That seems different though. If you are paying a fixed cost for offline software, you are not entitled to updates for it, that seems like wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

▲

cwnyth 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It costs nothing to update to the newest LibreOffice.

▲

paxy 4 hours ago | parent [-]

The cost is all the features you are missing.

▲

dotancohen 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That's how I feel about using MS Office. I have a text file somewhere of all the things I couldn't do with MS Office at my last gig, that I do regularly with LibreOffice.

▲

lanyard-textile 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I feel like the word processor as a product is fairly "finished." There's not much about it that'd you want to change year over year. Are there any new features to write home about?

	▲	htrp 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think the word processor, and the office suite have advanced features that would be better suited in a programming language. like mail merge or macros.... do you really need them in a day and age where you have an llm subscription is a different question

▲

consp 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Like? Wouldn't be surprised if those features don't matter for the 95th percentile.

	▲	hobo123 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Like loading or saving CSV files and choosing the separator character. I don't remember which, but Excel doesn't do one of them. Oh, did he say _LibreOffice_ is missing features. Well, probably it does too.

▲

Gualdrapo 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> That seems different though. If you are paying a fixed cost for offline software, you are not entitled to updates for it

I don't know, back in my day you could get at least discounts on updates for your paid software.

▲

stackghost 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

With a well-defined python API instead of the abomination that is VBA, you could dispense with all the fancy mail-merge and other stupid features and greatly simplify the word processor product. I think most people would be happy to pay $250, or whatever, for an offline office suite that worked and was free of serious/security-relevant bugs. The idea that you can release a half-baked product full of bugs and then expect people to pay you for the privilege of fixing your shitty product only exists in software.

In no other industry would that be okay. Automakers, for example, issue recalls when their products have serious defects, and then they fix them on the company's dime. Remind me again who's acting entitled?

▲

b00ty4breakfast 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I guess technically you aren't entitled to anything wrt software; They could charge you a monthly fee to use the v1.out.of.date and stop providing updates unless you start paying for v2.the.latest.

You would rightfully be upset, and it might even be a bad business move but you aren't "entitled" to anything but what is shoved onto your plate like gruel in a Dickensian workhouse cafeteria