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

When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

blog.zulip.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 267 posts

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#191

Post by usr1106 »

dijit wrote: post #163
usr1106 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. If I ever have to leave my current job (which could be soonish, startup and runway you know...) one of the things I'll miss most is the clean messaging experience provided by zulip. Everyone who likes the HN UX should be comfortable with zulip, even if it's quite a bit richer in details. We run our zulip on a smallish EC2 instance. It's probably less than a Euro/month/employee.

We pay zulip for their hosted version, which works out cheaper than slack and in any event I would like to support the development. I have had pushback from non-technical staff (and pushback from tech workers for a week, but now they seem to be very happy aside from UX bugs esp with the mobile app). If you're ever looking for work, we are hiring across the board, fully remote in Sweden or Germany. (due to tax!)

Sponsoring their development is a good point.

Thanks for the hint. As a German speaking Swedish that could be a great fit. I have coded a component for Lamborghini but not a part of my career I am particularly proud of. There should be smarter things to do than ruining the planet. So don't expect an application despite of zulip ;)

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#192

Post by dijit »

usr1106 wrote: post #191
dijit wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We pay zulip for their hosted version, which works out cheaper than slack and in any event I would like to support the development. I have had pushback from non-technical staff (and pushback from tech workers for a week, but now they seem to be very happy aside from UX bugs esp with the mobile app). If you're ever looking for work, we are hiring across the board, fully remote in Sweden or Germany. (due to tax!)

Sponsoring their development is a good point. Thanks for the hint. As a German speaking Swedish that could be a great fit. I have coded a component for Lamborghini but not a part of my career I am particularly proud of. There should be smarter things to do than ruining the planet. So don't expect an application despite of zulip ;)

> There should be smarter things to do than ruining the planet.

Hopefully my sim racing game that I am building will be good enough that we can stop wasting so much fuel on real cars. :)

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#193

Post by lrhegeba »

anonzzzies wrote: post #189

People don't look at the history of the company or the owners when they sign up; if I sign up for a 'one time pay, forever' plan, I need to to know this company, or, if it's new, the owners, have a history of delivering on promises in the past. If I sign up with a company that has delivered something for the past 15 years reliably and now add a forever plan, I can assume with some certainty it will continue. If it's…

while i agree with your conclusions regarding the probability if a "forever"-plan will be honoured, people are rightfully pissed. and it doesnt matter if people bought on a whim or after extensive research, the company advertised it as "forever" and when they now dont honour the deal they should be called out as fraudster/liars. cause thats what it is and i dont care if others do it too.

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#194

Post by pnt12 »

bombcar wrote: post #84
tough wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should at least grandfathered any users on the -free forever- plan

Or tell them it may stop being free in X years, where X is large enough that it’s aways off but close enough that some decide to switch. And then stop new signups but never actually take away the free plan. The “good work Wesley, I’ll probably charge you in the morning” plan.

Or just "free hosting", no further details needed. Later they may say "this was unsustainable and we will drop this", and that would be OK.

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#195

Post by anonzzzies »

lrhegeba wrote: post #193
anonzzzies wrote: post #189

People don't look at the history of the company or the owners when they sign up; if I sign up for a 'one time pay, forever' plan, I need to to know this company, or, if it's new, the owners, have a history of delivering on promises in the past. If I sign up with a company that has delivered something for the past 15 years reliably and now add a forever plan, I can assume with some certainty it will continue. If it's…

while i agree with your conclusions regarding the probability if a "forever"-plan will be honoured, people are rightfully pissed. and it doesnt matter if people bought on a whim or after extensive research, the company advertised it as "forever" and when they now dont honour the deal they should be called out as fraudster/liars. cause thats what it is and i dont care if others do it too.

Fully agree, but the research helps. I buy them sometimes if a service I have used for years offers one suddenly to get in some cash. I have not been betrayed; I do have some that are 15 years old. And they work.

But yes, fully agree with you; name + shame.

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#196

Post by dazc »

Panzer04 wrote: post #157
dazc wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Surely, one can expect better than that from a company whose stated principles include “customer obsession” and “earn trust”.' One should expect better but one should also expect such words to be basically bullshit too.

But why should we accept that such statements are bullshit? It’s because companies are so cavalier with their advertising language and we let them get away with it.

Because there is a history of businesses making statements that turn out to be nothing more than marketing slogans.

I'm not defending them or suggesting you shouldn't be angry about this; merely suggesting that being cynical of such claims at the outset is advisable.

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#197

Post by matwood »

pikdum wrote: post #73

If a company gets rid of my free forever plan with them, there is a 0% chance that they're getting any money or positive word of mouth from me in the future. It's incredibly scummy behavior. If you're not willing to actually offer it forever, just call it a free plan instead of lying about it.

> If a company gets rid of my free forever plan with them, there is a 0% chance that they're getting any money or positive word of mouth from me in the future. It's incredibly scummy behavior.

I'm sure they are also willing to give you back any money you have paid to date...

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#198

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

I worked for a hardware company that serviced devices decades old.

I remember walking through the back room of our Service Department, and seeing cameras on a shelf that were 60 years old. They were there for parts, if someone brought in an oldie.

I'm sure the service wasn't free, but they were willing to do it.

In our work, we were constantly being told to "play the long game," and think about how the software would age.

They were still using an SDK that I wrote in 1994/5, 25 years later.

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#199

Post by matwood »

selcuka wrote: post #126
jjav wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It should be illegal to offer 'free forever' plans and tiers. No company is actually capable of delivering on that promise. > It is perfectly possible if your marginal cost is low/zero. No, simply because no company or product is going to be around "forever". It's an impossible promise.

> No, simply because no company or product is going to be around "forever". It's an impossible promise. Real world customers are actually smarter and they don't take words literally. They know that contracts don't mean anything once one of the parties is not around. By the same logic making annual contracts should also be illegal because there is no guarantee that your company or product will be around until next yea…

> They know that contracts don't mean anything once one of the parties is not around.

Contracts also mean little if no money changes hands and both parties have zero liability. They mean about the same as the pinky promise made in first grade to be friends 'forever'.

Re: When “free forever” means “free for the next 4 months”

#200

Post by _Algernon_ »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #176
onion2k wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a company states something is 'forever' or 'unlimited' they should be held to exactly that offer. Companies should not be able to use very appealing language and then just say "but obviously we didn't really mean forever !". Using language with a specific meaning with no intention to actually honor what you're offering is fraud.

if you had read some of the previous thread you might have picked up on the subtle distinction that some of the people being dinged for saying Forever probably meant forever when they said it but then ran up against reality. True if you say forever you should be held to it, on the other hand if someone says forever to you you should hopefully be clever enough to realize they can't do it because forever is unknowable.…

You should be able to trust a contract to mean what is written. It is not my responsibility to ensure that the company is able to hold their end of the bargain. If they at a later point find themselves unable to hold their end of the bargain, they should face consequences for breach of contract / false advertising and those consequences should be greater than the expected gain from walking back on the contract. Otherwise all contracts become worthless which serves nobody.
Post reply on HN