221–230 of 374 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow that's a helpful response :/ ARM devices are happening.. without having seen your codebase I can't speak for how hard it'd be to build for a new target, but given that you're targeting win32 and posixy systems already it seems achievable. Wouldn't you much rather be the badass that works everywhere than snrk at a growing niche?
I don't think pretoriusB is Jon Skinner.
Here's what I'd love someone to organize: A Kickstarter campaign to raise enough money to pay the ST developer to make ST open-source. If ST becomes open-source, that solves one of the biggest issues many people have with ST, especially those coming from a vim/emacs background. This is something I know I would pay for, and I believe others would as well.
How much would you be willing to pay and how much do you think it'd take? The sublime text package manager has been installed 1.1 million times. Lets assume 10% of those are to a unique paid user at $60. That's $6 million right there. Sublime Text's popularity is only rising and if not a single update were released can expect good sales for several years. What do you think the odds are that Sublime Text sells a milli…
Of course, I'm probably an outlier here.
I think your assumption of 1.1 million installs belonging to 10% users is way off. Many people probably never purchase ST, but still install the Package Manager, especially since ST remains basically usable without paying. I'd think it's closer to 1%.
Of course, that still leaves us with quite a lot of money. To be honest, I hadn't looked at the figure of how many installs the package manager had - I'm pretty surprised (and happy) that ST is this popular. Guess I'll have to keep dreaming.
JetBrains should buy them and integrate all these wonderful features into Intellij. That might be the most powerful IDE ever made!
God no, please. The attractive of Sublime is that it's not an IDE, but a very fast and powerful text editor with some IDE-like niceties. If JetBrains bought it and integrated it in IntelliJ that would end killing the original project and I'd be forced to go berserk on Prague, big time.
It's 2013 and we generally still use text editors to work with code. The result is that code is typically tied to plaintext buffer by hacks and kludges in a quite awkward way. Highlighting is done by one subsystem, code analysis (if any's possible) is performed by completely another one (so highlighter output may accidentally contradict code analyzer), folding is totally separate from all those, and so on.
JetBrains has another approach to this, as most clearly seen with MPS.
Here's what I'd love someone to organize: A Kickstarter campaign to raise enough money to pay the ST developer to make ST open-source. If ST becomes open-source, that solves one of the biggest issues many people have with ST, especially those coming from a vim/emacs background. This is something I know I would pay for, and I believe others would as well.
Here's what I'd love someone to organize: A Kickstarter campaign to raise enough money to pay Microsoft to make Windows open-source. If Windows becomes open-source, that solves one of the biggest issues many people have with Windows, especially those coming from a Linux background. This is something I know I would pay for, and I believe others would as well.
Much more convincing than making analogies which most people can dismiss pretty easily.
Are these changes really worth the "3.0" tag? Goto to symbol is great, but all other bullet points taste like what I expected 2 to have once it left beta (basically, speed and not letting plugins crash my session). Isn't this a clever way to make users buy into a paid upgrade for a stable version of an editor they already bought?
The editor was already pretty stable, but maybe not the plugins, which are optional. I'd agree that the price is a bit high to upgrade, but for people like me who didn't own it yet, now is a good time to buy.
[Not that I'm saying this upgrade isn't worth it]
Here's what I'd love someone to organize: A Kickstarter campaign to raise enough money to pay the ST developer to make ST open-source. If ST becomes open-source, that solves one of the biggest issues many people have with ST, especially those coming from a vim/emacs background. This is something I know I would pay for, and I believe others would as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I already paid $59 for this software and that's enough for a text editor This only makes sense if: (a) I guess you're not a software developer, so you don't actually "make money" from the productivity increases of a text-editor good for you? or (b) you plan to switch to some other editor that's open-source (emacs? vim?) or (c) you're and IDE guy and rarely use a "simple" text editor. Please mention your use case be…
True, I'm not a software developer, but I do a lot of design with HTML/CSS and write with Markdown. I only use a sliver of the features ST has. Badically, I'm content with my $59 purchase (it's sturdy software that never gives me grief) but wouldn't eek another $30 of value from it.
Ultimately, I think continued development of plugins will force the issue, and upgrades will be required.
Version 3 is probably where I get off the ST upgrade train and just settle for version 2/3 beta. I like ST, and it serves my needs well enough, but I already paid $59 for this software and that's enough for a text editor. Paying yet another $30 isn't worth it for me, especially when I didn't ask for these upgrades.
Suppose that you cost $50,000 a year. If a new Sublime Text would only make you 2% more productive, even an upgrade for $100 per year would be peanuts. Start talking to your boss! If you use Sublime Text privately, I can see your point.
A 2% increase isn't very good IMO. I'd rather look for other efficiencies that won't cost me more money.
Here's what I'd love someone to organize: A Kickstarter campaign to raise enough money to pay the ST developer to make ST open-source. If ST becomes open-source, that solves one of the biggest issues many people have with ST, especially those coming from a vim/emacs background. This is something I know I would pay for, and I believe others would as well.
I say open source it, but continue to sell licenses for it.