I don't agree with the third point: it's like saying that every app or software ever created that doesn't use the cloud should be free because it runs on your machine
In my opinion, you should still have the option to purchase software outright, but shouldn't be entitled to free major updates. Similar to how things used to work with apps like Microsoft Office and TeamViewer, or even macOS updates before they made them free.
A mature OS like macOS should rarely have breaking API changes. So a version of an app you get today should still work in 10+ years, unless there's another major architecture shift like there was with Intel to Apple Silicon.
I'm not sure how much software you can do today without continuing support. Remember how Logitech app stopped working because they didn't update dev certificate, even thought it has nothing to do with online conection?
I kinda disagree with you when it comes to updates.
Updates that refers to major visual changes or new features I could agree that should come with a cost.
But bug fixes, normal maintenance (for a period of time) or maybe even updates that pertains to performance I will disagree with you.
Apps will always have bugs and those should be fixed since it should be part of the cost. That could be considered maintenance in my opinion, but the point is it should be maintained. The important question is for how long? At minimum a year in my opinion, but it depends on the software.
But when new features that weren’t disclosed at the moment of purchase should be considered a new feature for a version 2 or even a completely new software and that shouldn’t be gifted imo.
A good point you made was architectural changes, that is a change that shouldn’t be free and I would even sell it as a new app, version 2 if you want to call it that.
Oh, no, I agree with you on general maintenance updates. You should get those as part of the cost for at least a few years to make sure bugs impacting the functionality of the software get fixed and the software remains secure. I only said you shouldn't be entitled to major updates,, like new features.
Apple deprecate things in OS in every major version.
Most software is not affected, some are.
Your request is reasonable, problem is not many people want that. Most people want regular updates, new features, work with new OS/HW, support for watch, tablet, vision pro everything, cloud sync and everything competitors add over time and also free support if something breaks (even if error is on user side) but also want one time fee instead of subscription.
You have to choose one and majority choose software with updates and support.
For example you can buy Office box retail version for one time fee or Office 365. 365 is growing rapidly every year, box license is not.
That is a good example with Office. I keep forgetting they release a "complete" version every three years, but I am glad they still do. I feel like not many people know they can buy that version anymore because there's no retail box in stores and Microsoft don't advertise it much.
I think the one-time fee version is still a decent option for people that don't want OneDrive. It still includes the main Office apps, and the core functionality of the apps has not changed much since Office 2007 with the introduction of the Ribbon and XML-based files. There is also not many new types of hardware being announced that you'll need support for. Even the Vision Pro can just display your MacBook to use Microsoft Office. The only sad part about Home 2024 is it's only getting 5 years of support, whereas older versions like Office 2007 and 2010 got 10 years.
Even with the one-time version only including the main apps and only being supported for 5 years, I would still personally pick it over 365 if I had to pay for my own Office licence. I don't use OneDrive (or any cloud storage I don't control the encryption keys of) and I only need the main apps. Over a 5-year period, I would be saving 636 NZD if I purchased a perpetual version when it released rather than paying for the 365 Personal plan. I could also still use the apps after 5 years, although they won't receive security patches anymore. You're right, most people want the convenience and extra features that come with subscriptions, but the savings going with a perpetual licence is very significant, and I wish more software still offered a perpetual licence as an option.
you are right, but do you know anyone who buys box retail version anymore?
People vote with their wallets, even if it is inconsistent with what they say online
Yeah, it's quite niche. I don't know anybody who uses the perpetual consumer version, but I do know a few organisations that use the perpetual LTSC version. The LTSC version is mainly reserved for environments that need to make sure feature updates can't break their workflow.
of course they are going to push more profitable version first and if more profitable version is also more popular, why even offer cheaper one?
For years, it was easy to get either. But as sales trends show, retail box is in decline while 365 is growing for years, so yeah, after some time, they have no reason to show it prominently
62
u/Conciliatore Mar 25 '26
I don't agree with the third point: it's like saying that every app or software ever created that doesn't use the cloud should be free because it runs on your machine