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

171–180 of 329 posts

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

#171

Post by Macha »

justsomehnguy wrote: post #85
Macha wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> or that we pay a low price once and get indefinite free upgrades. To take IntelliJ as an example, I can't think of an improvement since 2018 that I really would pay for. Largely enabling that is why they moved to the subscription process because people like me would use IntelliJ 18 for five or so years then update for OS support or whatever. €100/yr is way more than I used to pay for intelliJ, €240/yr is way more t…

> If my headphones have a bug where they catch fire the manufacturer needs to eat the cost and recall and fix/replace/refund them > Even if it does wipe out their margin from the upfront €100 cost. That assumes what the initial price wasn't at least x20, though. > splitting the old upfront price as if customers were on a 2 year upgrade cycle rather than 5. It is also about perceived cost and maintenance costs: you ca…

> That assumes what the initial price wasn't at least x20, though.

Yes, I assume this is true because these companies were profitable businesses charging 2x annual, not 20x, before the move to subscription models. Requiring 20 years of subscription to profit sounds highly risky and not all the kind of thing investors would support.

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

#172

Post by mikewarot »

When automobiles came out, Henry Ford (on his 3rd try) managed to perfect mass production. He lowered the cost of production by at least an order of magnitude below that of traditional manufacturers, while producing quality, interchangeable parts.

Eventually, the market saturated, and his competitors shifted to fashion based sales, with model years, etc. Ford resisted, but eventually gave in.

---

In programming, the cost of production is effectively zero. There are no disks, boxes, and manuals to produce and ship any more. The costs are in support, and bug fixes (like recalls in cars).

Nobody expects to get next year's model car for free. But if a defect is found that can hurt people or damage the car in a premature manner, the manufacturer is required to recall and repair the defect.

---

It seems reasonable for people to want to buy and own their copy of software. Because of the complexity of software, there might be a need for support. It is up to the manufacturer of the software to specify, up front, what support they include in the purchase price, and for how long.

It seems reasonable to want any manufacturing defects to be corrected for no additional cost to the customer.

---

It does NOT seem reasonable for a manufacturer to be able to force the rental of a product instead of selling it. IBM was forced out of the exclusively rental business of its hardware for good reasons.

If someone wants to offer their software as a rental, to run on the customer's premises, that's fine, as long as purchase is also an option at a reasonable price.

If software manufacturers don't want to offer a reasonable price purchase, they should be forced out of the rental business by government fiat.

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

#173

Post by BatteryMountain »

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…

Was about to mention Jetbrain's perpetual license system which is the best of both worlds. I greatly appreciate their system.

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

#174

Post by tchock23 »

jpomykala wrote: post #82
jmacd wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to check out your service if you care to share the name here?

https://simplelocalize.io

Nice landing page - clean design and clear layout. I also like that you include a brief blurb about you and why you created it right on the homepage. So many software companies these days hide who is behind it and/or don’t have an “about us” page, which makes it hard to “invest” in the product as a potential customer…

Bookmarking for a future project!

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

#175

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

Technology has not been "appropriated". You still have the option to use free software, or only use software that charges an initial fee. The people building the software you use (not "appropriating") are also free to offer their software on whatever terms they deem appropriate.

Economically, if you're receiving ongoing value from software, it is not illogical that you'd pay ongoing cost for that software. We don't do this with most physical goods because it's logistically difficult to accomplish. But that doesn't mean it's an inherent evil. I really don't see the problem here.

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

#176

Post by skinkestek »

kasey_junk wrote: post #166
skinkestek wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely see your point. So here is a suggestion that might make it less annoying for users. I don't know if it will help you but for some businesses it should be a great idea (and I will prefer those who follow this model): Use tokens instead of subscriptions. Even if I end up paying the same on average this feels a whole lot better. There are just too many services out there that wants me to subscribe, and ever…

I’d bet that you are the exception that prefers token or metered pricing. Almost every time I’ve seen someone try that pricing model customers end up hating it and want a flat fee subscription. I do think making it easy to pause and restart subscriptions is an underused model but would also bet lots of price smart SaaS companies have looked at that.

I'm not against subscriptions per se. I subscribe to a number of things.

It just happens to be abused badly, from subscriptions for things that never need to update (I'd almost bet a dollar there is or has been a flashlight app with a subscription somewhere), to subscriptions for things you use a week and then are finished with to a certain alarm clock app that both charges multiple dollars a month and then has the guts to try to track me on top of that.

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

#177

Post by [deleted] »

dismalpedigree wrote: post #106
anthropodie wrote: post #76

Three months ago I picked up new hobby: Self Hosting. It has been an amazing ride. I learned a lot and I also get peace of mind knowing I am in control of my data. I understand that there is no self-hosted alternative for certain SaaS services but I think that will change as more and more people choose to be in control of their data. This is a good place to start https://old.reddit.com/r/selfhosted

Completely agree. I took the leap hard. Had some steep learning curves, but working well now. Nextcloud, onlyoffice, mattermost, pihole running on a home server. shifted to ubuntu from mac. The two most striking things are 1) how good the free software is. 2) how much less time i spend avoiding gotchas and dark patterns.

[deleted]

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

#178

Post by aceazzameen »

irutirw222 wrote: post #133
porcoda wrote: post #18

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. Given that developers need to be paid, and resources cost money, there needs to be a way to rectify that gap between the consumer and maintainer. At one point we did so by paying for an initial version of software, and then paying for updates. Now that we don’t do that, but…

The problem I have with this post, is that it's assuming erroneously the "eternal development" mindset. Once a software has reached maturity, beaides (very rare) security fixes there is not much that needs to be done to it. Is anyone seeing LaTeX receiving feature updates all the time? Or grep or vim in need of continuous updates? No! And MSO, which was mentioned here multiple times, also has reached maturity decades…

This is spot on. Adobe went subscription once their software was more than mature. Now that it's SaaS they're using paid subscribers as beta testers of features. Every once in a while something good comes of it. But then there's features no one asked for which introduce new bugs.

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

#179

Post by [deleted] »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #88
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…

This is not blaming the victim as there are no victims. OP’s is wrong that SaaS is rent sending. Software should not be free (in cost), yet always receive new features and updates. Indeed, the alternative is the ad-tech surveillance state.

[deleted]

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

#180

Post by ballenf »

Hnrobert42 wrote: post #88
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…

This is not blaming the victim as there are no victims. OP’s is wrong that SaaS is rent sending. Software should not be free (in cost), yet always receive new features and updates. Indeed, the alternative is the ad-tech surveillance state.

> Software should not be free (in cost), yet always receive new features and updates.

That sounds like an extension of "you wouldn't download a car".

Post reply on HN