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

Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 329 posts

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#111

Post by eaplmx »

azalemeth wrote: post #69
coldtea wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This sort of began when we all got the impression that software should be free, or that we pay a low price once and get indefinite free upgrades. Blame the victim? We din't get any impression, as we don't set the prices. The companies set those prices. For example Adobe customers never got or set any impression that "software should be free/low price". They paid 100s to 1000s of dollars for each update or package r…

The other model that works well is the open source one, with the maintainer having "another job"; e.g. academics doing scientific research (CERN!) or corporations who use the project internally. Unfortunately, the fact that the latter vastly outnumber the former means that the largest open-source projects are arguably corporate middleware or those of benefit to large corporations rather than users per se. People like…

A problem with open and free projects (to oversimplify the ideological differences) is the source of time and purpose.

The production cost is subsidized as a Hobbie not as a profession, so it's hard to expect a 'consumer product'. When you put external money and corporate interest in your hobbies, something breaks.

Not saying open products don't have to exist, we all love them. They cover different creative needs, and usually are a gift for the community.

https://apenwarr.ca/log/20211229 - The Gift of It's your problem now

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#112

Post by martindbp »

I think there are several factors why server-side software has taken over:

  1. It's easier to charge for, holding the software hostage in a way. Also gives a nice excuse "Look! Need to pay for server costs!".
  2. Greater choice in programming language and libraries. If you want to do ML of any kind for example, that's most convenient using Python + libraries. Moving inference client side is still a hassle.
  3. No out of sync client versions
  4. Faster release cycle and iteration speed
  5. If you have a need to store lots heavy user data like images, videos etc, you need to charge anyway, so might as well get the benefits of 2, 3 and 4.
  6. If you need interaction between users, which many apps need today, you probably need centralized severs anyway.
So it's pretty clear to me why it's happening, but that doesn't make it right. Personally, I'm going for a client-side-as-much-as-possible approach for my own project. This should allow me to scale a mostly free product to as many users possible without incurring much marginal cost. I'm hoping that I can then sustain the project on smaller revenue streams, since I'm not really interested in more than replacing a regular salary.

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#113

Post by rakoo »

> What has the world come to, where technology has been appropriated and we are left paying rents every month and companies are increasingly becoming user-hostile and predatory and monopolistic!

This is the expected outcome of Capitalism and was only a matter of time until it happened. If you let for-profit companies run wild, power will consolidate, allowing them to enact whatever policy has the best ROI at the cost of being user-friendly. Hoping for such an individualistic system that rewards greed to be nice is, to put it gently, naive.

The only way to ensure that users are the priority of a software is when users collectively have the power to make decisions. This can either happen when they own the whole process, or if it is run under a license that gives them the power to keep the admins in check. The Copyleft model is the only one that can give those guarantees, and it doesn't prevent admins from earning money

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#114

Post by bluecalm »

One big problem with one time payment model is that you at some point after shipping and fixing bugs need to start doing other things (next paid version or another product). In this period you will accumulate a lot of new features/functionality that isn't exposed to the users for a long time. This causes two problems:

1)Users who would love to have new stuff quickly have to wait, often for years until new version is ready

2)You unload everything in one go with the release and that means tons of bug reports/feature requests/urgent work at this time. This is stressful and counterproductive.

Subscription solves those problems and aligns incentives so developers ship new stuff as soon as it's ready which is better for everyone. I agree it's very nice to have a standalone one time payment option but that has to come without free upgrades (or only for limited period) or otherwise it doesn't make business sense.

There is not an easy way to implement buy your software and get limited subscription for upgrades model as you need to solve the problem of "what if they don't prolong the subscription for a few months but then want back on it". What Jet Brains has done wouldn't fly in consumer market. It's just not an easy problem to solve.

My own experience is that a few years ago people were thankful we don't offer subscription but these days more ask for it as they don't want to front the bigger cost and would be happy to get updates faster. As a consumer I want subscription for everything that may get new useful features.

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#115

Post by dcminter »

WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #78

This is not a wholly black and white world, though. Consider jetbrains: you have a subscription, true, but once you cancel you can still download and use whatever was the latest version released during your paid period. Uou get a perpetual license for it. Seems fair if you accept the fact your IDE no longer “moves fast” along with the ecosystem that seems to have a cult of perpetual churn. Some can afford it, some ca…

> once you cancel you can still download and use whatever was the latest version released during your paid period

I think it's actually the version that you started your paid period with, so usually a slightly older version. I think this is fair though.

Edit: It depends. See: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What...

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#116

Post by freedom2099 »

cube2222 wrote: post #108

I don't really share OP's impressions. I think the move to the subscription model is one of the best things that happened to our industry in the recent years. It's a model which lets you sustainably sell software and keep working on it, delivering updates, etc. The pay per update model forces the creator to release big feature updates, even if the features are just bloat, as bug fix releases and stability work will u…

I do agree… since adobe started they their subscription service I was finally able to afford photoshop!

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#117

Post by wartijn_ »

jpomykala wrote: post #96
wartijn_ wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not OP, but I use https://translationhut.com to manage my translations and it works really well. It can also automatically translate the assets for you, although I don't use that myself. (Full disclosure: I know the guy that makes that service, but am not involved with that project)

"I need to increase my prices" /s Or start charging in Euro :D

I wonder what charging in Euro does on the psychological price front. Does €79 look less than $85?

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#118

Post by CubsFan1060 »

MerelyMortal wrote: post #75
Kuinox wrote: post #5

> Microsoft has used its dominant position to charge for MS Office in perpetuity You can still buy a definitive, noncloud, without subscription of MS Office, and they still release it (there is a 2021 edition).

Microsoft is still taking away options and raising the price. For example, I used to buy a non-cloud/non-subscription license through the Home Use Program. It used to be relatively cheap. Now that option is not available, they only sell a slightly discounted cloud/subscription ($60/year vs $99/year).

So not only are subscriptions "bad", but they are not allowed to raise their prices either?

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#119

Post by dgudkov »

Software is made and supported by software developers and the developers want a recurring pay. Basically they want their employers to subscribe to their services. No wonder the employers transfer the subscription model up the value chain.

While there are cases of obvious abuse of the subscription model, in general, the subscription model for complex software is here to stay. Simple, one-off applications that don't require support or further development may not need subscriptions though.

Re: Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software

#120

Post by eertami »

hughrr wrote: post #92

I don’t mind paying rent for my stuff. What I do mind is paying a lot of rent for not a lot of stuff. When you have a $29 a year subscription for a one off use utility app they can fuck off. When you have a $29 a month subscription for storage, music, TV, fitness, games that spans 6 people I’m fine. What has changed is extortion for some products which have dubious or little value and really difficult to exit contrac…

I think the most egregious example I have seen recently was that company charging $30/month to give you a cloud hosted Chrome instance that you view with a stream ala remote desktop... through an electron app[0].

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26957215

Post reply on HN