Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
Would you buy it if it cost $40? Probably not.
And if if you did buy it for $40, how would you feel if a couple years from now iOS or MacOS broke compatibility (a very likely case due to the unorthodox functionality the product provides)? Would you expect the developer to address the issues? Would you pay for that?
if you wouldn't pay, yet still demand the update, put yourself in the developer's shoes. How would you feel about a bunch of clients asking you to revisit work you did years ago that met their needs at the time, but now that things are different, they want that work redone—and they refuse to pay for the rework? I know how I'd feel. Time to find some new clients.
Devs deserve to be paid ongoing money for ongoing work if that's the business model they establish.
Or, we could go back to the days where pro software was sold in a box with hardware dongle locks for $1000+ and the devs supported those high-prices licenses for years without additional payment.
Those aren’t good excuses. All software developers take those risks, so there’s nothing special for these people. That’s a non starter. You can look to many pieces of software for the Mac that have been around for many years. They have all had to make their software compatible when Apple updates the OS. Many are cheaper to buy, than to lease this for one year. Many of those programs are more sophisticated too.
what they need to do here is to get off their high horse and to look around and understand that even Microsoft offers Office 365 for less than twice that for consumer use. And even those who don’t like Microsoft, have to admit that Office is a bargain when compared to this.
i bought AstroPad when it first came out, and still own several competitors to it. The fact is that they’re asking too much. They think they’ve got the market cornered with this, and they’re trying to take advantage of it. Since this is a marginal product, and this never works out well for marginal products, because competitors will offer similar products for less.
You are wrong. Developers who offer subscriptions do not take those risks. They take different risks. As a small business person, I defend their right to move their business to a subscription service.
They have every right to license their software via subscription. You have every right to avoid that software. Or pay for a month, do a bunch of work with it, then cancel your subscription.
I don't get the impression they feel they have the market cornered. What I see is them saying they want to be the high-cost, high-service provided of this type of software. They are pouring the resources into being the best option for this type of application.
I own the original Astropad app as well. I do not currently subscribe to their service. I'm not sure I ever will. But I support their decision to take a shot at greatness. I hope they make something that is as no-brainer a subscription decision as Crashplan, MS 365 or Creative Cloud.
I’m not arguing that they shouldn’t move to a subscription service if they want to. That’s their right. And I think the app itself is still a “buy” methodology.
what I’m decrying is the price they’re asking. That’s something that was easy to see in my posts. $79 a year for fairly simple utility software is simply too much. They’re asking for that as a lump, for a year, not monthly. What I’m seeing is that companies think that people will subscribe, in a vacuum. What I mean by that is that these companies don’t seem to understand that by charging us much more than they could ever get away with in a lump charge, they are asking us to pay for multiple subscription every year. Just how many of these are people willing to pay for?
Eveerything is is going to subscription these days. This is bad overalll, while it may be good individually. How much could they have charged for this $79 a year sub if they charged it as a one time buy? Not much more, and they know it.
now they want a one time $60 for the hardware product, and that’s fine, as I said. But they also want $99 for the product and a one year sub for the software. Which software? I assume it’s the Pro for that $79 a year. So, they’ve already promised much faster response for just the pro software upgrade. How much faster will it be with this hardware and the pro software upgrade? I mean, their claims for the software speed increase is already pretty substantial. If I could try it first, I could get an idea.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
Would you buy it if it cost $40? Probably not.
And if if you did buy it for $40, how would you feel if a couple years from now iOS or MacOS broke compatibility (a very likely case due to the unorthodox functionality the product provides)? Would you expect the developer to address the issues? Would you pay for that?
if you wouldn't pay, yet still demand the update, put yourself in the developer's shoes. How would you feel about a bunch of clients asking you to revisit work you did years ago that met their needs at the time, but now that things are different, they want that work redone—and they refuse to pay for the rework? I know how I'd feel. Time to find some new clients.
Devs deserve to be paid ongoing money for ongoing work if that's the business model they establish.
Or, we could go back to the days where pro software was sold in a box with hardware dongle locks for $1000+ and the devs supported those high-prices licenses for years without additional payment.
As a software developer I know exactly what I'd pay. And yes, of course I've purchased $40 software, including iOS apps that high and some higher. A tool is a tool.
But I would not pay an ongoing subscription to use a tool that doesn't require ongoing cloud assets. How would you feel about paying Black & Decker an on-going subscription for full-use of the power tools you bought from them? You'd say that's absolutely ridiculous.
New versions of one-time-purchase software is as old as software. It's not rocket science or some foreign concept. On the contrary, it is subscription model pricing that is the new and controversial business model, not the charging for new versions.
Would it be ridiculous to pay ongoing for the hypothetical Black & Decker tool if the electrical power specification is being revised every year and the type of material you work with the tool is changed every year as well?
I reject your assertion that something new is controversial. New things are fine. New business models are fine. I am an independent creative worker without a W2 job job. Is it controversial that I run my career as a Solopreneur? Am I doing it wrong, too?
Edit: Upon further reflection, it would likely be Bosch or Makita who would produce a subscription tool. You are probably right that Black & Decker would never go the subscription tool route. Subscription works best for the best tools whose users need top performance on day 1 and stay that way forever. Black & Decker is crap that gets the job done for weekend warriors who likely pull out the tool a few times a year for small projects. And I own B&D tools. They certainly aren't my faves, though.
ok, here we go.
my response would be that what we get now in a product is what we would get with any tool, and most of mine are DeWalt, with some Bosch and others. Makita is junk, as far as I’m concerned.
what they all say is that they have no responsibility to add improvements to current products. That’s what would happen. Or, they would offer free upgrades to the firmware, assuming that that would fix these issues, which they wouldn’t, because they are hardware issues, I don’t know anyone who would pay yearly costs for hardware such as that.
its not a real issue anyway, so it’s a pretty stupid one to use as an example.
Don't blame me for the tool analogy. I just played along as best I could.
I’m not blaming you for it. I’m just responding to your post, where you respond to it. I post too much already, so I don’t want to respond to everyone.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
It doesn't add any new functionality to Apple Pencil. Apple Pencil's pressure information is provided by the operating system, not by that dongle. What the dongle does is just to transmit information it collects from the operating system. Yet it demands subscription fee for the use of a device upon which its contribution is nil ! If it is the transmission of the information from the iPad to the Mac that requires a payment, then this payment is already done when paying the price of the dongle. If you ask continuous payments for the use of a device then this is a rental, not sale. You cannot both sell and rent a device at the same time.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
It doesn't add any new functionality to Apple Pencil. Apple Pencil's pressure information is provided by the operating system, not by that dongle. What the dongle does is just to transmit information it collects from the operating system. Yet it demands subscription fee for the use of a device upon which its contribution is nil ! If it is the transmission of the information from the iPad to the Mac that requires a payment, then this payment is already done when paying the price of the dongle. If you ask continuous payments for the use of a device then this is a rental, not sale. You cannot both sell and rent a device at the same time.
