• XeroxCool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    Companies love subscription pricing and customers keep it up. Lots of software went this route and proved people still want the product. It shouldn’t be a surprise

    • orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure, for services or stuff used internally, but not for things that they’re selling to their own customers. Unless a company is also using a subscription model for their software it makes absolutely no sense to use a subscription library in your product, you’re putting yourself on the hook for recurring expenses on something you’re only receiving income on once. Any way you slice it that’s an absolutely braindead decision, and anyone that makes it should be terminated immediately for gross negligence.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Have you used Unity? If you haven’t. You’d understand why if you did. Its incredibly easy to use with a vast public storefront people can sell things on. Extremely extensible. Before this bullshit anyway

      • Maestro@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        There were no recurring expenses per-install under the old terms. The only expense was your own, per-developer expense. Als long as you had developer seats you could ship infinite units at no cost. Unity has often said that they were never going to change that. But that was just a pinky promise and wasn’t actually in their terms.