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

On paying for software

seths.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 279 posts

Re: On paying for software

#261

Post by ttoinou »

gkya wrote: post #257
ttoinou wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what sense do you not "own" your codebase if you release it under the GPL? There is no concept of property for information. By hiding your source codebase and the way it is being built (the same logic applies to your DAW music project, your video software editing file project etc...) you are making life harder for people who try to replicate features of your software, understand techniques behind it or pretend to…

There is very little in the world of software that's hard to replicate. And there's almost nothing that does not have any F/OSS alternatives.

But still "harder", it puts a heavier barrier of entry for others to enter the same area as you. The fact that there are FLOSS alternatives has nothing to do with what we're talking about

Re: On paying for software

#262

Post by pbhjpbhj »

RandomCSGeek wrote: post #253
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Software basically can't be objectively priced. // Can anything be objectively priced, how?

I can buy apples at a somewhat objective price by comparing the price provided by other sellers in nearby stores. Also the price will be mostly affected by supply vs demand. OTOH, softwares prices can be affected by too many parameters. Then again, IT industry is a child when compared to say, mechanical or Civil industries.

Your first method just overprices/wrong-prices the whole market. I'd argue that supply-demand doesn't give fair pricing (which presumably is what's meant [in part] by objective), if you can make something very cheaply does that mean you objectively deserve to be very rich simply because you've got a corner on that market?

Re: On paying for software

#263

Post by TimJYoung »

wazoox wrote: post #168
TimJYoung wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, donations, etc. may work for some creators, but they will not work for all. There are always going to be products that are "Wow, I'm donating to her !", but the vast majority are more of the "plumbing" variety that are much, much harder to monetize in ways other than "pay me".

You seem to forgot that most independent developers don't make money, period. The fact that your app is open source or not is only marginally related to the fact that it earns you a living. Thousands upon thousands developed applications for desktop or mobile or whatever and simply cant' make end meet . Believing that because your app has a sticker price on it will make you money is an illusion . I hire some dev inte…

No, I didn't forget or ignore the fact that a lot of software products fail to make money. I went through several failed software product attempts before building one that stuck, and it's part of the process of getting to know what one's forte is, as well as getting good at running a software company and making money from it.

But, I would seriously argue the proposition that open sourcing one's software does not harm your ability to make money from it. Exhibit A is how often you see a mass of "They want money ? We're switching/forking !!!" type of posts and comments whenever the inevitable "we need to start making money from this project" point hits with an open source project.

As for your example, you're kind of making my point for me. ;-) It's a serious issue, and one that I'm trying to make as much as possible: as software developers, we're seriously harming our own economic well-being as a group by being overly-altruistic and conditioning (what would normally be paying) customers into thinking that our work is without value. It doesn't matter what the reality is, but free=no value in the eyes of consumers.

Re: On paying for software

#264

Post by TimJYoung »

Avshalom wrote: post #145
TimJYoung wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but that statement was followed by more details as to exactly what I meant. A model that only works for a small percentage of people does not work . My point is that you can't start a business based upon some vague hope that someday, somehow, someone will possibly choose to donate money to you. You need a reliable stream of income, and one that will keep coming long after the shine has worn off the original prod…

>>My point is that you can't start a business based upon some vague hope that someday, somehow, someone will possibly choose to donate money to you. You need a reliable stream of income, and one that will keep coming long after the shine has worn off the original product and now you're slogging through complicated maintenance and upgrades What part of that doesn't apply equally proprietary software too?

I see the biggest difference being that with commercial software you know when to stop and move on to something else.

Re: On paying for software

#265

Post by jancsika »

jcrben wrote: post #218
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but this sounds like an opportunity for something like “Uber for FLOSS support.” Or perhaps it would be more like OkCupid. But you could pay money and your FLOSS problems get researched and solved for you by a developer who is experienced in this area. In practice I can see this as a forum where people make minimal effort posts and skilled people give them quality support. Just as I was forming the previous sent…

This has existed for a while: https://www.bountysource.com/ It hasn't been a tremendous success story so far - but these things take time.

That's different. I'm talking about participating as a user in a FLOSS mailing list, getting to know the people involved, then asking one of the devs if they can fix a bug or add a feature for you in exchange for money.

