Toby Wright wrote:
> My input is that an annual subscription fee is
preferable to
> a single
> large amount asked when a major milestone is passed.
My input is that an upgrade fee is preferable to an annual fee.
I like to own the software I have bought and be able to use it
for as long as I like for whatever purpose I like (so long as
its legal). I hate being told, by a subscription fee, that I have
only leased the software and that its real owner can demand it
back.
Ummmmmmmmm........ That is a very strange outlook on subscription fees
IMHO. Tell me, if you subscribe to a magazine, do you have to give
back the magazine when the subscription is over and done with? ; If you
subscribe to being in a club, do you have to give back all of the fun
from being in that particular club?
I believe you are mixing up leasing with subscriptions. With leasing,
when the lease is through you have to give back whatever it is you
have. Like a car. If you lease a car you have to give it back. ; If
you lease a phone - you have to give it back. ; A subscription though is
something you join for the benefit of that subscription. The
difference is - is when the subscription is over - you don't lose
anything. It is just that you no longer gain anything either.
This confusion has, IMHO, come about because of the software industry's
big corporations attempting to steal your rights under copyrights.
They have paid huge amounts of money out to lobbyists, congressmen,
senators, and such to pass EULA laws which, in any other industry,
would never stand up to scrutiny. At some point in the near future I
foresee a trial where this issue will be decided once and for all (or
maybe a civil war over the whole loss of rights issue). In any other
industry, if you buy something, it is yours to do with as you please.
It should be the same in the software industry as they are no different
than any other industry. Their big fear is that someone may reverse
engineer their software and produce look-a-like software. This is part
of why the DMCA was passed. The DMCA greatly extended the rights of
the copyright holders and greatly reduced the rights of the buyers of
copyrighted works. The DMCA should be revoked. It basically makes
slaves of everyone by law. So now not only do we have monopolies which
exist within the United States which are illegal under our laws but
they are governmentally sanctioned and the laws are heavily weighed in
their favor. As I said before, I believe this will eventually cause a
massive backlash against the government because people will get fed up
with what is being done. ; After all, who cares if Mickey Mouse is
covered by copyright when he is also covered by Patents, Trademarks,
and other legal means.
But a subscription is the better way to go and you DO get to keep your
software. The upgrades are yours also. ; So the "owner" can never tell
you to give it back in any way, shape, or form. ; Further, subscription
fees help the developers stay in business. Unlike the single payment
method and then a large upgrade fee, subscriptions help to pay the
bills on a month-by-month basis. So both parties gain from the
transactions. You, because the payment is much lower, and them because
they get to continue operating. In some cases (as probably with DB),
it may even mean that they can quit their day job and focus entirely on
the project. Maybe - maybe not. It depends upon how many people there
are who use DB.
Still, I stand by what I said. ; A smaller yearly subscription fee is
preferable to a single large upgrade fee. 
Mark