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

Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

fangdaddy.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 438 posts

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#191

Post by prirun »

muppetman wrote: post #144
jwr wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Windows 3.11, Office, Windows 95 etc seem to have done ok without monthly payments.

Monopolies are great! /s

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#192

Post by leaflets2 »

Ekaros wrote: post #162
jwr wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Shouldn't software be cheaper than ever? Features certainly haven't increased much. And we now have magnitudes more processing power, memory, bandwidth and storage space. And improved tooling should have made it much much more efficient process? So what has failed? The entire field? Do developers really deserve the expensive pay if their efficiency has not increased?

That's like: Metal and materials are better now than ever before, so shouldn't it be simple, to design new airplanes, nowadays? Why do the aerospace engineers get paid so much

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#193

Post by Kye »

viraptor wrote: post #186
Kye wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got my license back when 5 came out just as I was getting into music in 2015. That covers me to 6.99, and it's taken 7 years to reach 6.64. That's one heck of a bargain.

I didn't realise that. Now I actually want them to cut a new version soon. They deserve my money again and then some.

That's the neat thing. They're always making a new version. They dropped a whole notation editor in with nothing more than an item in the changelog. The video compositor is always improving.

You get all of whatever version you start on (Even if you start at x.99), plus the next, and then your license is done unless you renew it. So no matter what, I don't get updates after 6.99 unless I renew.

Most of what I do music-wise nowadays is making songs live in Ableton Live on Twitch, and I rarely bother to take them to a "produced" state, so what I have in the current Reaper is plenty. I probably won't upgrade, but I'll keep recommending it.

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#195

Post by wowokay »

renonce wrote: post #182
viraptor wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is unrealistic to expect to be able to pay once and use an app "forever". That's the other extreme though. There's a middle ground that http://reaper.fm/ uses. You buy the current x and x+1 versions. Then you pay for the license again for x+2, x+3 if you want to. The price is very reasonable and there's no subscription as such. If you're happy with the old major version, you can use it as long as it continues to…

In that case the number of users who would buy x+2, x+3 is probably not half as many as users who bought x, x+1 and the developers would no longer be incentivized to build any more versions, making such a business unsustainable. And newer versions of operating systems, especially Windows, break old software like Office 2003 to ensure that you are using the latest version of Office 365 so they can profit. You can stay…

Not true, some things need to be updated with the OS, like Parallels.

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#196

Post by spaceman_2020 »

ChildOfChaos wrote: post #50
xg15 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But our businesses are viable as subscription services, and not as one-off or ad-hoc puchase models. Doesn't explain businesses that had been per-purchase for a long time and are now still switching to subscriptions though. (E.g. photoshop, jetbrains...)

Agreed, it's usually nothing to do with the fact they weren't viable before, it's just that subscriptions are more profitable. With cost of living crisis and such, soon enough though it won't be able to last. People are already cancelling one of the biggest main subscriptions they have (netflix). Also I fear this is really changing society. Many years ago, as you got older you got into a better place in life because…

> your headphones needs replacing every few years

This part is absolutely bonkers to me and absurd that we’ve accepted it.

I’m an amateur music producer. Many producers I know, even pros, use headphones that are years old, some even decades old. Most of the bestselling models haven’t changed at all in decades. You can use them for years and the only parts you need to replace are the ear cushions and cable. Most manufacturers even build them with replaceability in mind with detachable cups and cables.

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#197

Post by [deleted] »

boffinism wrote: post #4

Dear 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.

[deleted]

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#198

Post by b112 »

leaflets2 wrote: post #192
Ekaros wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't software be cheaper than ever? Features certainly haven't increased much. And we now have magnitudes more processing power, memory, bandwidth and storage space. And improved tooling should have made it much much more efficient process? So what has failed? The entire field? Do developers really deserve the expensive pay if their efficiency has not increased?

That's like: Metal and materials are better now than ever before, so shouldn't it be simple, to design new airplanes, nowadays? Why do the aerospace engineers get paid so much

Due to all the frameworks, n0de junk, comp0se blather, I've seen devs write 200 lines of code, for what would have taken 20k lines in 2005.

Devs have it do easy now, that many are so abstracted away from DB, OS, network stack, persistence, that they literally have no idea how anything really works.

This is desired of course, devs today are in short supply, just like the bow vs the crossbow, years of practise turns into months.

But the point is, it is indeed far far far easier to deploy software today.

(why the 0 and now double u usage in place of w with auus?

I suspect auus, n0de, c0mposer dependant entities, such as auus,spend time defending their business model. I want honest discussion, not "omg, defend n0de" discussion, which latches on mention of such tech and pulls in the army)

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#199

Post by [deleted] »

mattjenner wrote: post #21

Dear 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…

[deleted]

Re: Dear startups: I hate subscription services (2021)

#200

Post by withinboredom »

jwr wrote: post #122
boffinism wrote: post #4

Dear 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…

The problem with a subscription model is that there is a mathematical limit to how much MRR you can make. You can configure the limit by changing pricing, marketing, etc, but then that effects churn. There is simply no way to bypass this limit, no matter what you do unless you can remove churn completely, which is not possible with a subscription model.

With a one-off purchase, you can sell the same thing to a customer multiple times, you can sell upgrades, and you "magically" remove churn.

You own a SaaS, how long do your customers stay customers? If it's 8 months, sell a one-off purchase for the cost of 16 months. Bam, you've made more than you ever would from an average customer, and you don't have to hunt them down and try to get them to stay a customer. You can just focus on building an awesome product and not worry about churn at all. In a year or so, think about a new feature or two that increases the value of your product, sell that new feature (eg, discounted) to existing customers and increase the price for new purchases.

Post reply on HN