3 ms·

Uh... what? I said open source, not free. Google the difference. I also didn't demand any features. I also didn't say or imply that I don't want to pay. Howeve

by fefe23 4y ago

Uh... what? I said open source, not free. Google the difference. I also didn't demand any features. I also didn't say or imply that I don't want to pay. However, this editor will have to compete with free, full featured, mature software like vim and emacs. That's a tough sell. Companies who don't care about the desires of future potential customers tend to fail. Maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to say here.

Johanx64 4y ago
The question isn't about whether you want to pay, the question is whether you are willing to pay so much that it would make any economic sense whatsoever to bundle source-code with this particular type of software (to bear the consequences of doing so). And you are absolutely not willing to pay that kind of money. Hell, If you consider vim and emacs "free, full featured software", you are 100% not a customer. If you're a linux user and "every software that runs on my PC has to be open-source" type then doubly so. And no (vim and emacs) absolutely does NOT compete with this product. And they are free only in the as long as "your time is worthless" category of free (ie. you have paid the massive upfront costs of dealing/tinkering with vim and emacs to bring it to some shoddy level of parity). Linux+"open source/free software beggary"+vim/emacs automatically puts you so far out of the pool of potential paying future customers for basically any type of software - it's not even funny.