Live data from Hacker News

JetBrains: $270M revenue, 405K paying users, $0 raised

twitter.com

441–450 of 680 posts

Re: JetBrains: $270M revenue, 405K paying users, $0 raised

#441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also Fork: https://git-fork.com/

I'm really curious - why do people want a graphical git client? The command line exposes everything, and the model is simple and intuitive. I work in a very large monorepo, so it's not like I'm working in a git tree that isn't complicated.

One of the advantages is you can easily explore what changes were made and merge conflicts through the tool.

Re: JetBrains: $270M revenue, 405K paying users, $0 raised

#442
post #415
post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On second read, you might be right so I amended my comment... In my defense, OP's comment is ambiguously worded. What you actually get is a permanent license to the oldest release available during your subscription. OP also says: >... after paying for any particular version of a product for 12 months, you also get a perpetual license for that particular version and so on and so forth." Also kind of unclear. And judgi…

You get the latest version you subbed to. So if you subbed last in 2018, you get that version. If resubbing j. 2019, the 2019 version. Also every year the price goes down, so you pay less and less.

That's misleading. Each year has multiple point releases. You don't get the latest point release.

My PHPStorm subscription expires in less than a week. In order to continue using it (without re-subbing), I have to downgrade from 2019.3 (current release) to 2018.3 (the release available on the date I subbed). Software that is one year old.

Similarly, the JetBrains site says my WebStorm subscription expires in around 10 months. At which point I have to downgrade to 2019.2 if I don't re-sub. Today's current version is 2019.3.

>Also every year the price goes down, so you pay less and less

That part is true and it's certainly commendable that they do that.

Re: JetBrains: $270M revenue, 405K paying users, $0 raised

#443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also Fork: https://git-fork.com/

I'm really curious - why do people want a graphical git client? The command line exposes everything, and the model is simple and intuitive. I work in a very large monorepo, so it's not like I'm working in a git tree that isn't complicated.

I think most folks like a graphical merge tool, such as opendiff, or at least that's what I've been able to glean.

Re: JetBrains: $270M revenue, 405K paying users, $0 raised

#445
I'm a really big fan of JetBrains. The pricing is reasonable, the pricing model is reasonable, and the products are moving forward quickly.

There's a lot of products I am either reluctant to pay for, or pay for only begrudgingly, because I feel like I have to, even though the value proposition isn't really there. JetBrains isn't like that!

Re: JetBrains: $270M revenue, 405K paying users, $0 raised

#446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Jetbrains gets any money directly by the usage of Kotlin on Android, as Kotlin too is open source, and works very well in IntelliJ Community (also open-source). In fact, I don't think IntelliJ ultimate has any extra Kotlin features.

No, but IntelliJ ultimate has more features than Android Studio given there are JetBrains developed plugins that aren’t available in the CE platform. Guice support, for example. You can live without it, but if you are working on a larger Android codebase and utilize it then it may be useful.

IntelliJ Ultimate has a lot of extra features, yes, but I don't recall any of them being related to Kotlin, or Android, so I don't think the parent comment claiming kotlin usage will result in extra revenue is relevant.

Re: JetBrains: $270M revenue, 405K paying users, $0 raised

#447
post #180

I'm a big fan of the way JetBrains sells their licenses. Like a lot of software companies nowadays, they only sell licenses on a subscription basis. But with a very customer-friendly clause of where if you pay for a subscription for 12 months you get a perpetual license for the latest version of the product when you initially subscribed. And then after paying for any particular version of a product for 12 months, you…

>But with a very customer-friendly clause of where if you pay for a subscription for 12 months you get a perpetual license for the latest version of the product when you initially subscribed. And then after paying for any particular version of a product for 12 months, you also get a perpetual license for that particular version and so on and so forth This came about due to a decent amount of consumer backlash, if I r…

When you say it like that, it doesn't sound amazing, but you can also phrase it as:

"JetBrains listened to their customers, took feedback on board, and made meaningful changes that addressed the concerns."

In a perfect world, that would the minimum expected behaviour, but in the world we live in, it's kind of surprising when it happens.

Re: JetBrains: $270M revenue, 405K paying users, $0 raised

#448
post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also get loyalty discounts on your subscription! After year three even their "everything" licence feels affordable for a working dev. (€649 for the first year, €389 by year three: https://www.jetbrains.com/store/#commercial?billing=yearly ) I wish more companies did this.

Their "everything" commercial license is €249 for y1, €199 for y2 and €149 for y3+ as an individual: https://www.jetbrains.com/store/#personal?billing=yearly The organizational license is only needed if your employer is paying for you or compensating you for the license cost: https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-gb/articles/207241075-What...

Considering the hassle involved in switching employers, then licenses, I’d much rather just use my personal license anyway.

Re: JetBrains: $270M revenue, 405K paying users, $0 raised

#449
post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really curious - why do people want a graphical git client? The command line exposes everything, and the model is simple and intuitive. I work in a very large monorepo, so it's not like I'm working in a git tree that isn't complicated.

Try doing a merge with IntelliJ's 3-way merge UI. It's flippin' fantastic compared to roaming through the files and removing sections between >>>> and <<<<.

Command-line git allows you to specify a mergetool, many of which are capable of three way merges.
Post reply on HN