I guess non-developers won't be able to participate in the discussions without a $21/month license if I'm on the Enterprise plan.

So for a non-developer that wishes to collaborate, they now need a GitHub license? That's a deal-breaker right there for any org that is composed of more than developers.

At my org we just have one user with reporter permissions on gitlab which is shared by a bunch of people who just write their name at the end of tickets or comments. For more involved people who need to be assigned to things or pinged, they pay the full license.

Good to finally hear from the inside what everyone on the outside sees.

It's a shame they are killing off the server products to push everyone into the cloud.

Jira Cloud is slow and expensive, and requires Atlassian Access subscription if you need SSO/2FA.

Jira Data Center doesn't get any new features anymore besides administrative back-end things, and is also very expensive.

Things look bleak in the Atlassian ecosystem.

you are self-hosted, which is different from cloud.

But we're still JIRA customers, which was the point I was trying to make.

Something is seriously hosed with your configuration if it takes up to 30 seconds to load an issue, especially on your specs which can probably support 5000+ users. Multiple servers won't fix your problem...probably should have support eyeball your configuration.

Except there's no sales people there to wine & dine you...it's actually the complete opposite.

I feel this is how Jira took off initially in orgs when they had a really affordable unlimited user tier. When hooked into LDAP/AD, suddenly every employee in the company was a user.

SaaS is a disaster without controls. They make it damn hard to automatically disable users who are no longer active. Then you have users picking competing duplicative tools, and now users can't work together without having duplicate accounts in each tool. Once they get you in, you've got no leverage--they'll just keep increasing prices because you're locked in. Companies are pushing you from perpetual license to cloud not for your benefit.

Name some examples of price increases that were unfair?

Price increases due to inflation are a necessity.

I can't see a world where I would buy a software once and use it forever, so paying for upgrades is necessary at some point.

There's a hell of a gap between "paying for upgrades is necessary at some point" and "my supplier can choose when I have to pay more".

At the startup I used to work at the MD spent quite a bit of time dodging calls from Cloudinary. Every few months we needed to be on a higher tier package. We'd generally be tasked with optimising whichever metric was causing the problem a coupe of times a year (deleting / consolidating versions of various images etc).

It felt pretty shady (both his behaviour and their pricing structures).

Some of us put accounts on pause if they've been inactive for 30 days. It's not the norm (yet), but the good PR and happy customers were well worth the extra business logic.