Docs or Figma, but you’ll never have a fully fleshed out original because nothing else can read those formats because they’re not documented and can change at the whim of their creators.
paulddraper 3y ago
That's true, but at the point that you have to fire up a VM to use some software... That's pretty niche

by jehb 3y ago

steveBK123 3y ago

SaaS from established firms seems to be more durable & maintained. The problem is all the flash in the pan ZIRP VC funded never-profit SaaS startups out there. Hopefully these get shaken out over the next couple years finally. For example, I've used Adobe products for a very long time, and they get a lot of flack. I was an extensive user of Photoshop (PS) and Lightroom (LR) for a long time. However, the old model was - PS pay $600 once, then $200 for updates every 2 years or so. LR was $200/100 as I recall. So your run-rate for both was over $150/year (factoring in the initial $800). This was in like year 2000 dollars. For $150 2023 dollars.. I get constant feature updates, cloud storage & sync, licensed to run on at least 2 machines, etc. Inflation adjusted this is nearly half the price of paying $150 in 2000. I'm also intrigued by how many very wealthy people are unwilling to pay $10/mo to stream music/video and/or share passwords, when I recall paying $20/CD at the record store in 1998 dollars. You can listen to basically every song you want for the year for the price of (inflation adjusted) 2.5 CDs purchased by my mallrat teenage self back then. I think we are all just very spoiled..

AlexandrB 3y ago
> The problem is all the flash in the pan ZIRP VC funded never-profit SaaS startups out there. The thing is those startups sometimes make very useful software while they're around. I ran Sparrow (an email client from > 10 years ago) for years after the company that made it was shuttered and acquired by Google. If Sparrow was a SaaS product it would be gone 30 days after the acquisition was announced. > SaaS from established firms seems to be more durable & maintained. I'm sure many other users have noticed this too. I wonder if it makes breaking into the software space as an upstart firm harder than "in the old days".
vbezhenar 3y ago
If I'm buying a lifetime thing, it's an investition. I spent money and got thing that will never get old. As time goes on, I'm getting more things and I need to spend less. If I'm buying a subscription, it's an obligation. I'll have to spend money from now until I die or I'll get reduced QoL. Even if today I have spare $200/month, that might not be the case tomorrow. Maybe I'll get fired. Maybe government turn my cash into paper. Maybe I'll have to pay everything I have to doctors to save my live or health. I'll still have bought songs, but I'll no longer have access to the streaming service.
- steveBK123 3y ago
  Lifetime thing is a rather large statement, especially with software though isn't it? Most of the pre-subscription model compares were never lifetime purchases. Software that needed paid purchase update every 3-5 years to get OS support / features. No software I used in 1995 will run on my current computers. Even 2005 or 2010 is dubious in some cases. Content constantly changed delivery mechanisms and people had to buy new media/devices every 5-10 years VHS/Betamax -> Laserdisc -> DVD -> Bluray / HD-DVD -> Bluray 4K Vinyl -> 8 track -> Cassette -> CD For many things there are cheap/free alternatives or you can opt for the fixed cost up front version. Paper books/eBooks/CDs/DVDs/MP3s can still be purchased outright. Streaming services have ad supported free tiers. You can go to the library, turn on the radio or tune into over the air TV signal. You can buy an old version of photoshop/lightroom put it on an old computer, and don't expect updates. Etc.

j45 3y ago

Part of the issue with SaaS is when they're rushed to build using the "fastest" technologies or platforms. Then, when they get bigger, they end up having a much higher break even burden. Building with boring technology on the other hand can remain very low in monthly costs and still provide a lot of scale and capacity for users.

zzzzzzzza 3y ago

supabase model of open source + saas might be better?

jwells89 3y ago

Proprietary file formats are also a problem. Sure, you can get versions of your data that are technically usable/readable by other software out of Google Docs or Figma, but you’ll never have a fully fleshed out original because nothing else can read those formats because they’re not documented and can change at the whim of their creators.

paulddraper 3y ago

That's true, but at the point that you have to fire up a VM to use some software... That's pretty niche