3 ms·

Again, the problem Sparrow, and all desktop/mobile apps face(d) is the one-time nature of their revenue. You must try to establish a recurring revenue model i

Again, the problem Sparrow, and all desktop/mobile apps face(d) is the one-time nature of their revenue. You must try to establish a recurring revenue model if you want a long term sustainable business. Ironically, despite objections, I think recurring revenue models are better for the user in the long run: it keeps the developers solvent so you don't have any "oh shit, discontinued?" moments, it reduces the temptation for feature-bloat to drive upgrades, it allows you to more easily stomach pricing the software closer to what it is worth to you (a lot) than to its incremental production cost ($0), while still allowing you to send market feedback if the product ceases to be useful to you.

macspoofing 14y ago
>the problem Sparrow, and all desktop/mobile apps face(d) is the one-time nature of their revenue. You That's a problem!? That business model has been a staple of software development for decades!!!
- carsongross 14y ago
  It is, indeed, a problem. Software is maturing (has Office improved much in a decade?) and, assuming software engineers continue to wish to eat, they will go where the money is, which is in recurring revenue products like Basecamp. I think the same thing will happen/is happening in mobile, but it's being masked to some extent by the fact that there is so much greenfield still available there. It's a tricky problem, but it's one that entrepreneurs and developers increasingly can't afford to ignore.
  - macspoofing 14y ago
    Hold on a second. We've never had the notion of buy once, free upgrades forever. What developers did was version their software. You get minor updates but pay again for major releases. It isn't a bad model. It still largely works.
    - carsongross 14y ago
      And this is where we disagree: I think software is becoming a more mature industry, and the upgrade-train model we've had for the last few decades is coming to an end. I might be wrong.
  - Steko 14y ago
    I think it's more like an acknowledgement that some software markets are inherently very limited. Consumer email software is in a place similar to where manufacturing pagers were when texting blew up. Sure some people still needed pagers and the newer pagers were the best ones ever but that doesn't matter when basically no one needed pagers any more. Meanwhile the market for non-recurring software seems as large as it's ever been. Sure you sell for $1-$10 instead of $200 but you sell to an audience thousands of times larger.
shpoonj 14y ago
A great example of this, and I believe the best, is OS X. It's not subscription based, but it's affordable and recurring.
- earl 14y ago
  Plus externally monetized by the hardware you have to buy.
earl 14y ago
It's worse than that; it's not just no recurring revenue. Sparrow is stupid cheap. Comparable software such as eudora cost $50 - $100 in the late 90s. Compare to $7 for the mac app or $2.10 for the ios app. And they're pinched between a platform vendor who wants a good email client on the platform; Google who gives gmail away for free because it's strategically important / they monetize it with ads; and people who are nearly unwilling to spend developer-sustaining amounts of money barring a giant hit, particularly for software requiring ongoing development.

macspoofing 14y ago

>the problem Sparrow, and all desktop/mobile apps face(d) is the one-time nature of their revenue. You That's a problem!? That business model has been a staple of software development for decades!!!

carsongross 14y ago
It is, indeed, a problem. Software is maturing (has Office improved much in a decade?) and, assuming software engineers continue to wish to eat, they will go where the money is, which is in recurring revenue products like Basecamp. I think the same thing will happen/is happening in mobile, but it's being masked to some extent by the fact that there is so much greenfield still available there. It's a tricky problem, but it's one that entrepreneurs and developers increasingly can't afford to ignore.
- macspoofing 14y ago
  Hold on a second. We've never had the notion of buy once, free upgrades forever. What developers did was version their software. You get minor updates but pay again for major releases. It isn't a bad model. It still largely works.
  - carsongross 14y ago
    And this is where we disagree: I think software is becoming a more mature industry, and the upgrade-train model we've had for the last few decades is coming to an end. I might be wrong.
- Steko 14y ago
  I think it's more like an acknowledgement that some software markets are inherently very limited. Consumer email software is in a place similar to where manufacturing pagers were when texting blew up. Sure some people still needed pagers and the newer pagers were the best ones ever but that doesn't matter when basically no one needed pagers any more. Meanwhile the market for non-recurring software seems as large as it's ever been. Sure you sell for $1-$10 instead of $200 but you sell to an audience thousands of times larger.

shpoonj 14y ago

A great example of this, and I believe the best, is OS X. It's not subscription based, but it's affordable and recurring.

earl 14y ago
Plus externally monetized by the hardware you have to buy.

earl 14y ago

It's worse than that; it's not just no recurring revenue. Sparrow is stupid cheap. Comparable software such as eudora cost $50 - $100 in the late 90s. Compare to $7 for the mac app or $2.10 for the ios app. And they're pinched between a platform vendor who wants a good email client on the platform; Google who gives gmail away for free because it's strategically important / they monetize it with ads; and people who are nearly unwilling to spend developer-sustaining amounts of money barring a giant hit, particularly for software requiring ongoing development.