5 ms·

> the original submission is free and polished No, it's not free. Every time you load up the page to view your own files with files.gallery, a big honkin' pop-

> the original submission is free and polished No, it's not free. Every time you load up the page to view your own files with files.gallery, a big honkin' pop-up shows up instructing you to buy a $40 license for additional features: Purchase a license [$39] to unlock features and support dev! - Remove this popup - Upload - Download folder - Code and text editor - Create new file - Create new folder - Rename - Delete - Duplicate file - Dedicated support - Multi-user, panorama and much more coming soon! [payment button] The files.gallery website only hints at this restriction at the very bottom of the page in the "License" section, which devs would expect to mean an OSS license: "Files is free to use with basic features. To remove the license-popup and unlock additional features, you may purchase a license [$39] from within the app." Now if you look at the rest of the landing page you can see it very carefully does not mention the ability to use basic file browsing features so that it's not technically a lie to present a tool that can "browse files and folders without complicated installations" that doesn't allow you to do anything more than download your own files without opening your wallet. The dev is just another hustler.

huhtenberg 5y ago
... and you are correct! Edited my comment above to reflect that. > The dev is just another hustler. But this was really uncalled for even if this does look kinda deceiving and dark-pattern-ish.
dewey 5y ago
> The dev is just another hustler. Are you working for free or do you ask for a salary from your employer?
- ratsmack 5y ago
  When you try and obfuscate the fact that it is a purchased product, it makes one a hustler. This is no different than the many click-bait sites that offer -free- stuff that are actually purchased items.
  - dewey 5y ago
    It's not obfuscated, the landing page says the following under the section "License". > Files is free to use with basic features. To remove the license-popup and unlock additional features, you may purchase a license [$39] from within the app.
    - pseingatl 5y ago
      "Free download": pity that phrase can't be erased from the Internet.
sdoering 5y ago
Maybe the dev isn't very clear about this. I agree it could be more clear up front. But does this mean devaluing their work by calling them "just another hustler"? I believe this isn't necessary. And sadly it totally devalues your comment for me.
- dewey 5y ago
  > I agree it could be more clear up front. More upfront than under the "License" section on the landing page?
  - oblio 5y ago
    Which is at the bottom? It's like that by design.
ratsmack 5y ago
I think what is worse is the fact that it is not a "one file app", and rather a php script that pulls in many js scripts of the net.

huhtenberg 5y ago

... and you are correct! Edited my comment above to reflect that. > The dev is just another hustler. But this was really uncalled for even if this does look kinda deceiving and dark-pattern-ish.

dewey 5y ago

> The dev is just another hustler. Are you working for free or do you ask for a salary from your employer?

ratsmack 5y ago
When you try and obfuscate the fact that it is a purchased product, it makes one a hustler. This is no different than the many click-bait sites that offer -free- stuff that are actually purchased items.
- dewey 5y ago
  It's not obfuscated, the landing page says the following under the section "License". > Files is free to use with basic features. To remove the license-popup and unlock additional features, you may purchase a license [$39] from within the app.
  - pseingatl 5y ago
    "Free download": pity that phrase can't be erased from the Internet.

sdoering 5y ago

Maybe the dev isn't very clear about this. I agree it could be more clear up front. But does this mean devaluing their work by calling them "just another hustler"? I believe this isn't necessary. And sadly it totally devalues your comment for me.

dewey 5y ago
> I agree it could be more clear up front. More upfront than under the "License" section on the landing page?
- oblio 5y ago
  Which is at the bottom? It's like that by design.

ratsmack 5y ago

I think what is worse is the fact that it is not a "one file app", and rather a php script that pulls in many js scripts of the net.