How so? Tech is moving so fast across multiple fronts that software obsolescence happens much quicker than before, not due to the developer themselves, but I mean things like Windows changing driver models, Apple changing silicon, Android APIs constantly evolving, web technologies mutating like a cancer... old versions quickly become useless without active maintenance.

Meanwhile the subscription services largely keep pace with one another and stay compatible because most users are on the latest version.

> old versions quickly become useless without active maintenance.

I think this is somewhat exaggerated. Not to mention that if you're using older versions of 3rd party software, you can use older versions of the OS too. In fact, many people don't like to update their OS version. If it ain't broke...

> Meanwhile the subscription services largely keep pace with one another and stay compatible because most users are on the latest version.

How is this different from upfront paid software? The latest versions of that stay compatible too. You may have to pay an upgrade fee, but that generally doesn't happen every year, unlike subscriptions.

Is it? A lot of my favorite games no longer work on the latest operating systems because they were on a buy once model. Others had their multiplayer shut down.

As for upfront paid software, sometimes it's also just not worth it to the developer to make a whole new version anymore or they shut down. The shareware industry is pretty much dead today, for example, although free trials for cloud subs are still very common. I think the sub model smooths out the feast and famine cycles, ultimately, and make for more intentional and less panicked releases.

> A lot of my favorite games no longer work on the latest operating systems because they were on a buy once model.

How long ago did you buy them?

> As for upfront paid software, sometimes it's also just not worth it to the developer to make a whole new version anymore or they shut down.

Lots of businesses shut down, regardless of business model.

> more intentional and less panicked releases

As a software developer, I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean.

Those old games still run on the old operating systems, and you can still get those systems because they were also on a buy once model.

If those old games were subscriptions instead, they would probably be unplayable today. Their authentication servers would be shutdown after so few players remained that it wouldn't be worth it for the company to keep it going. Just like a lot of multiplayer games are closed nowadays.

phrom already mentioned the "old subscription-products die" aspect.

The other thing games tended to do, that is basically a subscription, was frequent, sometimes yearly, releases. You just buy this years iteration of fifa or CoD. Playing the latest "version" will on current hardware, just like a subscription. Compare that to Fortnite, where you don't have a choice but play the latest version (i heard they removed building?!? not that i liked it, but that's certainly a change!).

Yes, it's a very modern take on a recent problem.

I used VLC, Firefox (Phoenix), LibreOffice (OOo), MSOffice, paint, photofiltre, and notepad++ when I was a teen. They still work today.

The trending app ecosystem, the social network du jour and the JS framework fever seem to have given the impression to the new generation that there is not other way to do this.

Many of those would be broken in various ways if they were not updated. For starters: VLC due to missing codecs, firefox not supporting newer standards. All the software you mentioned was most likely heavily updated since your teens.

VLC got popular because it was the first media player that would always play whatever you threw at it. But thinking back to those times, perhaps there was merit in those older players which stayed the same, but made you occasionally install a codec pack. It was a sensible separation between the "chrome" that was stable in time, and the decoders which were changing often to accommodate new and better formats.

It's not necessarily a generational thing. I grew up on DOS before Windows was common, remember v1 of OpenOffice and Phoenix and the birth of CSS and JS, and have been making webpages since before the div tag was invented. I bought and used many tools like Notepad++ and Ultraedit and Sublime, and used the heck out of Paint Shop Pro and some GIMP and the rest.

But many of those tools are quite a bit less powerful than the commercial subscription ones. Creative Cloud CC is very powerful when you use it professionally, as is IntelliJ. Worth it to me because I know the difference, having used both kinds of tools and payment models for more than 20 years. These days I make a little more money than I did back in the 90s, so I don't pirate or demand freeware and would rather pay for something sustainable and have it work well because my time is worth it.

Take IntelliJ for example. There was a big uproar when they moved to a subscription model, but their products have continued to get better since. The company would've gone bankrupt otherwise. Instead, their pricing is now both very fair and includes a perpetual fallback license, while their software still keeps improving. I am happy to pay for it because it adds tremendous value over VSCode or Notepad++ in my workflows.

Of course some FOSS software is still amazing. VLC is still the best player I know of. Audacity is still useful and I find myself using that more than Audition.

But other times the subscriptions just deliver better software that I'm happy to pay for.

>"Take IntelliJ for example. There was a big uproar when they moved to a subscription model"

They did not move. They still offer perpetual license. Otherwise I would not be using their products.

It's both isn't it? Subscription plus perpetual fallback?

yup. best of both worlds.

I actually do the same in with one of my products.

I don't where/when/how this myth started. If anyone from JetBrains is reading this, please asking you sales/PR/marketing team to make it crystal clear on your website so that we can kill off this silly myth that hurts your excellent brand.

>"...sales/PR/marketing team to make it crystal clear on your website"

They have, just not what you think unless your post is an attempt at humor:

https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845-What...

They've perhaps not realized that effective lifespan of software is so short because it's SaaS.