I don't understand the allergy that so many developers have (in my experience) to subscription software. Software is never finished, golden master style distribution ends up orphaning huge swaths of customers across major updates, and most of the cost of software maintenance is continuous. Continuous income via subscription services goes a long way toward solving these issues.

Because I don't need the latest and greatest of every single piece of software, but subscriptions are always priced as if I do.

"Look, you save 25% versus buying our old yearly releases every year!" they say.

But I wasn't going to buy all their yearly releases. Most software I use isn't my main workhorse. I was perfectly happy running old Adobe software for years, even after high DPI screens came out and it didn't support them. So what really happened is they took my purchase-every-five-years plan and jacked the price up 300% for stuff that I don't need.

Being required to pay for updates that I don't want (and the current version stops working entirely if you stop paying for it) takes away any pricing segmentation and tends to be a terrible deal for hobbyists.

If you're a creative professional maybe Creative Cloud is a great bargain. But it isn't for me, and neither is a $10/month FTP client. So props to Panic for not going that route.

Because it strips away your right to "own" software. Transmit 4 still works, and I can choose to pay for an upgrade if I wanted to. Transmit 5 is faster, nicer looking, and has more features, but I don't suddenly lose access to Transmit 4 by not upgrading. Charge me and upgrade fee and make versions, don't do a subscription.

In fairness, a lot of "digital distribution platforms" or online services do this as well.

Prime examples I've seen:

Google closing someone's account for using not their real legal name on Google+, locking away access to his music, documents, e-mail, and photos, all of which he'd migrated to his Google account.

Steam closing someone's account and basically cancelling a thousand dollars of "purchased" games because he broke their ToS, which makes you wonder what the difference is between purchasing and purchasing (via Steam) when the price is the same but your recourse is not.

You generally don't "own" any software anyway. If you read the terms of use/service, you'll probably see it is simply a license from the actual owner.

(this is the same with movies and music btw)

> Transmit 5 is faster, nicer looking, and has more features.

That's refreshing... more often than not, latest versions are slower, uglier, and bloated. One more reason to be able to own the previous version.

So does Transmit 3, which I still use when appropriate!

Not true of two big (and expensive) ones I use: Adobe and Autocad. I used to upgrade every couple of versions. This has ended up costing me way more. But I still pay it because I need the software. So I guess they win...

Another way to look at it is that they were going to raise the cost anyways, at least now you get updates when they're production ready instead of every two years.

Bug fixes always came out immediately for "major version" standalone license software.

There's 0 technical correlation between update delivery model and billing model.

But we're not just talking about bug fixes, we're talking about "major version" releases also.

Buying a product once and expecting subsequent updates is greedy, and I didn't see anyone suggesting that.

I don't think that really applies to the thread here, honestly. :/

This is the post I originally responded to:

>I used to upgrade every couple of versions. This has ended up costing me way more. But I still pay it because I need the software. So I guess they win...

So my post makes perfect sense. They were going to raise the price on you anyways, so you were going to pay more either way. With the new pricing model you're paying more and getting versions you might have otherwise missed.

Because when you stop paying you have nothing.

I'd much prefer a hybrid model. Happy to pay $30 or so for a single version and then $1-$2/mo for updates. If I stop paying at least I have something.

The app Gameshow by Telestream works like this and I really like the model. It's $35 and you get one year of updates. After a year you either stick with whatever the last point release was or you pay another $35. I wish Adobe software was like this.

That's how Jetbrains' licensing works: if you buy an annual license you get a perpetual license for that version; if you pay monthly you get a perpetual license after 12 months.

SQLyog is the same way. My only wish is that they would release a native Mac version. The last time I upgraded, I went with a 5-year upgrade plan because of how much I appreciate the software and the team behind it.

I like JetBrains's licensing model for doing this. You get a perpetual fallback license after subscribing a certain length of time, or you can keep subscribing and get updates.

I just realized I like this model too. Though it seems like they never include serious security updates. So I have this sort of subscription for a php web app. I'm kind of forced to pay for updates because of security.

