But, this is coming at the expense of those who prefer permanent licenses. These people will be charged 29.99 AND have a product with a shortened lifespan all at the same time.
PhoenixRising1, that's exactly the point.
Hypothetical: If 5 lifetime activations cost $40 the cost per unit would be $8 per. That's for the lifetime option, that won't update. If OS turnover picks up speed, the lifetime purchase doesn't make much sense, to me. The subscription model at $9 makes more economic sense if OS's last shorter times. Either way, lifetime or subscription, the devs have to be paid, remember, so that will be reflected in both models.
If you're complaining that MS's OS is expected to have a shorter lifetime, and therefore it's relatively more expensive, but Stardock has absolutely no control over that, and don't forget, the software will continue to work on the original purchase OS indefinitely, and perhaps older ones, as well.
No one's saying that in some hypothetical OS to come, the software won't work. You're assuming that. But, if that's the problem, then opt for subscription model. I don't think it's logical to fixate on one payment method. People might instead weigh which makes more economic sense if OSs change rapidly, and updating is more important. Just my thoughts. No one has to agree. No less important are considerations such as whether a theoretical customer will actually need some new feature or whether the prior version answers all needs.
Also, in these hypothetical OS's no one's even mentioned hardware requirements. Lol.
Good talking with you as well.