6 ms·

This latest shutdown inspired me to write a blog post in response[1] when I first heard about it. Although the reaction is understandable, it's a shame that dev

This latest shutdown inspired me to write a blog post in response[1] when I first heard about it. Although the reaction is understandable, it's a shame that developers feel compelled to adopt a scorched earth policy when they no longer wish to (or are no longer able to) support their products. These indie apps are often marketed as beautiful, wholesome alternatives to grimy corporate or open source software, but how could I possibly rely on these products for essential tasks like note-taking if they're just going to disappear out from under me in a few years? The idea that software has a lifespan controlled by the developer is, in my opinion, toxic to the market. It's just one of the many things pulling the App Store down, and one of the many downsides of living in a walled garden. As time goes on, and as I see more and more apps simply disappear off the face of the Earth when developers deem them no longer worthy of their time, I find myself switching over to software that's either backed by large corporations or open sourced, regardless of how clunky it might be compared to "designer" alternatives. My hope is that we soon find a way to collectively monetize the latter. It's simply awful that an app can just "pop" and take so many years of developer and user time with it. (None of the above is meant to blame Vesper or even comment on the sustainability of the app economy. It's just my sad reaction as a user and, um, app enthusiast. And props to Gruber for the introspective and humble post-mortem.) [1]: http://beta-blog.archagon.net/2016/08/21/tool-reliance/ http://beta-blog.archagon.net/2016/08/21/tool-reliance/

api 10y ago
It's largely an artifact of the cloud dependency of mobile apps in particular. Every app has a bill someone must pay and a server or other cloud presence someone must maintain, patch, etc. App stores also contribute in that an app without a dev account ceases to exist and can't be easily installed by anyone. So if the maintainer goes away so does the app. In the PC era software could live forever. Even closed source PC apps can still easily be run today on emulators.
- icebraining 10y ago
  Yeah, cloud, app stores and breaking platform APIs. I know people who still use ATnotes on their Windows 7 machines, despite the fact that it was discontinued more than a decade ago. Still, PC era shareware (the equivalent to these small apps made by a couple developers) wasn't immune to cloud dependency, particularly when they had online license validation mechanisms.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    You could always crack those if need be (at least if it was even a remotely popular application). And even if for some reason you couldn't, at least you had the files locally.
elsurudo 10y ago
They should open-source the backend (and hell, the front-end, too). That way you could self-host, or someone else can provide hosting.
- oarsinsync 10y ago
  This. I'm surprised this is the only comment on here suggesting this. It's the most obvious way to gracefully sunset an app. "This isn't making us any money, it's costing us money to maintain. If you still depend on it, here's the tools that will allow you to continue to depend on it"
  - zarify 10y ago
    I doubt open sourcing something moderately complex is as easy or cheap as that though, particularly if there are other technologies involved that you don't own. It's one thing to say it should be open sourced but to put further effort into something that's already losing you money just for the love of it doesn't seem like a winning proposition.
  - akshayn 10y ago
    They'd need to continue paying for their font license. "The biggest factor is that we have recurring costs: the sync server and the licensing fees for Ideal Sans, Vesper’s typeface." They'd need to continue paying for their font license.
    - jsprogrammer 10y ago
      Or switch to a free font.
    - mox1 10y ago
      The font is not cheap either*. When you can barely get people to pay $0.99 for a industry leading app, how on earth can you justify paying so much $$ for a font. I mean switch to the closest google / open source version and call it good enough. [1] http://www.typography.com/fonts/ideal-sans/overview/ http://www.typography.com/fonts/ideal-sans/overview/
jvdh 10y ago
In this case the reason is that not only the sync service costs money, but also the custom font they use costs money. So just letting it sit there would still cost money (on top of the fee for the app store itself).
wvh 10y ago
Software going out of fashion shouldn't be an issue if you take care to use applications that have open data formats, or can at least export their data to something usable by other software. Hardware became a commodity; software is on its way there too thanks to its face-paced nature and devaluation from "applications" to trendy, cheap "apps". But your data will likely always be valuable, so whatever you choose to use, make sure to have continuation plans. There is no vendor lock-in if your data stays yours. Some inconvenience perhaps; the sort of inconvenience that comes with freedom.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  And that is the reason I avoid most cloud-based solutions. I want my data to be in files on my drive, and not just in some database rows on a third-party server. Personally, I store all my notes in plaintext org-mode files in a Dropbox-synced folder.
- rrdharan 10y ago
  I think it's potentially underestimating the nature of the problem and OP's complaint to simply write off potential switching costs as "inconvenient". For example if I've developed a whole workflow around keyboard shortcuts, APIs, whatever, for manipulating a set of data using an app, and then that app disappears, even if I have the underlying dataset it might take me quite a while to get up to speed with a suitable replacement. All of that might argue against investing heavily in developing expertise with a closed, indie, proprietary, or even an OSS app[1]. Ultimately whenever you invest your time in developing a skillset or workflow you are inherently also obligated to evaluate the future risks involved. [1] Despite it being OSS, if it becomes unsupported and stops working on newer OSes/platforms and no one steps up to do the non-trivial work, or host the servers or whatever, you're still in the same boat.
mathattack 10y ago
There is a market for "life support" level maintenance of companies if they get large enough. Look at companies like CA buying (and gutting) companies who have lost their mojo. I think there is an opportunity for people to do this with smaller tech companies.
- mooreds 10y ago
  I think you'd need a certain scale of market size to make it worthwhile. And if you didn't have the size to support continued development, will you have size to support continued maintenance? On the other hand, if the devs have just moved on, there may be a sustainable company. See https://railslts.com/ https://railslts.com/
  - mathattack 10y ago
    This is the CA model. Gut and offshore the workforce. It's painful for both the employees and customers, but beats seeing a product get turned off.
ryanmarsh 10y ago
This is where the concept of source code escrow comes from. Maybe consumers should demand something similar.
arielm 10y ago
I echo the sentiment and think there's misalignment between the value and the monetization strategy for many apps. I wrote about it as well https://arielmichaeli.com/my-thoughts-on-vespers-unfortunate-end-6a8d13977a72 https://arielmichaeli.com/my-thoughts-on-vespers-unfortunate... Ultimately a lot of the sadness comes from what looks like missed opportunity IMO, which is really tough to predict.
- specialist 10y ago
  Reading your comment, I now wonder if there's a way to sell (formally transfer) these indie projects. Like how patio11 sold BingoCardMaker thru a broker. Then someone like you could take a swing with a different business model. Maybe a few dollars upfront and a tiered royalty model, to minimize risk for both sides.
  - arielm 10y ago
    I've seen a few platforms attempt to become brokers for such deals in the past but to my knowledge none were incredibly (or, at all) successful... But I do agree that it's a possible "exit" strategy.
admax88q 10y ago
I think you illustrated a key problem with proprietary software, particularly that which is used for practical tasks. Free Software puts the user first. All other forms do not.
- freshyill 10y ago
  > Free Software puts the user first. All other forms do not. If you look at it as a programmer, sure. To most people however, "how it works" is a lot more important than how it's licensed or even what it costs.
biztos 10y ago
If I were an indie app dev building a similar product, then in addition to all the questions of business strategy I would try to bake in graceful abandonment from the start. That is: make it a paid sync service (as Gruber would've in hindsight) but build the client such that the sync service could be easily overridden, and pointed at anything that would support a particular API. Then if I have to stop supporting the app, but I have users I still care about, I can just unlock the sync service override, publish the API spec, and give people some time to come up with alternatives. Though I guess that doesn't solve the problem of fixing bugs in the app itself. Especially if I might not have time to babysit an open-source app. Are there any examples, in iOS, of apps that were open-sourced and are controlled by some kind of committee or foundation and still kept up-to-date in the app store? What's the lightest-weight version of that that still keeps it totally free? (I bought Vesper over a year ago and thought it was nice but it didn't become one of my regular-use apps. No biggie: I've long been a DaringFireball reader and I'm happy to throw a few bucks Gruber's way. Plus, I was really hoping the "quality paid apps" model would work, sigh.)

