Deutsch
English
When I recently helped a friend with his PC, I found he had Office 365, Netflix and the current Photoshop on his machine - and he talked about his leased car. As I looked around, I saw no DVD player and no books even though he's a total media junkie. When asked about it, he remarked owning stuff was so yesterday and that he'd rely on streaming, renting or subscriptions for his entertainment needs. This would also make moving homes a lot less stressful. Is this the end of ownership?
The advent of streaming technology has changed how we consume media. Large private DVD or Blu-ray collections are no longer required as Netflix, Amazon Prime and many other portals have become a worthy alternative, thanks to the internet. For a monthly fee, we can now access millions of songs, movies and series, in high quality and often produced exclusively for a single portal. Consequently, the traditional TV and movie industry see their markets dwindle with fewer and fewer movies and CDs being sold. What was unthinkable a few years ago has now become a reality: consumption without ownership. We don't own any of the content we stream. Once a portal removes it from their site, we can kiss our favorite series goodbye. But since new content keeps coming out constantly, we accept that - with the exception of all-time favorites that we still occasionally buy on disc.
Since the beginning of last year, Porsche have joined the bandwagon and now offer "Porsche Passport", a vehicle subscription service that lets you drive your dream cars (for a whopping $2000 to $3000 price tag). For example, you can enjoy a 911 Carrera S on Monday, cruise around in a Panamera 4S on Wednesday and ease into the weekend in a Cayenne S electric hybrid. Now, you can drive multiple cars without owning any of them and I can't wait to see whether this offer will catch on. Will the fun of riding these luxury vehicles outweigh the need to actually own them? Will customers be sad when they later return "their" cars or happily look forward to the next hot rod?
Adobe was among the first software companies to adopt this approach for their entire product range, upending their license model in the process. All of their current products are subscription-only, you pick a package and pay a monthly fee. Traditionalists are longing for the time when you payed once and owned the product indefinitely but, according to Adobe, general acceptance is "very high". Microsoft struggled harder with their "Office 365". It was rumored this was due to digital natives (those that grew up with digital technology) being more amenable to subscriptions, unlike traditional users. So is it an age issue? Microsoft's Office bundle currently sells as a monthly or yearly subscription but there are also traditional buy once use forever licenses available for Office 2016 and Office 2019. It seems they're still testing the waters and haven't switched to subscription-only yet.
An area that has long seen the use of time-restricted licenses is antivirus software. You purchase the right to malware definition updates for one or more years and, since databases are updated on a daily basis, this price model makes perfect sense. It's the same with our Driver Updater. Its database has to be kept up to date constantly with drivers from hundreds of different sources, a lifetime license would be economically unsustainable here. It would equal a car with free repairs for its entire service life - not a nice thought, from a manufacturer's perspective at least.
Alas, some companies don't understand, or simply ignore, the principles behind this business model. They sell monthly licenses at exorbitant prices, sneak in automatic license extensions or stop supporting their programs altogether. Once customers notice serious bugs or experience issues after Windows updates, often in the first year, frustration builds up. Such neglectful conduct u ndermines trust both in the industry and the licensing model. That these companies acted the same way before with their traditional software licenses is all too quickly forgotten.
Pay to view
One definitive advantage of subscription-based software is that applications stay up to date. While traditional software eventually falls out of support and may cease to function, e.g. after a Windows update, subscribers always receive the latest upgrade. Microsoft has had a poor track record lately introducing software-breaking changes with several Windows 10 updates. If you've just purchased an expensive piece of software, this can be a real annoyance. In other cases, users who bought an older version (usually at a special discount) complain when, a few months later, a successor comes out. But with the traditional business model, software companies have to roll out new releases regularly, usually once a year, to stay profitable. Time-based licenses ensure users always have the latest software version. Even if you only need a program temporarily, e.g. for a specific project, time-restricted licenses will cost you less.
Many planners are already thinking way ahead: how about a housing flat rate for frequent travelers? You pay a certain amount and an accommodation will be ready for you any time anywhere in the world. Sounds futuristic? Maybe, but the demand is there today!
Despite the advantages, I'll adopt a two-pronged approach. I'll stream, rent or buy 1-year licenses where it makes sense but I want to own the things dear to me (not computers). This means, I'll continue to buy books and CDs and curate my movie collection. And I want to permanently own my car. Maybe this will make the next relocation more of a hassle but at least I'll be carrying my stuff.
