Isn't this the case with Vim, too?

Perhaps an amazing text editor is a project that's easily given to being a one-man-show. A single developer writing code and then thinking, "I need to make myself a better tool than this".

It doesn't look like it's the case with Vim - https://github.com/neovim/neovim

The wiki gives a good overview of the problems with current Vim https://github.com/neovim/neovim/wiki/Introduction#problem

I read about Neovim on HN when the developer (Thiago de Arruda) was crowdfunding it to make it his full time job. I remember Bram had refused (ignored?) a few pull requests from Thiago, which is one of the reasons for Neovim.

I was wondering whether Neovim would end up as a one-man endeavour too, but it seems like a pretty lively project with loads of other people involved - I'm really looking forward to seeing where it goes next.

No. Vim is opensource and developed by a community.

Nope. Technically correct (it is open source), but Vim in reality is mostly a one man show, 90% developed by Bram.

TextMate was just a one man show (with lots of community support) for quite a while. Might still be actually, although I think there were a couple of other people full time on it for a while.

I'd say it is used by more than just "thousands" of developers. https://sublime.wbond.net/stats :-D

I can't imagine that the product hasn't made enough money that it wouldn't be viable to hire a developer, or to take on investment to expand the operation. ST seems to be the most popular code text editor amongst developers.

Textmate had that mind share for a while. That one man shop pretty much stoppped. I see no reason why Sublime won't go that way if other developers (somehow) aren't brought in.

Developers do get tired and burn out.

Have to agree with you.

I bought ST just like many friends did. Sublime may be selling about as much as RubyMotion, which invested the proceeds in hiring very few, high-level coders that seem to be fully inline with the founder/original author.

Just a proof that freemium model doesn't work.

What proof? For one, he said "he can't imagine that they haven't made enough money" and he's correct. They have made boatloads of money. If they don't hire someone else to help with programmer, that's their choice.

Second, ST is not based on a freemium model. Only the betas are free (and that only as long as there's no stable release), for the stable versions you have to pay.

How much do you estimate ST makes a month? Considering, the software doesn't coerce you to buy a license by restrictions and you can continue evaluating forever, I speculate the sales records to be a bit gloomy.

What "proof" do you have that they made "boatloads of money"?

For one, the wild recognition it has in the editor space. People have been raving about it, left and right.

Second, the fact that since ST2 he was able to hire a second person to help him with the business side.

About as much proof as the poster above him.