Yeah, there are a lot of things about this that I don’t like.
for example, when they first announced the Pro upgrade to license, I went to their site to read up on it. Now, before I talk about that directly, I think I can say without too much disagreement, that what 99% of the users of the iPad, Pencil and Astropad want, is no, or very little lag, full use of the Pencil and - NOTHING else. Get that people? Nothing else.
but what they were, and still are, offering is a lot of fluff. Fluff that people don’t want, or need. Fluff that THEY need to offer, to come with a reason to charge what they’re charging. I couldn’t find a single thing that I thought; “hmm, this looks pretty good, I’d want that.”
so the problem is that if we’re using Photoshop on our Mac, and using the iPad as a pressure sensitive tablet with the Pencil, instead of a Wacom, well, what else do we need for that? The answer is nothing. The same thing is true for most every other program on the Mac that we would use this with. I can’t see spending all of that money for features that are useless for, at least, most of us. So make a version for the basic needs for $20 a year, and make a high end version with all the fluff for $79 a year, and see which sells best.
I think I know what most people will say. And as for the hardware, any software needed to make that work should be free. Yes, free. Because that’s what everyone else does, and because that’s what it’s worth.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
Would you buy it if it cost $40? Probably not.
And if if you did buy it for $40, how would you feel if a couple years from now iOS or MacOS broke compatibility (a very likely case due to the unorthodox functionality the product provides)? Would you expect the developer to address the issues? Would you pay for that?
if you wouldn't pay, yet still demand the update, put yourself in the developer's shoes. How would you feel about a bunch of clients asking you to revisit work you did years ago that met their needs at the time, but now that things are different, they want that work redone—and they refuse to pay for the rework? I know how I'd feel. Time to find some new clients.
Devs deserve to be paid ongoing money for ongoing work if that's the business model they establish.
Or, we could go back to the days where pro software was sold in a box with hardware dongle locks for $1000+ and the devs supported those high-prices licenses for years without additional payment.
As a software developer I know exactly what I'd pay. And yes, of course I've purchased $40 software, including iOS apps that high and some higher. A tool is a tool.
But I would not pay an ongoing subscription to use a tool that doesn't require ongoing cloud assets. How would you feel about paying Black & Decker an on-going subscription for full-use of the power tools you bought from them? You'd say that's absolutely ridiculous.
New versions of one-time-purchase software is as old as software. It's not rocket science or some foreign concept. On the contrary, it is subscription model pricing that is the new and controversial business model, not the charging for new versions.
Would it be ridiculous to pay ongoing for the hypothetical Black & Decker tool if the electrical power specification is being revised every year and the type of material you work with the tool is changed every year as well?
I reject your assertion that something new is controversial. New things are fine. New business models are fine. I am an independent creative worker without a W2 job job. Is it controversial that I run my career as a Solopreneur? Am I doing it wrong, too?
Edit: Upon further reflection, it would likely be Bosch or Makita who would produce a subscription tool. You are probably right that Black & Decker would never go the subscription tool route. Subscription works best for the best tools whose users need top performance on day 1 and stay that way forever. Black & Decker is crap that gets the job done for weekend warriors who likely pull out the tool a few times a year for small projects. And I own B&D tools. They certainly aren't my faves, though.
You're confused, I didn't say new things are controversial. I said the new model, subscription pricing for things that don't require it, is controversial. It is, and you can't pretend otherwise.
As for the hardware analogy, Black & Decker certainly does revise their tool portfolio and releases new models -- which you have to pay for, also one time. There is no subscription. Then you are free to use it (or your old version). This is old hat in software and nothing that requires imagination. If the older version is depreciated or passes its support lifespan it will suffer bitrot and stop being a useful tool. Developers carefully decide how long to patch a product (free) vs releasing a new major release (not free).
As for the tool brands you're getting distracted as its completely irrelevant to the analogy. The point was obvious -- there's no way in hell you'd pay Black & Decker (or any damn brand) a monthly subscription fee to use the cordless drill you bought from them. You'd bitch and use something else too.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
Would you buy it if it cost $40? Probably not.
And if if you did buy it for $40, how would you feel if a couple years from now iOS or MacOS broke compatibility (a very likely case due to the unorthodox functionality the product provides)? Would you expect the developer to address the issues? Would you pay for that?
if you wouldn't pay, yet still demand the update, put yourself in the developer's shoes. How would you feel about a bunch of clients asking you to revisit work you did years ago that met their needs at the time, but now that things are different, they want that work redone—and they refuse to pay for the rework? I know how I'd feel. Time to find some new clients.
Devs deserve to be paid ongoing money for ongoing work if that's the business model they establish.
Or, we could go back to the days where pro software was sold in a box with hardware dongle locks for $1000+ and the devs supported those high-prices licenses for years without additional payment.
As a software developer I know exactly what I'd pay. And yes, of course I've purchased $40 software, including iOS apps that high and some higher. A tool is a tool.
But I would not pay an ongoing subscription to use a tool that doesn't require ongoing cloud assets. How would you feel about paying Black & Decker an on-going subscription for full-use of the power tools you bought from them? You'd say that's absolutely ridiculous.
New versions of one-time-purchase software is as old as software. It's not rocket science or some foreign concept. On the contrary, it is subscription model pricing that is the new and controversial business model, not the charging for new versions.
Would it be ridiculous to pay ongoing for the hypothetical Black & Decker tool if the electrical power specification is being revised every year and the type of material you work with the tool is changed every year as well?
I reject your assertion that something new is controversial. New things are fine. New business models are fine. I am an independent creative worker without a W2 job job. Is it controversial that I run my career as a Solopreneur? Am I doing it wrong, too?
Edit: Upon further reflection, it would likely be Bosch or Makita who would produce a subscription tool. You are probably right that Black & Decker would never go the subscription tool route. Subscription works best for the best tools whose users need top performance on day 1 and stay that way forever. Black & Decker is crap that gets the job done for weekend warriors who likely pull out the tool a few times a year for small projects. And I own B&D tools. They certainly aren't my faves, though.
You're confused, I didn't say new things are controversial. I said the new model, subscription pricing for things that don't require it, is controversial. It is, and you can't pretend otherwise.
As for the hardware analogy, Black & Decker certainly does revise their tool portfolio and releases new models -- which you have to pay for, also one time. There is no subscription. Then you are free to use it (or your old version). This is old hat in software and nothing that requires imagination. If the older version is depreciated or passes its support lifespan it will suffer bitrot and stop being a useful tool.
As for the tool brands you're getting distracted as its completely irrelevant to the analogy.
The subscription pricing IS REQUIRED if the developer requires it. You can't pretend otherwise. Commercial software isn't some kind of social service for which there are mandated price controls.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
It doesn't add any new functionality to Apple Pencil. Apple Pencil's pressure information is provided by the operating system, not by that dongle. What the dongle does is just to transmit information it collects from the operating system. Yet it demands subscription fee for the use of a device upon which its contribution is nil ! If it is the transmission of the information from the iPad to the Mac that requires a payment, then this payment is already done when paying the price of the dongle. If you ask continuous payments for the use of a device then this is a rental, not sale. You cannot both sell and rent a device at the same time.
Yeah, there are a lot of things about this that I don’t like.
for example, when they first announced the Pro upgrade to license, I went to their site to read up on it. Now, before I talk about that directly, I think I can say without too much disagreement, that what 99% of the users of the iPad, Pencil and Astropad want, is no, or very little lag, full use of the Pencil and - NOTHING else. Get that people? Nothing else.
but what they were, and still are, offering is a lot of fluff. Fluff that people don’t want, or need. Fluff that THEY need to offer, to come with a reason to charge what they’re charging. I couldn’t find a single thing that I thought; “hmm, this looks pretty good, I’d want that.”
so the problem is that if we’re using Photoshop on our Mac, and using the iPad as a pressure sensitive tablet with the Pencil, instead of a Wacom, well, what else do we need for that? The answer is nothing. The same thing is true for most every other program on the Mac that we would use this with. I can’t see spending all of that money for features that are useless for, at least, most of us. So make a version for the basic needs for $20 a year, and make a high end version with all the fluff for $79 a year, and see which sells best.