Which approach do you favor: rent or buy? Or are you a collector?
PS: Before you ask, at Ashampoo, we'll continue to follow the traditional software model of buy once, use forever - with the exception of antivirus or driver updater software that require yearly subscriptions. Maybe we'll offer software as a service in the future to give you more options.
Pretty soon you will not have to have a life, you will be able to rent one. I think that is the whole object of the rental economic culture. There's no prominence associated with life as it is all just a string of temporary experiences. But you get to pay a little bit every month even for those experiences you no longer need her use. And you have nothing of value to resell because you don't own them. Think about it a little bit.
When it comes to owning content, I find that it's usually pointless. I own many games, books and DVD/Blu-rays (and comics, music CDs, ...), many of which I've never used, and 99.9% of the rest I will never re-play, re-read or re-watch. I do get pleasure from the fact I own stuff, but this seems to me like a pretty bad excuse for buying it.
I do find that buying to support the content creators is a good excuse. If you enjoy someone's work, buying their stuff is one way to reward them further, and owning that stuff gives some measure of fulfillment as a fan. I also occasionally buy at GOG to support DRM-free games.
Very good article. I do like to own things. I really like the Ashampoo approach to software. You buy it and you use it (and it may get improvements over time). If a new version comes out you get a chance to try the new features. If you want the new version you can buy it or you can choose to keep the old version. Works for me.
I'm still having trouble posting, for some reason.
Hi Sven
Like you, I have a two-pronged approach to the buy/rent option.
I'm a photography enthusiast, so Photoshop is a must for me. I have no option but to rent this, but the cost is not outrageous and I like the fact that my software is always up-to-date with the latest features.
I also have subscriptions to Netflix and Amazon Prime. These give me a huge choice of TV material, plus fastest delivery on my online purchases. I'm happy to pay the current cost of these.
But when it comes to music and books, I regard these as things with which I have some kind of emotional relationship (yes, I know that sounds a bit weird!). I enjoy the feeling of owning these items - of being able to keep them on a shelf as part of my home environment. For me, the idea of streaming music or e-books distances me from the enjoyment of physical contact with the album or book.
As for my car, I have four grandsons under the age of 13, so using a car that has to be returned to a subscription service is out of the question (unless the company would overlook mud on the seats, sand in the footwells, scratches on the plastic fittings, etc.!).
Besides, I like the familiarity of my own car - keeping all my stuff in the storage compartments, knowing instinctively where all the controls are, having a seat that has moulded itself to my shape, and knowing exactly how much time I need to overtake that bus.....
Do I sound a bit old? That's because I am!
Hi Sven,
Buying programmes from Ashampoo and updating or keeping the 'old programmes' has another angle, and I have bought many programmes from Ashampoo.
Many subscribers to Sven's blog may not be aware of an Ashampoo concept of testing programmes which have not yet been purchased.
The brilliant Ashampoo concept allows a customer, after several purchases, to become involved with the Yiggles programme.
Each purchase allows a certain number of points, called Yiggles to be accumulated.
These Yiggles allow a customer to obtain and own a earlier, pre-released programme without payment and only forfeiting a certain amount of Yiggles.
It is a fact that the Ashampoo team continue to update most of their programmes and offer discounts........it should be noted that nothing is free in life........the Ashampoo team offer their latest programmes to be purchased, after all they require a regular salary for the work they perform ...... freeware users note ....... who expects to be served a free meal in a restaurant or cafe ...... ???
........ people don't
Should we ever have need for a new marketing buff, we now know where to find him! :) Seriously, thanks a lot!
Hi Sven,
As always - a very relevant article on a very hot topic :)
Personally, just as you stated in your closing note, I believe there is a market both for "owners" and for "subscribers".
But first, just a bit of semantics: both movies / music and software are never OWNED! What is owned is the right of USING them (according to their respective licenses), but the owner remains their manufacturer (or whoever has the intellectual rights).
With this out of the way, here's the thing:
1. Just as it has been mentioned by other readers, relying on subscription software means potential lack of access to the proprietary files you need to use (and -- as Murphy would have it -- this will always happen at the least favorable moment).
