That seems more a marketing benefit than a real benefit. A load of software that I have a license to install simply crashes on launch on newer versions of the OS. Sure, I can legally run it, but if I don’t pay for a newer versions then I don’t actually have anything of value (unless I run a VM with an old and known-insecure version of the OS just to run the old programs).
This is one of the places where Windows does really seem to shine compared to Linux and macOS. Less so with software made more recently maybe due to the huge variation of .Net Framework releases, but old school regular compiled code often holds up really well. A couple of months ago I needed to use ProTel 99 (schematic capture software) that is probably at least 20 years old and it installed and ran just fine on Windows 11. I did laugh pretty hard at the blue-to-black gradient in the full screen installer but had no issue opening up their old files and figuring out what I needed.
I suppose adding an option to pay a lesser-than-main-subscription fee for maintenance for things like that might work? Or do you think its low effort enough that just doing that kind of maintenance for free is feasible?
There’s a psychological problem that people don’t want to have to pay for maintenance because they have the thing. I suspect that came from selling software in boxes, where you feel like you own an artefact. Most machines need some maintenance, presumably there’s some way of making people think about software like that.
I part of me really misses boxed software. It was exciting to bring home a new app, flip through the manual, and install it from disks. Or maybe it’s just because I was a kid at the time. I dunno.
From the vendor side, if they make their money from one-off licenses, the economics just don’t pan out over the long term. The incentives become for them to spend all their energy on endlessly expanding market share so they can sell to new users, and/or churning out paid upgrades and add-ons to sell to their existing buyers.
Another big problem with one-off licenses is piracy.
I agree with almost all that is said, but I think I there is an angle missed by the article.
I live in a rent controlled dwelling. This means that what was a pricey rental ten years ago became a real bargains untouched by inflation today. And it is great from a finance point of view, and I don’t even have to handle most maintenance cost like redoing the roof.
But I live in constant fear that I may lose all that. If my current landlord sell the building, the new owner could very well decide to inhabit the place and kick me out. Or I can be renovicted. I also have no control over stuff that matter. I cannot install better insulated windows to reduce my electric bill for example.
This is why I am searching for a home to buy. I don’t want to risk suddenly losing everything because of somebody else decision. Financially it is certain to be costlier than my current situation , and it come with its own set of problem, but at least I nobody can kick me out without a warning. (Expropriation and foreclosure aside), and I can make more decision about how things should be.
Same logic apply to software. I like my rental software, but when Spotify decided to introduce its shitty TikTok feed and remove the classic homepage, it was a stark reminder to me that I am at the whim of people who don’t have my interest at heart.
Tomorrow, GitHub can decide to drop a less used feature that is essential to you, and there is nothing you can do about it. At least with Jenkins you can continue to run an old version until you find a replacement.
Owning software is about the ability to decide that a feature is essential to you and that you will keep it, at least for now thank you very much, no matter how much a retarded CEO think it should be replaced by some AI crap. This can cost a shit ton of money, more often than not more than its worth, but for absolutely critical part of your infrastructure, it allow you to avert the risk of death by third party idiocy.
I live in a rent controlled dwelling. This means that what was a pricey rental ten years ago became a real bargains untouched by inflation today. And it is great from a finance point of view, and I don’t even have to handle most maintenance cost like redoing the roof.
Just sign a 10 or 20 year lease if you want. You can’t always convince every property owner to sign such long leases, especially in rent-controlled dwellings, but you can always try. I know one lawyer who managed to convince a property owner to sign an auto-renewing yearly lease, but only him, he has the option to not renew, giving him essentially guaranteed housing forever without having to buy. I’d really hate to be that property owner(especially if they are trying to sell down the road), but you can make the contract terms pretty much whatever you want on either side of the equation, provided you don’t break local law in the process(but in that case usually all that happens is that particular part of the contract is null and void, not the entire contract, presuming you bother to go to court over it).
All different types of rental periods are permitted, including week-to-week, month-to-month or annual tenancies. It is also possible to have a lease for no fixed amount of time. The term of a lease cannot exceed one hundred years. If the rental agreement exceeds one hundred years, it is reduced to that term (article 1880 Civil Code of Quebec).
I’m certainly not an expert in QC law, though I enjoyed my visits there, I’ve never lived there. I’m certainly not a practicing attorney in QC and this is definitely not legal advice. But we are getting way off topic. Good luck on whatever path you decide to take in regards to housing.
