Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Users hate change

gist.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 315 posts

Re: Users hate change

#161

Post by 8ytecoder »

ryandrake wrote: post #119
la_barba wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good point. I'm overall positive about subscription software, but I don't like the fact that it always seems to go hand in hand with DRM and other nonsense. I'd rather they take some modest amount per year and let me do whatever I want with the software. Its a headache to make the software work when the computer is on an isolated network and will never be connected to the internet. Office 365 I'm looking at…

On the other hand, I’m totally against subscription software because I resent having to pay again and again for the same product just to be able to use it a month later. What ever happened to making a product, selling it once to the customer, who then gets to use it as they wish for as long as it works? Why does everything have to be a recurring revenue stream? Because you have software engineers who need something t…

I like the jetbrains model. You can always stop paying whenever you want and you get to own whatever last version you hold.

Re: Users hate change

#162

Post by tmaly »

I agree with this post for the most part.

MS Excel when they switched to the ribbon UI was a huge problem for existing users.

I have had certain software running with antiquated UIs, but I keep them in place as users know how to use them. They have enough on their plates that they do not want to have to learn something new and deal with the cognitive overload.

  If the old way works, they will stick with it, as long as it gets the job done.

Re: Users hate change

#164

Post by mgfist »

grincho wrote: post #135
holy_city wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly? Because no software is free from bugs and there will always be a need for support. The difference between single sale and subscription can be life or death for a company, its products, and its support. But if you don't feel that a subscription to a service adds value, please don't buy it and voice your concern to the developers. Especially if they're a small shop. That said, subscriptions can be canceled. F…

Then charge for bug fixes. Charge for updates that make the application run on a new version of the OS. If those things provide sufficient value, users will pay for them. I've been paying for that for decades for my commercial text editor. And can subscriptions be canceled in practice? If you cancel your Photoshop subscription, your documents suddenly become unopenable. In this way, software subscriptions—at least fo…

How would you sell bug fixes? "Hi grincho, how would you like an update for X feature where we fix Y bugs for Z dollars?" Most people would respond by asking why they have to pay more money for things that should be working in the first place. It'll become hard to know whether a developer is fixing new bugs or whether they just wrote some buggy software knowing they'll get more money by selling bug fixes separately rather than writing it correctly in the first place.

Re: Users hate change

#165

Post by avip »

lkrubner wrote: post #117
flohofwoe wrote: post #5

My pet theory is that every software product has a "peak version". Before that peak version, the product is not yet in a complete state, and it is fairly obvious, both for the developer and user, what features are missing. Once the peak version is reached, new features are not added because they improve the product, but to justify selling the product again to existing customers, and to 'keep the team busy'. Instead o…

Microsoft Word 5.1 on the Macintosh was published in 1992 and was generally seen as the best word processor ever invented. It's UI was perfect. It won a lot of praise in the press, all of it deserved. Sadly, after version 5.1, Microsoft began to focus on the integration of the Office Suite, which meant re-doing all the apps so that they'd be open to programming. And more features got added, and the UI became cluttere…

Counterpoint: Was generally seen as the best word processor unless you had to use it with an RTL language.

In other words, it was perfect for (WORLD.population - 500mm)

What's bloat for you may be an essential need for your fellow worder.

#funfacts:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-boosts-languages-pro...

https://caniuse.com/#search=dir

Re: Users hate change

#166

Post by astine »

johnday wrote: post #33

It's interesting to compare the user responses to updates by Facebook and Twitter respectively. Facebook's UI has changed significantly over the last 15 or so years. Features have appeared and disappeared, boxes have been arranged and rearranged. But there's rarely a big fuss beyond it getting a little slower each time (roughly commensurate with consumer hardware speedup, in fact). People don't really notice and they…

"First, Twitter's UI changes have been big. They skip over incremental changes and go straight for gigantic overhauls. This requires people re-learn the language of the site completely every couple of years."

Honestly, I think that this is part of the point, at least with social media applications. When people get used to an application, and it works predictably, they have control over their use of it, and can fit it into their lives how they see fit.