2. Also: you may keep a piece of software for an one-in-a-while use; why pay permanently for it? Case in point: for various attempts of teaching recursive algorithms to young ones, I keep a copy of Therapin's Turtle-Logo highly acclaimed software.
I am using it at quite distant intervals (it also doesn't get updated too frequently - once every three years on the average).
With the most recent version (5) they moved to the subscription model. Only the license is such that not only don't you get updates / upgrades if subscription is over, but rather the software pack stops working altogether!
Obviously, I did NOT proceed with the upgrade.
I also let the company know of my stand: regretfully, they preferred not to comment or reply, even after I had a phone talk with them on the subject ...
3. As for movies: there is one more aspect to ownership vs. streaming - most of the wonderful DVDs / Blu-rays one purchases do not limit themselves to just the movie itself, but rather have a lot of extra material (many times more such in length than the feature itself) which bring a more interesting (and possibly different) perspective to the history of the events and to the making of the movie; outstanding material!
You do not get such meta-info when just streaming ...
4. And here's another point related to movies: the same movie might reach the screens / shelves in VARIOUS versions (regular / director's cut / interactively commented / extended version ...)
When purchasing the disc, you get to choose which version you wish to own & see.
When streaming, you are bound to just what the streaming company selected has to offer ...
And let's not overlook that -- due to various copyright & distribution rights reasons -- you may need multiple streaming subscriptions in order to reach all the movies you care to watch.
This doesn't mean that I do not hold subscriptions to Netflix & Prime, but I also keep an over 1,000 units collection of great Blurays & DVDs, carefully selected, with classics from the 30s as well as Marvel's & DC's "eco-systems".
As for software, I am trying to stick to offline-usable & non-expiring software for as much as I can.
For everyone's benefit, keep on writing your outstanding Blog :)
All the best,
Eric
Hi Eric,
We initially discussed whether we'd also include the subleties of copyright and right to use in the article but we decided against that. If you have a movie on DVD in your collection, you usually consider it "your" movie even though the law might state otherwise. As far as movies go, I'm with you. I love bonus content like deleted scenes and other extras. The Sherlock Holmes collection I bought even came with a booklet that outlines the origin story, which I happily devoured. My own movie collection extends from Fritz Lang movies all the way to 2018. :)
Thanks Sven,
I am on the non-renting side of life because I like to own what I have worked hard to own over my working life, which included three part-time jobs when I was still at school.
I bought the small things which I wanted and it was a great feeling to own them.
The attitude hasn't changed, to pay for something and own it is totally opposite to renting anything, and paying a regular fee for internet security is a great investment, it is paying for a service.
There is an off-shoot though in the renting saga, the number of people renting a home in this corner of the world is increasing due to the beyond ridiculous cost of buying a house on a 600 x 600 m2 piece of land is out of reach of Mr & Mrs Average working-class people.
David Wolstenholme raises an extreme valid issue with automatic subscriptions where subscriptions usually last for a year and are automatically renewed by the seller and customers are automatically charged a one year renewal subscription fee often with price increases as well and many subscribers are not aware of the situation and are usually out of their money and have a product they are not using/needing any more. There are many companies that have the business ethics and integrity and make sure the customer is made fully aware of the impending renewal actions. However there are an equal amount of shady companies that just renew the contract and automatically charge the customers and send notifications after the facts. I have only encountered 2 shady software companies that have shown a wanton disregard for the customers otherwise as far as the software field is concerned and the 2 exceptions mentioned above I have only experienced the highest level of integrity and service with the software companies I have had dealings with. Again its buyer beware, monthly software subscriptions are usually great for companies due to their purchasing power but not so great for individuals. My choice will always be owner ship of software and according to the user agreement.
Subscriptions are old school thinking from companies without a marketing department. Many come with a "cloud" sub so projects are on a hard drive I do not own nor control. Another company I remained loyal to for photo/video software just announced the final single owner version. New versions with extras will be subscription only. Not the way I would deal with loyal customers.
If your friend is set on not owning stuff why isn't he using an autonomous vehicle? Have a great weekend Sven.
Subscriptions are fine for Magazines through the post, but beware. I had a friend who died suddenly.
He had a magazine on subscription that was paid for from his account. We discovered a long time after, that the publisher had been getting money from his account for months afterwards. All done automatically.
