Perhaps slightly orthogonal to the discussion is something that came to mind as I read Craig's question.  I don't care for software that requires activation or a dongle or subscription if it gets in the way of me being  able to load and run my own data/project/file some day.  Things can go wrong beyond my control: the company goes out of business, the dongle key doesn't work anymore or is no longer supported, etc.
 
The way I see it is that if I bought something then, as long as I have a similar setup, then I should be able to use it.  Sadly that model is as rare as a wagon.
 
I can still play my old tape reels, cassettes, vinyl.  Analogue was cool that way.
I can also play my WAV files.  So digital can be open and accommodating too.
 
But I have fallen victim to all of the digital rights implementations and proprietary media formats at one time or another.  The same has occurred with software activations and registrations and subscriptions and dongles.  In both cases I have examples where I have given up using what I bought and just moved on, because the repeated hassle wasn't worth it.  I have some old Antares plug-ins loafing around that I don't even bother to install now for example.  I'm talking about things I paid for, and where my payment had no guarantee that what I bought would "just work".
 
It would be interesting to see if media and data files became more standardized (in the way that a cassette was a cassette, regardless of the player), such that any appropriate media player or software program could be used (just as you could use any cassette deck from any company).  I doubt this would ever happen because (a) the development changes occur so rapidly that a standard file format would be deemed as the bottleneck to progress, and (b) companies like proprietary formats because of the nature of "lock-in".
 
But just imagine a fanciful world where a music project file was more standard, such that it could be opened by Sonar, Cubase, Studio One, Reaper, etc.  Maybe then we'd see a different focus on the technology that could highlight a user's workflow preferences, and we would see separation of concerns like FX plug-ins etc.  It might sound crazy, but for a while we had this with MIDI, where hardware manufacturers and software development teams did some incredible things whilst being constrained to that MIDI spec.  Non-registered parameters and system exclusives provided a way to differentiate too.
 
Maybe in that case I'd be more interested in a subscription model for my DAW software, because I could jump more easily from one vendor to another whilst keeping all my old projects intact and available for use. Now THAT might interest me.  (see what I did there, I made my off-topic point turn full-circle into one that was on point).
 
 

I don't think it's a good idea at all. My personal computer is no longer personal. If I move to an area that doesn't have high speed internet it's all over.
 
The biggest problem I see is that continuous, ongoing, updates will mean companies will NEVER be forced to sell finished products. I can hear it now, "don't worry it will be fixed on the next maintenance release". That's sort of what we get today but under a subscription, these companies won't even pretend to feel guilty about releasing half baked cakes.
 
I worked with a specialized software app that was only available via subscription. 15 years ago the annual fee was 20K and it kept climbing. They became the world standard and just milked every customer. They really had the hook because all the processing had to be done on their servers. I see no reason why this trend could not extend into more common applications. That would be bad news.

For me, it comes down to wanting to own the software I use versus renting it.  I want the ability to skip a release if I feel it doesn't meet my current requirements or if a competitor comes out with something better.  When a 3rd party releases a new or updated version of a plugin, an Adobe like subscription model would force me to continue paying just to open up the project and remix it. 
 
Cheers,
 
jayson

Its rather cool to see how really thoughtful this forum members are. 

Msdn the Microsoft subscription to development software works as Scott g. Described and it makes me feel safe. I don't have to uninstall windows eight if lose my job.

Linux constantly pushes patches if you want them. It is the subscription model without the bill.

I've become happy with the way sonar or cakewalk do things. I like the new stuff each year. I liked not having to re install more often than that. I like it stable most of the year where stable means my comfort and skill as well as the software .

The benefit of msdn is that they have much more software than I could ever care to learn. By setting it to a single cost, I learn to use more of it than I otherwise would. Cakewalk isn't really in the same boat IMHO.

In this model do you have to be online for the software to work?

John
Its rather cool to see how really thoughtful this forum members are. 

I was thinking the same thing.
 
Vintagevibe, you don't need to be online with the Adobe programs, in fact the "cloud" element is mostly a dropbox-style way to collaborate on files. The programs are still installed locally on your hard drive and can still be cracked.
 
One of the comments about Adobe that I thought was brilliant was if Adobe offered a true cloud service where you actually worked in the cloud for projects that required huge amounts of video rendering. Then, you could take advantage of distributed rendering with Adobe's armada of servers to render stuff really fast. Several people said they would gladly pay for that; to me, that's a really creative use of the cloud.
 
Maybe another option is the newsstand magazine type of "subscription." You pay a nominal amount for each issue, and you can skip an issue if there's nothing of interest to you. But like magazines, if you purchased a one-year or two-year subscription, you could save some serious bucks.
 
That would seem almost ideal except...what happens if the update that comes out in November is dependent on something that needed to be added back in March, and you skipped that update?

One more thing...my understanding is that Microsoft offers both boxed and subscription version of some of their software. Boxed outsells subscriptions, but there is definitely an enterprise clientele that thinks the software model is absolutely wonderful.
 

Interesting points, Craig.  The other things that bother me are the fact that I must continue to pay forever to access my own files or programs and also the small print in all the cloud contracts that say they have the right to access your data.  Correct me if I'm wrong but that's what I have read.

I like the idea if it is cheap enough and you get to keep whatever version was the last paid one.  Losing software won't work - I mean, really.  I guess you could transfer the audio/midi to another, less delicate DAW, but you should buy it and then buy a plan that keeps you current. 
 
I don't think much would change - pricing or complaints about functions not working, but I like Craig's idea of incremental changes.
 
@