6 ms·

It's very likely that the original promise ("upgrade to version 2.0 will be completely free") was a huge factor in 2.0 shipping delay: Allan would need to inves

by vtail 15y ago

It's very likely that the original promise ("upgrade to version 2.0 will be completely free") was a huge factor in 2.0 shipping delay: Allan would need to invest a lot of effort to ship the new version to get only marginal return, as TextMate penetration of the relevant market was already high at the time the promise was made. Charging for 2.0 would seem like a breach of contract for people who only bought TextMate 1.x because they were expecting 2.0 soon. But for people who thought that $60 is a fair price for 1.x (I myself belong to this group, and so seem Marco), it's just a promise of a generous gift that was taken away. I for one would gladly pay for all hard work that went into rewriting TextMate.

phillmv 15y ago
I can't believe there are so many cheapskates in here. It's $60! WHO CARES! It's a tool you presumably use every single hour of your programming life. I refuse to accept that you feel personally violated over an idiot promise the author made six years ago. Are people really saying that if the dude came out and said, "Hey guys, it's done but… if I keep my original promise, I literally won't be able to afford the bandwidth needed to distribute it" you'd feel personally slighted? I'm not a fan of paying for dev tools, as I think open source is the way to go (yadda yadda yadda) but you're a professional for crying out loud. You get to write this off on your taxes.
- teaspoon 15y ago
  You're making the same faulty assumption that Marco does: that everyone who bought TextMate is a fellow software developer living in a wealthy nation. Many of the "cheapskates in here" are happy to pay twice, but recognize that it's a privilege to be able to do so.
  - phillmv 15y ago
    Bro, c'mon now. I hate using this argument, but if you can afford a macbook you can definitely pony up $60 for your main development tool. Dude's running a business, not a charity. Shit, I use vim. If you're so screwed for cash there are a couple of first class alternatives. EDIT: I use a macbook too. I think it's a great dev platform. It only represents about 5% of my yearly income, though. I doubt I'd be using it if it were costing me 20% of my yearly income.
    - thenduks 15y ago
      It has nothing to do with being a 'cheapskate'. It also has nothing to do with the amount. Next to the 'buy' button in 2005 there was text along the lines of "upgrades are free all the way to 2.0". Changing that now, added to the fact that we were all expecting much needed updates in 2008, is just a dick move. It (further) damages any confidence the community had in TextMate. The fact that I would gladly pay $200 for my dream editor (even though I've already paid for TM1 and ST2, I'm lucky that this would be a practical purchase for me) is just not relevant. As you say, he is running a business. A business that made a promise about what buying the product would get you. End of story. If I buy a car that has a big sign: "FREE WINTER TIRES", and 6 years later I'm still not seeing those friggen tires, does the fact that I can afford to just buy them make the dealership any less shady?
    - briandear 15y ago
      Xcode is my "main development tool." And it was free.
    - teaspoon 15y ago
      We're talking about people who already ponied up $60. From that alone, you can't infer (a) that another $60 is a pittance to them, (b) that they own a MacBook or any computer at all, (c) that they are professional developers, or (d) that they are capable of using vim. If you think that any of those is a given, you're spending too much time on HN. And how the concept of "charity" is relevant to paying customers of a product, I do not understand.
      - phillmv 15y ago
        I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a reply.
      - scott_s 15y ago
        If someone already paid for TextMate, I think it's fair to assume that they own an Apple computer.
        15y ago
- viraptor 15y ago
  He'd know it's not worth finishing before he made it to 2.0. People effectively knew they are paying for both versions, so what's the problem really? $60 is not free - some would spend it, some wouldn't. Why do you think you know better what other people want or don't want to do?
  - tptacek 15y ago