I think I know what most people will say. And as for the hardware, any software needed to make that work should be free. Yes, free. Because that’s what everyone else does, and because that’s what it’s worth.
I think you are confusing the hardware and software.
The software has offered a subscription for some time with extra features enabled. This was the case before the Hardware was announced.
The new Hardware, which is a one-time purchase will make that Pro software perform better.
You can run the free (is it pay still? your comment implies so. I though when they rolled out subscriptions the limited app became free. I bought it before then, so it just shows "purchased" in my App Store) software (accepting its limitations) just the same as before.
You can subscribe to the Pro software and get the full features set, same as before.
Now, if you want the tip-top experience you can buy the hardware (one time) and pay the subscription with all software features, same as before.
Buying the hardware doesn't impact how the software is sold at all. No more than buying Adobe's Pen & Ruler (remember those?) unlocked a free edition of Creative Cloud to purchasers (to be clear, it didn't entitle purchasers to free CC).
Did you know there is a paid tier for the Appleinsider App that arbitrarily turns off ads (also enables favorite articles, right?). It would be trivial for AI to enable that functionality to all users, but they probably like the revenue stream.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
Just for pressure sensitivity and the Apple Pencil.
That's just nonsense. This whole subscription model thing is a bunch of anti consumer bullshit. Astropad already managed to piss off its existing users with the change to the subscription model. The original app seems to still get updated but for how long?
I'll never subscribe to software. Software is already abusive to consumers enough as is.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
Just for pressure sensitivity and the Apple Pencil.
That's just nonsense. This whole subscription model thing is a bunch of anti consumer bullshit. Astropad already managed to piss off its existing users with the change to the subscription model. The original app seems to still get updated but for how long?
I'll never subscribe to software. Software is already abusive to consumers enough as is.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
Would you buy it if it cost $40? Probably not.
And if if you did buy it for $40, how would you feel if a couple years from now iOS or MacOS broke compatibility (a very likely case due to the unorthodox functionality the product provides)? Would you expect the developer to address the issues? Would you pay for that?
if you wouldn't pay, yet still demand the update, put yourself in the developer's shoes. How would you feel about a bunch of clients asking you to revisit work you did years ago that met their needs at the time, but now that things are different, they want that work redone—and they refuse to pay for the rework? I know how I'd feel. Time to find some new clients.
Devs deserve to be paid ongoing money for ongoing work if that's the business model they establish.
Or, we could go back to the days where pro software was sold in a box with hardware dongle locks for $1000+ and the devs supported those high-prices licenses for years without additional payment.
As a software developer I know exactly what I'd pay. And yes, of course I've purchased $40 software, including iOS apps that high and some higher. A tool is a tool.
But I would not pay an ongoing subscription to use a tool that doesn't require ongoing cloud assets. How would you feel about paying Black & Decker an on-going subscription for full-use of the power tools you bought from them? You'd say that's absolutely ridiculous.
New versions of one-time-purchase software is as old as software. It's not rocket science or some foreign concept. On the contrary, it is subscription model pricing that is the new and controversial business model, not the charging for new versions.
Would it be ridiculous to pay ongoing for the hypothetical Black & Decker tool if the electrical power specification is being revised every year and the type of material you work with the tool is changed every year as well?
I reject your assertion that something new is controversial. New things are fine. New business models are fine. I am an independent creative worker without a W2 job job. Is it controversial that I run my career as a Solopreneur? Am I doing it wrong, too?
Edit: Upon further reflection, it would likely be Bosch or Makita who would produce a subscription tool. You are probably right that Black & Decker would never go the subscription tool route. Subscription works best for the best tools whose users need top performance on day 1 and stay that way forever. Black & Decker is crap that gets the job done for weekend warriors who likely pull out the tool a few times a year for small projects. And I own B&D tools. They certainly aren't my faves, though.
You're confused, I didn't say new things are controversial. I said the new model, subscription pricing for things that don't require it, is controversial. It is, and you can't pretend otherwise.
As for the hardware analogy, Black & Decker certainly does revise their tool portfolio and releases new models -- which you have to pay for, also one time. There is no subscription. Then you are free to use it (or your old version). This is old hat in software and nothing that requires imagination. If the older version is depreciated or passes its support lifespan it will suffer bitrot and stop being a useful tool.
As for the tool brands you're getting distracted as its completely irrelevant to the analogy.
The subscription pricing IS REQUIRED if the developer requires it. You can't pretend otherwise. Commercial software isn't some kind of social service for which there are mandated price controls.
And if people think it sucks for that particular product, then the product, and often the company along with it, dies. It means that they didn’t understand their market. And that looks to be happening here.
ive got a piece of equipment that works with my iPad. It’s a measurement unit. It measures many electrical aspects. It works with the iPad through Bluetooth. It costs $145. The software, in the App Store, as these things always are, is free. They recently added features and updated it for iOS 11. The update was, as it always is for these products, free.
astropads hardware is very overpriced as well as requiring software. That software should be free. All the hardware looks to be is a chip and connector. Yes, I imagine there are some caps, resistors and diodes. I don’t know if this is a standard chip, or a custom one, but it should not cost more than maybe $25, and really, that’s too expensive. I have a Logitech trackball that comes with a radio that plugs into my Mac Pro USB port. It comes with software as well. The entire thing goes for $38 on Amazon. The software gets upgraded for free.
the whole point here, that I think most of us are making is not that it’s a subscription, but that they are charging way too much for what is utility software. It’s unheard of to charge twice as much, or more, for an upgrade to an app that makes it more useful, than the original price of the app itself. It’s crazy.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
It doesn't add any new functionality to Apple Pencil. Apple Pencil's pressure information is provided by the operating system, not by that dongle. What the dongle does is just to transmit information it collects from the operating system. Yet it demands subscription fee for the use of a device upon which its contribution is nil ! If it is the transmission of the information from the iPad to the Mac that requires a payment, then this payment is already done when paying the price of the dongle. If you ask continuous payments for the use of a device then this is a rental, not sale. You cannot both sell and rent a device at the same time.
Yeah, there are a lot of things about this that I don’t like.
for example, when they first announced the Pro upgrade to license, I went to their site to read up on it. Now, before I talk about that directly, I think I can say without too much disagreement, that what 99% of the users of the iPad, Pencil and Astropad want, is no, or very little lag, full use of the Pencil and - NOTHING else. Get that people? Nothing else.
but what they were, and still are, offering is a lot of fluff. Fluff that people don’t want, or need. Fluff that THEY need to offer, to come with a reason to charge what they’re charging. I couldn’t find a single thing that I thought; “hmm, this looks pretty good, I’d want that.”
so the problem is that if we’re using Photoshop on our Mac, and using the iPad as a pressure sensitive tablet with the Pencil, instead of a Wacom, well, what else do we need for that? The answer is nothing. The same thing is true for most every other program on the Mac that we would use this with. I can’t see spending all of that money for features that are useless for, at least, most of us. So make a version for the basic needs for $20 a year, and make a high end version with all the fluff for $79 a year, and see which sells best.
