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

A world where people pay for software

1sub.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 543 posts

Re: A world where people pay for software

#381

Post by bee_rider »

pfannkuchen wrote: post #332
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #306

Computers have an unprecedented ability to reproduce value for free. Programmers need a relatively fixed amount of resources to thrive. (The value of resources varies by location but we all need things like food, shelter, transportation, clothing, tools, etc etc) If we can find a way to make sure every person has what they need to thrive regardless of their income, programmers can open source all of their software an…

One problem is that most necessary projects aren’t fun, and most fun projects aren’t necessary. Does anyone design dishwashers as a hobby, as an easy example? How do you propose we motivate people to do work that isn’t fun? Currently the carrot of higher pay or ownership in a more valuable thing is doing that, so we would need something to replace it if that goes away.

I don’t think this is an argument to remove markets.

It looks to me more like a suggestion to give people a some kind of guaranteed minimum income, and abolish all IP laws.

Re: A world where people pay for software

#382

Post by ilyt »

chadash wrote: post #28

The link doesn’t talk about the SAAS model, which is probably the most profitable (and ubiquitous) one these days. I know people like to rail against it, but I actually like the SAAS model. It keeps incentives aligned. It used to be that I might shell out $200 for a piece of productivity software. Now, I might pay $10 a month instead. The thing is that under the old model, a company was incentivized by make a sale bu…

Saas is a model that looks great for some cases but overall leads to shittification of many apps as the way it is often done, to make 100% sure nobody can just use a copy of a program they have, is by putting it in the cloud, which means higher costs to them and worse experience to user (even the best web apps feel pretty laggy compared to native).

Re: A world where people pay for software

#383

Post by ilyt »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #316
steveBK123 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SaaS from established firms seems to be more durable & maintained. The problem is all the flash in the pan ZIRP VC funded never-profit SaaS startups out there. Hopefully these get shaken out over the next couple years finally. For example, I've used Adobe products for a very long time, and they get a lot of flack. I was an extensive user of Photoshop (PS) and Lightroom (LR) for a long time. However, the old model was…

> SaaS from established firms seems to be more durable & maintained. Google is infamous for shutting down services. And the same thing regularly happens even to large companies when they get acquired by even larger companies who then shut down their existing services and try to force migrate everyone to the parent's offering. Conversely, stalwarts like Oracle and IBM will often continue providing a service indefinite…

> But many people would just keep using the original version indefinitely. Paying $800 once is a lot less than paying $150/year until you die. It also lets you choose whether you want to pay more for the new features or save money because you don't need them.

The way around that was to change file format so if you're in industry using that file format (say .PSD Photoshop files), at some point you won't be able to open files from your clients...

Re: A world where people pay for software

#384

Post by loup-vaillant »

patrec wrote: post #365
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #306

Computers have an unprecedented ability to reproduce value for free. Programmers need a relatively fixed amount of resources to thrive. (The value of resources varies by location but we all need things like food, shelter, transportation, clothing, tools, etc etc) If we can find a way to make sure every person has what they need to thrive regardless of their income, programmers can open source all of their software an…

Sounds like an excellent idea that will work really well because it's incredibly well aligned with how humans actually function. I really wonder why no one else has thought of communism before.

, obviously. A couple remarks:

Just because someone is proposing something for a small slice of society, doesn’t mean they intend to propose something similar for all of society. For instance, insisting on free schools, free (rail) roads, free health care, free water, and nationalised energy plants doesn’t mean they want to make everything free, or that they want to nationalise everything, or that they are nostalgic for communist Russia or whatever. That’s just the Red Scare talking. The fact is, different systems for different slices of society can and do coexist.

Human nature is not limited to the environment we’re currently living in. Genetically we’re barely different from the people of a couple hundred years ago. And yet our ancestors lived under many kinds of societies. It would be a little presumptuous to assume the one we’re currently living in is the best. Especially considering how it came to be: remember that as Thatcher was saying capitalism/neoliberalism was natural, she did "nudge" things along by having the army pay a visit to workers on strike.

Even communism isn’t a monolith. It took various forms, which failed for various reasons. Sometimes it was direct outside interference, like how the Paris Commune was basically crushed by the national army.

Re: A world where people pay for software

#385

Post by ilyt »

steveBK123 wrote: post #185
vbezhenar wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I'm buying a lifetime thing, it's an investition. I spent money and got thing that will never get old. As time goes on, I'm getting more things and I need to spend less. If I'm buying a subscription, it's an obligation. I'll have to spend money from now until I die or I'll get reduced QoL. Even if today I have spare $200/month, that might not be the case tomorrow. Maybe I'll get fired. Maybe government turn my cas…

Lifetime thing is a rather large statement, especially with software though isn't it? Most of the pre-subscription model compares were never lifetime purchases. Software that needed paid purchase update every 3-5 years to get OS support / features. No software I used in 1995 will run on my current computers. Even 2005 or 2010 is dubious in some cases. Content constantly changed delivery mechanisms and people had to b…

When Saas software dies, your files die.

When Boxed software dies, you run it on your emulator and your files can be read.