Do you want to have your spyware renewals etc. taken out of your account in perpetua ? Be careful who you let take money from your account more than once for anything,
no matter what it is for. I pay up-front and sleep very well thank you.
I'll try to comment (posting hang last time I tried with the previous blog post). So first of all, just a little comment. If I manage to post I'll add more later.
> traditional TV and movie industry see their markets dwindle with fewer and fewer movies and CDs being sold
That's unrelated to ownership vs. rental. Traditional TV and movies were in no way owned, except on discs, which are a secondary market for them. CDs are on the decline because music (and software and video games) are more easily bought digitally and downloaded, instead of being sold as digital data on physical media. And sure, rental does have an effect, but it's a secondary one, after the main one (physical to digital) has already opened the way for it.
Without writing a book I would like to go right to the main reason why companies like Microsoft, Adobe and such are pushing subscription over owner ship and that is the high subscription profit margin over the one time sale-purchase owner ship model. I am sure it works well for corporations who benefit from lower priced bulk subscription but for the individual PC User owner ship of software is usually cheaper compared to the price of subscriptions. As far as I am concerned owning your software is still cheaper and has benefits like upgrading for a lower price and the software is yours as long as you want to use it without the price of a monthly subscription that is to expensive for most individual users due the facts most people do not use their software on a regular basis to justify a monthly bill so why would I pay a monthly charge using the software only every other month or so. That sure doesn't make sense and that day I am forced to pay a monthly user fee instead owning my adobe software I will be looking somewhere else for there are to many fish in the software sea who have equally good software. It is my contention the high profit margin is the only reason why software companies are pushing the monthly lease model on the consumer. It will work for some people but not for most occasional software users.
Microsoft and Adobe can sell their subscriptions to everyone else, but I'm not buying it. As long as Ashampoo continues to have the best "buy it and keep it" software out there, that's what I will buy. Another interesting note: This isn't really new. When Chrysler came out with their turbine car in the mid 1960's, they were leased to selected individuals only. When GM came out with their well-received electric cars, I think they were called EV or EV2 or something similar, they also were only available for lease to select individuals. So the concept of rent-it-because-you-can't-buy-it has been around a long while.
Hi Sven,
One major issue that I have is that quite often, the latest Software is worse than previous versions. Software developers are often charged with giving us something new and better. Unfortunately, if the last version was the absolute best, what more can they do to improve it ? The new version may be flashier or include the latest technical gizmo's, neither of which offer me any benefit.
I remember way back when Microsoft stopped indexing anything that was not Microsoft, our company suddenly lost the ability to scan Reports (.RPT) for specified text. We had to suddenly invent Macros,etc to change Reports to Text files so that they could be scanned and then reverted back to Reports !#!@#.
I am sure that we all remember the debacle that was WIN8 when they invented such idiocies as the Hidden "Charms" in order to shut down the PC. Well, Ashampoo did the same ! On Music Studio I no longer had a menu bar. I struggled for days to find out how to access some functions. I accidentally discovered that there were "charms" at the top of the screen that appeared ONLY when my mouse tried to scroll North !@#!@#
And so, yes, I love my paid-for (older) Software that does what I want without having extras that I do not need and would never use. And, I am sure that any subscription service is not going to store indefinitely my favourite movie or music, so, I will stick to my Hard Copy (DVD/CD) for now thanks.
cheers
thanks for that article which I found very interesting. I am a monthly subscriber to Spotify for streaming music but also have some 45000 music tracks on my laptop....the best of both worlds! Also stream movies or series from Netflix but don't use (hire) DVDs for movies anymore. Regards and looking forward to future articles.
It is a great idea for some people, however, nearly all people in the world own their car and will continue to own their car.
I was a loyal user of ADOBE until they introduced subscription or lease hire software, as it really is.
I do not lease ony of my products, or software, as there are many software companies that will not go down the path of lease hire of software.
If you are a business in Australia you can claim lease hire on Tax and collect a 100% tax refund over five years,
If you are not a registered business it is not worth going into a lease hire contract with your software dealer, this means you pay a Goods and Services Tax on someone else's product.
I used to purchase of Coffee Cup Software, however, their model does not suit many Australians, so we look around for great software from great software companies and purchase from them.
Lease hire software has no loyalty between the customer and the supply company, it is all about money.
