But times change and the cost of free tier users surpasses that of paying users. Should the company continue providing the same level of service for free tier users?
“Times changing” here seems to be the central trick to the argument.
What’s interesting about enshittification is that as the company gets more and more profitable there seems to be more and more excuses as to why these free features are so costly.
It’s very easy for a company to put out a statement that times are changing and that the free tier is unaffordable. Is that always true? Who’s to say?
I’m sure sometimes it is true but the doubt is why arguments like this will never go away.
Also, what other term than entitlement would you use for somebody gets something for free, is not promised that it will stay free forever, the free offering is cancelled or limited, and the user starts complaining?
What other term than incompetent would you use for a company that puts out a free product, attracts a bunch of free users, abruptly cuts access for those features and puts it behind a paywall, and then acts surprised when those same users complain about it.
If you want to make a business move go ahead, it’s your right, but accept the complaints from your user base you predictably pissed off.
That seems unnecessarily harsh.
I find the built in controls with visual studio supremely convenient.
After using git init --bare for the remote repo I use the built in git controls for branching and switching out as well as syncing and pushing. Why not, the button is right there and it’s literally faster.