41–50 of 129 posts
Honestly- just use UWP and sell on windows store. Hacker news is believe it or not, a very niche space with very few employees of big enterprises except the popular ones. You wont get to hear from the regular it worker here
Nobody in a big enterprise can buy from the Windows Store. Better sell license keys from a website.
Same applies to some of our customers that have done the migration to W10.
Just make a time limited trial, if they feel it is worth paying for then they will buy, if they don't then you don't owe them anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh. I didn't know Patreon published info on what creators are earning. Wouldn't that be a design flaw? What's the benefit to anybody? It seems to only deter potential sponsors.
I don't think Patreon does. As you can see you cannot see that information for every creator. Publishers/creators can choose to show or hide the number of subscribers and their monthly earnings. This site simply is scraping that freely available information.
You need to clearly understand the difference between making money from selling software licenses to your customers vs. having the investors as your primary customers. In the current market you will hardly find a private player looking for a return on their investment through profits/dividends; they will be more likely trying to cash out when you create enough buzz to get acquired or IPOed. That's a completely differ…
Build the thing, and sell it (not necessarily for shareware, either). There are new channels for software now (like Setapp[0]) that you can look at, too, depending on who the customer and platform is.
Then you can make decisions based on actual sales, demand, market size, etc, and if investors are needed at that stage, then you have a waaaaay better proposition for them.
[0]: https://setapp.com/
I've built a small tool that I distributed as "free for personal use, contact me for a commercial license", without technical enforcement, not even a nag screen. I made one (1) sale, despite receiving e-mails from several people thanking me that they're happily using it at work, and that sale was to a company who wanted customization, and only ended up actually paying the invoice when they asked for another round of…
I've built a small tool that I distributed as "free for personal use, contact me for a commercial license", without technical enforcement, not even a nag screen. I made one (1) sale, despite receiving e-mails from several people thanking me that they're happily using it at work, and that sale was to a company who wanted customization, and only ended up actually paying the invoice when they asked for another round of…
I've built a small tool that I distributed as "free for personal use, contact me for a commercial license", without technical enforcement, not even a nag screen. I made one (1) sale, despite receiving e-mails from several people thanking me that they're happily using it at work, and that sale was to a company who wanted customization, and only ended up actually paying the invoice when they asked for another round of…
Except 'IT'.
I can't buy a $5 mouse at Best Buy. Or a Lightning cable to charge my company-provided iPhone. That will trigger long chains of accusatory emails from Accounting and Procurement. Software and 'IT equipment' has to be purchased according to the Policy, which to be quite honest I've never successfully figured out how to do.
It's come to the point that I'd rather buy small things (<$50) out of my own pocket than persecute myself by spending days going through some convoluted process and knowing at the end of it that we paid 3x the market price to get it from our 'Preferred Supplier'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's one big catch there - once you reach a "fair" income level, many people will think that you are already getting enough and won't bother to sponsor you. Look at the statistics [0]: unless you are in the top 100 creators, you'll get far less than your regular FAANG pay. [0]: https://graphtreon.com/patreon-creators
Huh. I didn't know Patreon published info on what creators are earning. Wouldn't that be a design flaw? What's the benefit to anybody? It seems to only deter potential sponsors.
I've built a small tool that I distributed as "free for personal use, contact me for a commercial license", without technical enforcement, not even a nag screen. I made one (1) sale, despite receiving e-mails from several people thanking me that they're happily using it at work, and that sale was to a company who wanted customization, and only ended up actually paying the invoice when they asked for another round of…
If you really want a legal way to get companies to pay, phrase it as "free for non-commercial use" and include that in the public documentation as well as somewhere in the tool itself. Non-commercial includes the indirect commercial cases that would apply to the tool.