Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux • Hacker News Board

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#351

Post by simias » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 9:58 AM UTC

jerguismi wrote: post #221

mattl wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unfortunately, the fundamentalist FOSS mentality we encountered on Reddit is still alive and well. This is incredibly rude. You may not like it, but GNU/Linux was built by people for user freedom, not for proprietary email clients. Instead of using words like “fundamentalist” please instead consider that you are doing something that is not welcomed by the creators of the operating system and a large number of the l…

If you consider "fundamentalist" a rude adjective to descibe the said behaviour, what would be a better adjective then? I don't have anything against that kind of attitude, it's great and I approve those guys though I myself also like to buy software. "Fundamentalism" IMO describes it pretty well and I don't see the negative connotation.

"principled"? I really try to avoid closed source proprietary software as much as possible both for ideological reasons but also because it's a pain in the ass if you like to hack your OS, you need to step around it all the time.

I can understand thinking it's a "fundamentalist" mindset if you're used to Windows or Mac and software being proprietary by default but if you're a un*x poweruser who doesn't hesitate to hack the source code of the software to customize it it's a very pragmatical approach I think.

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#352

Post by simias » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 10:03 AM UTC

hardly_a_mirage wrote: post #247

windows_tips wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"fundamentalist" is used as a slur by some people (c.f. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fundamentali... ). The slur assumes things that don't exist in the word itself, so it's not obvious the word incorporates them.

I think the difference between the slurred fundamentalist (connoting a terrorist-like figure) and a tech fundamentalist is objectively clear.

Fundamentalism implies a religion-like devotion to your principles, it's definitely pejorative used outside of this context. FLOSS is not a religion.

From https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fundamentalism :

> The tendency to reduce a religion to its most fundamental tenets, based on strict interpretation of core texts.

Using such a strong word to define your adversary's position is a way to discredit them.

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#353

Post by dpower » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 10:09 AM UTC

TuringTest wrote: post #345

dpower wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi there - I'm the author of the post in question. I chose my language carefully. I do think FLOSS only is a fundamentalist position. The word is used to describe a religious believer who interprets scripture literally. I did mean to bring the baggage, but to provoke thought rather than to insult. And I must stress, this only applies to those who believe in FLOSS ONLY, completely turning their back on proprietary sof…

What's not to like indeed? With FLOSS you get access to rewrite the code to suit your needs, independence from the provider, possibility to create as many copies as needed (no volume licensing)... And most importantly, a guarantee that any paid investment to improve the code will be available in the future, no matter what happens to the original provider company. If you pay for closed source instead, the company goin…

Those traits are desirable, but not essential for most of our users. I still maintain that rejecting ALL proprietary software is a fundamentalist position. The purpose of software is to do a job - to add value on your behalf or on behalf of a company. Although a FLOSS philosophy should factor into the equation when choosing software, it is unlikely that it should be the primary consideration (although there are cases where it could be). If you simply rule out proprietary software on principle, you are doing your company or yourself a disservice. You are failing to extract the best 'work done' from yourself or your colleagues because of an ideology. Hence the use of the word 'fundamentalist'.

I do understand that by being closed source, our software lacks the desirable properties you have mentioned. But we have not been able to find an open source model that makes financial sense for our company.

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#354

Post by simias » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 10:10 AM UTC

wendy0x2 wrote: post #229

mattl wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unfortunately, the fundamentalist FOSS mentality we encountered on Reddit is still alive and well. This is incredibly rude. You may not like it, but GNU/Linux was built by people for user freedom, not for proprietary email clients. Instead of using words like “fundamentalist” please instead consider that you are doing something that is not welcomed by the creators of the operating system and a large number of the l…

This isn't rude at all. He was describing a situation in the Linux community where a large number of users have an aversion to paid software. It's a real problem and one of the main reason osx was able to eclipse desktop software usage on linux in such a short amount of time. Responses like yours are the real problem. If you want linux desktop software to grow, there needs to be room for proprietary software.

>He was describing a situation in the Linux community where a large number of users have an aversion to paid software.

So "having an aversion" means that you're a fundamentalism? That's a bit extreme, no?

>If you want linux desktop software to grow, there needs to be room for proprietary software.

Judging by how I feel more miserable and less in control every year with the dumbification of the Linux desktop I genuinely don't want that. People keep adding abstraction layers in order to lure the mythical "average joe" to Linux, except that he doesn't care anyway so I'm the one who ends up having to deal with that bloat that doesn't offer anything to me. I'd use FreeBSD instead of Linux if I could because I prefer the way it works but I can't because of... proprietary drivers that are not available on the BSDs.

If people like to eat crap that's their problem, I don't see why I should force my self to get a taste for it just so that we can eat at the same table.