Because 5 or 10 bucks a month multiplied by however many apps adds up very quickly.

Subscriptions done right:

* JetBrains - big discount during the change to subscription model, perpetual license to the last version that was released while your sub was active

* Office - gives me OneDrive space, 5 licenses to use in my family, Skype minutes, yearly payment - the subscription is the best value for money.

Subscriptions done wrong:

* Creative Cloud - more expensive in Australia for no reason, no value in choosing just the app/s I need, can't use old versions if my sub lapses.

* Google Apps - holds $300+ of Android apps hostage if I ever cancel my subscription

> I don't understand the allergy that so many developers have (in my experience) to subscription software.

Not owning it, keeping data somewhere else, stacking many small subscriptions into a big monthly bill.

> Software is never finished

But some apps are not in active development forever. You don't need to add big features endlessly to something like a FTP client:

http://geekandpoke.typepad.com/geekandpoke/2012/03/thank-god...

Just to add to the chorus of "you have nothing when you stop paying" / "it keeps working after they release v2", etc, let me toss in:

If the company shuts down (or gets acquired or simply stops supporting the software), subscription software stops working. Paid usually does not.

I've outlived too many useful products, and lost them entirely. I expect to continue to do so for a lot longer, so I avoid subscriptions-for-non-hosted-software like the plague it is.

I dunno, my CCleaner installer checks my key against a server when I install it. Installers / serial checks like this are a single point of failure.

That is definitely true. Though that's another reason to avoid DRM whenever possible :) Which is not often, but oh-so-worth-it when it is.

I can see a business sense for subscription software. They have an aversion to capital expenditures and much prefer operational expenditures. It helps them scale up and down and stay nimble.

As an individual, I really don't like having to constantly make a judgement call if I'm still getting value out of my recipe manager or my disk usage analyzer. Most of the development was done up front, as with the risk in developing it. There's also not really continuous updates or a lot of new features always needed.

When people sit down to budget, the first things people ask about are reoccurring expenses that can be minimized or eliminated; cheaper cellphone plan, cutting out daily lattes, cable bill--even investment fees. They easily sneak in and add up over time.

I would be fine with a subscription model if the customer service was actually better as you seem to claim the model provides.

I recently had an issue importing a logbook using arguably the most popular iOS pilot logbook app and it took a week. A WEEK! For the them to attend to my support request. A week could be 30 hours worth of flights for a pilot depending where they work.

Why do you need almost $100/year from me if you can't answer one email in 48 hours?

I've been dreaming of an open source logbook setup ever since this experience. I wish I didn't have to rely on $100/yr subscriptions to be locked into something so critical to my career.

He said that he pays every year money on something that didn't work and the support took ages. that was his problem....

Now I assuming that if he had a opensource logbook he could quickly find out what the problem was himself without relying one someone else.

Maybe the right counter argument would be that 100$ is not sufficient to provide a SLA to handle his support request whithin a shorter timespan. It should be prices higher ;) If this app is so critical for him I assume again the OP wouldn't mind paying it.

I tend to agree but think some developers do consider certain software "finished" and a subscription model adds undue pressure. Whether that model makes sense really depends on the type of software, its user base and the developer themselves.

Software may not be finished, but I may not care about the design roadmap. Version 3.5 might be feature-complete for my specific needs. Let me compensate you for that snapshot. Then let your power users fuel your continued development.

So let's assume that for a particular app the costs between a "one time purchase" and "subscription" would be exactly the same: for example, a subscription of $1/month vs purchasing a new app exactly every year for $12.

Here's the difference:

- People who no longer use the app, will forget about it and the subscription will keep going for some time, which means free $ for company.

- People who don't really need the new features of the app and normally would not re-buy it (perhaps the Developer neglected renewing the app and it only has minor changes) still get it and pay for it through the subscription.

I honestly can't think of a single advantage of subscriptions for customers.

When the subscription runs out, so does your ability to use the software.

At least Jetbrains lets you lock in the last version subscribed.