Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

elezea.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 202 posts

Re: The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

#191

Post by technoslut »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #124
technoslut wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much of what is left of Quicksilver today is about fixing bugs and keeping it on life support which is why I used the term "fell apart" instead of "dead". This was an app that the developer stopped programming for in 2006 and the bug fixing didn't really start until last year. Th plug-ins to other apps are part of what made Quicksilver great and most still don't work and haven't been updated since that time.

Sounds like a great idea for a kickstarter. I'd still take "basic bugfixing and maintenance" over "gone completely" however. I suppose in some sense it's a bit like owning a classic car, the warranty and support from the manufacturer is long since gone but there exists a community of owners and refurb businesses keeping it alive.

The difference with your car analogy is that the car doesn't stop working because other cars are adopting new technology or that the roads became worse. Quicksilver broke once Leopard was released.

Re: The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

#192

Post by wiz21 »

indubitably wrote: post #144

It seems to me that the real story here is that software is starting to face real and widespread commoditization on a deep scale. Software has always been a very high-end, specialized line of work, and qualified many developers still expect to make upwards of 80K a year (at least). Well, what happens when the software industry starts suffering from the same crisis as the rest of the economy, in an irreversible way?

I think there's software and software. Software for the masses, that adresses the masses needs, well, hello commoditization. Now there's another job which is to tell people with bucks how to make more bucks with computers. If they have 10 bucks, well, your value will be in the range of 1-2 bucks. If they have one billion, then you might help them a bit more and grab the money. The only one who make money with the masses are Apple, Google and the like. Except a few really complicated things like Amazon, PayPal or really "sweet spots" like facebook, I'd think the probability to have a deal is super low. So what's the solution ? Well I don't know. I guess we won't be able to advertise things ad infinitum... So we'll be back to added value sooner or later.

Re: The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

#193

Post by ceejayoz »

wang2bo2 wrote: post #66

Sparrow is never independent OK? They depend on GMail. They cannot even deliver push-notification for their iOS apps because they don't want to save your credentials on their servers. The argument around Instapaper still stands as long as it's an independent, complete product.

> Sparrow is never independent OK? They depend on GMail.

False. Sparrow works with any IMAP mail server.

Re: The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

#195

Post by adambyrtek »

technoslut wrote: post #190
adambyrtek wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After a long hiatus Quicksilver was taken over by a dedicated team of contributors who resumed active development[1]. Open-source worked after all, as this wouldn't be possible otherwise. [1] http://blog.qsapp.com/

I realize that many Quicksilver fans will be upset with my comments but I can't rely on something that was essentially broken for five years and count on it being something I can use a couple of hundred times everyday. What happens the next time something gets broken after a major OS update? I can't wait for a few months to get it working again. I'm not saying that open source software is lousy. I use it all the time…

TextMate could act as a counterexample showing that the original author being fully in charge doesn't guarantee anything.

Re: The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

#196

Post by Nicole060 »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #120
jseliger wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I upgrade my Mac the day after a new OS X version is released I used to do that—until I realized that 10.7 (and now probably 10.8) don't offer any substantial improvements to things I care about (as discussed here: https://jseliger.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/mac-os-10-7-is-out... ). In other words, I've probably reached "peak operating system," in that marginal improvements to OSes are really quite marginal. That's als…

Problem is, what happens when they stop supporting the version that you are using and happy with? Would you feel confident going online with an OS that has known security issues that will never be patched?

Using an outdated OS that is not supported anymore isn't good security, but in theory there shouldn't be much danger as long as you follow some basic restrictions :

1/ Put the computer behind a NAT router with no open ports/outside access 2/ Use a browser that hasn't dropped your platform (just because the OS isn't supported anymore doesn't mean you can't find at least one browser that's up to date with continuous security updates. There are still people porting Firefox to PPC macs, an initiative called "TenFourFox". You can also try Camino or iCab, two alternative browsers that have kept PPC compatibility) 3/ Don't open an email attachment unless it has been scanned through an antivirus

Point 1 and 3 are something I do even on a patched computer anyway. Your desktop shouldn't be directly exposed to the internet.

I've never ran an outdated OS myself but I would feel confident in using one as long as I respect those principles. The one thing I wouldn't be confident in doing, though, would be running an outdated browser or an outdated mail client. Security updates for anything that is in direct contact with the internet is a top priority and using an abandoned mail client like sparrow that doesn't guarantee security updates is a terrible, terrible idea.

Re: The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

#197

Post by Tyr42 »

technoslut wrote: post #189
EdiX wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair in 2007 leopard's spotlight implemented the 20% of quicksilver's features that most users used 80% of the time. You probably were a quicksilver poweruser, but I don't think there were many of you.

I don't think any Quicksilver user was anything other than a power user.

I currently use it, and I am not a power user. (But I'm just one datapoint)

Re: The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

#198

Post by minikites »

jseliger wrote: post #115
antr wrote: post #14

In 1998 we wouldn't of complained - at least me. It is 2012, and when I purchase software, I don't buy into the premise that this software is going to be static for perpetuity, and this is because of the fast-paced nature of OS, platform and web evolution. I "marry" the software I love, and I am very happy to pay for upgrades. I upgrade my Mac the day after a new OS X version is released, not only that, but I use non…

I upgrade my Mac the day after a new OS X version is released I used to do that—until I realized that 10.7 (and now probably 10.8) don't offer any substantial improvements to things I care about (as discussed here: https://jseliger.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/mac-os-10-7-is-out... ). In other words, I've probably reached "peak operating system," in that marginal improvements to OSes are really quite marginal. That's als…

I personally hit that point when 10.4 rolled around.

Re: The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

#199

Post by wensing »

ben1040 wrote: post #70
steve8918 wrote: post #60

Unfortunately, this is what you get when you pay $10 for an app. There is a huge disparity when it comes to the cost of apps these days vs the salaries required to sustain the engineers who make those apps. Even at $10/pop, you need to sell a lot of apps just to sustain the salaries of very good engineers, and THIS is what makes great products vulnerable to acqui-hires. The problem is that the $0.99 model of the App…

This is spot on. Thanks to the App Store, the days of paying $30+ for boxed software and paying again every year or so for version n+1 (assuming it comes out at all) are pretty far back in the rear view mirror now. I paid $10 for Sparrow and got far more than $10 in value from it. So while I am disappointed that the best email app I have seen is EOL'd now I did get a decent value and I can't complain a whole lot. I a…

How do we recalibrate people's expectations about the value of software back to pre-2008 levels?

One suggestion: Stop trying to push the cutting edge forward and start delivering value to people in the technical stone ages. In other words: B2B.

Stop focusing on entertainment or social value and make something that actually makes or saves money. People are still paying $12,000 per seat per year for the Bloomberg Terminal. Make another one of those.

Re: The real reason we’re upset about Sparrow’s acquisition

#200

Post by tubbo »

steve8918 wrote: post #60

Unfortunately, this is what you get when you pay $10 for an app. There is a huge disparity when it comes to the cost of apps these days vs the salaries required to sustain the engineers who make those apps. Even at $10/pop, you need to sell a lot of apps just to sustain the salaries of very good engineers, and THIS is what makes great products vulnerable to acqui-hires. The problem is that the $0.99 model of the App…

What's the point of paying at all if it's going to be acquired? Seems to be you could save a bit of money by just stealing it until it gets acquired, then download the free version legally. I'm all for supporting independent developers, but I feel like I'm wasting money when I buy an app that's just going to be free in the future anyway.
Post reply on HN