Software as a (Dis-)service
But I used the free version. because I can't justify the cost for the bit of convenience (almost £40 a year, every year)*. And then they changed the rules so that the free version could only be used on a couple of devices.
This is why after looking long and hard at Evernote, years ago, I not only decided to avoid it, but to avoid all 'software-as-a-perpetual-service' scams.
If Evernote had unbundled the client and the service, I'd have been fine with that. But I'll never commit to an application that wants to manage (i.e. control) a my documents but won't let me own it outright. Having the vendor unilaterally change the terms of the arrangement is only one of many obvious pitfalls. Being forced to accept 'upgrades' that may ruin the utility of the product is another. Having the developers abruptly decide to retire to a South-Sea island and live on their ill-gotten gains is yet another. (I'm still happily using ECCO Pro, 20 years after it was abandoned. Evernote users will never have that option.)
Users need to remember that the interests of the vendor are very different from - in fact, diametrically opposed to - their own. Signing a perpetual contract removes the only feedback mechanism (repeated purchase of optional upgrades) that gives the user any influence over the vendor.
I don't think it's a coincidence that applications that go to the SaaS model tend to either stagnate or backslide. I'm still using Photoshop CS4, and I've yet to see anything in Photoshop CC that would make me feel seriously envious. Despite years of endless 'updates,' Windows 10 (love it or hate it) still doesn't offer me any compelling reason to abandon my comfortable, reliable Windows 7 setups. And I don't expect it ever will.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