api 10y ago

It's largely an artifact of the cloud dependency of mobile apps in particular. Every app has a bill someone must pay and a server or other cloud presence someone must maintain, patch, etc. App stores also contribute in that an app without a dev account ceases to exist and can't be easily installed by anyone. So if the maintainer goes away so does the app. In the PC era software could live forever. Even closed source PC apps can still easily be run today on emulators.

icebraining 10y ago
Yeah, cloud, app stores and breaking platform APIs. I know people who still use ATnotes on their Windows 7 machines, despite the fact that it was discontinued more than a decade ago. Still, PC era shareware (the equivalent to these small apps made by a couple developers) wasn't immune to cloud dependency, particularly when they had online license validation mechanisms.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  You could always crack those if need be (at least if it was even a remotely popular application). And even if for some reason you couldn't, at least you had the files locally.

elsurudo 10y ago

They should open-source the backend (and hell, the front-end, too). That way you could self-host, or someone else can provide hosting.

oarsinsync 10y ago
This. I'm surprised this is the only comment on here suggesting this. It's the most obvious way to gracefully sunset an app. "This isn't making us any money, it's costing us money to maintain. If you still depend on it, here's the tools that will allow you to continue to depend on it"
- zarify 10y ago
  I doubt open sourcing something moderately complex is as easy or cheap as that though, particularly if there are other technologies involved that you don't own. It's one thing to say it should be open sourced but to put further effort into something that's already losing you money just for the love of it doesn't seem like a winning proposition.
- akshayn 10y ago
  They'd need to continue paying for their font license. "The biggest factor is that we have recurring costs: the sync server and the licensing fees for Ideal Sans, Vesper’s typeface." They'd need to continue paying for their font license.
  - jsprogrammer 10y ago
    Or switch to a free font.
  - mox1 10y ago
    The font is not cheap either*. When you can barely get people to pay $0.99 for a industry leading app, how on earth can you justify paying so much $$ for a font. I mean switch to the closest google / open source version and call it good enough. [1] http://www.typography.com/fonts/ideal-sans/overview/ http://www.typography.com/fonts/ideal-sans/overview/

jvdh 10y ago

In this case the reason is that not only the sync service costs money, but also the custom font they use costs money. So just letting it sit there would still cost money (on top of the fee for the app store itself).

