Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by incrudible 1911 days ago
> Because if it's a one time fee, there will be no recurring income and the developer will have to stop development.

Here's a crazy idea in 2020: That's totally fine. There's a point where adding more features becomes a negative ROI. That's when you know you need to move on solving a different problem. That's the alternative.

1 comments

The problem in 2021 (and 2022 and 2023, etc) is that the app will break over time.

OS updates will break a small piece of functionality. Critical security vulnerabilities will be discovered that need to be patched. If the developer abandons the application because it isn't earning new revenue, the application will eventually degrade over time.

I don't have a good answer here, because I also don't like the SASS billing model for desktop software, but I recognize that a "one-time purchase" rarely actually terminates the relationship at the time of purchase. People expect ongoing bug-fixes, and security patches even for desktop software.

In my experience, Windows applications very rarely break, Mac OS apps only break with major changes, and Linux isn't worth supporting in the first place. Setting aside a little bit of money to keep the app working and patched is possible. Charging for the occasional update to make that happen is acceptable too, especially with Apple users.
You think those issues began in 2021?
No