# Why are software users tolerating subscription software? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [January 10, 2015, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504 "2015-01-10T21:31:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/21 "2015-01-12T15:43:57Z")
What **Amateur Barbarian** said. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/22 "2015-01-12T15:45:49Z")
> [@Napier](#): > > ALL software is subscription based, in effect. You pay, then a few years later it breaks permanently because other software around it gets updated and creates incompatibilities. … And even if it didn’t break, you’d end up paying for an upgrade to get newer features. So we’ve always had a “subscription” system. And making it a monthly (or annual) payment makes the expense more predictable. If I pay for subscription now, and a new version comes out next month, I don’t have to pay to get it. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/23 "2015-01-12T15:46:48Z")
> [@Macca26](#): > > 1. Adobe has historically put out a new version of their software about every two years. The CS revisions have come much faster than that - from around nine months to a bit over a year is my perception, without wandering off to check actual dates. I was using then-new CS3 in mid-2007; we’re now four to six generations past that. (CS4, 5, 6, CC and CC/2014… did I miss one?) ETA: Yes, CS5.5. ETA2: Which I find funny, because Windows users limped along with Illustrator 4 - oh look you can draw on your computer screen - until I think v8 was finally released for both platforms. (Now, of course, the tools are developed under Windows and ported to the other platforms.) ---
**Author:** ![Macca26](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/13edae/32.png) [@Macca26](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Macca26)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/24 "2015-01-12T15:52:10Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > The CS revisions have come much faster than that - from around nine months to a bit over a year is my perception, without wandering off to check actual dates. I was using then-new CS3 in mid-2007; we’re now four to six generations past that. (CS4, 5, 6, CC and CC/2014… did I miss one?) > > ETA: Yes, CS5.5. > > ETA2: Which I find funny, because Windows users limped along with Illustrator 4 - oh look you can draw on your computer screen - until I think v8 was finally released for both platforms. (Now, of course, the tools are developed under Windows and ported to the other platforms.) I think I may have accidentally thought “every two years” because that’s when I upgraded. :o 😛 CS1 was good, got that. Skipped CS2. CS3 was a game changer. Cs4, meh, didn’t get. CS5, another game changer. CS6 I skipped. Got CC. So I’ve been skipping every other version for a while now! ETA: Wiki says release dates were: CS1 in 2003, CS2 in 2005, CS3 in 2007, CS4 in 2008, CS5 in 2010, CS6 in 2012, and CC in 2013 So I wasn’t too far off the first time, actually. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/25 "2015-01-12T15:59:26Z")
Maybe I’m thinking of announcement dates. It did seem like I’d barely finished configuring all the tools before a new version was announced. (I tend to use the tools in groups - video, web, print - in cycles, so I might not have, say, a video project for the first few months with a new tool set.) But subscription is a better model all around. I can even dick around with the minor tools, see if Edge has come anywhere near Flash capabilities yet (nope), try to figure out who in the hell is using Muse and for what (no clue) and use very infrequently needed tools like SpeedGrade… for “free”! ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/26 "2015-01-12T16:55:06Z")
Often, you don’t really have a choice. For example, Adobe isn’t giving you a choice anymore. QuickBooks Online does things that Desktop can’t, and Online can’t be “bought” like the Desktop version can. Almost all of the original software subscriptions were online products, in fact. Things like BaseCamp come to mind. Since there was never an option to buy a license and download it, the choice was to put up with the subscription model or to use a different product. If there were compelling features, you might just deal with the subscription model. But the subscription model also makes sense for faster startup and more flexible licensing needs. A business can pay for Adobe for a six-month project and then stop. My company just moved e-mail over to the online Exchange offered by Microsoft. At our size, it’s actually cheaper to pay by the year than to try buying and installing our own Exchange software - not to mention easier. ---
**Author:** ![control-z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/eada6e/32.png) [@control-z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/control-z)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/27 "2015-01-12T18:48:30Z")
To me renting is generally a worse deal than buying. I wouldn’t rent/lease a car and I don’t want to rent software either. ---
**Author:** ![Coriolanus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coriolanus/32/18769_2.png) [@Coriolanus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Coriolanus)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/28 "2015-01-12T19:21:17Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > As a heavyweight user of the Adobe Creative Suite, I think most of the answers have already been given, but not put in context. > > … > > By the way, NONE of this has anything to do with “software in the cloud.” All of the Adobe apps are installed on my workstation and work fine without a network connection. (They just want to “check in” at least once a month to verify subscription status.) . My ignorance is fought. I thought Adobe’s latest and greatest was cloud based. [rant]I was a consultant for a company that would only use Oracle DB. I personally did not enrich Larry Ellison’s life with my money (or talk to him) yet that software was crud. As is M$ implementation of SQL. [/rant] MySQL rules! ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/29 "2015-01-12T20:26:37Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > As a heavyweight user of the Adobe Creative Suite, I think most of the answers have already been given, but not put in context. > > There are two kinds of software, and two kinds of users. One kind of software is essentially static in purpose and features - email client, word processor, spreadsheet, etc. programs haven’t changed in any substantive way for at least a decade (and I’m being charitable). This is commodity software - buy it, use it forever, most users will never know about small bugfixes or improvements and can live without a suite of new features invented by the marketing department. This is why some vast number of Word users are just as happy with Google Docs or Open Office or any old version of Word that’s lying around. Pay more than once for such software, if that? Nonsense. > > The other kind of software is high-end professional development and creation software - chief among them the Adobe suite and AutoCAD. These tools do evolve fairly steadily and are used by a user base that has to stay in step with each other (far more than two users with vastly different versions of Word do). These tools have been effectively “subscription” for a long time, although they were called “updates” and cost a big chunk of change, meaning that in a large work pool, not everyone was going to have the same versions and so forth. > > I paid around $2,000 for CS Master Collection maybe ten years ago. I paid $6-800 a pop for the updates, sometimes holding off until I ran into problems with collaborators. But with no more than on exception, I felt like I got my money’s worth on each upgrade as the tools got more integrated, added key features, smoothed out workflow processes and generally moved towards a multifaceted mega-tool instead of a collection of almost-compatible separate ones. I am more than happy to pay a flat $50 a month to have nearly every tool Adobe makes (most of which I use and the rest of which are nice to have on hand for the occasional tweak, side job or experimentation). $600 a year? It’s an effin’ bargain, and I get two user installations for that, meaning my very advanced-user son can have SOTA tools instead of crap freeware and discards to do his video and audio work. > > Adobe doesn’t make Photoshop for people who dick around a little with photos for their websites, or even for amateur or occasional photographers. It doesn’t make Illustrator and InDesign and DreamWeaver for home hobbyists. If the amateur or sometime crowd wants to use these tools, fine, use old versions or less-than-legit ones, or GIMP or Corel or whatever. But don’t bitch because “Photoshop is so overpriced.” It’s not - not for those who use it and its huge set of kin as a daily production and development system, in step with the whole industry that does. > > I resisted the move to the subscription model until I’d thought it through. Now, I have a continually updated tool set, and a complete one, at all times, for substantially less than either the updates or the hassles of working around incompatibilities used to cost. > > By the way, NONE of this has anything to do with “software in the cloud.” All of the Adobe apps are installed on my workstation and work fine without a network connection. (They just want to “check in” at least once a month to verify subscription status.) High-power subscription-ware is not the same as Office365, GoogleDocs, etc. where the app runs on a server somewhere. (As for virtualization, it doesn’t work well for high-end graphics apps. It’s cheaper and more efficient to run them locally than to build a server, network and client that can handle, say, Premiere.) > > Two kinds of users, two kinds of software, making a matrix of at least four situations - you can’t argue one set of issues as applying to the others. For at least one cell of that matrix, subscription effin’ rocks. Thank you for bring this into perspective. Your points are spot on. Word and Excel users don’t require the latest and greatest versions. Users with more recent versions can save documents in formats Office 2003 can read. Even Office 2000 compatibility. I occasionally have to ask vendors to save a document they send me in a compatible format. I didn’t realize compatibility was such an issue in the graphics field. I learned something today. I can recall even in 1990 Autocad was just too expensive for me to get and use casually. That was back when they had the keyed floppy disk that had to stay in the drive. I never learned Autocad. There was some desktop publishing software too (Quark is one example) that I never got to learn. Required a Mac and the software was priced for professionals. Photoshop used to be affordable. Especially with academic licensing. A lot of people learned Photoshop in the 90’s. I’ve used it since 1997 or 98. There were so many DIY books that teaching yourself was possible. Now its priced for professionals. Premier is the same. Its not something many home users can afford. Adobe’s focus is on the professional market. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/30 "2015-01-12T20:43:31Z")
I wonder if young adults today are learning software to enhance their resumes? I invested a lot of money in software and books in the late 80’s and early 90’s. I was young and felt it was critical that I have those skill sets. I even bought the Office Resource Kit in the mid 90’s to write Office Apps. That’s still a good strategy. Employers like to see Ms Office skills on the resume. People that know Access, Excel, and even Publisher are valuable in the job market. Graphics and Desktop publishing has gotten so specialized that employer’s almost have to train those skill sets. The software is expensive and it changes every few years. ---
**Author:** ![Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/6bbea6/32.png) [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Living_Well_Is_Best_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/31 "2015-01-12T21:25:55Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > I wonder if young adults today are learning software to enhance their resumes? Um, how old are you exactly??? ---
**Author:** ![Yarster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/7c8e57/32.png) [@Yarster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yarster)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/32 "2015-01-12T21:59:36Z")
I would echo the sentiment of the OP (and am a 45 year old male if that matters), but less so for high-end Adobe software. My gripe is with new operating systems, and particularly shitty failure ones like Windows 8 or Vista. The fact new computers come with the ‘latest greatest’ operating system, which may or may not be compatible with your legacy programs is wildly frustrating to me. That’s where I want the revolt to come from. Every time a new operating system comes out, it seems there are people lining up to get it, and I want to throw eggs and piss-filled water balloons at those people. Yes, I know they are geeks who want to get the OS and start monkeying with it so they can become in-demand and defacto “experts” in the new thing, but who is really out there clamoring for Windows 9? I mean, versus the average consumer who bought their laptop at Costco and had the latest turd forced on them through no fault of their own? I suppose having everything be browser/subscription based is a way around that constant BS with operating systems, although I also often work offline, and hate “cloud-only” solutions. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/33 "2015-01-12T22:06:56Z")