wvh 10y ago

Software going out of fashion shouldn't be an issue if you take care to use applications that have open data formats, or can at least export their data to something usable by other software. Hardware became a commodity; software is on its way there too thanks to its face-paced nature and devaluation from "applications" to trendy, cheap "apps". But your data will likely always be valuable, so whatever you choose to use, make sure to have continuation plans. There is no vendor lock-in if your data stays yours. Some inconvenience perhaps; the sort of inconvenience that comes with freedom.

TeMPOraL 10y ago
And that is the reason I avoid most cloud-based solutions. I want my data to be in files on my drive, and not just in some database rows on a third-party server. Personally, I store all my notes in plaintext org-mode files in a Dropbox-synced folder.
rrdharan 10y ago
I think it's potentially underestimating the nature of the problem and OP's complaint to simply write off potential switching costs as "inconvenient". For example if I've developed a whole workflow around keyboard shortcuts, APIs, whatever, for manipulating a set of data using an app, and then that app disappears, even if I have the underlying dataset it might take me quite a while to get up to speed with a suitable replacement. All of that might argue against investing heavily in developing expertise with a closed, indie, proprietary, or even an OSS app[1]. Ultimately whenever you invest your time in developing a skillset or workflow you are inherently also obligated to evaluate the future risks involved. [1] Despite it being OSS, if it becomes unsupported and stops working on newer OSes/platforms and no one steps up to do the non-trivial work, or host the servers or whatever, you're still in the same boat.

mathattack 10y ago

There is a market for "life support" level maintenance of companies if they get large enough. Look at companies like CA buying (and gutting) companies who have lost their mojo. I think there is an opportunity for people to do this with smaller tech companies.

mooreds 10y ago
I think you'd need a certain scale of market size to make it worthwhile. And if you didn't have the size to support continued development, will you have size to support continued maintenance? On the other hand, if the devs have just moved on, there may be a sustainable company. See https://railslts.com/ https://railslts.com/
- mathattack 10y ago
  This is the CA model. Gut and offshore the workforce. It's painful for both the employees and customers, but beats seeing a product get turned off.

ryanmarsh 10y ago

This is where the concept of source code escrow comes from. Maybe consumers should demand something similar.

arielm 10y ago

I echo the sentiment and think there's misalignment between the value and the monetization strategy for many apps. I wrote about it as well https://arielmichaeli.com/my-thoughts-on-vespers-unfortunate-end-6a8d13977a72 https://arielmichaeli.com/my-thoughts-on-vespers-unfortunate... Ultimately a lot of the sadness comes from what looks like missed opportunity IMO, which is really tough to predict.

specialist 10y ago
Reading your comment, I now wonder if there's a way to sell (formally transfer) these indie projects. Like how patio11 sold BingoCardMaker thru a broker. Then someone like you could take a swing with a different business model. Maybe a few dollars upfront and a tiered royalty model, to minimize risk for both sides.
- arielm 10y ago
  I've seen a few platforms attempt to become brokers for such deals in the past but to my knowledge none were incredibly (or, at all) successful... But I do agree that it's a possible "exit" strategy.

admax88q 10y ago

I think you illustrated a key problem with proprietary software, particularly that which is used for practical tasks. Free Software puts the user first. All other forms do not.

freshyill 10y ago
> Free Software puts the user first. All other forms do not. If you look at it as a programmer, sure. To most people however, "how it works" is a lot more important than how it's licensed or even what it costs.

biztos 10y ago

If I were an indie app dev building a similar product, then in addition to all the questions of business strategy I would try to bake in graceful abandonment from the start. That is: make it a paid sync service (as Gruber would've in hindsight) but build the client such that the sync service could be easily overridden, and pointed at anything that would support a particular API. Then if I have to stop supporting the app, but I have users I still care about, I can just unlock the sync service override, publish the API spec, and give people some time to come up with alternatives. Though I guess that doesn't solve the problem of fixing bugs in the app itself. Especially if I might not have time to babysit an open-source app. Are there any examples, in iOS, of apps that were open-sourced and are controlled by some kind of committee or foundation and still kept up-to-date in the app store? What's the lightest-weight version of that that still keeps it totally free? (I bought Vesper over a year ago and thought it was nice but it didn't become one of my regular-use apps. No biggie: I've long been a DaringFireball reader and I'm happy to throw a few bucks Gruber's way. Plus, I was really hoping the "quality paid apps" model would work, sigh.)