I think I know what most people will say. And as for the hardware, any software needed to make that work should be free. Yes, free. Because that’s what everyone else does, and because that’s what it’s worth.
I think you are confusing the hardware and software.
The software has offered a subscription for some time with extra features enabled. This was the case before the Hardware was announced.
The new Hardware, which is a one-time purchase will make that Pro software perform better.
You can run the free (is it pay still? your comment implies so. I though when they rolled out subscriptions the limited app became free. I bought it before then, so it just shows "purchased" in my App Store) software (accepting its limitations) just the same as before.
You can subscribe to the Pro software and get the full features set, same as before.
Now, if you want the tip-top experience you can buy the hardware (one time) and pay the subscription with all software features, same as before.
Buying the hardware doesn't impact how the software is sold at all. No more than buying Adobe's Pen & Ruler (remember those?) unlocked a free edition of Creative Cloud to purchasers (to be clear, it didn't entitle purchasers to free CC).
Did you know there is a paid tier for the Appleinsider App that arbitrarily turns off ads (also enables favorite articles, right?). It would be trivial for AI to enable that functionality to all users, but they probably like the revenue stream.
And I don't see any problem with that, either.
How about you?
I’m not confusing anything. There’s a combination here that they’re trying to sell. One is the hardware, and two is the software subscription. They go hand and hand. If you don’t care about the speed, you won’t want either. And if you do care, then best performance, we’re being told, is obtained with both.
i get it, but by all the commenting here, it’s clear that you don’t. While your statements are basically correct, in a formal way, you steadfastly refuse to address the horridly overpriced subscription costs.
and please, don’t compare them to Adobe, because they are so far away from them in any useful way as to make it painful just reading it. There is no way you can compare this crap upgrade for $79 a year to a sub for both Lightroom and Photoshop for $119 a year. They aren’t even in the same universe. This is just utility software, the type that comes free with hardware. And while I know it’s not their hardware, because it’s Apple’s, so that I have no problem paying for it. But nevertheless, it’s still just utility software. It’s not worth anywhere near $79 per year. And as I’ve been saying, all we want is the speed advantage, and nothing else from this, because what it offers is a complete waste.
as for the site subscription, no I didn’t know about that, but now that I do, I’ll look into it. I do pay $50 a year for arstechnica for that, as well as the ability to have articles in pdf format that I can add to iBooks. But these sites offer a lot. This software doesn’t.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
It doesn't add any new functionality to Apple Pencil. Apple Pencil's pressure information is provided by the operating system, not by that dongle. What the dongle does is just to transmit information it collects from the operating system. Yet it demands subscription fee for the use of a device upon which its contribution is nil ! If it is the transmission of the information from the iPad to the Mac that requires a payment, then this payment is already done when paying the price of the dongle. If you ask continuous payments for the use of a device then this is a rental, not sale. You cannot both sell and rent a device at the same time.
Yeah, there are a lot of things about this that I don’t like.
for example, when they first announced the Pro upgrade to license, I went to their site to read up on it. Now, before I talk about that directly, I think I can say without too much disagreement, that what 99% of the users of the iPad, Pencil and Astropad want, is no, or very little lag, full use of the Pencil and - NOTHING else. Get that people? Nothing else.
but what they were, and still are, offering is a lot of fluff. Fluff that people don’t want, or need. Fluff that THEY need to offer, to come with a reason to charge what they’re charging. I couldn’t find a single thing that I thought; “hmm, this looks pretty good, I’d want that.”
so the problem is that if we’re using Photoshop on our Mac, and using the iPad as a pressure sensitive tablet with the Pencil, instead of a Wacom, well, what else do we need for that? The answer is nothing. The same thing is true for most every other program on the Mac that we would use this with. I can’t see spending all of that money for features that are useless for, at least, most of us. So make a version for the basic needs for $20 a year, and make a high end version with all the fluff for $79 a year, and see which sells best.
I think I know what most people will say. And as for the hardware, any software needed to make that work should be free. Yes, free. Because that’s what everyone else does, and because that’s what it’s worth.
I think you are confusing the hardware and software.
The software has offered a subscription for some time with extra features enabled. This was the case before the Hardware was announced.
The new Hardware, which is a one-time purchase will make that Pro software perform better.
You can run the free (is it pay still? your comment implies so. I though when they rolled out subscriptions the limited app became free. I bought it before then, so it just shows "purchased" in my App Store) software (accepting its limitations) just the same as before.
You can subscribe to the Pro software and get the full features set, same as before.
Now, if you want the tip-top experience you can buy the hardware (one time) and pay the subscription with all software features, same as before.
Buying the hardware doesn't impact how the software is sold at all. No more than buying Adobe's Pen & Ruler (remember those?) unlocked a free edition of Creative Cloud to purchasers (to be clear, it didn't entitle purchasers to free CC).
Did you know there is a paid tier for the Appleinsider App that arbitrarily turns off ads (also enables favorite articles, right?). It would be trivial for AI to enable that functionality to all users, but they probably like the revenue stream.
And I don't see any problem with that, either.
How about you?
I’m not confusing anything. There’s a combination here that they’re trying to sell. One is the hardware, and two is the software subscription. They go hand and hand. If you don’t care about the speed, you won’t want either. And if you do care, then best performance, we’re being told, is obtained with both.
i get it, but by all the commenting here, it’s clear that you don’t. While your statements are basically correct, in a formal way, you steadfastly refuse to address the horridly overpriced subscription costs.
and please, don’t compare them to Adobe, because they are so far away from them in any useful way as to make it painful just reading it. There is no way you can compare this crap upgrade for $79 a year to a sub for both Lightroom and Photoshop for $119 a year. They aren’t even in the same universe. This is just utility software, the type that comes free with hardware. And while I know it’s not their hardware, because it’s Apple’s, so that I have no problem paying for it. But nevertheless, it’s still just utility software. It’s not worth anywhere near $79 per year. And as I’ve been saying, all we want is the speed advantage, and nothing else from this, because what it offers is a complete waste.
as for the site subscription, no I didn’t know about that, but now that I do, I’ll look into it. I do pay $50 a year for arstechnica for that, as well as the ability to have articles in pdf format that I can add to iBooks. But these sites offer a lot. This software doesn’t.
I can't express in words how completely useless a subscription to Ars Technica would be to me. Does my assessment make it useless to you?
Which brings me to the point I keep trying to make, in my basic, formal way, as you put it: Just because you don't find the subscription compelling doesn't make the cost objectively outrageous. You don't strike me as Astropad's target customer. I am the kind of customer that Astropad is looking to land, and I'm interested, if skeptical. I agree it is problematic software right now, but I am willing to support them to fund their efforts to build a real touch solution for Mac. As I said before, I don't subscribe now, and I'm not sure I ever will. But I want to "want to subscribe".
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
Would you buy it if it cost $40? Probably not.
And if if you did buy it for $40, how would you feel if a couple years from now iOS or MacOS broke compatibility (a very likely case due to the unorthodox functionality the product provides)? Would you expect the developer to address the issues? Would you pay for that?
if you wouldn't pay, yet still demand the update, put yourself in the developer's shoes. How would you feel about a bunch of clients asking you to revisit work you did years ago that met their needs at the time, but now that things are different, they want that work redone—and they refuse to pay for the rework? I know how I'd feel. Time to find some new clients.