I really like the model that Van Dyke uses. I basically paid them a whole bunch of money for a single license of secure CRT and then I periodically pay maintenance to keep myself up to date. This is much cheaper than many of the subscription services which in some cases are asking as much as 30 or 40 dollars a month. They still get money in the form of support and I don’t have to spend 10 Starbucks coffee trips worth of money in order to pay for it every month. I’ve been a subscriber since 2015.
I like the perpetual fallback license:
More information: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207240845
That seems more a marketing benefit than a real benefit. A load of software that I have a license to install simply crashes on launch on newer versions of the OS. Sure, I can legally run it, but if I don’t pay for a newer versions then I don’t actually have anything of value (unless I run a VM with an old and known-insecure version of the OS just to run the old programs).
This is one of the places where Windows does really seem to shine compared to Linux and macOS. Less so with software made more recently maybe due to the huge variation of .Net Framework releases, but old school regular compiled code often holds up really well. A couple of months ago I needed to use ProTel 99 (schematic capture software) that is probably at least 20 years old and it installed and ran just fine on Windows 11. I did laugh pretty hard at the blue-to-black gradient in the full screen installer but had no issue opening up their old files and figuring out what I needed.
I suppose adding an option to pay a lesser-than-main-subscription fee for maintenance for things like that might work? Or do you think its low effort enough that just doing that kind of maintenance for free is feasible?
There’s a psychological problem that people don’t want to have to pay for maintenance because they have the thing. I suspect that came from selling software in boxes, where you feel like you own an artefact. Most machines need some maintenance, presumably there’s some way of making people think about software like that.
I part of me really misses boxed software. It was exciting to bring home a new app, flip through the manual, and install it from disks. Or maybe it’s just because I was a kid at the time. I dunno.
Another big problem with one-off licenses is piracy.
I agree with almost all that is said, but I think I there is an angle missed by the article.
I live in a rent controlled dwelling. This means that what was a pricey rental ten years ago became a real bargains untouched by inflation today. And it is great from a finance point of view, and I don’t even have to handle most maintenance cost like redoing the roof.
But I live in constant fear that I may lose all that. If my current landlord sell the building, the new owner could very well decide to inhabit the place and kick me out. Or I can be renovicted. I also have no control over stuff that matter. I cannot install better insulated windows to reduce my electric bill for example.
This is why I am searching for a home to buy. I don’t want to risk suddenly losing everything because of somebody else decision. Financially it is certain to be costlier than my current situation , and it come with its own set of problem, but at least I nobody can kick me out without a warning. (Expropriation and foreclosure aside), and I can make more decision about how things should be.
Same logic apply to software. I like my rental software, but when Spotify decided to introduce its shitty TikTok feed and remove the classic homepage, it was a stark reminder to me that I am at the whim of people who don’t have my interest at heart.
Tomorrow, GitHub can decide to drop a less used feature that is essential to you, and there is nothing you can do about it. At least with Jenkins you can continue to run an old version until you find a replacement.
Owning software is about the ability to decide that a feature is essential to you and that you will keep it, at least for now thank you very much, no matter how much a retarded CEO think it should be replaced by some AI crap. This can cost a shit ton of money, more often than not more than its worth, but for absolutely critical part of your infrastructure, it allow you to avert the risk of death by third party idiocy.
Just something to keep in mind.
For like a month, and then you have to upgrade or backport a patch because someone found a RCE (unless you’re running entirely offline, of course).
Just sign a 10 or 20 year lease if you want. You can’t always convince every property owner to sign such long leases, especially in rent-controlled dwellings, but you can always try. I know one lawyer who managed to convince a property owner to sign an auto-renewing yearly lease, but only him, he has the option to not renew, giving him essentially guaranteed housing forever without having to buy. I’d really hate to be that property owner(especially if they are trying to sell down the road), but you can make the contract terms pretty much whatever you want on either side of the equation, provided you don’t break local law in the process(but in that case usually all that happens is that particular part of the contract is null and void, not the entire contract, presuming you bother to go to court over it).
Sadly, those legal advice do not apply where I live (QC, Canada), but thank you nevertheless
source: https://www.tenantrights.ca/facts/quebec
I’m certainly not an expert in QC law, though I enjoyed my visits there, I’ve never lived there. I’m certainly not a practicing attorney in QC and this is definitely not legal advice. But we are getting way off topic. Good luck on whatever path you decide to take in regards to housing.
I really like the model that Van Dyke uses. I basically paid them a whole bunch of money for a single license of secure CRT and then I periodically pay maintenance to keep myself up to date. This is much cheaper than many of the subscription services which in some cases are asking as much as 30 or 40 dollars a month. They still get money in the form of support and I don’t have to spend 10 Starbucks coffee trips worth of money in order to pay for it every month. I’ve been a subscriber since 2015.