Tell HN: A Conversation Needs to Be Had over Subscription Software • Hacker News Board

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

#191

Post by loudmax » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:00 PM UTC

rvz wrote: post #15

It just means that you don't own the software that you run. Always having to have an account and sign in and pay the subscription tax otherwise you lose access to it. Now with games becoming digital, if you break their 'terms of service' they can lock and ban your account; taking your 'digital' games away or even locking the console. (Unless you paid for the physical version.)

> It just means that you don't own the software that you run.

Arguably this goes for all proprietary software. You're allowed to use software that you paid a license for, but you were never allowed to make and distribute copies of it.

For most practical purposes, licensed software that runs on your computer feels like ownership. After all, we're not allowed to make and distribute copies of published books but we're pretty comfortable saying that we own a book that we've bought. But those copyright limitations are still there. You can own a physical copy of the book, but there are some things you're not allowed to do with it.

Owning a subscription to online software as a service points to the limitations of what we mean by ownership.

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

#192

Post by Kbelicius » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:01 PM UTC

bosie wrote: post #162

chii wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nobody expected to get updates for free if there's a security vulnerability, i'm sure you'd expect the update to be free.

Why though?

Because If I get a faulty vacuum cleaner I expect to be able to exchange it for a working one for free.

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

#193

Post by MerelyMortal » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:03 PM UTC

CubsFan1060 wrote: post #118

MerelyMortal wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Their non-cloud/non-subscription license is still the same price, they just removed the discounted option and replaced it with a higher priced subscription option. It looks like they want to dissuade as many people as possible from their non-cloud/non-subscription option.

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

#194

Post by rglullis » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:03 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #184

rglullis wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could argue that MS Office and Adobe products were always "subscription-based", if companies and professionals never left the update treadmill. After all, if all you need is MS-Office 2000 or Adobe Photoshop 6, no subscription is needed and you can still find licenses around.

One could argue it. But they would then have to answer why would non-business buyers, that is, users who did "leave the update treadmill" and bought new updates (or skipped them) at their convenience, suffer the subscription model too?

Because they are such an irrelevant part of the market that they basically could disappear and no one would care, and the hobbyist/non-professional people who don't mind using years-old software could as well just use Free/Open alternatives?

There is nothing stopping Joe-who-only-pays-full-licences to continue using his MS 2007 Office suite, is there?

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

#195

Post by marginalia_nu » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:05 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #63

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…

> 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…

> Blame the victim?

I don't think it makes sense to call anyone making an informed decision to overpay for a service a victim. If you don't think the deal is reasonable, then don't accept the deal and use something else.

The exception being profiteering in the case of a shortage, but I don't think this is the case. There is no software shortage being taken advantage of.

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

#196

Post by tlogan » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:07 PM UTC

Using trustpilot as evidence of quality of a company is really strange. First and foremost trustpilot is 100% scam.

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

#197

Post by WesolyKubeczek » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:07 PM UTC

BatteryMountain wrote: post #173

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.

It kind of reflect the model where by subscriptions, you fund the ongoing development. Also a nice move that when you cancel, your installed software doesn't stop working. As far as I remember, they generate a product key that can be used for perpetual licenses and the software won't be phoning home.

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

#198

Post by fsloth » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:08 PM UTC

Lots of business users actually prefer monthly subscription over a fixed license. This lets them move the costs from capital costs (CAPEX) to operational costs (OPEX) which finance departments like more.

It's not just something software vendors push, it's what many of their clients actually want.

Now, as a private user the situation may or may not be completely different. But prefering a monthly license over a fixex license is not a dark pattern as such.

ARR (annually recurring revenue) or - yeah, monthly licensing - is also something the stock market incentivizes. Generally stocks have gone up considerably for companies that have moved to subscription based revenue models. For publicly listed companies this is a fairly strong signal as well.

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

#199

Post by aceazzameen » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:09 PM UTC

My biggest problem with SaaS is how much control it gives a corporation over a user. They have control over you're experience via unnecessary UI refreshes. They have control over what version you're allowed to use. They have control of your data via surveillance of your devices. They have control over your files via file formats which can become inaccessible unless you continue to subscribe. And they control how much you should be taxed for all of the above.

I'd be more accepting of SaaS if I could regain at least some of that control, which is only available in non-SaaS software.

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

#200

Post by ericd » Fri, Jan 21, 2022, 2:11 PM UTC

gefhfffh wrote: post #160

jtbayly wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example, 1Password. I’m happy to pay for a new version if my current version stops working. OS or browser update broke the app? I’ll pay for the new version. But they are trying to force me to pay every month, therefore they remove my ability to use the app at all unless I pay for their cloud storage which I neither need nor want.

Well, they don't stop working on an improved app and new features while you don't want to update. You don't only get compatibility with X with the new version but all that as well.

If no one wants those improvements, why should they pay them to keep working on it? Maybe 1pass should start working on something else to sell, and move the old stuff to minimal maintenance.