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#355

Post by dpower » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 10:13 AM UTC

massysett wrote: post #316

dpower wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi there - I'm the author of the post in question. I chose my language carefully. I do think FLOSS only is a fundamentalist position. The word is used to describe a religious believer who interprets scripture literally. I did mean to bring the baggage, but to provoke thought rather than to insult. And I must stress, this only applies to those who believe in FLOSS ONLY, completely turning their back on proprietary sof…

This shows you just do not understand either free or open source software. Plenty of companies in open source are "private companies compelled to compete in a free market." Indeed, this describes nearly all the money that drives open source development. Red Hat isn't running a charity. Neither is Google. RMS is as fundamental as they come and even he has no objection to selling software. People are taking insult from…

"This shows you just do not understand either free or open source software." - Please. Read my comment above for clarity on my position. If you reject ALL proprietary software based on ideology, I think it's fair to say you have a fundamentalist position.

We looked into open source models and couldn't find one that made financial sense for us.

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#356

Post by dpower » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 10:41 AM UTC

pjmlp wrote: post #338

dotancohen wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We were very enterprise focused, but it just didn't work. How was that focus manifested? What is your focus now? I ask because I would love to pay for an email client that has the single feature I most need. But the Hiri website only lets me know that the software: * Helps me conquer my inbox. How? I have no idea. * Removes unnecessary clutter from my inbox. I actually don't want anything removed from my inbox. * A…

$120 ridiculous, oh the prices we use to pay in the 80's and 70's even for basic stuff like having access to a compiler. Pick your monthly salary, then imagine how many units of work you would need to sell to achieve the same value at what given price. Naturally $120 means one sale equals several at $20-$40, thus easier to achieve sustainability, given the ratio of marketing and sales team efforts to effective sales.

We tried a few price points/models. This one is what seems to work for us. Every business is different and it's a matter of experimenting until you find what works.

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#357

Post by dpower » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 10:42 AM UTC

jerguismi wrote: post #260

dpower wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi there, I'm the author of the blog post. Some context you may find interesting, and maybe I should do a follow up post about this. We were very enterprise focused, but it just didn't work. We were trying to displace MS Outlook. And unfortunately, most people want to stick with Outlook. Not because it's better, but because it's what they know. We found that even if we convinced 8 out of 10 people in a company to buy…

> I would say about 50% of our customers are paying with the department credit card, and the other 50% buy it using their personal card. Is this your way to determine if it is for business or personal use? Often in small companies and startups people use their personal credit cards for business purchases. Even in some bigger companies they do that, they just invoice it later separately.

We use domains more than anything. It's not the easiest thing to determine, but I'd be pretty confident in the 50/50 scenario. But I should have said that many of the people buying with their own credit card are actually purchasing for work.

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#358

Post by dpower » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 10:46 AM UTC

alkonaut wrote: post #213

dpower wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi there, I'm the author of the blog post. Some context you may find interesting, and maybe I should do a follow up post about this. We were very enterprise focused, but it just didn't work. We were trying to displace MS Outlook. And unfortunately, most people want to stick with Outlook. Not because it's better, but because it's what they know. We found that even if we convinced 8 out of 10 people in a company to buy…

Any business that is part Linux and part windows, exchange infrastructure, will need an exchange client for all their Linux client machines? Assuming web based won’t cut it for those users, then it would seem Hiri is a good fit for that business? I can’t see in what way you are competing or displacing Outlook if you are makinhg a product for Linux. The reason it’s a viable product would be 1) because there is no Linu…

Linux is not our USP. In fact, we mostly sell to Windows users. We've been around for 5 years. We released Hiri for Linux a year ago.

Our USP is increased productivity. Check out the Skills Center: https://www.hiri.com/skills/

Also, we're not really trying to compete with Outlook per se. We will never match it feature for feature - not necessary or desirable.

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#359

Post by g5095 » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 10:52 AM UTC

magduf wrote: post #72

The big thing I see missing from all this analysis is the home vs. work distinction. You have people saying "Linux users choose FLOSS because of philosophy, and proprietary software goes against this", you have users saying "I'd have tried it if it were FLOSS and I could just download it and try it", etc., but the problem is: this is a product for working with an Exchange server. How many individual users have a need…

The one thing I miss on linux is a good mail client.

Currently using Mailspring, but honestly the paid mail clients for OSX leave anything on Linux in the dust. Airmail is my personal favorite and it's $9.99.. a couple of cups of coffee for a great experience in an area that touches your life a dozen times a day? Absolutely I'd pay for a GOOD mail client on Linux.

Re: Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux

#360

Post by DTND » Tue, Jul 24, 2018, 10:52 AM UTC

TuringTest wrote: post #65

"Unfortunately, the fundamentalist FOSS mentality we encountered on Reddit is still alive and well. Some Linux blogs and Podcasts simply won’t give us the time of day. This is not a problem with the mainstream tech blogs and is a problem unique to Linux." It seems weird that this guy will try to promote his product to the Linux community and chooses to do it by insulting its user base. While not all Linux users have…

>It seems weird that this guy will try to promote his product to the Linux community and chooses to do it by insulting its user base.

Please don't act like you are a representative sample of all linux users. FOSS centric guys are vocal but distributions like Ubuntu became very popular in part because they included and automatically installed proprietary wifi and GPU drivers right from their installer CD.

That you feel insulted reading someone talk about "fundamentalist FOSS" doesn't mean every linux user feels insulted reading the sentence.