Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by function_seven on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @02:33PM
(#20043711)
I really like their model as well. I think the really novel part of it is that, when you decide to stop paying the subscription, you keep the perpetual license for whatever was current a year ago. So if you just updated to the latest and greatest, and you love it, then you need to pay one more year subscription in order to "buy" it out right.
I think that's clever
Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by Wowfunhappy on Thursday May 30, 2019 @10:53AM
(#20051806)
Personally, if I thought I might have to downgrade a piece of software a year from now, I just wouldn't update in the first place, to avoid the pain of downgrading.
Even understanding that the goal is to incentivize continued payment, making users downgrade at the end feels excessively punitive IMO. Just let them keep the last version.
Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by bitL on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @04:08PM
(#20044780)
It used to be more friendly - you could have kept the last update before your time was up, not to roll back 1 year.
Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by jwr on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @03:07PM
(#20044105)
I don't think "keep using the old version" is a solution. We should accept the truth, which is that in today's computing world you can't "keep using the old version", because you will want the bug fixes, the security fixes, and you will need the software to be updated to newer OS versions.
Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by jsty on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @03:28PM
(#20044338)
Oh I agree that most users will want / should have the updates, but having the ability to still access an older version:
(1) means the lapsed subscriber can still access their data / functionality (at least for a while until OS compatibility issues kick in), and
(2) makes sure the developer is still actually 'earning' the subscription through updates, not just counting on data lock-in.
Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by rbritton on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @02:32PM
(#20043705)
I agree. I completely avoid any locally installed software that's subscription only (e.g., Adobe Photoshop CC) because in most cases, I don't need the continual updates. I'm perfectly fine using a single purchase for years and just buying the update when the OS upgrade triggers it.
Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by matt2000 on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @11:33PM
(#20048133)
The price goes down over the first 3 years as well. Not sure why they do that exactly, but for a long time user like myself I'm happy they do!
Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by _bxg1 on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @02:47PM
(#20043867)
I wonder if the App Store supports (or could support) this kind of model.
Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by rbritton on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @03:00PM
(#20044026)
It does not support it on its own. You could build that functionality into an app as far as features go, but how easy they are to isolate will probably vary wildly, and it may be more work than it's worth.
Re:Delisted Overnight: A Cautionary Tale for Indie iOS Devel...
by _bxg1 on Wednesday May 29, 2019 @05:18PM
(#20045611)
It would mean only pushing updates to some users and not others, which would have to be supported by the App Store. Unless you jerry-rigged some way of separating your "updates" from the actual binary updates distributed by the app store, which, yes, would probably be more work than it's worth.
It just seems to align incentives on both sides quite well.