My comic book collection from the 60'sand 70's, mostly Marvel, is worth thousands of dollars. I wonder how much it would be worth now if it consisted of digital downloads such as being sold today. By the way, I am still using Photoshop 5.5 and am very happy with it going on over twenty years. I have my PC Matic under the Evergreen program ,paid once and get to use for life (five computers). I'm happy people have money to burn on subscriptions. I don't ( ok, I'm cheap/frugal). I avoid subscription plans like the plague. They get you in at a nice price and gradually increase it. No thanks.
In my opinion it's not the end of the ownership , despite the fact the big companies can afford to sell limited time licenses at high prices (monopol behavior).Here, the EU Commission must work a lot in the future, defending the rights of our EU citizens.
The problem is with high quality medium business who must keep their place in the market.Always friendly with customers.
Customers prefer stability and predictibility-thats why PrePay phone was a success.
Regarding media-I don't imagine my little library without the books of Patrick Rothfuss;I own the precious!
software can become outdated quickly i think software will be rented in the near future but the rent must be very low
seller of the operating system should include more as these operating systems arent cheap
And I want to permanently own my car. Maybe this will make the next relocation more of a hassle but at least I'll be carrying my stuff.
Very interesting and current topic Sven. It makes me think of the "disposable" culture we are now beginning to live in. Something drops out of favor, and it's gone. No sentimentalism there. Music, movies and whatever end up in our digital trashbin, and even our appliances, furniture and clothing can end up in the garbage, so this development should not be a surprise. The millennials are programmed to act this way!
Still, I am not ready to give up my classic sports car or my collection of tools or antiques or works of art. If people prefer to live the disposable life, then let them. It can be frivolous and stupid, but they're not going to listen to your opinions unless there's a benefit for them. They spend a lot of money on their gadgets ($1000+ dollars on a phone!) and subscriptions, but are often very cheap when it comes to buying objects in the used market, (which happens to be a very eco-friendly way to live). To each his own.
Thanks Sven. It's a very relevant Topic for Discussion and worth pondering about. I's rather take your final Option of a combination of the two systems according to one's needs and preferences. One very good Way forward is what "Giveawayoftheday" has introduced by offering the "outdated" software for free to users who may not have had it before and then upgrade to the newer versions thus making development of Software worth undertaking to the best and highest levels possible without thinking of time as the limiting factor.
Hi Sven, you have touched a nerve here with your current posting. I first noticed this when Adobe adopted this model for Photoshop which I had only just recently bought. I was persuaded to never ever buy or hire an Adobe product again. I am convinced that at some point in time Microsoft will follow suit making Windows a subscription product, when that happens I guess I move over to LInux and open source software.
I get the advantages but having been used to owning product I just feel ripped off by the concept. After all I'm still using Adobe CS6, Office 2007 amongst other aging programs. I amused to them, know where to find functions and don't want to waste time learning where they have been moved to in the new version.
I still have my 2nd Octavia which has served me well, I have owned this my 2nd house for 20 years and know every creak and squeak in its fabric.
I'm not a Luddite, my latest laptop is only a month old, I do own some new software notably Magix Photostory, I try out open source software such as Gimp, EM Client, Raw Therappee when need rises. I have even been known to buy a range of Ashampoo software. I own about 6 digital cameras having bought new when the need for specific functionality occurs, however I have kept the old models as I regard them as old friends which have served me well and the trade in value is pathetic.
I see the rental model as an overpriced way to obtain software where every new release needs to be relearned primarily for the benefit of its makers profit.
My preference is to own. All vehicle leasing "schemes" are more expensive than owning. Software "rental" is on average 4~7 times more expensive than owning based on a three year amortization period.
The argument of always being current falls flat on its face given how new software is always breaking and not working with what used to work fine on an older version.
Music and movies, I own more than 1100 music CDs and 500 DVDs. I rip to hard drive so as to have easily accessible, even though many copyright "laws" and "rules" are closing out "fair use" exemptions.
Ongoing and continual revenue extraction is the end goal. Nothing to do with "better service and products". When the internet is down you are hooped. When on your system not needing interent access you can continue to use as you please. Is your internet connection 100% reliable and guaranteed? Mine isn't, and I consider myself to have among the most reliable service available.