Alfred on the Mac is a one-time purchase that only works for the major version it was purchased for.
Rectangle Pro as well.
Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
101–110 of 174 posts
Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
#102Yes, I did so for 10+ years, about 15 years ago. It launched my business (which then evolved to include a lot of consulting). I charged for major version upgrades that introduced substantial new functionality (discounted for existing customers); minor version upgrades were free. I was probably too generous with support, but it resulted in very satisfied customers and a solid reputation that paid in spades with the mo…
I do almost the same thing, except I also offer a monthly subscription. The reason being that I’ve run into some companies that absolutely only want to pay monthly, and others that absolutely only want to pay once. I figure it’s best to make it as easy as possible for them to pay.
Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
#103Yes, I did so for 10+ years, about 15 years ago. It launched my business (which then evolved to include a lot of consulting). I charged for major version upgrades that introduced substantial new functionality (discounted for existing customers); minor version upgrades were free. I was probably too generous with support, but it resulted in very satisfied customers and a solid reputation that paid in spades with the mo…
Development cycles are getting faster making this less viable. You can’t afford to hold on to finished features waiting to bundle them in to a major release. Your competitor just released a feature, you have it finished, but you’re holding it for a release. Users will get frustrated and move to the software that’s always ahead.
That’s the theory, but I have yet to see it play out in real life. Very few products are so identical that this would be the case.
Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is piracy a concern? Or are there good enough libraries to implement a client side license key mechanism?
I used to worry about it a lot but now I have made peace with it. It's a cat and mouse game. Pirates will always find a way no matter how hard you make it to crack. There's no way to make it impossible to crack.
Just make it hard enough to keep the mostly-honest people honest.
Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
#105Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to worry about it a lot but now I have made peace with it. It's a cat and mouse game. Pirates will always find a way no matter how hard you make it to crack. There's no way to make it impossible to crack.
Just make it hard enough to keep the mostly-honest people honest.
Yeah that's what I've done!
Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for stating this. Some customers (who are often the vocal minority) don't like SaaS likely due to subscription fatigue but most don't realize the amount of manpower it requires to continuously update software that will atrophy without them, not to mention adding more features. The business reality is often not understood by the users and that's why every company is moving towards SaaS, it allows the company de…
> and that's why every company is moving towards SaaS... This is a bold and not necessarily true statement. It really comes down to your target market. A SaaS is a much less disputed cost when it's targeting businesses but you're much more likely to encounter resistance to a subscription when you're targeting individual consumers. There is plenty of highly successful mainstream modern day software that offers a perpe…
100% this. This helps consumers understand the need for SW maintenance services on their own, without having to convince them... "You want to keep the software alive on your WindowsXP machine after the 2yr support garuntee that comes with your perpetual license is up? Have at it. However, here's a nice service package that will get you back up and running when your ready to upgrade your environment to align with the rest of the world."
I suppose the risk to the SW company is that consumers never learn and just keep opting for the one-time perpetual license every 5 yrs or so, so the perpetual license needs to be priced to bridge that time gap (effectively rolling multi-year support agreements into the perpetual license cost).
I don't belong to a country club, but I've heard they work that way. A big one time payment to join, then annual dues to maintain a membership. If you leave (don't pay dues) for a period of time, then you'll need to pay the big payment again because you haven't been contributing to the maintenance/operating costs of the club to 'keep it alive', so you need to back-pay your fare share.
Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
#108Yes, I did so for 10+ years, about 15 years ago. It launched my business (which then evolved to include a lot of consulting). I charged for major version upgrades that introduced substantial new functionality (discounted for existing customers); minor version upgrades were free. I was probably too generous with support, but it resulted in very satisfied customers and a solid reputation that paid in spades with the mo…
Development cycles are getting faster making this less viable. You can’t afford to hold on to finished features waiting to bundle them in to a major release. Your competitor just released a feature, you have it finished, but you’re holding it for a release. Users will get frustrated and move to the software that’s always ahead.
There's some truth to that, but I'm not sold it's universally the case (or needs to be).
Speaking for myself, I pushed those minor updates - with lots of little feature enhancements - as soon as they were ready (sometimes mere days after being envisioned/suggested). The major upgrades generally included stuff reliant on larger overhaul efforts or new foundations. I wouldn't typically hold anything back artificially. My team was small (for a good portion of time solo) and our efforts were focused, which probably helped.
On the other hand, I've seen increasing examples in the last decade of meaningless UI changes that trip up the user by moving their cheese (instead of being carefully thought out in the first place), needless bugs introduced with no remorse, and a whole class of "features" there not for the user but instead to serve the interests of the vendor or their data-hoovering partners. (Windows sadly became a great example)
My beef isn't inherent to the subscription model itself, but the shift in revenue structure made it tempting for companies to uncouple development from user wants. Where upgrades used to be forged on the anvil of user acceptance and pitched to our wallets first, they're now shoved down our throats with little choice whether to adopt. (And cloud delivery eliminated the option to stay on that old version you liked better.)
I'm not convinced users jump ship quite so rapidly just to get new features. We saw a big move to mobile even when the apps lacked anywhere near the breadth of their desktop counterparts.
Personally I gravitate toward products which do a good job of solving their primary purpose. As an example, I loved Dropbox for years but plan to migrate away soon because sync got worse and their dev efforts have been focused on all kinds of new fluff I never wanted.
Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it can be possible to have a license that allows you to run it at your own risk forever right? I mean, open source licenses do that, so you can make those and sell those as well. The 'support' being whatever updates happen to appear. Or the support is separately sold (again, like open source), so you pay once and for all year and you get updates forever, however, no support after 1 year; you can buy more. I have…
Usually if something is written into law, a person can't waive those rights with a separate contract.
Yeah, (and I realize this is all based on a half-remebered law) but the OP said the law only obligated the company to support the SW fully "during the licensing period". In my experience, most perpetual licenses come with some initial "support agreement" (2yr, 4yr, etc.). After that, the user can still use the SW, and the company wouldn't be obligated to provide support. So, this law sounds like it's really preventing some a-hole from selling perpetual licenses without any agreed upon garunteed support period (basically taking the money, calling the consumer a 'sucker' and running for the hills)
Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?
#110Yes, I did so for 10+ years, about 15 years ago. It launched my business (which then evolved to include a lot of consulting). I charged for major version upgrades that introduced substantial new functionality (discounted for existing customers); minor version upgrades were free. I was probably too generous with support, but it resulted in very satisfied customers and a solid reputation that paid in spades with the mo…
Development cycles are getting faster making this less viable. You can’t afford to hold on to finished features waiting to bundle them in to a major release. Your competitor just released a feature, you have it finished, but you’re holding it for a release. Users will get frustrated and move to the software that’s always ahead.
Easy migrations are unheard of. If competition existed, electron apps would never exist.