This is a fairly core feature they're removing from a product they already sold.
I also liked that they don't make any attempt at claiming this is for any reason other than more money. No "oh our new models are too powerful to run locally" or "oh for security reasons" or whatever. Which would be pretty transparent bullshit but I think a lot of companies would try anyways. This literally admits that the cloud functionality is identical, just paid per use.
Imo if you bought the product in this state, fine, but if you bought it before they probably ought to have to grandfather you in forever.
I already thought this was outrageous just on principle, but
holy cow this point you just raised pushes it over the top. This point alone should end all conversations dead without even a hint of a maybe or calculation.
"I will go back to pencils and drafting boards before I put my entire companies primary assets on anyone else's server." * 1m companies.
Imagine if github owned git and removed the local repo other than the current checked out hash?
I also liked that they don't make any attempt at claiming this is for any reason other than more money. No "oh our new models are too powerful to run locally" or "oh for security reasons" or whatever. Which would be pretty transparent bullshit but I think a lot of companies would try anyways. This literally admits that the cloud functionality is identical, just paid per use.
Imo if you bought the product in this state, fine, but if you bought it before they probably ought to have to grandfather you in forever.