
“Git Tower” revokes licenses when discussing bugs/feedback on Reddit - ValentineC
https://www.reddit.com/r/git/comments/ao1q7t/care_git_tower_revokes_licenses_when_discussing/
======
JeremyBanks
> _Hi, Julian from Tower here! We were just made aware of this post via email.
> We would never revoke a license unless a user requests a refund. We highly
> value each form of feedback to our app, especially critical feedback. Thanks
> to that feedback, we have been able to improve Tower over the years and
> continue to do so!_

> _It would be great if OP could reach out to us, so we can find the
> corresponding license and check why it seems to be no longer working. Thank
> you!_

[https://www.reddit.com/r/git/comments/ao1q7t/care_git_tower_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/git/comments/ao1q7t/care_git_tower_revokes_licenses_when_discussing/efy8bc3/)

~~~
kbenson
Yay, another case where people assume the worst possible interpretation of a
situation, posts about it on the internet like it's fact, and an angry mob
forms. What a wondrous time we're living in! /s

Seriously, I view this as horrible behavior on the reddit OP's part. Whether
it turns out to be Git Tower blocking them or some other problem, not taking
the time to try to figure out what happened before publicly asserting
something is inexcusable.

~~~
Someone1234
So just to clarify: It is horrible behaviour on the OP's part to make
assumptions about other people's motives, but you're going to go ahead and
make assumptions about the OP's motives just the same?

Seems a little hypocritical.

~~~
kbenson
I'm making a statement about what the OP posted and provided, which did not
include any indication of contacting the company in question to find out what
hapoened, did not include any info on how that company would have known what
license to revoke, and in a reply to a company spokesman on reddit _also_ did
not note any of this info.

If the OP did have any of this info, not including it is also bad. My problem
is with the OPs observable actions.

------
alexgaribay
I used to love Git Tower until the most recent version came out with the
annual-renewing license. I used to promote Git Tower all the time because the
one-time-purchase license was such a good deal for the tool and I truly
believed it was worth the cost. However, this is another strike against the
tool. I already abandoned Git Tower and switched to using Magit in Emacs. I
don't regret my decision.

~~~
rubbingalcohol
A big part of the problem (why a lot of apps are doing this) is Apple
disallows software vendors from charging for major release upgrades on the Mac
App Store. Ideally Apple would provide a pathway for upgrade pricing as a one-
time purchase but of course they have a perverse incentive to sell
subscriptions, and developers take the blame for it.

~~~
alexgaribay
I have no issue with paying for subscriptions or paying for major releases.
For example, JetBrains products are subscription-based but after a year of
paying, you gain a perpetual license and can continue using the product
without continuing to pay for updates. The problem with Git Tower now is that
you always have to have a subscription going to use the product. For me, the
value of the product does not outweigh the cost.

Edit: grammar

------
berbec
Git tower speaks:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/git/comments/ao1q7t/care_git_tower_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/git/comments/ao1q7t/care_git_tower_revokes_licenses_when_discussing/efy8bc3/)

------
kevindong
Even if revoking the license was intentional retaliation, how would the
developers of Git Tower know who posted on Reddit (and therefore know who's
license to revoke)?

------
futureastronaut
I don't see anything giving them that right in [https://www.git-
tower.com/legal/eula](https://www.git-tower.com/legal/eula), not a lawyer at
all but I think OP has a case?

~~~
wl
From the user in question:

> I tried to lookup my old license and realized I was given 1 free license
> this annual period (around ~October) after purchasing 2 seats the previous
> year for contributing significantly to bug reports with full screencasts,
> etc.

> So it looks like I received it for free (well, more or less - after roughly
> a combined 20 hours worth of bug report effort for the year).

Revoking a free license seems a little less shady than revoking a paid one.

------
dopamean
Pretty slimy. Even if the user had said something really nasty on reddit about
the product revoking their license is a pretty ridiculous and petty thing to
do.

~~~
mosselman
If we really have all the facts here it seems like it is reason enough not to
ever bother with Git Tower.

~~~
rubbingalcohol
That seems like a pretty big "if" to be fair.

------
myself248
[https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161220/12411836320/softw...](https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161220/12411836320/software-
company-shows-how-not-to-handle-negative-review.shtml)

You'd think they'd take a page...

------
mcphage
Honestly, this doesn't seem very likely—if the Tower folks were assholes, I
could see them try it after a very nasty review, but it wasn't a nasty review
at all, so it seems unlikely Tower would try to retaliate for it.

------
amingilani
Off topic: but is there anything for life-long git CLI user to gain from by
going GUI?

~~~
latencyloser
As someone who made the opposite transition: no. My colleagues that are still
GUI bound are generally slower at accomplishing most day to day tasks.
Committing, rebasing, merging, pushing tags, etc.

~~~
rimliu
I wonder, how is that even possible. Like committing you have the same or less
amount of work to do. Merging is just drag-and-drop. Rebasing is two clicks.

~~~
takeda
You really underestimate how fast CLI is.

