I'm not against paying for updates, but this post feels like a bit of an overcomplicated spin on a subscription model

Edit: my point being, a lot of people seem to be misunderstanding what this means for Sketch and maybe the post would be more easily understood if there wasn't so much beating around the bush

I feel like people here don't realize you can keep using your current version of Sketch for free forever even after your "subscription" expires. So this is pretty different from Adobe's model.

It's just $100, if you use it as a tool to make $, you can earn your investment back in a few hours and yet the ROI is MUCH bigger.

Nobody wants to work for free, if you want the next shiny update, you have to pay. If you don't want it, use whatever you have and chillax. It's very simple. Just don't write an Medium about it.

The comments in this thread are hilarious.

If Adobe did this (and they did), the people who defend Bohemian Coding would call out Adobe. Yet—because it’s Sketch—they jump to defend it.

This community is full of double standards. Sketch is upheld as a holy application that can do no wrong. A bug in Photoshop? THIS APP IS THE DEVIL. Fuck Adobe. The same bug in Sketch? Ah well, that’s just Sketch! Let’s hug it out.

My opinion on the new licensing model is irrelevant to this thread. What is relevant is the inconsistent attitudes and double standards of this community.

problem

Sketch's files may not be compatible if you don't upgrade yearly, which means plugins won't support too (I've seen so many plugins which say compatible 3.6+)

Are Sketch files backwards compatible? If not, then what's the point of holding on to an older version of the app?

Some perspective. Sketch $99/12 = $8.25 per MONTH. Adobe single app plan = $19.99 per MONTH (but more likely you have the $49/month plan). InVision Pro plan = $25 per MONTH.

Time spent in Sketch, 90% of the day. Time in InVision 8%. Time in Adobe, 1%.

Still looks like a great deal to me.

I really don't see the point in making all of this fuss.

Before:

Buy Sketch 3.0 -> get updates for n months -> stop on 3.9 -> no more updates

Now:

Buy Sketch version x -> get updates for exactly 12 months -> stop on version y -> no more updates

I’m sorry to say, but this is just ridiculous! I am a student and certainly not willing to pay 99 dollars a year for this. I’m paying 120 a year for the full adobe suite, that would be much of a better value…

Maybe whether it's OK or not depends how much cash you have? Sketch 3 was $79 with up to 2 years of free updates, it went up to $99, and is now is $99 a year.

I'd rather it was still $79 once, then $49 every 2 years for major version loyalty upgrades, and free minor updates. That's "fairer". The price and terms have become worse, not better.

So instead of $99 every two years it will be that every year... Nice subscription model Bohemian (Sketch)

Hello I'm a designer and I have important opinions on this to share with you all.

I actually understand what Bohemian is trying to do here. rather than stall a feature just to justify a major version release as a paid upgrade, they are already integrating it to the app so we'll get the feature now rather than later.

I don't feel like this is Adobe way of doing subscription. If you stop paying Adobe, you can no longer use the product but with Sketch you can keep the Sketch version you bought as long as you want. This is similar to people who are still holding on to their copy of Adobe CS6.

I think it's fair to get a number of major free updates until you are required again to pay for a new license.

This is great. If it means they can up their QA and release great new features on a regular basis, I am more than happy to pay a measly $99 per year for that.

That said, I hope they fix Symbols and Styles, like soon. Because, you know,

I think Bohemian Coding found the perfect business model. It has the best of both worlds; subscriptions and pay an amount once.

$99 for Sketch + one year of updates is a more than fair price. If you're satisfied you don't have to buy another year of updates. You can pause or stop paying, and still use Sketch. This is a huge advantage over Creative Cloud. Where the software is useless after your subscription ends.

Paying once for an app and never pay anything again isn't a business model that works. I'd like Bohemian Coding to continue existing and working on improving Sketch every day.

This is so not cool, Bohemian Coding.

I can just agree:

We think a fairer approach is for everybody to get the same period of free updates, no matter when they purchased the app.

Because, let's say they would release Sketch 4 traditionally with a $99 price tag, but you had just purchased Sketch 3 six months ago and then feel the need to get 4, you would be paying 99/6 months vs. a user who has Sketch 3 already for 2 years which is 99/2 years: which means the cost/productivity revenue is way less. It just doesn't make sense for a user buying high numbered version software and I think the devs realized that and actually came up with a very clever subscription model that actually rocks, because no matter when you get the software - you GET THE SOFTWARE (which you can actually use as long as you want) & 1 year of FREE UPGRADES.

Don't confuse this with Adobe's way of subscription, which basically says: "If you stop paying us, you won't be able to use our software AT ALL anymore !"

