I think this made sense in 2011, but now the trend of acquihires has gotten so out of hand that it hardly makes a difference; products making plenty of revenue are still being instantly shut down after being bought out.
VSCO is a curious case.
Don't Be a Free User (2011)
91–100 of 107 posts
Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)
#92This is why web services should be open source and available for self hosting: - The geeks with the know-how to run a Web server benefit from your product for free, but in exchange you get bug reports, patches, etc. - Everyone else pays, because you also offer a paid hosting option. But because the product is fundamentally open source and federated, it can and hopefully will outlive its original developer.
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…
> 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.
These companies much prefer to pay for support, even for open-source projects.
Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)
#93Unfortunately, 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 title must be given to OS/360. Usable backwards compatibility for half a century, and counting.
Windows backwards compatibility took a dramatic turn for the worse with Windows 7 when they decided to run old software in a VM instead of keeping compatibility. People had to turn to DOSBox instead, which perhaps ironically was originally made for things like Linux to run DOS software.
Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh wow. Read it but somehow missed that. Well I'll leave the foot in mouth comment for posterity.
Oh good apparently owning up to a mistake and leaving it up should also get downvoted. Gotta love this community.
> Please resist commenting about being downvoted. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.
Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)
#95Earlier 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…
> 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. These companies much prefer to pay for support, even for open-source projects.
Companies don't really want to pay for the software because every IT manager can go on long rants about idiotic and broken licensing but they will be quick to pony up for a support contract, white labeling, and hosted services.
Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)
#96[deleted]
Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)
#97Earlier 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…
There are 2 issues with that:
- People who only need basic functionalities don't bring any money
- People who need paid functionalities don't get to try them in the free version
So as much I as like free tiers as a user, for a business I think "free trial" is the way to go.
Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)
#98Its actually very simple: do not use web services that do not provide data liberation into some standard format.
In other words, you take a free ride wile its there then you switch to some other solution. You might be irritated at first because you liked the tool and its workflow but that is the only downside which is not that serious as typically something similar will appear soon enough.
Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
There are 2 issues with that: - People who only need basic functionalities don't bring any money - People who need paid functionalities don't get to try them in the free version So as much I as like free tiers as a user, for a business I think "free trial" is the way to go.
People who only need basic funcs provide you testing, i.e. product stability i.e. money.
Re: Don't Be a Free User (2011)
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the Busines Source License has cleanly solved this dilemma: http://monty-says.blogspot.com/2016/08/applying-business-sou... Free as in Freedom but not free as in beer. You get to use the software for free subect to limitations (can't have more than N users, can't resell hosted access, etc), until N years from now, when the license reverts to GPL. Point releases restart the clock (so you have to fork the N yea…
The Business Source License is not Free as in Freedom. The FSF states the first requirement for software to qualify as Free ( https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html ) is: "The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose." Any limitations on use make the software non-Free.
The FSF doesn't say you can run it when you wish.
Seriously though, you download it now, and there is a contractual obligation that the software will be GPL later. Stallman used to charge people for improvements to emacs. This is the same, but with an extended delivery timeline that (hopefully) leads to better Free software.
Also, note that once you pay, you get all the benefits / protections of the GPL, including redistribution of modifications after the timer expires.
I'm not sure if you can redistribute modifications immediately or not. I would certainly hope so! (Any money for modified versions would go to the author of the original version, and there is no "we're missing feature X" like there would be with open core / demoware so why should they block such things?)