Devs deserve to be paid ongoing money for ongoing work if that's the business model they establish.
Or, we could go back to the days where pro software was sold in a box with hardware dongle locks for $1000+ and the devs supported those high-prices licenses for years without additional payment.
As a software developer I know exactly what I'd pay. And yes, of course I've purchased $40 software, including iOS apps that high and some higher. A tool is a tool.
But I would not pay an ongoing subscription to use a tool that doesn't require ongoing cloud assets. How would you feel about paying Black & Decker an on-going subscription for full-use of the power tools you bought from them? You'd say that's absolutely ridiculous.
New versions of one-time-purchase software is as old as software. It's not rocket science or some foreign concept. On the contrary, it is subscription model pricing that is the new and controversial business model, not the charging for new versions.
Would it be ridiculous to pay ongoing for the hypothetical Black & Decker tool if the electrical power specification is being revised every year and the type of material you work with the tool is changed every year as well?
I reject your assertion that something new is controversial. New things are fine. New business models are fine. I am an independent creative worker without a W2 job job. Is it controversial that I run my career as a Solopreneur? Am I doing it wrong, too?
Edit: Upon further reflection, it would likely be Bosch or Makita who would produce a subscription tool. You are probably right that Black & Decker would never go the subscription tool route. Subscription works best for the best tools whose users need top performance on day 1 and stay that way forever. Black & Decker is crap that gets the job done for weekend warriors who likely pull out the tool a few times a year for small projects. And I own B&D tools. They certainly aren't my faves, though.
You're confused, I didn't say new things are controversial. I said the new model, subscription pricing for things that don't require it, is controversial. It is, and you can't pretend otherwise.
As for the hardware analogy, Black & Decker certainly does revise their tool portfolio and releases new models -- which you have to pay for, also one time. There is no subscription. Then you are free to use it (or your old version). This is old hat in software and nothing that requires imagination. If the older version is depreciated or passes its support lifespan it will suffer bitrot and stop being a useful tool.
As for the tool brands you're getting distracted as its completely irrelevant to the analogy.
The subscription pricing IS REQUIRED if the developer requires it. You can't pretend otherwise. Commercial software isn't some kind of social service for which there are mandated price controls.
And if people think it sucks for that particular product, then the product, and often the company along with it, dies. It means that they didn’t understand their market. And that looks to be happening here.
ive got a piece of equipment that works with my iPad. It’s a measurement unit. It measures many electrical aspects. It works with the iPad through Bluetooth. It costs $145. The software, in the App Store, as these things always are, is free. They recently added features and updated it for iOS 11. The update was, as it always is for these products, free.
astropads hardware is very overpriced as well as requiring software. That software should be free. All the hardware looks to be is a chip and connector. Yes, I imagine there are some caps, resistors and diodes. I don’t know if this is a standard chip, or a custom one, but it should not cost more than maybe $25, and really, that’s too expensive. I have a Logitech trackball that comes with a radio that plugs into my Mac Pro USB port. It comes with software as well. The entire thing goes for $38 on Amazon. The software gets upgraded for free.
the whole point here, that I think most of us are making is not that it’s a subscription, but that they are charging way too much for what is utility software. It’s unheard of to charge twice as much, or more, for an upgrade to an app that makes it more useful, than the original price of the app itself. It’s crazy.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
It doesn't add any new functionality to Apple Pencil. Apple Pencil's pressure information is provided by the operating system, not by that dongle. What the dongle does is just to transmit information it collects from the operating system. Yet it demands subscription fee for the use of a device upon which its contribution is nil ! If it is the transmission of the information from the iPad to the Mac that requires a payment, then this payment is already done when paying the price of the dongle. If you ask continuous payments for the use of a device then this is a rental, not sale. You cannot both sell and rent a device at the same time.
Yeah, there are a lot of things about this that I don’t like.
for example, when they first announced the Pro upgrade to license, I went to their site to read up on it. Now, before I talk about that directly, I think I can say without too much disagreement, that what 99% of the users of the iPad, Pencil and Astropad want, is no, or very little lag, full use of the Pencil and - NOTHING else. Get that people? Nothing else.
but what they were, and still are, offering is a lot of fluff. Fluff that people don’t want, or need. Fluff that THEY need to offer, to come with a reason to charge what they’re charging. I couldn’t find a single thing that I thought; “hmm, this looks pretty good, I’d want that.”
so the problem is that if we’re using Photoshop on our Mac, and using the iPad as a pressure sensitive tablet with the Pencil, instead of a Wacom, well, what else do we need for that? The answer is nothing. The same thing is true for most every other program on the Mac that we would use this with. I can’t see spending all of that money for features that are useless for, at least, most of us. So make a version for the basic needs for $20 a year, and make a high end version with all the fluff for $79 a year, and see which sells best.
I think I know what most people will say. And as for the hardware, any software needed to make that work should be free. Yes, free. Because that’s what everyone else does, and because that’s what it’s worth.
I think you are confusing the hardware and software.
The software has offered a subscription for some time with extra features enabled. This was the case before the Hardware was announced.
The new Hardware, which is a one-time purchase will make that Pro software perform better.
You can run the free (is it pay still? your comment implies so. I though when they rolled out subscriptions the limited app became free. I bought it before then, so it just shows "purchased" in my App Store) software (accepting its limitations) just the same as before.
You can subscribe to the Pro software and get the full features set, same as before.
Now, if you want the tip-top experience you can buy the hardware (one time) and pay the subscription with all software features, same as before.
Buying the hardware doesn't impact how the software is sold at all. No more than buying Adobe's Pen & Ruler (remember those?) unlocked a free edition of Creative Cloud to purchasers (to be clear, it didn't entitle purchasers to free CC).
Did you know there is a paid tier for the Appleinsider App that arbitrarily turns off ads (also enables favorite articles, right?). It would be trivial for AI to enable that functionality to all users, but they probably like the revenue stream.
And I don't see any problem with that, either.
How about you?
I’m not confusing anything. There’s a combination here that they’re trying to sell. One is the hardware, and two is the software subscription. They go hand and hand. If you don’t care about the speed, you won’t want either. And if you do care, then best performance, we’re being told, is obtained with both.
i get it, but by all the commenting here, it’s clear that you don’t. While your statements are basically correct, in a formal way, you steadfastly refuse to address the horridly overpriced subscription costs.
and please, don’t compare them to Adobe, because they are so far away from them in any useful way as to make it painful just reading it. There is no way you can compare this crap upgrade for $79 a year to a sub for both Lightroom and Photoshop for $119 a year. They aren’t even in the same universe. This is just utility software, the type that comes free with hardware. And while I know it’s not their hardware, because it’s Apple’s, so that I have no problem paying for it. But nevertheless, it’s still just utility software. It’s not worth anywhere near $79 per year. And as I’ve been saying, all we want is the speed advantage, and nothing else from this, because what it offers is a complete waste.
as for the site subscription, no I didn’t know about that, but now that I do, I’ll look into it. I do pay $50 a year for arstechnica for that, as well as the ability to have articles in pdf format that I can add to iBooks. But these sites offer a lot. This software doesn’t.
I can't express in words how completely useless a subscription to Ars Technica would be to me. Does my assessment make it useless to you?