> Content constantly changed delivery mechanisms and people had to buy new media/devices every 5-10 years VHS/Betamax -> Laserdisc -> DVD -> Bluray / HD-DVD -> Bluray 4K Vinyl -> 8 track -> Cassette -> CD

You can still find VHS players. You can't get data from SaaS app that died yesterday

Re: A world where people pay for software

#386

Post by m463 »

steveBK123 wrote: post #94
jehb wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has not been my experience at all with SaaS. I find SaaS products, including ones I have paid for, disappear at a much greater rate than the rate at which the desktop tools they replaced stop working. There's also next to nothing I can do as an end user when they do disappear. If I'm very lucky, I get a limited window to be able to export a portion of my data. But we've eroded data formats to the point where eve…

SaaS from established firms seems to be more durable & maintained. The problem is all the flash in the pan ZIRP VC funded never-profit SaaS startups out there. Hopefully these get shaken out over the next couple years finally. For example, I've used Adobe products for a very long time, and they get a lot of flack. I was an extensive user of Photoshop (PS) and Lightroom (LR) for a long time. However, the old model was…

saas is antagonistic to customers

It deliberately changes in the interests of the business at the expense of the customer.

Updates are forced, cannot be backed out, lock in the customer, degrade privacy, remove features, upsell, and more.

There needs to be a way to attract willing customers and maintain a respectful trustworthy relationship. Saas doesn't seem to do it.

Re: A world where people pay for software

#387

Post by Panzer04 »

crazygringo wrote: post #369
HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. I have some audio waveform generation software I use only once in a long while. I paid about $50 for it almost 5 years ago. If it were SaaS, I'd have paid a lot more than that over the last 5 years. A long time ago I worked out an agreement with a local gym. To avoid a membership that I would only need for a few months (I was living in a hotel temporarily with no access to my own equipment), I paid $10 each time…

> I paid $10 each time I showed up. This could be a useful model for rarely-used software. But it already is. Pay for a month and then cancel. Repeat each time you need it. I don't understand why people are assuming you have to pay continuously for years instead of just paying for the months you actually use.

It's a bit frustrating having to "subscribe" and cancel almost everything. I barely signup to anything and I still forget that I'm subscribed to things.

Companies are fully aware that many, many people forget about charges on their card and leech off those for extended periods.

Re: A world where people pay for software

#388

Post by bee_rider »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #306

Computers have an unprecedented ability to reproduce value for free. Programmers need a relatively fixed amount of resources to thrive. (The value of resources varies by location but we all need things like food, shelter, transportation, clothing, tools, etc etc) If we can find a way to make sure every person has what they need to thrive regardless of their income, programmers can open source all of their software an…

We should guarantee minimum income, and abolish intellectual property. Build an economy around actually doing things rather than calling dibs on solutions. Let the market sort out the doing of things, just make sure everyone can participate.

Re: A world where people pay for software

#389

Post by ilyt »

steveBK123 wrote: post #94
jehb wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has not been my experience at all with SaaS. I find SaaS products, including ones I have paid for, disappear at a much greater rate than the rate at which the desktop tools they replaced stop working. There's also next to nothing I can do as an end user when they do disappear. If I'm very lucky, I get a limited window to be able to export a portion of my data. But we've eroded data formats to the point where eve…

SaaS from established firms seems to be more durable & maintained. The problem is all the flash in the pan ZIRP VC funded never-profit SaaS startups out there. Hopefully these get shaken out over the next couple years finally. For example, I've used Adobe products for a very long time, and they get a lot of flack. I was an extensive user of Photoshop (PS) and Lightroom (LR) for a long time. However, the old model was…

> I'm also intrigued by how many very wealthy people are unwilling to pay $10/mo to stream music/video and/or share passwords, when I recall paying $20/CD at the record store in 1998 dollars. You can listen to basically every song you want for the year for the price of (inflation adjusted) 2.5 CDs purchased by my mallrat teenage self back then.

I'm willing to pay $10/mo to play music but that gets me access to near-all music I want access to, on all devices I use. A CD can be just in one place at once and needs a specific player. So it's a terrible comparison.

Re: A world where people pay for software

#390

Post by guidoism »

ilyt wrote: post #377
smolder wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are potentially other carrots aside from material wealth that can motivate people to do unpleasant work. Currently it takes significant pay to get people to do certain important but thankless jobs. We could thank them. A legacy is important to many people. They may enjoy an immutable commemoration of their work, if they're secure in a material sense.

Sure, ask someone to shovel shit for 8h/day 5 days a week and see where your thanks will get you. You might find one sucker, but not nearly enough

Clearly this isn't going to work in a world where people use the word "sucker" to refer to people who do work to help others. Honestly, do we call volunteers at soup kitchens suckers?

The problem clearly involves an unequal distribution of work.

If everyone is else being paid and you are trying to convince a single person to literally shovel shit for 8 hours then yes, that won't work. They will feel like they are being taken advantage of. I think this is a common feeling amongst all workers. If your boss asks you to work late you are much less likely to be pissed off if the boss stays late and helps out too.

Post reply on HN