The subscription mode is for syncing your content on their cloud storage.
One of the nice features of the remarkable device is that they allow you to ssh on the device and run your software on it. There is a community who builds various tools that run on the device. I didn't check recently but I'm pretty sure you have one or more open options to sync your content to your remote storage of choice.
This is about the features they enable through their easy to use UI.
You're free to not like it, but that's not what I'm talking about.
I'm talking about the fact that this is one of the few platforms where I can ssh onto the underlying Linux host and run my damn software and extend it in various ways, which includes syncing docs with whatever storage system I want. Surely, this is for "hackers" use only. This is what I like about this and I'm happy to accept the tradeoff.
That's not entirely true, you DO get syncing with no plan, just not unlimited syncing. But yes, I agree it is expensive for just connecting to somebody else's service.
"Just connecting to someone elses service" is a pretty thankless job in my opinion.
I write software that can connect to 3rd party services. It takes a lot of effort to make sure it all works. There's always stuff that breaks randomly, and it's really hard to debug because you typically get only vague error messages when something fails, and you can't debug from the server side.
So you end up spending way too much time making sure your product is compatible with some service, just so your customers can spend money on 3rd party services that you don't earn money from.
The subscription mode is likely primarily there for syncing their bank account with bank accounts of VCs who price everything in multiples of monthly recurring revenue. Probably not gonna end well.
Without a subscription they have no incentive to update the software of already sold or older model ( which they already do). Considering the price and the niche market, they probably can't rely on future sales only to improve the software.
As a relatively fragile portable device with a limited-life sealed battery, which is essential to people who adopt it, there is a nice replacement market. Being nice to your users by providing relative low-cost maintenance software updates should more than pay for itself.
No need to include new features, they can be sold for a one-off optional fee to old device users. Subscription is worse here: it provides weaker feedback from users to the developers, who have a harder time knowing if the new features are useless or damaging to the user experience. Products don't always benefit from constant gratuitous updates.
A subscription doesn't give someone an incentive to update software.
If anything, it does the opposite: if I'll get paid whether I add a feature or not, why spend the money to add the feature when I could just pocket the money?
That's why companies love the subscription model so much: Instead of having to find compelling new features and updates to sell new versions or attract new customers, they can just sit back, put their feet up and the money keeps flowing in.
You’re making a lot of faulty assumptions about how customers engage with subscription models. When I pay for software every month, I’m evaluating the value of it every month. That includes things like the update frequency, how often I use it, etc.
I know subscription pricing isn’t popular around here, but these wild speculations about how things work are getting a little silly. Especially coming from people who, I’m guessing, don’t use that many subscription apps.
Maybe it's just me, but evaluating my subscriptions every month sounds like discussing OS upgrades with friends - normal people just don't do that. I sign up, and then leave it on autopay until they do something I find abhorrent enough to cancel my subscription (I'm looking at you, NYtimes). Which is why subscriptions are so lucrative - people don't regularly check their subscriptions on a monthly basis.
(Not saying this is the most fiscally responsible position to take, just a far more 'normal' one.)
No, companies love the subscription model because it makes for a predictable cashflow they can plan around, and which they can use to support software long-term.
I think your parents meant subscription gives recurring revenue to sustain a ongoing cost which is software development.
It is not an incentive, but a criteria. I often wished Remarkable would be brought up by big companies with more resources to work on it. But most companies these days aren't interested in making better products. Not to mention the possibilities of ruining it.
> The subscription mode is likely primarily there for syncing their bank account with bank accounts of VCs who price everything in multiples of monthly recurring revenue. Probably not gonna end well.
Since subscription has been Wall Street's fetish for a few years now, it's safe to say they have aspirations of going public sometime in US exchanges.
One of the nice features of the remarkable device is that they allow you to ssh on the device and run your software on it. There is a community who builds various tools that run on the device. I didn't check recently but I'm pretty sure you have one or more open options to sync your content to your remote storage of choice.