Which brings me to the point I keep trying to make, in my basic, formal way, as you put it: Just because you don't find the subscription compelling doesn't make the cost objectively outrageous. You don't strike me as Astropad's target customer. I am the kind of customer that Astropad is looking to land, and I'm interested, if skeptical. I agree it is problematic software right now, but I am willing to support them to fund their efforts to build a real touch solution for Mac. As I said before, I don't subscribe now, and I'm not sure I ever will. But I want to "want to subscribe".
Maybe I'm an idiot.
Maybe we both are.
I don’t care how little you are interested in science, technology, or anything else, or whether you can afford it or not. You’re the one who brought up the point about a subscription here, so blame yourself for my giving you that information in response.
actually, I am their target customer. That doesn’t mean I agree with the way they’re doing it. The fact that you “want to subscribe” doesn’t mean that much,because if you don’t actually subscribe, then you are obviously NOT a customer at all. You not the “kind” of customer they want, because they don’t want the platitudes you’re giving us, but real money, which you are apparently not willing to give, in opposition to your stated position of its value proposition. I guess that means that while you’re willing to give them verbal support, you’re not willing to give them actual support. You don’t understand that unless you hand your money over, your not supporting them at all. Commenting on a forum isn’t real support, as no one here will do anything based on your statements.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
Would you buy it if it cost $40? Probably not.
And if if you did buy it for $40, how would you feel if a couple years from now iOS or MacOS broke compatibility (a very likely case due to the unorthodox functionality the product provides)? Would you expect the developer to address the issues? Would you pay for that?
if you wouldn't pay, yet still demand the update, put yourself in the developer's shoes. How would you feel about a bunch of clients asking you to revisit work you did years ago that met their needs at the time, but now that things are different, they want that work redone—and they refuse to pay for the rework? I know how I'd feel. Time to find some new clients.
Devs deserve to be paid ongoing money for ongoing work if that's the business model they establish.
Or, we could go back to the days where pro software was sold in a box with hardware dongle locks for $1000+ and the devs supported those high-prices licenses for years without additional payment.
As a software developer I know exactly what I'd pay. And yes, of course I've purchased $40 software, including iOS apps that high and some higher. A tool is a tool.
But I would not pay an ongoing subscription to use a tool that doesn't require ongoing cloud assets. How would you feel about paying Black & Decker an on-going subscription for full-use of the power tools you bought from them? You'd say that's absolutely ridiculous.
New versions of one-time-purchase software is as old as software. It's not rocket science or some foreign concept. On the contrary, it is subscription model pricing that is the new and controversial business model, not the charging for new versions.
Would it be ridiculous to pay ongoing for the hypothetical Black & Decker tool if the electrical power specification is being revised every year and the type of material you work with the tool is changed every year as well?
I reject your assertion that something new is controversial. New things are fine. New business models are fine. I am an independent creative worker without a W2 job job. Is it controversial that I run my career as a Solopreneur? Am I doing it wrong, too?
Edit: Upon further reflection, it would likely be Bosch or Makita who would produce a subscription tool. You are probably right that Black & Decker would never go the subscription tool route. Subscription works best for the best tools whose users need top performance on day 1 and stay that way forever. Black & Decker is crap that gets the job done for weekend warriors who likely pull out the tool a few times a year for small projects. And I own B&D tools. They certainly aren't my faves, though.
You're confused, I didn't say new things are controversial. I said the new model, subscription pricing for things that don't require it, is controversial. It is, and you can't pretend otherwise.
As for the hardware analogy, Black & Decker certainly does revise their tool portfolio and releases new models -- which you have to pay for, also one time. There is no subscription. Then you are free to use it (or your old version). This is old hat in software and nothing that requires imagination. If the older version is depreciated or passes its support lifespan it will suffer bitrot and stop being a useful tool.
As for the tool brands you're getting distracted as its completely irrelevant to the analogy.
The subscription pricing IS REQUIRED if the developer requires it. You can't pretend otherwise. Commercial software isn't some kind of social service for which there are mandated price controls.
And if people think it sucks for that particular product, then the product, and often the company along with it, dies. It means that they didn’t understand their market. And that looks to be happening here.
ive got a piece of equipment that works with my iPad. It’s a measurement unit. It measures many electrical aspects. It works with the iPad through Bluetooth. It costs $145. The software, in the App Store, as these things always are, is free. They recently added features and updated it for iOS 11. The update was, as it always is for these products, free.
astropads hardware is very overpriced as well as requiring software. That software should be free. All the hardware looks to be is a chip and connector. Yes, I imagine there are some caps, resistors and diodes. I don’t know if this is a standard chip, or a custom one, but it should not cost more than maybe $25, and really, that’s too expensive. I have a Logitech trackball that comes with a radio that plugs into my Mac Pro USB port. It comes with software as well. The entire thing goes for $38 on Amazon. The software gets upgraded for free.
the whole point here, that I think most of us are making is not that it’s a subscription, but that they are charging way too much for what is utility software. It’s unheard of to charge twice as much, or more, for an upgrade to an app that makes it more useful, than the original price of the app itself. It’s crazy.
A number of companies have raised a lot more than that and went out of business. I hope that doesn’t happen here, because if those people are willing to pay the reduced amount of money for backing a Kickstarter project, then I hope they get the product. But May is still a long way off. And the price for this will be substantially higher after the product is released, and that’s the pricing we’ve been arguing about, though actually, you still refuse to talk about the pricing. I wonder why?
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
Would you buy it if it cost $40? Probably not.
And if if you did buy it for $40, how would you feel if a couple years from now iOS or MacOS broke compatibility (a very likely case due to the unorthodox functionality the product provides)? Would you expect the developer to address the issues? Would you pay for that?
if you wouldn't pay, yet still demand the update, put yourself in the developer's shoes. How would you feel about a bunch of clients asking you to revisit work you did years ago that met their needs at the time, but now that things are different, they want that work redone—and they refuse to pay for the rework? I know how I'd feel. Time to find some new clients.
Devs deserve to be paid ongoing money for ongoing work if that's the business model they establish.
Or, we could go back to the days where pro software was sold in a box with hardware dongle locks for $1000+ and the devs supported those high-prices licenses for years without additional payment.
As a software developer I know exactly what I'd pay. And yes, of course I've purchased $40 software, including iOS apps that high and some higher. A tool is a tool.
But I would not pay an ongoing subscription to use a tool that doesn't require ongoing cloud assets. How would you feel about paying Black & Decker an on-going subscription for full-use of the power tools you bought from them? You'd say that's absolutely ridiculous.
New versions of one-time-purchase software is as old as software. It's not rocket science or some foreign concept. On the contrary, it is subscription model pricing that is the new and controversial business model, not the charging for new versions.
Would it be ridiculous to pay ongoing for the hypothetical Black & Decker tool if the electrical power specification is being revised every year and the type of material you work with the tool is changed every year as well?
I reject your assertion that something new is controversial. New things are fine. New business models are fine. I am an independent creative worker without a W2 job job. Is it controversial that I run my career as a Solopreneur? Am I doing it wrong, too?
Edit: Upon further reflection, it would likely be Bosch or Makita who would produce a subscription tool. You are probably right that Black & Decker would never go the subscription tool route. Subscription works best for the best tools whose users need top performance on day 1 and stay that way forever. Black & Decker is crap that gets the job done for weekend warriors who likely pull out the tool a few times a year for small projects. And I own B&D tools. They certainly aren't my faves, though.
