"We" do not talk about musicians stealing chord progressions, at least I do not. There is (in western diatonic music) a quite limited number of chord progressions (that sound "good"/"acceptable" to ears used to this kind of music) Should new music be prohibited from being created once they've been used? Should painters not be allowed to use a certain combination of colors anymore because another artist already used them? As a (studied but now hobby) musician, I think that is utter nonsense, excuse my french...
But do you think “work they did once” holds true for the majority of software that uses subscription based pricing? No updates, no migrations to new OSs, no bugfixing, no support, would you want that? Should people just write perfect software off the bat?
I like the model in use by software such as Hopper (disassember with nice native UI) and Sublime Text. You buy a license for a major version and get updates for that for X years. You may use these versions forever. But a new major is gonna cost you.
I'd never buy subscriptionware for hobbyist or fun purposes. Or so I thought. Because I do pay for a WoW sub :/
Most of the time, I don’t want the new version or features. If I didn’t think the current version were suitable for my needs, I wouldn’t buy it as-is.
You seem to be conflating future updates with the software as it stands today.
I am not buying support, I am not buying upgrades. I’m buying software once today (and even that is an exception, as the majority of my tools, including 100% of the most critical ones, are free software).
Additionally, I find proprietary software vendors who do open source cosplay (“open core” is something made by people who dgaf about software freedoms) to be generally disdainful. Open core is a slap in the face; nobody is forcing proprietary software vendors to be in denial about being proprietary software vendors.
This is infuriating. I've also had my fair bit of trouble with App Store Review but your this really takes the freaking biscuit. C'mon y'all, let's get this post some visibility.
This! Also, tone and general behaviour matters. I think many comments here mistake this beautiful article for advice to use words like this.
I’ve read both his biographic books multiple times, read into the Feynman Lectures and watched many an interview and other stuff with and about him.
If I’d ever gotten to meet him (he’s a top candidate on my “if you could have dinner with any person, living or dead” list) and he’d have called an idea of mine stupid, I’m pretty sure that my reaction wouldn’t have been to be hurt. I would have hoped for him to explain to me why it’s stupid or give me a hint on where to look to find out for myself. Context matters. Character matters.
Don’t call people stupid. Don’t call things (or ideas) stupid unless you can explain what’s stupid about the thing or idea and why.
If you’re passionate about something, try to appreciate when someone tells you, without euphemism, why it won’t work.
If anyone has an idea on how one could get to travel back and meet him, we can find out together why it’s stupid. Or “impossible” :)
Personally, when I’m writing for fun, I especially try writing quality code. There, I can reason about it, learn it and do it without management breathing down my neck due to business constraints like time and money.
