I hate that this is becoming less and less available. In the rare cases where both a subscription and a single payment is offered, I've done the math and from time to time I actually estimate that I'll spend less money on the subscription (although normally it's the other way around, of course), but even in these cases, I prefer paying upfront.
Adobe photoshop cs2 free for mac software#
But I paid once and I can use the software as much as I want without paying again.įor me, it's not about the amount of money, but the peace of mind (no additional bills, no additional shit to renew when I my debit card expires, and most important, I don't need to engage in any bullshit cancellation process). For the record, I don't have any problems paying, say, 400€ for Mathematica and things like that (in fact, I haven't pirated anything in a very long time). But for software, no matter how useful it is, I just refuse to choose between an unbounded price and the possibility of losing it because I don't want to keep paying. New content, I can understand (I spend about 40€ monthly on several Patreons, mostly comic artists and I have a couple news subscriptions as well), although I still hate music/tv subscriptions and I don't want Netflix, Spotify or whatever. I'm a very, very firm believer on not paying for "subscription" to software. If your product sucks, you can still sell your team. It is also cool to have 1000 devs in case of an acqui-hire. Going back to 10 or 20 devs is borderline impossible, even if you reduce the scope, since the infrastructure needed to support 100 or 1000 has too much of an overhead in itself. Not to mention the extra need of support, QA and ops people, which in turn needs more coordination and management. Hiring warehouse workers, moderators and content editors scale, so they extrapolate that to devs and expect the same results.Īlso with lots of devs you need lots of designers, managers, product owners and other idea people, so there’s a lot of minor tasks being pushed trough, which would otherwise not be if it was a 20 dev product.
Investors and CEOs think they need massive numbers because they misunderstand how dev headcount scales and how much overhead it generates.
Sibling post is correct: I worked in a couple companies backed by Softbank and they specifically asked for engineering headcount increase.