You're confused, I didn't say new things are controversial. I said the new model, subscription pricing for things that don't require it, is controversial. It is, and you can't pretend otherwise.
As for the hardware analogy, Black & Decker certainly does revise their tool portfolio and releases new models -- which you have to pay for, also one time. There is no subscription. Then you are free to use it (or your old version). This is old hat in software and nothing that requires imagination. If the older version is depreciated or passes its support lifespan it will suffer bitrot and stop being a useful tool.
As for the tool brands you're getting distracted as its completely irrelevant to the analogy.
The subscription pricing IS REQUIRED if the developer requires it. You can't pretend otherwise. Commercial software isn't some kind of social service for which there are mandated price controls.
And if people think it sucks for that particular product, then the product, and often the company along with it, dies. It means that they didn’t understand their market. And that looks to be happening here.
ive got a piece of equipment that works with my iPad. It’s a measurement unit. It measures many electrical aspects. It works with the iPad through Bluetooth. It costs $145. The software, in the App Store, as these things always are, is free. They recently added features and updated it for iOS 11. The update was, as it always is for these products, free.
astropads hardware is very overpriced as well as requiring software. That software should be free. All the hardware looks to be is a chip and connector. Yes, I imagine there are some caps, resistors and diodes. I don’t know if this is a standard chip, or a custom one, but it should not cost more than maybe $25, and really, that’s too expensive. I have a Logitech trackball that comes with a radio that plugs into my Mac Pro USB port. It comes with software as well. The entire thing goes for $38 on Amazon. The software gets upgraded for free.
the whole point here, that I think most of us are making is not that it’s a subscription, but that they are charging way too much for what is utility software. It’s unheard of to charge twice as much, or more, for an upgrade to an app that makes it more useful, than the original price of the app itself. It’s crazy.
A number of companies have raised a lot more than that and went out of business. I hope that doesn’t happen here, because if those people are willing to pay the reduced amount of money for backing a Kickstarter project, then I hope they get the product. But May is still a long way off. And the price for this will be substantially higher after the product is released, and that’s the pricing we’ve been arguing about, though actually, you still refuse to talk about the pricing. I wonder why?
You mean people like me who backed the kickstarter?
Yeah, I hope to get my piece of hardware, just like everyone else.
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
You do realize all software, by definition, allows you to use your own hardware. Hardware with no software=nothing.
Would you buy it if it cost $40? Probably not.
And if if you did buy it for $40, how would you feel if a couple years from now iOS or MacOS broke compatibility (a very likely case due to the unorthodox functionality the product provides)? Would you expect the developer to address the issues? Would you pay for that?
if you wouldn't pay, yet still demand the update, put yourself in the developer's shoes. How would you feel about a bunch of clients asking you to revisit work you did years ago that met their needs at the time, but now that things are different, they want that work redone—and they refuse to pay for the rework? I know how I'd feel. Time to find some new clients.
Devs deserve to be paid ongoing money for ongoing work if that's the business model they establish.
Or, we could go back to the days where pro software was sold in a box with hardware dongle locks for $1000+ and the devs supported those high-prices licenses for years without additional payment.
As a software developer I know exactly what I'd pay. And yes, of course I've purchased $40 software, including iOS apps that high and some higher. A tool is a tool.
But I would not pay an ongoing subscription to use a tool that doesn't require ongoing cloud assets. How would you feel about paying Black & Decker an on-going subscription for full-use of the power tools you bought from them? You'd say that's absolutely ridiculous.
New versions of one-time-purchase software is as old as software. It's not rocket science or some foreign concept. On the contrary, it is subscription model pricing that is the new and controversial business model, not the charging for new versions.
Would it be ridiculous to pay ongoing for the hypothetical Black & Decker tool if the electrical power specification is being revised every year and the type of material you work with the tool is changed every year as well?
I reject your assertion that something new is controversial. New things are fine. New business models are fine. I am an independent creative worker without a W2 job job. Is it controversial that I run my career as a Solopreneur? Am I doing it wrong, too?
Edit: Upon further reflection, it would likely be Bosch or Makita who would produce a subscription tool. You are probably right that Black & Decker would never go the subscription tool route. Subscription works best for the best tools whose users need top performance on day 1 and stay that way forever. Black & Decker is crap that gets the job done for weekend warriors who likely pull out the tool a few times a year for small projects. And I own B&D tools. They certainly aren't my faves, though.
You're confused, I didn't say new things are controversial. I said the new model, subscription pricing for things that don't require it, is controversial. It is, and you can't pretend otherwise.
As for the hardware analogy, Black & Decker certainly does revise their tool portfolio and releases new models -- which you have to pay for, also one time. There is no subscription. Then you are free to use it (or your old version). This is old hat in software and nothing that requires imagination. If the older version is depreciated or passes its support lifespan it will suffer bitrot and stop being a useful tool.
As for the tool brands you're getting distracted as its completely irrelevant to the analogy.
The subscription pricing IS REQUIRED if the developer requires it. You can't pretend otherwise. Commercial software isn't some kind of social service for which there are mandated price controls.
And if people think it sucks for that particular product, then the product, and often the company along with it, dies. It means that they didn’t understand their market. And that looks to be happening here.
ive got a piece of equipment that works with my iPad. It’s a measurement unit. It measures many electrical aspects. It works with the iPad through Bluetooth. It costs $145. The software, in the App Store, as these things always are, is free. They recently added features and updated it for iOS 11. The update was, as it always is for these products, free.
astropads hardware is very overpriced as well as requiring software. That software should be free. All the hardware looks to be is a chip and connector. Yes, I imagine there are some caps, resistors and diodes. I don’t know if this is a standard chip, or a custom one, but it should not cost more than maybe $25, and really, that’s too expensive. I have a Logitech trackball that comes with a radio that plugs into my Mac Pro USB port. It comes with software as well. The entire thing goes for $38 on Amazon. The software gets upgraded for free.
the whole point here, that I think most of us are making is not that it’s a subscription, but that they are charging way too much for what is utility software. It’s unheard of to charge twice as much, or more, for an upgrade to an app that makes it more useful, than the original price of the app itself. It’s crazy.
A number of companies have raised a lot more than that and went out of business. I hope that doesn’t happen here, because if those people are willing to pay the reduced amount of money for backing a Kickstarter project, then I hope they get the product. But May is still a long way off. And the price for this will be substantially higher after the product is released, and that’s the pricing we’ve been arguing about, though actually, you still refuse to talk about the pricing. I wonder why?
You mean people like me who backed the kickstarter?
Yeah, I hope to get my piece of hardware, just like everyone else.
Al this bickering about pricing and finance. Let's talk about the product itself. To me it looks like something that Apple should have build in every MacBook. To me it certainly has a wow factor!
Monthly subscription to use my own hardware? No thanks, no buy.
Just for pressure sensitivity and the Apple Pencil.
That's just nonsense. This whole subscription model thing is a bunch of anti consumer bullshit. Astropad already managed to piss off its existing users with the change to the subscription model. The original app seems to still get updated but for how long?
I'll never subscribe to software. Software is already abusive to consumers enough as is.
Enjoy your Gimp and OpenOffice.
I'll use Pixelmator and MS Office thanks. And FCPX. And DaVinci Resolve.
Your assertion is stupid for two reasons. First, a lot of high quality commercial software isn't subscription. Second, because a lot of top tier software is actually open source. Atom, Celestia, VirtualBox, Docker (CE), etc.