This isn't what social media companies want. Social media companies want users to spend as much time using their applications as possible which means setting up skinnerbox-esque mechanisms as much as possible which requires the application to at least be a little bit unpredictable. Replacing time based news feeds with unpredictable algorithmic ones is one way to do this, but any kind of change throws the user's sense of balance off. If the user doesn't quit right away (and most don't) they have the potential to become more dependent going forward.

Re: Users hate change

#167

Post by SubiculumCode »

flohofwoe wrote: post #5

My pet theory is that every software product has a "peak version". Before that peak version, the product is not yet in a complete state, and it is fairly obvious, both for the developer and user, what features are missing. Once the peak version is reached, new features are not added because they improve the product, but to justify selling the product again to existing customers, and to 'keep the team busy'. Instead o…

A counterpoint:

FL Studio is a long-standing, and much loved software package for audio production.

Since its beginning FL Studio has had the following policy: Once you buy the software, all updates are free for life.

The counterpoint is that each new version of the software has gotten better and better. Therefore, the purchase of FL Studio license both has fantastic current and future value, and has earned intense customer loyalty and online reputation, generating substantial word-of-mouth sales---like what I am doing right here, right now.

Re: Users hate change

#168

Post by nofunsir »

yoz-y wrote: post #70
flohofwoe wrote: post #5

My pet theory is that every software product has a "peak version". Before that peak version, the product is not yet in a complete state, and it is fairly obvious, both for the developer and user, what features are missing. Once the peak version is reached, new features are not added because they improve the product, but to justify selling the product again to existing customers, and to 'keep the team busy'. Instead o…

Subscription model is actually way better if you don't want to end up with feature bloat. Because you actually get money from users even if you only ever fix bugs and improve performance. If you freeze your features you will soon arrive at a point where everybody who wanted your software bought it and then the revenue stops.

"everybody who wanted your software bought it and then the revenue stops."

That's... how it should work. You don't get to hook into their wallets for time and all eternity.

everybody who wanted your bought it and then the revenue stops.

everybody who wanted your bought it and then the revenue stops.

everybody who wanted your bought it and then the revenue stops.

... and then you go do something else!

That is the precise mechanism that drives the economy forward.

Re: Users hate change

#169

Post by la_barba »

ch_sm wrote: post #160
la_barba wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What ever happened to making a product, selling it once to the customer, who then gets to use it as they wish for as long as it works? That was the old business model. It worked well for a while. Then most small software companies that sold general purpose software went out of business doing just that. And with App Stores basically stealing 30% of all your sales, its become even more harder to do that. A lot of majo…

> It worked well for a while. […] And with App Stores basically stealing 30% of all your sales … I’ve never understood that argument. Physical media production, packaging and shelf space was way more expensive than 30%. Not trying to justify the Apple’s Premium here, just pointing out that it’s a lot cheaper than physical retail used to be. > I kept using Photoshop because its just a better software... In some ways i…

Well, I could sell it on my website and keep 100% of the sales? Modern operating systems seem to think any binary is malware these days. Windows ads a NTFS metadata tag to any file thats downloaded online and will throw up scary looking warnings when you try to run it. And the security folks spent years writing columns telling people not to download "random" binaries from the internet. So now we download "random" binaries from the App Store. Ofcource the app store has very little interest (beyond bad PR) in actually testing or ensuring that the application is not malicious, because who wants to hire tens of thousands of people for that when you can just use an "intelligent" algorithm to figure it out. They will pass the buck back to the vendor in a nanosecond when they discover malware in the app store. They're still going to keep the 30% of sales though. I'm not bitter, I promise! :)

Re: Users hate change

#170

Post by rolltiide »

8ytecoder wrote: post #161
ryandrake wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, I’m totally against subscription software because I resent having to pay again and again for the same product just to be able to use it a month later. What ever happened to making a product, selling it once to the customer, who then gets to use it as they wish for as long as it works? Why does everything have to be a recurring revenue stream? Because you have software engineers who need something t…

I like the jetbrains model. You can always stop paying whenever you want and you get to own whatever last version you hold.

I'm really curious how well that actually works for Jetbrains, and if it would work for a new entrant with a different financing structure.
Post reply on HN