> I’m not sure your critique of v6 to v7 migration is fair. Im sure v6 continued to work fine on that old version of chrome. But it seems perfectly reasonable for developers to be compensated for writing new code to work with new versions with new requirements.
I don't disagree that they should be compensated for new versions, however, I think we have a difference of opinion on what qualifies as a patch; I'm not intrinsically against upgrading license types ( though I don't like the move to subscriptions-only ), but I also expect the software I've already paid for to be updated when a major selling point feature ( browser integration ) breaks, especially if it's only the previous version ( in spirit or in practice ).
To be honest, though, I don't really expect they'll have a similar situation in the future now that they're actively maintaining all platform versions ( and with a unified core! ), so I'm being bitter over the past and letting it seep into how I feel about v8, local vaults, and control of my data.
I don't disagree that they should be compensated for new versions, however, I think we have a difference of opinion on what qualifies as a patch; I'm not intrinsically against upgrading license types ( though I don't like the move to subscriptions-only ), but I also expect the software I've already paid for to be updated when a major selling point feature ( browser integration ) breaks, especially if it's only the previous version ( in spirit or in practice ).
To be honest, though, I don't really expect they'll have a similar situation in the future now that they're actively maintaining all platform versions ( and with a unified core! ), so I'm being bitter over the past and letting it seep into how I feel about v8, local vaults, and control of my data.