5 ms·

Why what's happening with Figma?

iambateman 1y ago
The thinking is that an IPO will encourage them to reduce the app’s functionality except for enterprise tiers. The technical term is enshittification.
- scarface_74 1y ago
  Charging more money for features is not enshittificaton. Making the product worse like adding advertisements would be. A full professional seat is $16 for individual, $55 for organizations and $90 for enterprises. Either price is a nothing burger for a professional tool.
  - rhet0rica 1y ago
    There are plenty of textbook cases of enshittification that are covered by price increases—just look at Adobe and AutoCAD selling credits that are used just to launch the program. As long as it fits with the "claw back value from your customers and partners to feed your investors" pattern, ∂shit > 0.
    - scarface_74 1y ago
      I looked up adobe credits. Aren’t they just used to buy licensed assets like pictures and videos. But not for the core app?
      - rhet0rica 1y ago
        You're right; unfortunately I can't edit my comment to remove Adobe from it. Though they are plenty guilty of 'adding value' in the worst possible ways.
    - mschuster91 1y ago
      I 'member Adobe's Creative Suite costing hundreds of dollars. Photoshop alone clocked in at 699$, the full CS6 was 2599$ [1]. Either you were a professional and paid dearly every odd year or you were a student and used a cracked/keygen'd CS6. Today? The full CC license is 70$ a month for individuals (30$ for students) and 100$ a month for businesses. Despite inflation, assuming a two year upgrade cycle you still get the same price for the full Adobe package when comparing CS vs CC. One may complain a lot about Adobe (RIP Flash, and anything Gen AI can go to hell for all I care), but "enshittification" is one thing that can't reasonably be thrown at them. As for Adobe Credits, AFAIK that's credits for fonts and assets - and again, I vastly prefer dealing with one storefront (Adobe) than having to buy and license individual font files or stock photos. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2012/4/23/2968192/adobe-cs6-pricing-availability-creative-cloud-announcement https://www.theverge.com/2012/4/23/2968192/adobe-cs6-pricing...
      - dhruvrrp 1y ago
        It's enshittification because most people don't need the 2 year upgrade cycle. For most individuals and small businesses, it was more like buy once and use forever.
        scarface_74 1y ago
        A majority or at least large minority of Adobe users were/are on Macs. The Mac version has lived through 68K MacOS pre and post System 7, PPC Mac pre and post OS X, x86 Macs pre and post Carbon support and now ARM Macs. After each transition , there was a limited amount of time that you could use the same version and even a smaller amount of time that you would have wanted to. But the same argument applies that applies to Figma. It’s a professional tool that should help you generate income far greater than the cost
        rhet0rica 1y ago
        True, but depressing. Definitely something to add to the FLOSS casus belli...
      - 1y ago
    - dmix 1y ago
      Adobe has always been targetted at profressionals price wise. Making it SaaS made pirating harder and the high monthly price (and annoying dark patterns) excluded and alienated the general public which upset people who decided to pay for it for the first time in their life. The problem there is mostly the lack of good competition in spaces like Lightroom but that's starting to change. The everyone-pirates-photoshop so don't bother trying to compete idea is now over.
      - benrbray 1y ago
        > upset people who decided to pay for it for the first time in their life It also upset paying customers. It's no longer possible to _own_ Adobe software, and so I don't anymore. Up until just a couple years ago I was still using the copy of Photoshop CS4 I paid for (as part of the Master Collection CS4, Student Edition) in 2008. A monthly subscription is a complete non-starter for me.
        p_ing 1y ago
        You never owned any Adobe product, you licensed it. And that license could be revoked at any time; while it is unlikely Adobe would go after an individual, the license that you agree to allows them to do so.
        egg1 1y ago
        Adobe can say whatever they want in their EULA; whether it's legally enforceable in court is another matter. Imagine how these you-own-a-license-not-the-thing-itself shenanigans would play out for any other product we purchase. "No, you didn't buy that $40k car in cash upfront! You only bought Toyota's permission to operate the car, and we reserve the right to repossess it at any time."
        s1mplicissimus 1y ago
        reminds me of the teslas that got downgraded because the new owners only paid for the cheaper subscription
    - vjvjvjvjghv 1y ago
      From a financial point of view I think Adobe’s enshittification is working pretty well.
- no_wizard 1y ago
  I’d just settle on Figma supporting features that enforce consistency when designers are working in it. It has no way of setting for example, designs to always use auto layout. That’s my frustration with this product
- danielvaughn 1y ago
  That’s been going on for a while with Figma. Their core user base (at least historically core) generally feels neglected, because they’ve been trying to go horizontal with a slew of related products. Meanwhile they’re charging designers to use variables. Imagine being charged to use variables. Crazy.
  - jastuk 1y ago
    Yup, I'll confirm this 100%. I do not like Figma and have 0 trust and optimism about it; I use it because I have to and will ditch it at the first corner, probably for Penpot. When you have trivial-to-fix bug reports with hundreds of comments and votes collecting dust for 3-4 years, you lose all respect from your userbase. My hope is that at least with Penpot I can submit a PR if I am motivated enough. With Figma, I've done all I can.
    - bravesoul2 1y ago
      The eternal broken printer driver

