Earlier quoted context omitted.
It blows my mind that there are people in this thread who think that a business should charge once for a product that requires iteration or continued backend support.
If I sold furniture, the designs and manufacturing processes and materials usage all undergo continuous iteration, yet when I sell you your chair, you don't have to keep paying me forever to keep using it. Yes, you also don't get updates to it. That is actually perfectly fine for countless bits of software. I have 30 year old software, and it still does it's original job just fine, if I happen to be ok with all it's…
Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
141–150 of 438 posts
Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
#142I am pretty sure there is a business that can be built over managing all these subscriptions - something like European OpenBanking but that includes credit cards - and you just get a dashboard showing you all the subscriptions you have (that will be ticket shock) and then you can turn them off as needed. Not sure if credit cards are in openbanking but that would be the core of it
Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
#143Dear innovative people: think of a better model. 1. Free = problematic with the lack of money 2. Freemium = looks good if the balance is right 3. Ads = Mostly works but the model is flawed and skewed 4. Subscription = Love/Hate currently trendy but too relied on 5. Pay-what-you-can = Fans provide the service for everyone 6. Premium only = Only what it's worth, when it's worth 7. Enterprise = S'ok because my company/o…
The opposite effect is you are pressured to keep using the product and I feel my friends are losing valuable time because of their Netflix subscriptions.
Pay-per-use might also be a similar option, and I'm happy with many web services working this way.
Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
#144Dear customers: we know. But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. We know because we tried them. So we're catering to the people who are OK with buying a subscription because there are enough of them. Sorry if that doesn't suit you.
That sounds like a cynical take, but is actually close to the truth. The usual take is that businesses are "greedy" and subscription models are "lucrative". The word I'd rather use is "sustainable". Maintaining software (any software) is an ongoing process, not a one-time effort. It needs to be paid for on an ongoing basis. Even a tiny phone app needs regular maintenance work just to stay current with OS and tools de…
Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I sold furniture, the designs and manufacturing processes and materials usage all undergo continuous iteration, yet when I sell you your chair, you don't have to keep paying me forever to keep using it. Yes, you also don't get updates to it. That is actually perfectly fine for countless bits of software. I have 30 year old software, and it still does it's original job just fine, if I happen to be ok with all it's…
No one is going to use an unpatched bug in your chair to rob your house.
This is an overused excuse that does not actually justify nearly as much as what it's used for.
Also, online services suffer leaks and outtages and 3-letter/police pressure that I have no control or knowledge of that self owned self hosted software does not.
None of the excuses for rent hell are actually valid. They are just the excuses used to sell the idea.
The fact that services have their own problems does not mean there is no such thing as a valid service, or that the security update issue is not a real thing, it just means that this security update issue is just a thing like a lot of other things, that only really necessarily applies in certain cases, and doesn't apply everywhere, and doesn't override all other concerns, and there are other equally valid issues that are addressed by the opposite sort of model. Ie, it's nothing special and does not excuse or trump anything else.
Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
#146I think SaaS, and even many platform applications, are OK as subs.
"Buy once" platform app models are subs, anyway. It is unreasonable to expect a software developer to keep a package updated through many new operating systems. Some systems, like MS Windows (and, I suspect -but don't know for sure- Linux), do a great job of retrofitting, so older apps can often keep going, but most mobile systems won't. Apple is in the middle. It supports a ways back, but will deprecate features that older apps may require.
I used to buy the Adobe CS suite, yearly. Each year, I would get an upgrade, as the software would usually get new features that I wanted. I suspect that, eventually, the version I had, would stop working, but I never let it age that long. I probably could have gotten away with reupping every two, or even three, years.
I like the new sub model. I get access to every single Adobe app, at a lower price than what I paid for my yearly upgrades (but more than if I did it bi-yearly). This allows me to do something like install inDesign, if someone sends me an ID file. I don't want to keep the app around, otherwise.
SaaS is basically built around a "service," and "services," by definition, are subs. If I subscribe to a newspaper, that paper hits my doorstep every weekend, until I stop paying the bill. That's an ancient model, that has not changed; nor does it need to.
Hardware is another matter. I can see having a piece of hardware that could benefit from regular firmware updates, but I think it should keep running at spec, with a single firmware setup, despite new versions coming up.
I'm also pretty cynical about hardware that is sold with "lifetime upgrades." It's been my experience that "lifetime," is actually only a couple of years, before the firmware stops being upgraded. As long as the device keeps working with the last firmware, then that's basically what I paid for, anyway. If the device is "time-bombed," though, that's just evil.
If the device works, but uses a SaaS subscription, then I would think that the manufacturer needs to figure out how to keep supporting the device for as long as possible, and have some way to transition the device to “standalone” operation; especially if the company is going out of business, or phasing out support for the hardware. This would probably require legal backing, against corporate officers, personally, as corporations can get off the hook, fairly easily.
Also, I think we should do away with "lifetime" anything. I think the expected lifespan of stuff (like firmware updates and SaaS support) should be spelled out at purchase time, and legally enforced.
Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
#147One thing the article seems to miss out: price. Some subscriptions are horribly expensive. $8/month for something I’d be happy to pay $10/year. That’s the real problem. A lot of services come out at $50/$60 per year with minimal improvements over an OSS or ad-supported tool.
Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
Restate it as "more viable".
Yeah, I'll restate that as "more profitable", a.k.a. "we're greedy and if we can make more money by lowering the quality of our products and restricting the range of people who can use them, of course we'll do that."
That doesn't mean the rest of your statement, but if that happened then competition in a free market would take care of it. Perhaps you can start the next billion-dollar Adobe?
Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
#149Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)
#150Dear customers: we know. But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. We know because we tried them. So we're catering to the people who are OK with buying a subscription because there are enough of them. Sorry if that doesn't suit you.
That sounds like a cynical take, but is actually close to the truth. The usual take is that businesses are "greedy" and subscription models are "lucrative". The word I'd rather use is "sustainable". Maintaining software (any software) is an ongoing process, not a one-time effort. It needs to be paid for on an ongoing basis. Even a tiny phone app needs regular maintenance work just to stay current with OS and tools de…
Infinite support or updates and a one-time-payment is unrealistic, yeah, ruling out cloud-based SaaS. But for common desktop apps and on-prem stuff, that just isn't neccessary. Drop support at some (previously announced) point and the customer can decide if they want to upgrade. Adobe CS6 still runs fine.