Live data from Hacker News

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

twitter.com

551–560 of 680 posts

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

#551

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 wonder the opposite thing: why do people try to use git in a terminal?

Its output is so rich and complex that it's impossible to make it legible outside of a real GUI, with graphics and colors.

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

#552
post #521
post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An editor that needs (even) 2GB to be blindingly fast is a failure.

That's fine, because it's an IDE and a new dev machine tends to have more than 16gb of ram.

Some machines, and some people, have other uses for RAM than the text editor.

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

#553

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…

That didn't happen by what they tried to push. This happened because there was lots of developers threatening to walk over a pure subscription model.

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

#554
post #553

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…

That didn't happen by what they tried to push. This happened because there was lots of developers threatening to walk over a pure subscription model.

That's still the good thing. Can change the narrative to "developer tools company listens to its customers and gives them a fair deal". The effect is amoral, even if the cause is moral.

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

#555
post #553

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…

That didn't happen by what they tried to push. This happened because there was lots of developers threatening to walk over a pure subscription model.

Oh, I remember that pushback. Glorious days of outrage culture when it wasn't abused yet and the consumer power was strong

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

#556
post #447
post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

It wasn't amazing. There was a lot of unneccessary effort to change their mind.

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

#557
post #447
post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

You can frame it whatever you want. Fact is, if not the pushback JetBrains would be worse than Adobe

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

#558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> git log | grep -- find the hash of the one I want. This misses the point of the problem -- the point is you don't know precisely what string to grep for. > or git log > file and look at it in an editor. no need to change the tools just for this unusual action. I mean, nobody said this 1 reason should be enough to make you switch tools? I was just giving an example. And no, it's not "unusual" just because you say so…

I don't think a lot of the steps listed in your first example are as painful as you make them about to be. Most of those steps are just as elementary as clicking a button in a GUI to someone with fluency on the CLI. I also doubt the claims that it's that much faster for someone with a lot of experience doing it. Perhaps you could be faster with the GUI than on the CLI, but learning a GUI doesn't come with zero overhe…

> I don't think a lot of the steps listed in your first example are as painful as you make them about to be. Most of those steps are just as elementary as clicking a button in a GUI to someone with fluency on the CLI. I also doubt the claims that it's that much faster for someone with a lot of experience doing it.

I mean, it's not like you can ever convince me that >10 keystrokes are as fast as 1 click, but regardless, this is easy enough to settle -- just time yourself and let me know how long the steps take you on the CLI.

> Perhaps you could be faster with the GUI than on the CLI

Hence the point!

> but learning a GUI doesn't come with zero overhead:

I don't think anybody claimed this either, so it's fine.

> you have to understand it's terminology, how it's configuration works, what its icons and symbols mean.

It sounds like you haven't used TortoiseGit... at all? How often have you had to look at its manual? How many times have you had to look at the manual of git itself? Honestly, your own reply is warranted here so many times more than it was to me -- "I don't think a lot of the steps are as painful as you make them about to be."

In fact so many of the commands are so obviously self-explanatory (both in text and in icons) that you literally never need to look them up. Stuff that you would never just guess how to do in git itself. Like when you right-click a file in a commit and click "Save revision to...", which also has a floppy next to it. Is it really such a mystery what it does? Is it even remotely comparable to figuring out checkout-index (or whatever the right command is)?

And honestly: it's such a poor attempt at an argument to suggest that the minor ramp-up time of TortoiseGit is somehow not worth the perpetual git pains it saves you from that I don't even know what to say.

> Particularly when it comes to VCS management, GUI's like to simplify sometimes complicated or nuanced VCS behavior and you can't really be sure what is being done to your repo until you've pressed the button and done it.

First, this is such an unnecessary strawman. If you're so worried what some GUI command does, then just use the CLI for it instead.

Second, this is completely irrelevant for read-only operations (like log, Browse Repository, etc.) which were the ones concerned here.

And third... again, it sounds like you're only saying this because you haven't used TortoiseGit, because (shockingly enough, to someone coming from the git CLI) it's not a minefield; in fact it has a number of safeguards. "Commit" creates a commit, "Revert" reverts your changes, "Checkout" checks out a commit, etc... and in fact fails if your tree is dirty, so you don't lose data. Heck, sometimes the git commands it prints end up being more correct than what you'd type on the command line. I know I've learned a fair number of random git features from TortoiseGit.

> Not to mention you are now investing time learning a program that can be abandoned at any time and leave you without the basic knowledge necessary to manage your repo

Again, nobody said you shouldn't learn the CLI. In fact, I'll say it right here: you should definitely learn the CLI, especially for git, before moving to the GUI, or you will be confused (though even then, you'd probably be less confused than you would be if you started with the CLI itself).

> (not saying this would affect you this way, but it could certainly be a reason to not learn it in the first place).

No, it's most definitely not a reason not to learn it.The discussion was never about what you learn in the first place, but what you use. You should learn the command-line regardless. And even regarding usage, it's again a strawman: nobody even suggested you should never use the CLI. The question was "why do people want a graphical git client?" and the answer was "because it makes {tasks} easier", for some tasks. If you find any tasks that don't fall in that category, just use the CLI. It's just a tool after all, not a religion.

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

#559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also switched from Tower when they introduced subscription pricing. My current git setup: - Git Fork for committing, pushing - P4 Merge for resolving conflicts (it's not a pretty app, but the fantastic feature set more than makes up for the non-native look) - GitUp for reordering, editing and splitting commits - Command line for the rare things the GUIs can't do None of those cost money and I don't understand how t…

I found P4 Merge to be totally inscrutable, could you elaborate on what makes it so good?

It's a 3 way merge tool that works well with Fork. To be honest I can't say how it compares with other merge tools, I tried a few merge tools some time back and liked P4 best.

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

#560
post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to what michaf mentioned, what we have now is not what they originally proposed. https://blog.jetbrains.com/blog/2015/09/18/final-update-on-t... - the perpetual license fallback did not exist under the original proposals and only happened due to backlash.

Why does this matter? Yes, their original plan was pure SaaS. But they listened to criticism and changed it once they realized that there was backlash from the community. If anything, that should be admired not criticized.

It's matter, because even in this thread you have people prizing jetbrains for beign better than Adobe SaaS, but in reality jetbrains would go even futher than any big predatory corporation out there to vendor lock you into their set of tools.

If you have an option, stick with open tools with strong community support. Just observation: with commercial tools you don't have full control of your own work, nuff said

Post reply on HN