The thinking is that an IPO will encourage them to reduce the app’s functionality except for enterprise tiers. The technical term is enshittification.

scarface_74 1y ago
Charging more money for features is not enshittificaton. Making the product worse like adding advertisements would be. A full professional seat is $16 for individual, $55 for organizations and $90 for enterprises. Either price is a nothing burger for a professional tool.
- rhet0rica 1y ago
  There are plenty of textbook cases of enshittification that are covered by price increases—just look at Adobe and AutoCAD selling credits that are used just to launch the program. As long as it fits with the "claw back value from your customers and partners to feed your investors" pattern, ∂shit > 0.
  - scarface_74 1y ago
    I looked up adobe credits. Aren’t they just used to buy licensed assets like pictures and videos. But not for the core app?
    - rhet0rica 1y ago
      You're right; unfortunately I can't edit my comment to remove Adobe from it. Though they are plenty guilty of 'adding value' in the worst possible ways.
  - mschuster91 1y ago
    I 'member Adobe's Creative Suite costing hundreds of dollars. Photoshop alone clocked in at 699$, the full CS6 was 2599$ [1]. Either you were a professional and paid dearly every odd year or you were a student and used a cracked/keygen'd CS6. Today? The full CC license is 70$ a month for individuals (30$ for students) and 100$ a month for businesses. Despite inflation, assuming a two year upgrade cycle you still get the same price for the full Adobe package when comparing CS vs CC. One may complain a lot about Adobe (RIP Flash, and anything Gen AI can go to hell for all I care), but "enshittification" is one thing that can't reasonably be thrown at them. As for Adobe Credits, AFAIK that's credits for fonts and assets - and again, I vastly prefer dealing with one storefront (Adobe) than having to buy and license individual font files or stock photos. [1] https://www.theverge.com/2012/4/23/2968192/adobe-cs6-pricing-availability-creative-cloud-announcement https://www.theverge.com/2012/4/23/2968192/adobe-cs6-pricing...
    - dhruvrrp 1y ago
      It's enshittification because most people don't need the 2 year upgrade cycle. For most individuals and small businesses, it was more like buy once and use forever.
      - scarface_74 1y ago
        A majority or at least large minority of Adobe users were/are on Macs. The Mac version has lived through 68K MacOS pre and post System 7, PPC Mac pre and post OS X, x86 Macs pre and post Carbon support and now ARM Macs. After each transition , there was a limited amount of time that you could use the same version and even a smaller amount of time that you would have wanted to. But the same argument applies that applies to Figma. It’s a professional tool that should help you generate income far greater than the cost
        rhet0rica 1y ago
        True, but depressing. Definitely something to add to the FLOSS casus belli...
    - 1y ago
  - dmix 1y ago
    Adobe has always been targetted at profressionals price wise. Making it SaaS made pirating harder and the high monthly price (and annoying dark patterns) excluded and alienated the general public which upset people who decided to pay for it for the first time in their life. The problem there is mostly the lack of good competition in spaces like Lightroom but that's starting to change. The everyone-pirates-photoshop so don't bother trying to compete idea is now over.
    - benrbray 1y ago
      > upset people who decided to pay for it for the first time in their life It also upset paying customers. It's no longer possible to _own_ Adobe software, and so I don't anymore. Up until just a couple years ago I was still using the copy of Photoshop CS4 I paid for (as part of the Master Collection CS4, Student Edition) in 2008. A monthly subscription is a complete non-starter for me.
      - p_ing 1y ago
        You never owned any Adobe product, you licensed it. And that license could be revoked at any time; while it is unlikely Adobe would go after an individual, the license that you agree to allows them to do so.
        egg1 1y ago
        Adobe can say whatever they want in their EULA; whether it's legally enforceable in court is another matter. Imagine how these you-own-a-license-not-the-thing-itself shenanigans would play out for any other product we purchase. "No, you didn't buy that $40k car in cash upfront! You only bought Toyota's permission to operate the car, and we reserve the right to repossess it at any time."
        s1mplicissimus 1y ago
        reminds me of the teslas that got downgraded because the new owners only paid for the cheaper subscription
  - vjvjvjvjghv 1y ago
    From a financial point of view I think Adobe’s enshittification is working pretty well.
no_wizard 1y ago
I’d just settle on Figma supporting features that enforce consistency when designers are working in it. It has no way of setting for example, designs to always use auto layout. That’s my frustration with this product
danielvaughn 1y ago
That’s been going on for a while with Figma. Their core user base (at least historically core) generally feels neglected, because they’ve been trying to go horizontal with a slew of related products. Meanwhile they’re charging designers to use variables. Imagine being charged to use variables. Crazy.
- jastuk 1y ago
  Yup, I'll confirm this 100%. I do not like Figma and have 0 trust and optimism about it; I use it because I have to and will ditch it at the first corner, probably for Penpot. When you have trivial-to-fix bug reports with hundreds of comments and votes collecting dust for 3-4 years, you lose all respect from your userbase. My hope is that at least with Penpot I can submit a PR if I am motivated enough. With Figma, I've done all I can.
  - bravesoul2 1y ago
    The eternal broken printer driver