I'm not too happy about Sublime Text 3

Re:I'm not too happy about Sublime Text 3 by huhtenberg on Tuesday February 26, 2013 @11:06AM (#5286345)

> Just give us incremental updates and charge a yearly fee.

Hahahahaha... why do I get a feeling that this guy would've called this a "dick move" too if ST dev did in fact do as he suggested? After all, he paid for the damn software, why should he be paying again some ridiculous annual fee to have this PoS collection of bits fixed over and over again. By the way, isn't it suspicious that fixes never stop. It must be to keep everyone hooked up on the maintenance licensing. Just give us our incremental updates, period.

You get the picture. Once a whiner, always a whiner.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I'm not too happy about Sublime Text 3 by czottmann on Tuesday February 26, 2013 @11:13AM (#5286407)

I know him personally, and I can assure you, you are dead wrong.

Thanks for playing, tho.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I'm not too happy about Sublime Text 3 by omni on Tuesday February 26, 2013 @11:53AM (#5286726)

Have you ever heard the term "straw man argument?"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I'm not too happy about Sublime Text 3 by huhtenberg on Tuesday February 26, 2013 @12:28PM (#5286973)

Have you heard of any non-enterprise software that charges annual fee for an access to the updates?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I'm not too happy about Sublime Text 3 by kevinh on Tuesday February 26, 2013 @12:50PM (#5287136)

All of the JetBrains products.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:I'm not too happy about Sublime Text 3 by huhtenberg on Wednesday February 27, 2013 @04:15AM (#5291429)

Right. Any others?

Point being that this is an unconventional fee model with very little real-world adoption, except for the enterprise market, where it's a norm. So trying to use it outside of that niche is risky. For every person who says that they would pay for the maintenance, there will be a dozen who will be completely pissed by it and won't hesitate to trash the product.

[ Parent | on HN ]