Comments
what I’m decrying is the price they’re asking. That’s something that was easy to see in my posts. $79 a year for fairly simple utility software is simply too much. They’re asking for that as a lump, for a year, not monthly. What I’m seeing is that companies think that people will subscribe, in a vacuum. What I mean by that is that these companies don’t seem to understand that by charging us much more than they could ever get away with in a lump charge, they are asking us to pay for multiple subscription every year. Just how many of these are people willing to pay for?
Eveerything is is going to subscription these days. This is bad overalll, while it may be good individually. How much could they have charged for this $79 a year sub if they charged it as a one time buy? Not much more, and they know it.
now they want a one time $60 for the hardware product, and that’s fine, as I said. But they also want $99 for the product and a one year sub for the software. Which software? I assume it’s the Pro for that $79 a year. So, they’ve already promised much faster response for just the pro software upgrade. How much faster will it be with this hardware and the pro software upgrade? I mean, their claims for the software speed increase is already pretty substantial. If I could try it first, I could get an idea.
for example, when they first announced the Pro upgrade to license, I went to their site to read up on it. Now, before I talk about that directly, I think I can say without too much disagreement, that what 99% of the users of the iPad, Pencil and Astropad want, is no, or very little lag, full use of the Pencil and - NOTHING else. Get that people? Nothing else.
but what they were, and still are, offering is a lot of fluff. Fluff that people don’t want, or need. Fluff that THEY need to offer, to come with a reason to charge what they’re charging. I couldn’t find a single thing that I thought; “hmm, this looks pretty good, I’d want that.”
so the problem is that if we’re using Photoshop on our Mac, and using the iPad as a pressure sensitive tablet with the Pencil, instead of a Wacom, well, what else do we need for that? The answer is nothing. The same thing is true for most every other program on the Mac that we would use this with. I can’t see spending all of that money for features that are useless for, at least, most of us. So make a version for the basic needs for $20 a year, and make a high end version with all the fluff for $79 a year, and see which sells best.
I think I know what most people will say. And as for the hardware, any software needed to make that work should be free. Yes, free. Because that’s what everyone else does, and because that’s what it’s worth.
As for the hardware analogy, Black & Decker certainly does revise their tool portfolio and releases new models -- which you have to pay for, also one time. There is no subscription. Then you are free to use it (or your old version). This is old hat in software and nothing that requires imagination. If the older version is depreciated or passes its support lifespan it will suffer bitrot and stop being a useful tool. Developers carefully decide how long to patch a product (free) vs releasing a new major release (not free).
As for the tool brands you're getting distracted as its completely irrelevant to the analogy. The point was obvious -- there's no way in hell you'd pay Black & Decker (or any damn brand) a monthly subscription fee to use the cordless drill you bought from them. You'd bitch and use something else too.
The software has offered a subscription for some time with extra features enabled. This was the case before the Hardware was announced.
The new Hardware, which is a one-time purchase will make that Pro software perform better.
You can run the free (is it pay still? your comment implies so. I though when they rolled out subscriptions the limited app became free. I bought it before then, so it just shows "purchased" in my App Store) software (accepting its limitations) just the same as before.
You can subscribe to the Pro software and get the full features set, same as before.
Now, if you want the tip-top experience you can buy the hardware (one time) and pay the subscription with all software features, same as before.
Buying the hardware doesn't impact how the software is sold at all. No more than buying Adobe's Pen & Ruler (remember those?) unlocked a free edition of Creative Cloud to purchasers (to be clear, it didn't entitle purchasers to free CC).
And I don't see any problem with that, either.
How about you?
I'll never subscribe to software. Software is already abusive to consumers enough as is.
ive got a piece of equipment that works with my iPad. It’s a measurement unit. It measures many electrical aspects. It works with the iPad through Bluetooth. It costs $145. The software, in the App Store, as these things always are, is free. They recently added features and updated it for iOS 11. The update was, as it always is for these products, free.
astropads hardware is very overpriced as well as requiring software. That software should be free. All the hardware looks to be is a chip and connector. Yes, I imagine there are some caps, resistors and diodes. I don’t know if this is a standard chip, or a custom one, but it should not cost more than maybe $25, and really, that’s too expensive. I have a Logitech trackball that comes with a radio that plugs into my Mac Pro USB port. It comes with software as well. The entire thing goes for $38 on Amazon. The software gets upgraded for free.
the whole point here, that I think most of us are making is not that it’s a subscription, but that they are charging way too much for what is utility software. It’s unheard of to charge twice as much, or more, for an upgrade to an app that makes it more useful, than the original price of the app itself. It’s crazy.
i get it, but by all the commenting here, it’s clear that you don’t. While your statements are basically correct, in a formal way, you steadfastly refuse to address the horridly overpriced subscription costs.
and please, don’t compare them to Adobe, because they are so far away from them in any useful way as to make it painful just reading it. There is no way you can compare this crap upgrade for $79 a year to a sub for both Lightroom and Photoshop for $119 a year. They aren’t even in the same universe. This is just utility software, the type that comes free with hardware. And while I know it’s not their hardware, because it’s Apple’s, so that I have no problem paying for it. But nevertheless, it’s still just utility software. It’s not worth anywhere near $79 per year. And as I’ve been saying, all we want is the speed advantage, and nothing else from this, because what it offers is a complete waste.
as for the site subscription, no I didn’t know about that, but now that I do, I’ll look into it. I do pay $50 a year for arstechnica for that, as well as the ability to have articles in pdf format that I can add to iBooks. But these sites offer a lot. This software doesn’t.
Which brings me to the point I keep trying to make, in my basic, formal way, as you put it: Just because you don't find the subscription compelling doesn't make the cost objectively outrageous. You don't strike me as Astropad's target customer. I am the kind of customer that Astropad is looking to land, and I'm interested, if skeptical. I agree it is problematic software right now, but I am willing to support them to fund their efforts to build a real touch solution for Mac. As I said before, I don't subscribe now, and I'm not sure I ever will. But I want to "want to subscribe".
Maybe I'm an idiot.
Maybe we both are.
Maybe they are dying?
I hope not.
actually, I am their target customer. That doesn’t mean I agree with the way they’re doing it. The fact that you “want to subscribe” doesn’t mean that much,because if you don’t actually subscribe, then you are obviously NOT a customer at all. You not the “kind” of customer they want, because they don’t want the platitudes you’re giving us, but real money, which you are apparently not willing to give, in opposition to your stated position of its value proposition. I guess that means that while you’re willing to give them verbal support, you’re not willing to give them actual support. You don’t understand that unless you hand your money over, your not supporting them at all. Commenting on a forum isn’t real support, as no one here will do anything based on your statements.
A number of companies have raised a lot more than that and went out of business. I hope that doesn’t happen here, because if those people are willing to pay the reduced amount of money for backing a Kickstarter project, then I hope they get the product. But May is still a long way off. And the price for this will be substantially higher after the product is released, and that’s the pricing we’ve been arguing about, though actually, you still refuse to talk about the pricing. I wonder why?
You mean people like me who backed the kickstarter?
Yeah, I hope to get my piece of hardware, just like everyone else.
I hope you do get it. I hope everyone gets it.
Your assertion is stupid for two reasons. First, a lot of high quality commercial software isn't subscription. Second, because a lot of top tier software is actually open source. Atom, Celestia, VirtualBox, Docker (CE), etc.