Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 174 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#121

Post by BlueTemplar »

Delphiza wrote: post #114
stakhanov wrote: post #72

Legal changes are making it increasingly very difficult to sell perpetual licenses. For example, in Germany, a new law recently took effect that clarifies that if you sell a software license for a given period of time, you're liable to provide whatever updates/support the customer may need over the course of the software's licensing period to enable the customer to keep running it, at no additional cost, regardless o…

That is a good point that US-based developers may not be aware of. The EU CRA (Cyber Resilience Act) mandates "an obligation to provide duty of care for the entire lifecycle of such products", mostly by requiring updates for security vulnerabilities. Any software that connects to the network (or Internet) has to be assumed to have a vector for vulnerability at some point in the future. This means that it has to be up…

A lot of software has no need to connect to the Internet though, sounds like a "loophole" ?

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#122

Post by vunderba »

cageface wrote: post #58
vunderba wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very well-versed in the field, what DAW(s) are you referring to? Cubase, Ableton, FL Studio, Logic Pro X, Bitwig, Reaper, etc. are all flat fees. Studio one has a subscription model but it's tied to access to splice assets and it's completely separate from their one time fee model.

Logic Pro iPad is a subscription. It remains to be seen if the desktop version goes this way. Reason is pushing a subscription model hard. Online services like Splice are sub based for sounds & samples. Bitwig is a yearly fee. You don't have to upgrade but you're probably going to have issues with newer OS versions before long if you don't. Overall I agree it's sill a better space than most for software you actually…

Oh yeah, I forgot that Logic Pro iPad is a subscription. I honestly don't know who the target audience is for it. I'd think most hobbyists could probably just get away with GarageBand on the iPad which is free.

When traveling I've actually sketched out music in iPad GarageBand then brought over to my Mac and opened them directly in Logic X. It works pretty flawlessly.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#123

Post by BlueTemplar »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #110
Gigachad wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You don't consider Qt to be competition to Electron ?

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#124

Post by BlueTemplar »

whiletrue111 wrote: post #93

Take Steam, for example, when it comes to games. It remains a platform for 'traditional downloadable software,' where indie developers can still make money. It also has a very large and active community

Is it though, when it has included so many functions into itself, like updating and DRM management ?

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#125

Post by iKlsR »

outcoldman wrote: post #100

I do. macOS applications. Generating between 1,000-2,000 USD monthly (so variable because no subscriptions). Obviously this is still a hobby that I am trying to make more sustainable. But this is where I am right now after 3-4 years in this business. https://loshadki.app - you can check the apps here.

OpenIn seems like something I've been hunting for for a while on Windows, use case is I primarily use firefox but I have so many google logins that it only makes sense to use chrome where applicable for several reasons the most annoying being it's hard to toggle between accounts when logged into multiple google accounts, I also use Notion Calendar which by default tries to open firefox when you start a meeting. So my workflow typically is click join meeting, go to the firefox tab, copy said link then open the appropriate profile and paste link. Ideally I'd want to click that link which launches Chrome where I select a profile and it continues to the link.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#126

Post by araes »

trimethylpurine wrote: post #63
lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A little off topic, but, if you'll indulge me: Why do you think nobody has been able to make a successful alternative to Photoshop? Everybody I know complains about it constantly, and yet it's still the industry standard.

Gimp works great. The worst thing about it is the lack of high end YouTube video tutorials. That's what you're really paying for with Adobe, I think.

Having used Gimp and Photoshop fairly extensively, I'd agree that Gimp works, and it has the features that Photoshop has (for the most part). However, there's quite a bit of user interface issues with Gimp that make somewhat simplistic activities rather irritating.

Gimp kind of has the Open Source issue where it has tons of features, yet there's a large wall of complexity, zillions of little fiddly knobs to tweak on almost every process, and the interface makes you feel like you need to, because they're all exposed immediately.

Photoshop (personal opinion) is better about having an initially functional feature, with relatively "what you expect" defaults, and then layers of fiddly knobs you can tweak if you "really" want to or need to for a project.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#127

Post by araes »

BenjiWiebe wrote: post #70
Gigachad wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need updates these days or stuff stops working fast. Everyone at every stage is quite happy to make breaking changes without long term backwards compatibility other than a transition period because it’s understood that everything can be quickly updated. Every time I updated macOS I find that some program stopped working and I just have to update it and it works again. As well as the fact that most software these…

Windows is pretty good with backwards compatibility. We bought some software back in the early '00s and it still runs fine on Windows 10. You do have to install the manufacturer's update after installing it off the CD, though. Even though the update says only for win2k machines. :)

Frankly, I may have serious issues with Microsoft, yet backwards compatibility is one of the few areas where there's almost nothing to criticize, and MS is almost off the deep end on the other side. You can install stuff from the 90's and it will still have the hardware drivers. It's really kind of ridiculous.

I tried compiling modern software in Visual Studio, and the number of includes for historical support was mind boggling. "Holy s*t, I think MS just added every printer for the last 30 years to my project. There's like a 1000 includes on a 5 file project. Doesn't even print." (maybe a teeny bit of criticism)

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#128

Post by stego-tech »

Just take a look at Panic - most of their stuff is perpetual license software, with really only Nova requiring a subscription if you want ongoing updates after the first year. They make this model work for them by providing compelling software that just works - no unnecessary feature creep, proper rebuilds on new architectures rather than lazy ports, understanding what customers actually need versus what the broader industry says is a must-have. They’re successful in spite of largely being locked to the Mac, too, proving you can find success in even niche market segments if you’re actually listening to customers and providing a competent product.

To be fair, they’ve pivoted a bit these past few years into more experimental areas - game publishing and hardware, for example - but even those experiments have bore impressive successes for a company of their size and lineage.

So yes, it’s possible, and you don’t even have to find a captive audience to find success. Just do good work while nurturing your customer base.

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#129

Post by [deleted] »

gregmac wrote: post #112
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #19

I believe they are called "apps" now, it's a $500B market. As far as desktop software, it's the same as it ever was... you make a product, you release it for download, you sell a license. No mystery to it. But it often makes more sense to sell it as a subscription; you can make it very cheap for the user up front, and get a continuous revenue stream. Subscriptions make more sense if you provide constant updates, supp…

Yeah, at the core of it I see this as a value problem. If you charge a lot, it's a tough or impossible sell for users who aren't yet sure they'll get that amount of value from it. If you charge too little, you're leaving money on the table from big customers who would be willing to pay much more. Setting the up-front cost also requires you to estimate a bunch of things: what will it cost you to build (including futur…

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

#130

Post by neverartful »

BlueTemplar wrote: post #123
GoblinSlayer wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy migrations are unheard of. If competition existed, electron apps would never exist.

You don't consider Qt to be competition to Electron ?

Qt is competition (perhaps not direct in many cases) and it's not the only one. Also wxWidgets, Lazarus, Delphi, C++ Builder, WinForms, WPF, Xojo, etc.
Post reply on HN