3 ms·

> A company could produce a polished Linux desktop but nobody will pay for it so it won't happen. I could see myself paying let's say $100 a year for a polishe

> A company could produce a polished Linux desktop but nobody will pay for it so it won't happen. I could see myself paying let's say $100 a year for a polished Linux desktop. "Polished" meaning no screen tearing, video hw acceleration, working power management, macOS (or at least Windows) level of GUI consistency, nice package manager with a curated app store. How many customers would be required to support a project like this?

diskzero 5y ago
Tens of thousands. Probably more. Subscription models are customer kryptonite. They run screaming with pain when you propose them, and only grudgingly accept them when no other option exists. Providing a subscription model for a desktop environment adds additional complexity. Do you want to be cut off from using your desktop when your subscription lapses? As a developer, I am not interested in you paying me $100 for a year and then be able to use the product for life. My mind will change if you are willing to pay $1000 up front. As a software developer and entrepreneur, I founded companies that could sell software for $499, provide one upgrade and then charge a smaller amount for additional upgrades. Those days are over. I recently spent a significant sum develop a mobile application for a niche market. It was well liked, worked well, provided a real solution for a real problem. It was offered as a subscription. Endless one star reviews and hate. It was offered for $49.99. Endless one star reviews and hate. Something has gone wrong with consumer expectations on pricing and the effort required to fund development of software that meets customer expectations. I feel we are in a software dystopia and can't figure out how to fund product development.
shaan7 5y ago
I don't mean this as sarcasm, I'm genuinely curious, why would you not use macOS instead (given that it ticks all your boxes)? I used a MacBook for few years and I felt it has all of that (well, brew meh), but I couldn't take the inflexibility of the whole setup so I moved back. What is/was it for you?
- Toutouxc 5y ago
  I actually do use macOS, but my trust in Apple isn't infinite and I'd like this race to have two horses instead of one.
  - shaan7 5y ago
    Got it. Thanks!

diskzero 5y ago

Tens of thousands. Probably more. Subscription models are customer kryptonite. They run screaming with pain when you propose them, and only grudgingly accept them when no other option exists. Providing a subscription model for a desktop environment adds additional complexity. Do you want to be cut off from using your desktop when your subscription lapses? As a developer, I am not interested in you paying me $100 for a year and then be able to use the product for life. My mind will change if you are willing to pay $1000 up front. As a software developer and entrepreneur, I founded companies that could sell software for $499, provide one upgrade and then charge a smaller amount for additional upgrades. Those days are over. I recently spent a significant sum develop a mobile application for a niche market. It was well liked, worked well, provided a real solution for a real problem. It was offered as a subscription. Endless one star reviews and hate. It was offered for $49.99. Endless one star reviews and hate. Something has gone wrong with consumer expectations on pricing and the effort required to fund development of software that meets customer expectations. I feel we are in a software dystopia and can't figure out how to fund product development.

shaan7 5y ago

I don't mean this as sarcasm, I'm genuinely curious, why would you not use macOS instead (given that it ticks all your boxes)? I used a MacBook for few years and I felt it has all of that (well, brew meh), but I couldn't take the inflexibility of the whole setup so I moved back. What is/was it for you?

Toutouxc 5y ago
I actually do use macOS, but my trust in Apple isn't infinite and I'd like this race to have two horses instead of one.
- shaan7 5y ago
  Got it. Thanks!