> [@control-z](#): > > To me renting is generally a worse deal than buying. I wouldn’t rent/lease a car and I don’t want to rent software either. Then don’t. If you need Creative Suite or AutoCAD, it’s better supplied under the old model of “leased with 100% updates and support” than as standalone purchases. If you don’t need such broadshouldered apps, you probably have a dozen choices of buy it and own it options. I do think the model of taking commodityware to a subscription basis is everything cynical and grubbing that’s being complained about in this thread. But then, MS could have left off with about Office 2003 and the world would have lost very little. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/34 "2015-01-12T22:10:53Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > Photoshop used to be affordable. Especially with academic licensing. Well, that hits the nail on the head. A lot of people buy their first software as students and get these deep-deep-discount prices, which are offered to the academic market for transparent reasons. It’s unreasonable to expect commercial licensing for production-oriented software to match “teaching” licenses (that lack most support and upgrade options, for one thing). But it’s part of the Truly Unfair World new grads have to deal with, and often do so loudly and with great butthurtedness. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![crazyjoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f14d63/32.png) [@crazyjoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crazyjoe)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/35 "2015-01-12T22:25:51Z")
While I am not terribly enamored of the model, paying $100/year for Office isn’t all that terrible. You get a LOT of functionality (which goes 99% unused) for that price. What I hate is all the little piece of shit apps that want to ding you 4 or 5 bucks a month to essentially fill ONE function. For example, I have an app on my son’s tablet that limits the amount of time he can spend on it. There is added functionality available to let me adjust his allowed time remotely, let him do chores for additional time, and a few other things. To get this added set of features, the author of the program wants $4/month. Say what? This sort of thing is happening all over the software marketplace these days, and that’s when it can really add up. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/36 "2015-01-12T22:51:26Z")
> [@crazyjoe](#): > > While I am not terribly enamored of the model, paying $100/year for Office isn’t all that terrible. You get a LOT of functionality (which goes 99% unused) for that price. What I hate is all the little piece of shit apps that want to ding you 4 or 5 bucks a month to essentially fill ONE function. Well… as a word processor has pretty much been a word processor since the earliest WYSIWYG versions were optimized around Word 97, I’d say that paying endlessly for one is a bad model. There’s very little to update, support or add value to Word, Excel, Powerpunt, or even most of what users use Outlook for. They are, or could be, completely static apps, and are, and can be, replaced by several clones each. The amount of functionality has nothing to do with it - with static apps, it’s built in, it’s done with, it’s amortized no matter how plentiful it is. Charge/pay whatever that functionality is worth and move on. The subscription model is for expensive, complicated, frequently updated and upgraded software that works within a world of compatibility. Nothing in Office meets that criterion. The subscription model is for enterprise-scale users and to make MS money from a moribund user base. Making the menus purtier and fancier and bundling in more templates and useless dross is not worth paying for. ---
**Author:** ![typoink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@typoink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/typoink)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/37 "2015-01-12T23:00:25Z")
I think there’s a lot of complaints and concerns, but I will say that Adobe’s new pricing has allowed me to have legal, paid copies of Photoshop and Lightroom. As a serious hobbyist / very light professional, it’s been difficult to justify the cost of full-price software, but their subscription model for photographers really works for me. My only lament is that there’s no cost effective way to get Illustrator. I love using Illustrator purely for my own amusement. Upgrading to the full creative cloud is way too big a jump, and there’s no ala cart options. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2015, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/38 "2015-01-12T23:07:28Z")
> [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](#): > > Um, how old are you exactly??? Fifty, Software was brand new in the mid 80’s. We had to invest in our own employment futures buying and learning this software. My first PC purchase was an investment in my future. Its paid off too. I’ve written some complex spreadsheets linked to Word Docs. Designed access databases for ad hoc staff reporting. Written a large database in MYSQL. I use my software skills every week in my job. I learned Photoshop but I suck as a graphics artist. My art skills were always pathetic in school. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2015, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504/39 "2015-01-13T01:06:27Z")
> [@control-z](#): > > To me renting is generally a worse deal than buying. I wouldn’t rent/lease a car and I don’t want to rent software either. Isn’t that mostly dependent on the price? The reason renting is usually worse than buying is that renting is priced for short-term usage, and you pay a premium for flexibility. I’d gladly rent a car if it cost me less overall than buying. By my calculations and record-keeping, owning the cars I’ve owned costs me about $2000/year in maintenance and capital losses. If someone wanted to rent me a comparable one for $1000/year, I’d jump at the chance! There are lots of nice things about renting compared to owning. It’s lower risk. It’s more flexible. It’s a more predictable cost to the renter, and revenue stream to the seller. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-software-users-tolerating-subscription-software/709504.md?page=1)