This is an entire Unity project that won't load due to however many content blockers I've got running on my phone. The incompetent one loads instantly, though it's admittedly laggy.
I think it's mostly just that a subscription seems weird for a tool like this. Most users would probably only need it occasionally, and with a subscription you can't just add it to your toolbox to grab when that time comes.
IMO a big disservice to the universe has been done with the recurring revenue drive. Many services could/should offer a one-shot option, with the highest margin. Somehow the world got stuck on SaaS model so hard that one off is completely ignored.
I know why the capital class loves MRR I'm just mad that OTC is ignored.
I am struggling with finding a good model for desktop apps. The subscription model always seems to yield the most money, but I too dislike subscriptions.
One-shot option seems attractive, but the desktop (MacOS at least) app market is actually so niche that the SAM is somewhere in the low thousands. So, if I would offer a one-time 100$ app, I'd have 100k$ before taxes. And for that revenue, there's developing, marketing, plus support and maintenance. So to match a dev's salary, I'd need to make 2-3 successful apps a year, that I'd also have to maintain for a long time.
I think maybe there's a mid-ground with buy forever, 1 year updates, so people get the product they paid for, and if they want updates or support the development they can re-buy, however I'm yet to hear opinions on this model.
> I think maybe there's a mid-ground with buy forever, 1 year updates, so people get the product they paid for, and if they want updates or support the development they can re-buy, however I'm yet to hear opinions on this model.
As far as desktop software is concerned, I think this a commonly accepted approach. Sublime Text is probably the most notable example.
Isn't that just how most software used to be sold? If you buy Photoshop CS5 or MS Office 2023 you get the product as it's released and maybe a year of bugfix releases (but no new features). If you want the new features buy Photopshop CS6 or MS Office 2024
Personally I like the model, as long as old versions stay truly static and don't get enshittification updates. It aligns incentives on feature development far better than subscription models: if you make genuine improvements you get recurring sales, if you don't then existing users will just stay on the old version. And existing users are protected from features or UI changes they disagree with
For me it would make more sense to have something like “unlock for a week” if the dev wants to keep the ongoing revenue model. Of course a lifetime purchase is even better, not sure why that’s not an option.
I would be happy to pay $100 for unlimited access and be locked into the current version of the app, maybe only have minor version updates free so you don’t get locked into a buggy version.
But that’s a more complicated licensing model to implement I guess.
If you only need it occasionally doesn’t subscription make sense? Just pay for the months you need it.
I’m cautious of adding subscription products i would depend on to my tools but if it’s something I definitely only need once a year I just buy a month of it.
Although $30/mo is a bit much for what it does. So if they did go one off presumably it would be about $500 a license.
And nowhere does anyone explain exactly what “poisoned data” is and just how the claim that training a model on a small amount of such data will have a big impact.
There is no exact definition. It can be a harmless bullshit, or something more harmful. Imagine AI recommending child to drink some common liquid for fun or as a medicine. Liquid which is in fact known poison. There are many dangerous things that aren't often mentioned in internet because people have common sense and never do it. It's enough to add just a bit of misleading information.
With cheap generic robots coming this can be a real problem. Human supervision can help when there is one.
How many compatibility issues is MacOS realistically expected to spur? Windows DX felt unusable to me without a Linux VM (and later WSL), but on MacOS most tooling just kinda seems to work the same.
It’s not the tooling for me, macOS is just bad as a server OS for many reasons. Weird collisions with desktop security features, aggressive power saving that you have to fight against, root not being allowed to do root stuff, no sane package management, no OOB management, ultra slow OS updates, and generally but most importantly: the UNIX underbelly of macOS has clearly not been a priority for a long time and is rotting with weird inconsistent and undocumented behaviour all over the place.
Linux is not immune to BIOS/UEFI firmware attacks either. Secure Boot, TPM, and LUKS can work well together, but you still depend on proprietary firmware that you do not fully control. LogoFAIL is a good example of that risk, especially in an evil maid scenario involving temporary physical access. I think Apple has tighter control over this layer.
You completely misunderstood the quoted remark you responded to. The desktop security features in MacOS that interfere with unblessed binaries and libraries loading is a huge pain in the ass, especially for headless server use.
For server usage? macOS is the least-supported OS in terms of filesystems, hardware and software. It uses multiple gigabytes of memory to load unnecessary user runtime dependencies, wastes hard drive space on statically-linked binaries, and regularly breaks package management on system upgrades.
At a certain point, even WSL becomes a more viable deployment platform.
Provisioning, remote management, containers, virtualization, networking, graphics (and compute), storage, all very different on Mac. The real question is what you would expect to be the same.
> Aura says a targeted voice phishing attack against one of its employees led to unauthorized access to about 900,000 records [...]
Employers are often surprised when I ask for less access, but I firmly believe no random employee should have personal data access like this. Ideally you'd want to require the customer to be in the loop to access their data as employee.
reply