In any case I can't stand all that false statements. Let's take this one for example:
> Subscription demands constant improvement of our product and enables us to make $Product better for you — faster.
In fact, the opposite is the case! Just look at Adobe. Or maybe CAD/BIM products, like Revit from Autodesk. The only thing that was new in this years version was slanted walls (!). Something competitors have for ~20 years already.
So for me subscription basically is equivalent with the opposite. As soon companies decided to switch from the possibility to let me buy their software, as in "I own this thing and I can use it indefinitely." to "rent" their software, progress came to a grinding halt most times.
The reason why this doesn't work like in the PR statement above is the way things work in real life. First you lock them customers in: all their files are now in your proprietary format. The presumption from above is, that you won't renew you subscription when you don't like the new yearly version – but then you can no longer access your files you need, since you do business! So cancelling of subscriptions basically never happens, turning your company into a gold mine.
Yearly realases are bad btw and nobody likes them. Except shareholdes maybe.