Disappointed with the new model.

[gustavrsh]

I didn't buy YNAB for you to change it to a subscription based service. You could at least make a offline version of YNAB 5 for YNAB 4 users, or a final update for it. Hugely disappointed.

[Ravenlock]

Seriously, guys? This is what we're going to do now?

We hashed this out pretty well. YNAB's security is literally the same as that used by banking institutions, and the functionality they've tied to it is completely optional. There's no ♥♥♥♥ measuring contest to have here. Drake's allowed to hate it if he wants.

[Drake]

Publicado originalmente por Ravenlock:

Seriously, guys? This is what we're going to do now?

We hashed this out pretty well. YNAB's security is literally the same as that used by banking institutions, and the functionality they've tied to it is completely optional. There's no ♥♥♥♥ measuring contest to have here. Drake's allowed to hate it if he wants.

So, I don't hate it, I simply think the risks outweight the benefits. Others can decide different, it's their information, their choice.

Second, big banks, credit card companies, large retailers, at one point or another all have been compromised, and will continue being compromised. That's all there is to it. There's no 100% guarantee, and there's no such thing as 100% secure, especially when it comes to cloud based apps.

[Ravenlock]

Of course there's no 100% guarantee. Nobody said there was. What I said, and somewhat tediously had to defend, was that they are taking security as seriously as just about any other service I can point to being used by millions of people to house personal or financial data (despite having a much smaller user base than many of those others). I'd like to see two-factor authentication keys, but aside from that they're ticking all the boxes.

It is totally okay if that is not good enough for you, but it is not accurate to claim they have been negligent in their design compared to others providing cloud based services.

[Drake]

Publicado originalmente por Ravenlock:

Of course there's no 100% guarantee. Nobody said there was. What I said, and somewhat tediously had to defend, was that they are taking security as seriously as just about any other service I can point to being used by millions of people to house personal or financial data (despite having a much smaller user base than many of those others). I'd like to see two-factor authentication keys, but aside from that they're ticking all the boxes.

It is totally okay if that is not good enough for you, but it is not accurate to claim they have been negligent in their design compared to others providing cloud based services.

So here's the difference between a bank, a financial institution, and the developers of YNAB.

A financial institution has no choice but to deal with the financial and identifiable information, they must store it, process it, transmitt it. There's no way around that risk.

YNAB developers didn't have to create an on-line only flash program, with cloud storage to boot, forcing the end user to store, transmitt and work with their finanical and identifiable information through that medium. The only beneift is to YNAB developers, due to the "hook" of online monthly subscription for access, none to the consumer.

That's the differnce.

[Ravenlock]

And it's fine for you to have that opinion. Presumably, those customers happy with the new YNAB model *disagree with you*. Not because they haven't thought about it, or don't understand how the internet and security work, but because the auto-importing of transactions and the ability to load up their budget on any device without having to maintain their own sync service has value to them.

Can we please, please stop circling this bush. Everybody has made their point. Like, four times.

[Flame Soulis]

Jesus, this is STILL being argued over?

Finally found the unsubscribe option.

[Bazaa]

Just learned about this and am disappointed.

[M3TH0D1CAL]

Publicado originalmente por Ravenlock:

YNAB always had a recurring cost if you wanted the new versions. There was always an upgrade fee to go from 2 to 3, or 3 to 4. You could stick with the old, or pay for the new.

This is literally no different, they've just amorized the cost of the new version to $5 / month instead of a bigger payment for a large upgrade.

Or you can stick to the old version. Exactly the same as before.

The only thing that has changed here is that now it's a web app. If you dislike that, okay, cool. But complaining about having to pay more than once just means you had no idea how it already worked.

For those of us willing to give a little bit of money regularly (or $45 a year, since they're giving a discount to existing users), we just get updates faster than we used to. Which isn't a bad deal, in my opinion.

This makes sense to me

[FNG_DirtyD <VOLK>]

Sure, that makes sense...except when you see that the price per month is almost 3x what it would take you to buy each major version when they come out.

Publicado originalmente por FNG_DirtyD <VOLK>:

I complained on their FB about the pricing when it was announced. Sure, $5/month isn't a lot of money. YNAB 4 has been a great help to my budgeting, for sure saving me more than $5/month. However, I bought YNAB 4 two and a half years ago. I paid $40 for it, which works out to $1.34/month for the time I've owned it up til now (and it's still "good" for another 7 months).
--
nYNAB would cost me $112.50 (at the $45/yr. discount rate) for the same two and a half years I've had YNAB4. If I calculate it out the additional 7 months YNAB 4 will be good for, nYNAB would be $135 for the same length of time YNAB 4 cost me $40. Now do you see why the subscription model is a raw deal?

[Rebel]

Any word on if YNAB 4 will still be in the store after main support ends on it at the end of the year

[MongoTheRed]

I'll jump on this train. I like my software on my computer where I at least have a firewall between me and anyone having access to it (if you don't understand how the internet works and anyone having access to your finances then I sugges you look up the definition of open source). I also hate the idea that I can't make a single payment though steam once again to upgrade to the next version. Utilizing subscription fees turns me away immediately from this method of upgrade though the bigger issue to me is that it is no longer local on my machine. Such a shame since I have grown to love this software. Any suggestions on something very close to this software as an alternative would be very appreciated at this point.

[jeprira]

Same as MongoGrubb, I don't want my finances on the cloud.

Hugely disappointed with the change of model. And since I bought it when very close to the move to the cloud, I felt robbed when I realized it would not be maintained.

I'm testing GNU Cash to see whether it would work for me.

[luckz]

Publicado originalmente por MongoGrubb:

(if you don't understand how the internet works and anyone having access to your finances then I sugges you look up the definition of open source).

The immigrants aren't taking your jobs and building a wall around Mexico won't keep your jobs safe.

[MongoTheRed]

Publicado originalmente por luckz:

Publicado originalmente por MongoGrubb:

(if you don't understand how the internet works and anyone having access to your finances then I sugges you look up the definition of open source).

The immigrants aren't taking your jobs and building a wall around Mexico won't keep your jobs safe.

LOL... I was not talking about job safety. :D You are quite entertaining. :D

[Perfice]

Saw the update and checked on here to see if it was worthwhille.

Browser-based instead of software actually installed on my computer? No thanks.
Subscription-based as opposed to a one-time payment with 10% Steam discount? No thanks.

I saw someone say the old payment model was a 'raw deal' for the company. I don't really see how getting people to pay $40 for something they could literally do themselves on a piece of paper is losing them money.

I agree with whoever it was that said the subscription model is like buying a brand new software every year instead of just using the one you bought 2 years ago for as long as you want.

I've been trying the new version out and they added in a few things I liked but took out alot of stuff I liked from YNAB4 also. I was just telling my girlfriend "I don't like how it groups all my income for the entire year into one category and doesn't show what is currently in my accounts."

Then I checked the new version and said "Well now it shows whats currently in my account but it doesn't take into account what I'm going to be receiving in my monthly budget, only what's currently in my account."

Why is it hard to figure out how to do it correctly?

I saw someone say they saved $100 a month on YNAB4 and with YNAB5 they are still saving $65. So you're saying your don't mind wasting more of the money you're saving on a program that works just as well as the previous version?

If YNAB5 saved me more money than YNAB4 it would be worth the money, not if it's doing the same job for more money.