BUT to be fair, I must add they should then probably half their price to $50. Why? Because traditionally as they wrote themselves on their blog, they would release a new version every 2 years. Which means when you had bought the app on release, you would pay: 99 / 2 = $49 per year & we still could use it after 2 years.

If instead of $50 the new price of the subscription model will still be $99 for the software & 1 year of free updates, it's just a hidden price increase on Sketch.

We're all fucked

unless Bohemian offers backwards compatibility - of which they don't currently. I'm so sick of the subscription model. Sad news.

Hate on me as much as you want but Sketch is not good enough to cost this much. It's pleasant to use but the quality is not where it needs to be. I hope for them they use the money to improve the quality of their software, but IMHO affinity is already in a better place and improving rapidly.

So they're going with the Framer model.

I wonder if they had been talking to the Framer team and realised that it makes more economic sense to do it this way...

I'm not overly concerned. I can quickly recoup the $99/year I'll spend on Sketch. It'd be different if they said "Pay us $99 per year or we'll deactivate your license." They're not doing that; if you want to upgrade, pay the $99. If not, wait until an upgrade comes around that you're interested in using, then pay the $99.

I get they need to get revenue. Why can't they just stick with the major versions you pay for? If you already have a license for 3, you get a discounted upgrade price. Then just offer 4 free to anybody who bought 3 within a month or two of launching 4.

I think it would be fair if the renewal price is 50% of the initial purchase, since basically when you renew the license it's just for the new features / bugfixes not for a completely new product.

I have no problem with this as long as they make file backwards compatible. Not all of us are working in an ecosystem where you can make your team-mates subscribe to something just because of your workflow. If I get it right, with this model if you created a file in 4.0 and your coworker is on 3.8 - they first have to upgrade the license even to just access the file. Not having Windows compatibility was already bit of hassle - but one that I could afford. I still love sketch but this might, just might make me re-consider Adobe.

When they start fixing all the pain in the A.. bugs than i am ready to pay for it. If this does not happen i will give Adobe XD a chance it looks promising and they develop it for the designers.

By that same token, you could buy any of the old Adobe apps and keep them forever. You would have the same problems with dated software, you can't open files created by anyone with the newer version, compatibility issues with new OS versions, bugs that never get addressed, etc.

So now, Sketch costs as much as PS (the PS photography plan which includes LR, PS and a bunch of other mobile/cloud apps is $100/yr).

Now having said that (only to highlight that BC did the same thing Adobe does), I think $100/yr for a design tool that you use to earn your living and create almost all of your work is a perfectly reasonable price.

If this enables BC to create a better sketch, then by all means, use the same pricing model Adobe has.

I think they should solve the issue for open files from a new minor version in a old version of Sketch before switch to this kind of business model, they way it is today would be impossible to work with other people after your subscription ends. And $99/y is almost the price of the Photoshop + Lightroom combo. Maybe they'll drop the price just a little bit.

This is basically what they were already doing. Buy 2.0, and get free updates until 3.0. It's just time-based now instead of arbitrary version-number based. I think this is more predictable for us and for them, and makes a lot of sense

Good for them.

Sketch is at the center of design tools that spawned and shook up the design ecosystem.

Not that it should be "all about the money" - but, as other players (Invision for example) who I really appreciate as well - as these players have way higher upsides on the back of their product, it must be frustrating.

I've been using Sketch for a few years now and easily spend 6 - 8 hours a day using it.

The three to four thousands hours I've spent using Sketch for that $100 investment are a steal.

Finally, believe it or not - the new pricing schema and approach may make it easier to convince larger organizations to switch to Sketch.

Anyhow, I'm happy to invest more into a product that is the center of my life .

I hope this gives them the resources they need to take Sketch to the next level.

I think I'm ok with this. A lot of people seem to be mis-reading the model in thinking it's a purely subscription model like Adobe's. In reality, they're just streamlining their release process so they don't have to hold onto large feature upgrades for the major version release. If they continue to deliver with feature updates, then the consumer isn't really losing much value.

It would also be nice to be able to pay a larger amount up front to maybe get unlimited upgrades forever (Alfred and Arq have this model and I have bought into both).

Windows user :|

We need Affinity to release an UI focused application.

If I have to pay 99€ for a new app each year or 99€ a year for a subscription-fee, doesn't change so much. What's is important IMHO, is if I'm satisfied of the product and so if it's worth the price. Obviously I'm happy if I save 99€ in my pocket every year, but personally I have no problem to pay yearly for a good and useful product. Are you? This is the only good question you have to make to yourself.