4 ms·

> It was that conversation that made me realize how we've become accustomed to the quality and price of software that's been heavily subsidised by massive VC in

> It was that conversation that made me realize how we've become accustomed to the quality and price of software that's been heavily subsidised by massive VC investments. Not to mention open source, sponsored by big companies, universities and passionate individual contributors. E.g. try and sell a compiler, a JS framework or an IDE.

danmaz74 10y ago
> or an IDE I think JetBrains is doing fine...
- mark242 10y ago
  Didn't they switch to the subscription model because people weren't upgrading enough to sustain the business?
  - stuartaxelowen 10y ago
    And it worked.
- tajen 10y ago
  and Atlassian is selling fine when there are heaps of open-source bugtrackers, wiki, git hosters, build engines and chat tools.
ForHackernews 10y ago
This is one of several reasons why the GPL is a great license for FLOSS. You can GPL-license your software and contribute to the community, while offering alternative commercial licenses to companies that want them. If you use a totally-permissive BSD-style license, you're stuck trying to charge for a support contract or custom plugins or something.
- koolba 10y ago
  Or AGPL if the market direction is going to be providing a hosted service running your product.
- hyperpallium 10y ago
  I sold my software dual-licensed GPL, and a deal-breaker for me was how long it took companies to actually purchase. They had the software, used it, and so didn't have a compelling need to buy, right now. Though they all did actually buy in the end, and there was enough income to live on, I found the uncertainty very distracting and not worth it.
- golergka 10y ago
  What's stopping other companies from using your GPL software in their proprietary stuff without telling anyone? Not every company out there is a startup who needs to be sparkling clean to pass due diligence for the next round, acquisition or IPO. A lot of companies out there are perfectly fine with a little bit of cheating here and there — I would actually say that most of them are. Especially when you remember about the world outside of US.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - nine_k 10y ago
    It gives you a future market share via so many people using your software for free. They won't pay if it weren't free anyway, but would use a competing piece of software. That is, without the free (as in freedom) version, few would even consider paying for a commercial license. Did you ever think why Microsoft is so lazy about enforcing the end-user Windows licenses on non-business customers? Maybe they want kids get used to to running Windows at home, and expect it in a work environment, and value this higher than the lost revenue from "pirates"?
    - camus2 10y ago
      > Did you ever think why Microsoft is so lazy about enforcing the end-user Windows licenses on non-business customers? Microsoft doesn't need to, AFAIK pirated copy don't get upgrades and genuine HOME copies only work on the first computer they are installed on.
      - nine_k 10y ago
        Note how many people still happily run Win 7, and before that happily ran XP, and before that happily ran win2k — while being very reluctant to upgrade. It's corporations that need upgrades and support. With corporations, I'm sure, MS is not lax and enforces the licensing policy.
    - josho 10y ago

danmaz74 10y ago

> or an IDE I think JetBrains is doing fine...

mark242 10y ago
Didn't they switch to the subscription model because people weren't upgrading enough to sustain the business?
- stuartaxelowen 10y ago
  And it worked.
tajen 10y ago
and Atlassian is selling fine when there are heaps of open-source bugtrackers, wiki, git hosters, build engines and chat tools.

ForHackernews 10y ago

This is one of several reasons why the GPL is a great license for FLOSS. You can GPL-license your software and contribute to the community, while offering alternative commercial licenses to companies that want them. If you use a totally-permissive BSD-style license, you're stuck trying to charge for a support contract or custom plugins or something.

koolba 10y ago
Or AGPL if the market direction is going to be providing a hosted service running your product.
hyperpallium 10y ago
I sold my software dual-licensed GPL, and a deal-breaker for me was how long it took companies to actually purchase. They had the software, used it, and so didn't have a compelling need to buy, right now. Though they all did actually buy in the end, and there was enough income to live on, I found the uncertainty very distracting and not worth it.
golergka 10y ago
What's stopping other companies from using your GPL software in their proprietary stuff without telling anyone? Not every company out there is a startup who needs to be sparkling clean to pass due diligence for the next round, acquisition or IPO. A lot of companies out there are perfectly fine with a little bit of cheating here and there — I would actually say that most of them are. Especially when you remember about the world outside of US.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- nine_k 10y ago
  It gives you a future market share via so many people using your software for free. They won't pay if it weren't free anyway, but would use a competing piece of software. That is, without the free (as in freedom) version, few would even consider paying for a commercial license. Did you ever think why Microsoft is so lazy about enforcing the end-user Windows licenses on non-business customers? Maybe they want kids get used to to running Windows at home, and expect it in a work environment, and value this higher than the lost revenue from "pirates"?
  - camus2 10y ago
    > Did you ever think why Microsoft is so lazy about enforcing the end-user Windows licenses on non-business customers? Microsoft doesn't need to, AFAIK pirated copy don't get upgrades and genuine HOME copies only work on the first computer they are installed on.
    - nine_k 10y ago
      Note how many people still happily run Win 7, and before that happily ran XP, and before that happily ran win2k — while being very reluctant to upgrade. It's corporations that need upgrades and support. With corporations, I'm sure, MS is not lax and enforces the licensing policy.
  - josho 10y ago