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

81–90 of 329 posts

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

#81

Post by tyingq »

onion2k wrote: post #19
ique wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a large part of the problem is that so much software (like Office) is turning into a service when it doesn’t need to be.

I think a large part of the problem is that so much software (like Office) is turning into a service when it doesn’t need to be. One significant advantage of SaaS over traditional download-and-run-and-pay-for-updates apps is the fact that everyone is always on the same version. In a large organisation, and across organisational boundaries, working around people using different versions of things is an incredibly inef…

One funny piece of that is the O365 gives both online and downloaded/local editions of word, excel, powerpoint, etc.

Those two editions often cannot properly render documents made in the other one.

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

#82

Post by jpomykala »

jmacd wrote: post #52
jpomykala wrote: post #16

I’m running a super simple translation management system where people can manage, host, auto-translate their translation files. How I supposed to run my app without subscriptions? In last 30 days, I transferred over 280 GB of translation data from my service to end-users around the word. Should I tell DeepL, Google and AWS that they should offer me their services for free or what? EDIT: I apologize if this sounds too…

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

https://simplelocalize.io

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

#83

Post by jpomykala »

n_cusan wrote: post #21
jpomykala wrote: post #16

I’m running a super simple translation management system where people can manage, host, auto-translate their translation files. How I supposed to run my app without subscriptions? In last 30 days, I transferred over 280 GB of translation data from my service to end-users around the word. Should I tell DeepL, Google and AWS that they should offer me their services for free or what? EDIT: I apologize if this sounds too…

That sounds very useful. Mind sharing the link to your service? Thanks.

https://simplelocalize.io

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

#84

Post by harry-wood »

skilled wrote: post #24

It's actually getting wild "out there". WordPress was once a really good choice for a blogging platform. Now, majority of the "popular" plugins are strictly businesses. E.g. You can use our API for 100 calls a month, either pay up to use this plugin more or wait another 30 days to get another 100 calls. And yes, it is mostly the cost of convenience. For example, I manage my own server not because it's cheaper (which…

Yes. I didn't do much with wordpress for years, but always thought of it as a very open-source-ish community. Recently I find myself taking on a pre-existing wordpress site with a lot of plugins. I was quite surprised by the way so many plugins are available for $$$. It's sort of impressive "professionalisation" of the ecosystem. I can see it's allowing/encouraging glossy presentation, explanatory videos, documentation, and support guarantes, but there's a voice in my head thinking "Nah! These PHP snippets are all supposed to be free aren't they?"

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

#85

Post by justsomehnguy »

Macha wrote: post #34
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…

> 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 can charge $10/y but ~$3 from this sum would go to fees and taxes, and you still need a profit margin and sustainability margin for the future growth (and recession) and to be able to give out refunds.

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

#86

Post by cycomanic »

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.

When and how did that happen? SAAS has been the wet dream of the big software houses for a long time, it was just not really acceptable for people for quite a while.

It's also sounds like this is about poor software developers making a living, but the reality is that software developers are amongst the highest paid professions and software companies are ruling the world and typically have the highest profits. In fact I would argue this really started to take over when investors realised that they could get insane ROI from very little investments for software companies and started to expect these kind of returns.

The other thing that is driving this push is that the FANGS want to commoditize everything except for "owning" large amount of data, because that's their value add and everything else is just a cost centre for them.

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

#87

Post by wartijn_ »

n_cusan wrote: post #21
jpomykala wrote: post #16

I’m running a super simple translation management system where people can manage, host, auto-translate their translation files. How I supposed to run my app without subscriptions? In last 30 days, I transferred over 280 GB of translation data from my service to end-users around the word. Should I tell DeepL, Google and AWS that they should offer me their services for free or what? EDIT: I apologize if this sounds too…

That sounds very useful. Mind sharing the link to your service? Thanks.

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)

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

#88

Post by Hnrobert42 »

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…

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.

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

#90

Post by tjoff »

toyg wrote: post #73
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…

Yeah, it's not really about free software; it's about paying salaries. Recurring expenses inevitably result in business models optimized for recurring revenues. That was always the case; it just so happened that the expansion of industrial production of goods was so vast for so long, that this was kinda hidden (and it was hard to justify - there are only so many widgets you can continuously supply to customers). Now…

Recurring expenses very often isn't necessary though.

For software the initial costs are big, but after that it can be pretty low maintenance or at least costing much less to develop new features when the foundation is set.

When you start to think about recurring expenses that's when you have to find a way to justify those expenses. And that is usually by adding bloat and unnecessary features that those that already bought it might not even want.

So now you have to pay for features that you don't want to keep using the features that you've already bought? Tough sell...

Post reply on HN