    I understand where people who write comments like this are coming from, but I think if you take a step back and think about what Marco is saying, then as a response to Marco this argument is irrational. The fact is that Odgaard has many more lucrative options open to him than living up to an unfavorable pricing commitment from 6 years ago. Meanwhile, your own interests are poorly served by telling him to shove it and watch you switch to Sublime Text. At least if Odgaard can be happy building TM2, you have a choice. But sticking to your sense of entitlement actually wins you nothing. Building commercial products that serve programmers is a risky and painful proposition for the same reason that there isn't a lucrative business to be build selling ice to Inuits. Consider carefully that Odgaard is in no way captive to your judgment. If he himself was more rational, he'd drop TM2 today and start building iPhone apps for many times more money than anyone is ever going to pay him for a text editor.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - xiaoma 15y ago
      It's difficult to tell whether you're trolling or if you seriously don't realize where exactly you're arguing from. It's absolutely mundane to have more desirable options than honoring prior commitments. This is true in business, in friendship and even in love. If this weren't the case what would the rational be for people to make commitments and hold each other to them? Surely you can see that there are ideals beyond being "more rational" and breaking one's word at any point it becomes inconvenient?
      - tptacek 15y ago
- zobzu 15y ago
  it has nothing to do with the price. it could be $1. It's about keeping your word. It's about morality. Heck people can still donate, a lot more than that too. And if keeping your word is going to kill, don't write stuff like "ohlala im so poor damn what im gonna do! damn if only people would agree to pay!" and hope that it works. You man up and you apologize properly, saying it ain't going to be free and that wasn't planned, but it has to be. Going through the foggy FUD before announcing that (if ever announced of course) would be pretty low on my scale. Time to use your mod down points :-)
  - phillmv 15y ago
    >You man up and you apologize properly, saying it ain't going to be free and that wasn't planned, but it has to be. Oh I agree. But this would be very easy to do tactfully, and so I consider it semi trivial. All you have to do is be humble, and apologize profusely and talk about the soul-consuming labour of love the project has been over the past few years and I think most people would forgive him.
- bradgessler 15y ago
  Consider how many hours of productivity where wasted watching TextMate block the UI thread all the time. I've probably wasted hours in the project-wide search alone. The lost time vastly exceeds $60.
  - ericd 15y ago
    Install the Ackmate plugin and banish the beachball forever.
    - bradgessler 15y ago
      I installed Sublime Text 2 and achieved the same outcome. Additionally I get more than 2 software updates per year.
      - ericd 15y ago
        Heh fair. To be honest, though, I don't see what all the fuss/anger about TextMate not being updated often enough is about - it works really well as it is, what updates does it need?
- LVB 15y ago
  For me it has zero to do with me wanting or not wanting to pay for TM2. I was simply put off by Marco's presumption to speak on behalf of everyone, "We will not hold you to it... Please let us give you more money." Had the post been just his own offer of support and words of encouragement it would have been quite nice, but instead it ended up being a bit irritating to me.
stonemetal 15y ago
Yes but as GP points out that promise is a part of the reason why there will ever be a 2.0 in the first place. People over paid for V1 because they were buying a v1-v2 package. People who would have passed on V1 were willing to buy it because of the promise of polished V2 for no cost. Without the promise he wouldn't have done nearly so well and perhaps would have folded before V2 became a reality. If anything V2 should have been reduced in scope and shipped sooner because of the promise, not drawn out so that you kill revenue giving free upgrades.
5teev 15y ago
> But for people who thought that $60 is a fair price for 1.x (I myself belong to this group, and so seem Marco), it's just a promise of a generous gift that was taken away. But kind of a bummer for people who considered the $60 as $30 for 1.x, $30 for 2.x.

