Don't Be a Free User (2011) • Hacker News Board

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#31

Post by user5994461 » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:33 PM UTC

microtonal wrote: post #28

Unfortunately, it often seems that with too little money, a service disappears due to bankruptcy, with too much money a service disappears due to talent acquisition. With software as an application, there was still the possibility to continue using software for years when a company shut down. Windows has terrific backwards compatibility and on UNIX you get far by keeping around old shared libraries and giving a hint…

> Windows has terrific backwards compatibility

Windows is most backward compatible software in existence.

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#32

Post by user5994461 » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:37 PM UTC

oblio wrote: post #27

dkyc wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience running a project/company like you describe: 1) Not the geeks, but the big multinational companies with disposable developer time end up using your open-source solution. Exactly the types of users I don't feel sorry for and would rather extract money from. 2) The "payback" in the form of bug reports and patches is negligible, because nobody likes to do work if they're not being compensated (either throu…

Open Core for the win. You want to use the base functionalities? Be my guest. You want Single Sign On through LDAP, AD, etc.? Commercial edition. You want advanced user management and permissions, etc.? Commercial edition. You want the product to work behind a NTLM proxy? Commercial edition. You want to use your own domain name (if hosted)? Commercial edition. There's a handful of requests that are sure-sign markers…

Or open demo for the win.

Everything is paid.

Except there is a free edition for up to N users, or non-production use.

This lets people try the product, demo and experiment.

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#33

Post by nrb » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:37 PM UTC

anondon wrote: post #21

The term "free software" is used rather ambiguously in the article. The free software that is referred to in the article is free as in beer. The more commonly used meaning of the word (among hackers) implies free as in freedom. If you want to learn more refer here https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html

It seems like the author is indeed referring to Free Software, but then makes a comparison to free-as-in-beer web services.

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#34

Post by aub3bhat » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:38 PM UTC

devoply wrote: post #18

akjainaj wrote: post #10

I am a proud free user. When a service closes because of bankruptcy, a new one always appears. Or maybe two or three. So who cares? There's always a free alternative to every service, especially web ones.

Thank you Mr. Locust, that will do.

Its not predatory but rather a symbiotic relationship. Customer/Users, Organizations (Management/Investors), Employees all are inter dependent on each other a view of the world that devotes attention to one of the three groups is misguided.

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#35

Post by alt3red » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:40 PM UTC

I think many services become popular and see wide adoption, because they are free. When the free element goes away there will not be nearly as many users willing to try it or to use it and love it so much that they will recommend it.

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#36

Post by anondon » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:42 PM UTC

moolcool wrote: post #12

thatlooper wrote: post #9

So what about HackerNews?

I don't think of HN like a product meant to make money though, more like a big ad for YC

> more like a big ad for YC

That is dumbing HN down a lot. This community is much more than that: hackers share cool articles, have vibrant discussions and the comments section is probably the least toxic of all comments sections. YC related posts are very popular and YC itself is promoted heavily, but the community is much more than just YC.

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#37

Post by a3n » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:44 PM UTC

I pay for pinboard, for exactly this reason. I like it enough that I want it to be there tomorrow. Same with LastPass, Fastmail (don't know if they still have free accounts), The Guardian and The NYT.

There is much, much more of the web that I use for free, either because they have their own reasons for for not charging at all, or they appear to have enough of a paying base that I'm merely small-guilty but not worried, or because I don't care enough about them to think about the issue.

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#38

Post by clamprecht » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:48 PM UTC

Raed667 wrote: post #23

These arguments fall apart when you're living in a country with no access to online, international payment methods. And I realize that you don't want to bother with people that are not currently potential customers, but I'm just saying that you're locking entire countries out.

Could Bitcoin solve this?

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#39

Post by edp » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:50 PM UTC

user5994461 wrote: post #31

microtonal wrote: post #28

Unfortunately, it often seems that with too little money, a service disappears due to bankruptcy, with too much money a service disappears due to talent acquisition. With software as an application, there was still the possibility to continue using software for years when a company shut down. Windows has terrific backwards compatibility and on UNIX you get far by keeping around old shared libraries and giving a hint…

> Windows has terrific backwards compatibility Windows is most backward compatible software in existence.

I think that's what danieldk meant. Terrific != terrible (english is not my primary language so I might be wrong)

Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)

#40

Post by gregmac » Sat, Jan 21, 2017, 2:53 PM UTC

nrb wrote: post #33

anondon wrote: post #21

The term "free software" is used rather ambiguously in the article. The free software that is referred to in the article is free as in beer. The more commonly used meaning of the word (among hackers) implies free as in freedom. If you want to learn more refer here https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html

It seems like the author is indeed referring to Free Software, but then makes a comparison to free-as-in-beer web services.

I disagree: it seems like the author is completely unaware of the "free-as-in-freedom" definition, and all usages of "free software" refer to free-as-in-beer web services.