Re: On paying for software

#266

Post by carapace »

afarrell wrote: post #251
carapace wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the world you propose, option #1 is impossible. You can still send $50 to the creator of ReticulatorPro? But that's not quite your point, is it? You're saying that I, as a developer, should be able to work on a product that doesn't have enough qualified demand (pre-sales or crowd-funds) upfront to pay for its development costs, and expect to cover my gamble by requiring customers to give me money before allowing…

Correct.

Okay, cool.

Meaning no disrespect, what I'm saying is, I think that's dumb.

Not the first part, that's a problem I face personally: I'm a developer working on a product that doesn't have any qualified demand upfront. (Heaven help me, it's a programming language!) I'm really hoping the Zig creator's plan works out because that would be my ideal life (modulus living in NY. Wonderful city, but I like forest.)

The second part: attempting to limit copying of a digital artifact after it's been written is really hard and I think that setting up your business strategy to rely on it is pragmatically and strategically foolish. That's not to say it can't be done. More like, imagine an alternate universe where Microsoft open-sources DOS and Windows from the very start and Bill Gates has only $100M net worth...

As an aside, in re: getting those 10,000 fans. I've found that a lot of people are lacking one or two skills that would really help them succeed, and if they can connect with other people who have those skills then together they can really take off. If growing a fanbase feels daunting to you, that's okay, you can get a consultant, coach or co-founder that can do it. Kevin Smith found Jason Mewes whose performance in "Clerks" catalyzed both their careers. Anyhow, for my own project, I am going to try "Tupperware parties" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupperware#Tupperware_parties

Finally, working on projects you love and believe in is great and I don't knock it, I'm doing it myself, but if you're starting a business to make money you really should pre-qualify your idea, and doing that by pre-selling and/or crowd-funding gives you pretty $$$olid feedback that there's real demand for your product.

Re: On paying for software

#267

Post by andyidsinga »

mherrmann wrote: post #248
andyidsinga wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(sorry - I little off topic) Just curious, how did you come to your current pricing? (I saw your blog post about sublime)

I'm not sure if you mean the prices themselves ($18/12) or the scheme "perpetual license + optionally updates for $x/year". Feel free to hit me up on twitter @m_herrmann.

I was thinking mostly about the $18 license. More generally though, your process on pricing in general would be cool to learn about. For instance - sources of inspiration from "the literature" (ex. Strategy and tactics of pricing), past experience, user price sensitivity testing etc.

thanks - appreciate your response and its cool to see you building and selling your software!

Re: On paying for software

#268

Post by jcoffland »

justinclift wrote: post #209
jcoffland wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gina Häußge is the only one making reasonable money on Patron for a software project, last I checked. I exchanged several emails with her about this very topic. Despite her success in fund raising, even she was concerned about the long-term viability of this sort of funding. I also am the author of an active Open-Source project. I accept donations but they have never amounted to much.

Just noticed you're the primary author of CAMotics. I'd heard of it before, but haven't yet tried it out. I'll try to get time to do so, as I've recently started helping out a different CNC project (github.com/synthetos/g2). They kind of look like they might complement each other. Not 100% sure yet though. ;)

Yes, I'm friends with the Syntheos guys. It can work with CAMotics. You might also be interested in another project I work on, the Buildbitics Open-Source CNC controller.

Re: On paying for software

#269

Post by cup-of-tea »

jackweirdy wrote: post #135
cup-of-tea wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What in the... You could donate to the FSF, OSI, or directly to the developers of most projects. Did you even bother looking?

A donation doesn’t reasonably entitle you to expect anything. A purchase does

Does it? In either case the code is already written. Your payment doesn't mean there will be new features.

Re: On paying for software

#270

Post by user5994461 »

terragon wrote: post #216
user5994461 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Expect 500 euros per day for a cheap developer in Eastern Europe. Maybe similar for Indian outsourcing or Latin American. Expect over a 1000 dollars per day for a qualified developer in a first world location. Point being. No individual can pay that much and the develop should rather get a day job unless the software has high earning potential.

Which developer in a first world country has 30k a month in salary? $1000 a day is beyond ridiculous!

They are standard rates for contracting and outsourcing firms.

500 euro a day is about 100k a year, accounting for 200 work days in a year.

Remove the margin of the firm, pension, healthcare, sick leave, company taxes, office costs, benefits... and what's left is the gross salary.

Post reply on HN