If it's a matter of cost, then that shouldn't be an issue. I hate to play the "but you guys have iPhones!" card, but $3 to $5 a month shouldn't be that big of a deal? If you can't justify an extra $90 to $150 a year for the rest of your life, then fair enough. But it just seems odd given all the other expenses we put up with.
As for updates, if they don't take away features, that should be fine. I'm hearing in this thread that they did, and that does suck. But not much you can do about it though. I mean, being able to stay on the same software can't be guaranteed in this day in age. That said, my father was using a copy of Office 2003 that stopped working. I'm surprised it didn't have issues sooner :\
But comments about how subscriptions are attractive for devs aren't unfounded. I've heard a podcast where they've stated that if you're not going to charge premium pricing.. that's at least 5x the prices (this would've been 3 years ago), so your $10 one-time purchase would be more like $50 really, then subscription really is the way to go. Especially if your app requires you to maintain servers. Otherwise, apps will lose support and get yanked from the iOS App Store in due time. I don't believe iOS users generally have older devices to use such apps? They really do like to get newer versions of iOS when then can for the security and features.
Here's the funny thing.
1Password 7 and lower doesn't require you to maintain a server. In fact, for WiFi sync, all of that functionality is already embedded within the application. You start your own WLAN server within 1Password, and every other 1Password app that has the shared key to that server (the main 1Password desktop application) can sync to it.
Compare that to Bitwarden, where they want you to create a server (Windows, Linux, Solaris, doesn't matter), whether a physical box or a VM, to run Docker. From within Docker you are setting up your own server for Bitwarden to host your vaults. From that, you sync your clients to that vault. That leaves not only the maintenance of Bitwarden, but also Docker and that physical server or VM up to you to do. You have to keep up with software updates. You have to keep up with patches. You have to keep up with kernel updates (if necessary). No-one thinks about the upkeep regarding those when you are "hosting your own server".
Funnily enough, that is the offering that 1Password is looking for in pittance for ticking off their base of users who would lose their standalone vaults, while still sticking them to the subscription model.
Now, as far as the $3 - $5/month argument, see my previous post regarding cost and comparing that cost over the span of 8 to 10 years. A one time cost for a license that can be used for my lifetime would be immensely cheaper than spending money per month. For example, a 20-year old person spends $50 for 1Password, and uses it for 50 years. In that same vein, another 20 year old kid spends $5 on a subscription and uses it also for 50 years. Let's do the math.
The subscription kid:
$5 per month, * 12 = $60/year.
$60/year * 50 years =
$3000.
The License kid:
$50.
That leaves the license kid another $2950 that he could use for his other expenses over the course of 50 years that the Subscription kid does not have. The issue? The subscription model only sees a short term cost without amortizing that out for the lifetime of use, and when they finally do, they see that they've spent so much money on something they've had for a long period of time and continue to have until they say stop. And when they do say stop, they have no control over what AgileBits does with their data when they cancel their subscription.
So uncertainty surrounding his data and $2950 more spent versus the License kid. The license kid has the security and ensured privacy of his data, and a lot less spent. The license kid doesn't look foolish there,
n'est-ce pas?
The subscription kid got screwed.
BL.
