Introducing ONCE
once.com
Once upon a time you owned what you paid for, you controlled what you depended on, and your privacy and security were your own business. We think it’s that time again.
    • sadreality@kbin.social
      165·
      1 year ago

      This person is feeling the dystopia

      Contract law is powerful like that. Daddy tells you the deal, you take it when you use the product and/or service and now he can fuck ur waifu.

      You signed her away in these here T&Cs.

  • qwertyasdef@programming.dev
    85·
    1 year ago

    …What are they actually launching though? I mean I love the payment scheme but I can’t get excited over this without an actual good product being sold.

  • Ertebolle@kbin.social
    575·
    1 year ago

    I don’t want to pay once and own it forever, I want to pay once and then in a few years when it’s gotten buggy or incompatible or whatever I pay you some more money for an upgrade. If I use it a lot maybe I pay you more often, if I use it rarely maybe I pay less often, if I’ve got a lot of bills this month maybe I put it off a few months.

    That’s really it - I’ll happily give you more money occasionally if I keep using it, but the burden of stretching that revenue so that you can make your payroll every 2 weeks ought to fall on you, not on me, and if you sit on your ass and barely make any changes for a year I shouldn’t be stuck paying you the same monthly fee while you do that.

    • λλλ@programming.dev
      3·
      1 year ago

      I agree with you on this. Lifetime licenses are great, but not feasible for some software. Anything that needs to be constantly updated needs steady income for developers. But, if their updates don’t provide anything that you need then you should be able to keep using the version you are on for no additional money.

    • radau@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      2·
      1 year ago

      JetBrains did similar with their perpetual fallback license and it did ok. My only gripe with their strategy was it required either the upfront year paid or at the end of 12 months of month to month you would get the license. Issue was the license was from the first month so you would have to go downgrade. I like your idea way more

    • hairyballs@programming.dev
      11·
      1 year ago

      This: comparing something you buy once, with a license does not make a lot of sense. In SaaS, you get update, support, etc. For something critical, I’d rather get that than something that I buy once and may be buggued in the future.

  • lazyforaname@lemmy.world
    321·
    1 year ago

    “In the early 2000s, we were among the early pioneers leading the industry into the SaaS revolution. Now, 20 years later, we intend to help lead the way out. The post–SaaS era is just around the corner.”

    So, this company helped to get us into this whole subscription thing, and now they’re going to be the white knights to save us from it?

  • Thisfox
    30·
    1 year ago

    I love that no one has a clue if there is in fact anything for sale, or what it might be.

    • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
      6·
      1 year ago

      Maybe a software lootbox. So you get a random surprise software, which is worse and more outdated than those on CDs you had glued to magazines.

  • gsfraley@lemmy.world
    369·
    1 year ago

    I mean, I get it, but there’s value in paying for support and updates, and it’s untenable for an organization to do that for free. I’m optimistic for software running under this model, I’d 1000% love to go back to the pay once per major version model, but “pay once forever” software leaves some unanswered questions.

    • sebinspace@lemmy.world
      391·
      1 year ago

      First question: the fuck are they actually making? They’re so vague about everything except how to pay.

      • Radium@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        71·
        1 year ago

        Typical DHH bullshit. He likes to be contrarian but he never actually follows through.

        He’s a little bitch and both Ruby on Rails and the world endurance championship would be better off without him.

    • JoeCoT@kbin.social
      13·
      1 year ago

      Right. I have boxes full of software I bought once, and I have the license to use it forever. But it’s for Windows XP or older. I’d need emulators or WINE to run it now, and it’s not really worth it. For some of it I even paid for a “lifetime” of updates, but that stops working out when they stop updating it. I apparently live a lot longer than 90s and 2000s software companies. Just let me pay for major versions again with a guarantee of updates for X years, and price it according to those expectations.

      37Signals is the company that made Basecamp, and they talk about hosting the software yourself, so presumably they are writing web software that would often be SaaS and letting you host it. So it’s great that you’ll be able to get it for one time purchase. But it definitely needs updates, as libraries change versions, new security flaws are uncovered, obviously for bugs, etc. Buying web application software is only as useful as the length of the updates included. Them providing the source is better, but since that’s not open source exactly a community couldn’t really work together to continue updates themselves.

      • 0x0@programming.devEnglish
        5·
        1 year ago

        I apparently live a lot longer than 90s and 2000s software companies.

        In business lingo, that makes you an immortal.

    • words_number@programming.dev
      81·
      1 year ago

      I think there were probably times where software that got shipped actually worked. So you bought it and you could use it, no need for “maintenance”. I generally don’t think that’s the right word since software doesn’t decay on its own, so there’s nothing to “maintain” actively. Apart from compatibility of course, but if that breaks (e.g. with newer OS or hardware), it would make sense to pay for an update if you need it. Makes a lot more sense than those disgusting subscription scams that adobe is pulling off (and every other company seems to follow).

      • mrginger@lemmy.worldEnglish
        81·
        1 year ago

        There were still bugs. You just learned how to deal with them or work around them.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
      1·
      1 year ago

      I agree. Per major version. I have SaaS for things such as word that really don’t change much.

      • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
        1·
        1 year ago

        Have or hate? You can buy lifetime licenses for word etc. The subscription gets you much more than just the software.

  • myersguy@lemmy.simpl.website
    201·
    1 year ago

    Few thoughts:

    1. What is being made? Can’t really care about it without having some idea
    2. What makes this company’s version of it worth our interest?
    3. How is it better than the FOSS solutions that in this day and age almost definitely already exist
    4. Why are we to put our faith in this group for pay once software when their two major products are SaaS?
    • Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
      3·
      1 year ago

      37Signals, the company that made Basecamp, is really good at getting news. They’re a really small company (less than 30 ppl), but the owners are all big in marketing. So they write books about culture and how to run a business, as well as how to get attention.

      This post is again, them finding a way to get attention.

      I neither like or dislike 37Signals. I think theyre neat. But I also read their books like it’s fantasy, as they are telling the business world how to run their companies while also being such a tiny entity.

  • ck_@discuss.tchncs.de
    102·
    1 year ago

    Can someone enlighten me as to when this magical period of time was supposed to have been? As far as I can remember (end of the 80s), proprietary software never had any source available and always had an EULA stating that you don’t actually own anything. Best you could get was usage rights which were revocable for arbitrary reasons. So I’m a bit confused as to what they are talking about.

    • FlumPHP@programming.devOP
      5·
      1 year ago

      Right. Even pay-once software can have a phone home component that disables it if the creator deems it. So really we’re talking about old versions of software that just used offline license keys which were easily cracked.

      I honestly really like the Jetbrains model where they offer a subscription for continual updates but you also get a fallback version you can use forever if you decide to stop paying. It acknowledges that you aren’t costing them money if you aren’t getting the new updates.

      • Pyro@programming.dev
        1·
        1 year ago

        I came across a similar pricing model for Prodigy, and it does seem like a sensible option. You pay for updates, but will always be able to use the versions you already have in perpetuity.

  • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
    7·
    1 year ago

    Sure, but can I:

    • use the software as I like to?
    • see how it works and adapt it to better fit my needs?
    • lend it to my friend to help him?
    • pay someone else to improve this software?
  • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
    61·
    1 year ago

    So zero idea of what their software will be? 😂

    SaaS serves a purpose that single purchase software doesn’t. There is room for both to exist.

  • dbilitated@aussie.zone
    61·
    1 year ago

    do I get updates? I own word 97, I’m not thrilled I can still use it…

    also, what is it?!