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

A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 97 posts

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#21

Post by samsolomon »

maxxxxx wrote: post #17
samsolomon wrote: post #16

The case of Adobe is interesting. I think the move to a subscription model has been a hostile move for customers. The second you stop paying for the software, you lose the ability to open your old files. This has allowed smaller software applications such as Sketch, The Affinity Suite and Capture One to grab marketshare. I think Sketch’s current business model is perfect. Customers pay for a year of updates. If a cus…

"The second you stop paying for the software, you lose access to any of your old files." It seems you lose editing access, you still can view them. Still not great, but I wanted to clarify.

I've updated my comment. You don't lose access, but you cannot open old files.

I suppose you could use a PSD or AI to Sketch converter. I'm unsure about other file types.

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#22

Post by maxxxxx »

samsolomon wrote: post #21
maxxxxx wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The second you stop paying for the software, you lose access to any of your old files." It seems you lose editing access, you still can view them. Still not great, but I wanted to clarify.

I've updated my comment. You don't lose access, but you cannot open old files. I suppose you could use a PSD or AI to Sketch converter. I'm unsure about other file types.

I think you can open and view them with Photoshop, just not edit. At least that's my understanding.

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#23

Post by toyg »

pspeter3 wrote: post #15
brynedwards wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One I know is Bitwig who recently changed their licensing model so you get 12 months updates with your perpetual license and can pay to continue receiving updates after 12 months[1]. [1] https://www.bitwig.com/en/17/new-license-model.html

That seems like a good hybrid model

It's the old JetBrains model.

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#24

Post by toyg »

ColanR wrote: post #18
pspeter3 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide your reasoning? I assume that the subscriptions continue to fund software developers working on the product.

I think parent's point is about how the company is drawing in cashflow. If the customer owns perpetually a copy of the software, the only reason they'll buy a new copy is if the new one is substantially better than the old: hence, the only way the company makes cash next year is if they've been improving their product. With the subscription model, the company is still going to make that income regardless if they have…

On the other hand, this removes a big incentive for "featuritis". A developer can sit back and only add features that really matter to the product or fix minor but annoying bugs, rather than pushing unnecessary flashy changes dictated by a sales cycle.

I'm not particularly happy about moving to what is effectively a rent society, but I think this is one of the few silver linings of the subscription model.

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#25

Post by ptero »

maxxxxx wrote: post #22
samsolomon wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've updated my comment. You don't lose access, but you cannot open old files. I suppose you could use a PSD or AI to Sketch converter. I'm unsure about other file types.

I think you can open and view them with Photoshop, just not edit. At least that's my understanding.

I suspect you can still edit them with an older version of the Photoshop. PSDs have been around forever.

I am not arguing that subscription models forced by Adobe on users is a good thing. It is, IMO, horrible and is the reason I am still using CS3 for my photography hobby.

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#26

Post by specialist »

ColanR wrote: post #18
pspeter3 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide your reasoning? I assume that the subscriptions continue to fund software developers working on the product.

I think parent's point is about how the company is drawing in cashflow. If the customer owns perpetually a copy of the software, the only reason they'll buy a new copy is if the new one is substantially better than the old: hence, the only way the company makes cash next year is if they've been improving their product. With the subscription model, the company is still going to make that income regardless if they have…

I have a different view. Perhaps because I used to publish my own shareware. Today's current Patreon model is pretty close to how shareware used to work (for me).

Buying a license today is investing in future development. I wouldn't pay to use software that's not actively being maintained. Nor would I expect my customers to either.

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#27

Post by cwyers »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #6
pspeter3 wrote: post #5

As a counter point, I hope that by paying a subscription, I get a continuous stream of small patches with bug fixes, security updates, and design improvements. I like the subscription model, especially if it has a free tier, because passionate customers can support the developer team and subsidize less passionate users

> As a counter point, I hope that by paying a subscription, I get a continuous stream of small patches with bug fixes, security updates, and design improvements. But you do realize that the subscription model is exactly the thing that removes the incentive to do that, right?

> But you do realize that the subscription model is exactly the thing that removes the incentive to do that, right?

Can you name a single case where this has happened with subscription software, though? The big named examples in the article (as far as I could stand to read it, at least) are Adobe Creative Cloud and Microsoft Office 365.

Here's the What's New page for Photoshop CC 2017, along with links to the changes in various bugfix releases that have occurred since release:

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/whats-new.html

You can find the release notes for the past few releases of Photoshop:

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/photoshop-releasenotes.htm...

They aren't sitting on their laurels. And Office hasn't stagnated, either. If the subscription model removes the incentive to do that, why are they still doing that? You get new features in Office 365 sooner than you do on shrinkwrap Office releases. Adobe products have been subscription only for over four years now. The incentive seems to be in place.

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#28

Post by TimJYoung »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #7
pspeter3 wrote: post #5

As a counter point, I hope that by paying a subscription, I get a continuous stream of small patches with bug fixes, security updates, and design improvements. I like the subscription model, especially if it has a free tier, because passionate customers can support the developer team and subsidize less passionate users

> a continuous stream of small patches with bug fixes, security updates, and design improvements That doesn't require a subscription. Plenty of companies offer a permanent purchase that comes with a year of updates or all minor-version updates or similar. The option is there to treat it similarly to a subscription, but importantly you never have to pay and what you already own can never be changed or taken away.

That's how we do it with our products (purchases include a subscription). A subscription consists of:

- A year of support on our forums (real company-provided support, not just peer-provided).

- All minor releases and bug-fix builds within the year.

- After the subscription has expired, you still keep everything that you purchased forever, including being able to download anything you own at any time (we keep track of all of that for you).

We do have some "catches" to prevent free-riders at the expense of customers that maintain subscriptions, notably that you can only renew a subscription at the normal price within 2 years of your last renewal. After that, we start to ratchet up the renewal costs until, at the 5-year mark, you'll need to (effectively) purchase a new license.

Also, we offer inexpensive direct phone/email support through a separate "support session" method that is not tied to your subscription. So, even after a subscription expires, you still have direct support options.

The key is that any arrangement be fair and beneficial to both parties. In our case, we get a steady, predictable stream of revenue, and the customers get support, enhancements, and bug fixes quicker and at less cost.

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#29

Post by rcthompson »

pspeter3 wrote: post #5

As a counter point, I hope that by paying a subscription, I get a continuous stream of small patches with bug fixes, security updates, and design improvements. I like the subscription model, especially if it has a free tier, because passionate customers can support the developer team and subsidize less passionate users

We're not talking about subscribing to a service or subscribing to updates. We're talking about the "keep paying us or you lose access to the software" kind of subscription.

Re: A Critical Analysis of the Subscription Economy

#30

Post by greggman »

samsolomon wrote: post #16

The case of Adobe is interesting. I think the move to a subscription model has been a hostile move for customers. The second you stop paying for the software, you lose the ability to open your old files. This has allowed smaller software applications such as Sketch, The Affinity Suite and Capture One to grab marketshare. I think Sketch’s current business model is perfect. Customers pay for a year of updates. If a cus…

I personally hate the Adobe model and am still on Photoshop CS6 but my artist friends all love it. Maybe they don't realize they're paying at least double. All they concentrate on is it's cheap to stsrt.
Post reply on HN