3 ms·

I don't understand how we all just stood by and let "monthly subscription" sneak in and become the dominant form of paying for software (and entertainment/media

I don't understand how we all just stood by and let "monthly subscription" sneak in and become the dominant form of paying for software (and entertainment/media, too). Almost everything else in my life is a one time purchase. I pay for the thing, I use it forever. I would never buy a vacuum cleaner subscription. Or a pressure washer subscription. Why should I need to endlessly pay for software? The usual excuses from developers: 1. But I need to maintain the server and that's a monthly cost! Nope. Tethering your software to a server was your choice, not mine. I shouldn't have to pay for your decision. I have lots of perfectly good software on my computer that work fine without your server. 2. But it costs money to constantly be developing and publishing updates! Nope. Nobody is asking you to constantly change your software. Generally, I don't want your updates. The software met my needs when I bought it, and I don't want you to change it, and I certainly don't want to keep paying you just so you can keep changing it. We need to go back to treating software like it was something you bought in a box off a store shelf and that was it. No recurring payments. No updates. No accounts. No nagging. No telemetry. Just a box of bits that I hand over money for once.

jfengel 1mo ago
I think software developers feel that their work is never finished. Nothing is ever fully complete. The software always has bugs and security holes. It is always lacking critical features that you haven't gotten around to yet. I think it's pretty clear that management has taken advantage of that instinct. They keep upgrading software long after it really is fully finished. Nobody has wanted a new version of Microsoft Word for decades. But it took decades to reach that point. Most software hasn't reached it. We send out software barely good enough -- if that much. Because it takes a long time to actually get good, and if we waited that long, the company would have gone belly-up. And the customers seem content to buy good-enough software, in the hopes that the other bugs and features will get fixed. Obviously you should be able to opt out of all of that, and stick with a version you like. When enough customers do that, you stop, and move on to a new thing. But I do think it's inevitable that companies will sell you a Minimum Viable Product and charge you to complete it. Because that's how they are able to afford to get it out the door before they go bankrupt. And if they don't, somebody else will, and get the software out faster.

jfengel 1mo ago

I think software developers feel that their work is never finished. Nothing is ever fully complete. The software always has bugs and security holes. It is always lacking critical features that you haven't gotten around to yet. I think it's pretty clear that management has taken advantage of that instinct. They keep upgrading software long after it really is fully finished. Nobody has wanted a new version of Microsoft Word for decades. But it took decades to reach that point. Most software hasn't reached it. We send out software barely good enough -- if that much. Because it takes a long time to actually get good, and if we waited that long, the company would have gone belly-up. And the customers seem content to buy good-enough software, in the hopes that the other bugs and features will get fixed. Obviously you should be able to opt out of all of that, and stick with a version you like. When enough customers do that, you stop, and move on to a new thing. But I do think it's inevitable that companies will sell you a Minimum Viable Product and charge you to complete it. Because that's how they are able to afford to get it out the door before they go bankrupt. And if they don't, somebody else will, and get the software out faster.