by vtail 15y ago

phillmv 15y ago

I can't believe there are so many cheapskates in here. It's $60! WHO CARES! It's a tool you presumably use every single hour of your programming life. I refuse to accept that you feel personally violated over an idiot promise the author made six years ago. Are people really saying that if the dude came out and said, "Hey guys, it's done but… if I keep my original promise, I literally won't be able to afford the bandwidth needed to distribute it" you'd feel personally slighted? I'm not a fan of paying for dev tools, as I think open source is the way to go (yadda yadda yadda) but you're a professional for crying out loud. You get to write this off on your taxes.

teaspoon 15y ago
You're making the same faulty assumption that Marco does: that everyone who bought TextMate is a fellow software developer living in a wealthy nation. Many of the "cheapskates in here" are happy to pay twice, but recognize that it's a privilege to be able to do so.
- phillmv 15y ago
  Bro, c'mon now. I hate using this argument, but if you can afford a macbook you can definitely pony up $60 for your main development tool. Dude's running a business, not a charity. Shit, I use vim. If you're so screwed for cash there are a couple of first class alternatives. EDIT: I use a macbook too. I think it's a great dev platform. It only represents about 5% of my yearly income, though. I doubt I'd be using it if it were costing me 20% of my yearly income.
  - thenduks 15y ago
    It has nothing to do with being a 'cheapskate'. It also has nothing to do with the amount. Next to the 'buy' button in 2005 there was text along the lines of "upgrades are free all the way to 2.0". Changing that now, added to the fact that we were all expecting much needed updates in 2008, is just a dick move. It (further) damages any confidence the community had in TextMate. The fact that I would gladly pay $200 for my dream editor (even though I've already paid for TM1 and ST2, I'm lucky that this would be a practical purchase for me) is just not relevant. As you say, he is running a business. A business that made a promise about what buying the product would get you. End of story. If I buy a car that has a big sign: "FREE WINTER TIRES", and 6 years later I'm still not seeing those friggen tires, does the fact that I can afford to just buy them make the dealership any less shady?
  - briandear 15y ago
    Xcode is my "main development tool." And it was free.
  - teaspoon 15y ago
    We're talking about people who already ponied up $60. From that alone, you can't infer (a) that another $60 is a pittance to them, (b) that they own a MacBook or any computer at all, (c) that they are professional developers, or (d) that they are capable of using vim. If you think that any of those is a given, you're spending too much time on HN. And how the concept of "charity" is relevant to paying customers of a product, I do not understand.
    - phillmv 15y ago
      I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a reply.
    - scott_s 15y ago
      If someone already paid for TextMate, I think it's fair to assume that they own an Apple computer.
      - 15y ago
viraptor 15y ago
He'd know it's not worth finishing before he made it to 2.0. People effectively knew they are paying for both versions, so what's the problem really? $60 is not free - some would spend it, some wouldn't. Why do you think you know better what other people want or don't want to do?
- tptacek 15y ago
  I understand where people who write comments like this are coming from, but I think if you take a step back and think about what Marco is saying, then as a response to Marco this argument is irrational. The fact is that Odgaard has many more lucrative options open to him than living up to an unfavorable pricing commitment from 6 years ago. Meanwhile, your own interests are poorly served by telling him to shove it and watch you switch to Sublime Text. At least if Odgaard can be happy building TM2, you have a choice. But sticking to your sense of entitlement actually wins you nothing. Building commercial products that serve programmers is a risky and painful proposition for the same reason that there isn't a lucrative business to be build selling ice to Inuits. Consider carefully that Odgaard is in no way captive to your judgment. If he himself was more rational, he'd drop TM2 today and start building iPhone apps for many times more money than anyone is ever going to pay him for a text editor.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - xiaoma 15y ago
    It's difficult to tell whether you're trolling or if you seriously don't realize where exactly you're arguing from. It's absolutely mundane to have more desirable options than honoring prior commitments. This is true in business, in friendship and even in love. If this weren't the case what would the rational be for people to make commitments and hold each other to them? Surely you can see that there are ideals beyond being "more rational" and breaking one's word at any point it becomes inconvenient?
    - tptacek 15y ago
zobzu 15y ago
it has nothing to do with the price. it could be $1. It's about keeping your word. It's about morality. Heck people can still donate, a lot more than that too. And if keeping your word is going to kill, don't write stuff like "ohlala im so poor damn what im gonna do! damn if only people would agree to pay!" and hope that it works. You man up and you apologize properly, saying it ain't going to be free and that wasn't planned, but it has to be. Going through the foggy FUD before announcing that (if ever announced of course) would be pretty low on my scale. Time to use your mod down points :-)
- phillmv 15y ago
  >You man up and you apologize properly, saying it ain't going to be free and that wasn't planned, but it has to be. Oh I agree. But this would be very easy to do tactfully, and so I consider it semi trivial. All you have to do is be humble, and apologize profusely and talk about the soul-consuming labour of love the project has been over the past few years and I think most people would forgive him.
bradgessler 15y ago
Consider how many hours of productivity where wasted watching TextMate block the UI thread all the time. I've probably wasted hours in the project-wide search alone. The lost time vastly exceeds $60.
- ericd 15y ago
  Install the Ackmate plugin and banish the beachball forever.
  - bradgessler 15y ago
    I installed Sublime Text 2 and achieved the same outcome. Additionally I get more than 2 software updates per year.
    - ericd 15y ago
      Heh fair. To be honest, though, I don't see what all the fuss/anger about TextMate not being updated often enough is about - it works really well as it is, what updates does it need?
LVB 15y ago
For me it has zero to do with me wanting or not wanting to pay for TM2. I was simply put off by Marco's presumption to speak on behalf of everyone, "We will not hold you to it... Please let us give you more money." Had the post been just his own offer of support and words of encouragement it would have been quite nice, but instead it ended up being a bit irritating to me.

stonemetal 15y ago

Yes but as GP points out that promise is a part of the reason why there will ever be a 2.0 in the first place. People over paid for V1 because they were buying a v1-v2 package. People who would have passed on V1 were willing to buy it because of the promise of polished V2 for no cost. Without the promise he wouldn't have done nearly so well and perhaps would have folded before V2 became a reality. If anything V2 should have been reduced in scope and shipped sooner because of the promise, not drawn out so that you kill revenue giving free upgrades.

5teev 15y ago

> But for people who thought that $60 is a fair price for 1.x (I myself belong to this group, and so seem Marco), it's just a promise of a generous gift that was taken away. But kind of a bummer for people who considered the $60 as $30 for 1.x, $30 for 2.x.