Also happened to me this morning. I gave-in and paid for the upgrade since I've been a happy Sublime user since inception. However, I am very disappointed in the overall performance compared to ST3. Indenting code via TAB takes approx. 500-850ms and is a noticeable delay that would annoy just about anyone. Overall it's a bit shocking. It seems like the creator could've been short on dough and came up with this dark strategy.
Seems like a bad UI caused by the change that means anyone who bought ST3 in the last 3 years can upgrade to ST4 with their current license.<p>They should have released a small ST3 update that detects if the license would be valid for ST4 and prompts the frictionless upgrade only for this case, and otherwise maybe just makes an alert that a paid update is available if you want it.<p>I am planning to upgrade though as I’m a satisfied user of ST2 and ST3.
I had this happen to me this morning on macOS: I saw there was an update available, accepted it, and ended up with ST4. I was planning on buying it in the immediate future anyways, but having it sprung on me actually saved me $10 (thanks to the release period discount).<p>Overall, I'm not too upset about this -- a lot of the commenters in the linked thread seem to think that software shouldn't change major versions without (more) explicit consent, but ST4's backwards compatibility appears to be perfect so far (I have all kinds of weird personal plugins that use less-documented parts of the ST API, and they're all still working). They could have certainly made the update message clearer, but I don't think the developers deserve the kind of indignation they're receiving.
On Ubuntu it's as easy as an `apt upgrade`.<p>Although I pay the fee happily, this does seem wrong. It seems to me that as a software provider you have two choices:<p>1. Make it a monthly (or whatever) subscription for the latest version (eg Photoshop)<p>2. Charge for a new version (eg apt install ST3 vs apt install ST4)