Re:Qt 6.0
by toyg on Tuesday December 08, 2020 @11:55AM
(#25347888)
Something like Qt or Photoshop does not need to “reach critical mass” - they actually did already do that while using a simpler licensing model. Which proves the “everything is SaaS” model is not necessary, but rather another way to extract more money from customers.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Qt 6.0
by chipotle_coyote on Tuesday December 08, 2020 @02:29PM
(#25350148)
This is true, but I think people have forgotten just how expensive software was a generation ago. Photoshop in the pre-Cloud days was a $600+ program depending on where you got it, with upgrade pricing in the $150–200 range. Today, you can get a "Photography" Creative Cloud subscription with Photoshop and Lightroom for $120/year.
I'm not in love with "everything is SaaS," but I recognize that a lot of software businesses really want recurring revenue rather than a rush of orders -- many of which are lower-priced upgrades -- when new releases come out, then a trickle until the next for-pay release (which a subset of your existing customers won't upgrade to). And, in an era where a lot of people have come to see upfront prices of $99+ for applications as outrageously high -- and worse, have been trained by app stores to expect free upgrades indefinitely -- the old model may just not be sustainable.
Re:Qt 6.0
by chrisseaton on Tuesday December 08, 2020 @01:50PM
(#25349691)
> rather another way to extract more money from customers
This is just cynical!