Sublime Forum

Why buy ST2 is so expensive?

#35

I find ST2 to be expensive also, but not in license costs. The $60 is peanuts compared to the investment in changing my workflow, and the opportunity costs from that.

I’ve been using ST2 since October and I’m still not sure if it’s for me. It has its quirks, but I can live with them because it also has great features. The biggest thing keeping me on the fence has been the development lifecycle. It’s not OSS – fine, I don’t want to flog that horse again – but that does mean visibility into the product’s development progress is that much more important to me. Especially since it’s a one-man show. Yet there hasn’t been a blog post from the author since late July, and not even a “nightly” build since September.

This, to me, is why ST2 is expensive.

0 Likes

#36

Completely agree.
OR (let me put this way): I don’t think that the price for ST2 is so high… or, at least, the productivity you get back pays for the cost of the product.
BUT, should I but ST2 today, with the above mentioned “problems”??

Don’t get me wrong: I’m loving ST2, but some “life signal” from the developer would be appreciated… :wink:

0 Likes

#37

Very good point. I only recently discovered ST and I was on board all the time I thought the development speed was still high. I could ignore the flaws, expecting them to be ironed out within a reasonable timespan, but I haven’t scraped together the money for a license because I don’t want to line up behind the wrong product too soon. For an unpaid developer like me, it’s a substantial price to pay for something I might later regret.

0 Likes

#38

memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=2
Last visited:Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:22 am

it’s alive :wink:

:arrow_right: btw, i’m considering to buy ST2, but i’m waiting for some news. If today I buy ST2 , and tomorrow it’s launch of ST3 gonna be sad.

0 Likes

#39

Yea, however 10% conversion ratio in case when the product can also theoretically be used for free … I would not be that optimistic

Take a look at youtube videos, usually only 1% of people seeing the video rate it … and that costs 1 second and $0

As written by Seth Godin…

0 Likes

#40

[quote=“NoxArt”]

Yea, however 10% conversion ratio in case when the product can also theoretically be used for free … I would not be that optimistic

Take a look at youtube videos, usually only 1% of people seeing the video rate it … and that costs 1 second and $0

As written by Seth Godin…[/quote]

That result wouldn’t have separated unregistered users because it’s highly unlikely he would’ve had access to the data needed, so it’s a poor analogy given that all Sublime users can be considered “registered”. What’s more, people like me don’t rate YouTube videos, generally speaking, because it’s pointless but I do sometimes buy proprietary software. Different strokes and all that.

0 Likes

#41

Sublimetext is too expensive? I say no. Coda will cost about 64 euros, a sexy interface is that it was already - I bought Coda and I’m not really happy with it. Unlike Sublimetext. FTP support, because I have Transmit.

For a professional developer of the award sets eh represents the lowest hurdle, the price for the license sought is purely with an hour of work and still have money for a good lunch for disposal.

For recreational users Sublimetext may be too expensive, because that would not make any money, but you’re not forced to buy one license needs to take the “buy me” message be content.

In my understanding, it certainly looks like that when I use a tool which gives me an advantage, then I should also be willing to pay the price. Otherwise, I have to look for other alternatives (of which there are plenty).

I also pay for the current state of the software, I do not buy a lifetime of updates. I can not expect every day JPS developed a new update so that my update addiction is satisfied. Sure it would be nice if once JPS clearly expresses the future because it is surprising, even if since September no new nightly update came out.

0 Likes

#42

[quote=“sfuchs”]Sublimetext is too expensive? I say no. Coda will cost about 64 euros, a sexy interface is that it was already - I bought Coda and I’m not really happy with it. Unlike Sublimetext. FTP support, because I have Transmit.

For a professional developer of the award sets eh represents the lowest hurdle, the price for the license sought is purely with an hour of work and still have money for a good lunch for disposal.

For recreational users Sublimetext may be too expensive, because that would not make any money, but you’re not forced to buy one license needs to take the “buy me” message be content.

In my understanding, it certainly looks like that when I use a tool which gives me an advantage, then I should also be willing to pay the price. Otherwise, I have to look for other alternatives (of which there are plenty).

I also pay for the current state of the software, I do not buy a lifetime of updates. I can not expect every day JPS developed a new update so that my update addiction is satisfied. Sure it would be nice if once JPS clearly expresses the future because it is surprising, even if since September no new nightly update came out.[/quote]

Well said.

0 Likes

#43

I’m agreed with OP. Let’s imagine, if ST2 costs $10, it’ll be too many users of pro version, and developers will get more money. Even OSX cost much cheaper. I love ST2, but currently I have to use ST2 and NP++ because NP++ have built-in FTP plugin.

0 Likes

#44

I’d have to disagree. It’s roughly the price of a normal technical book, certainly affordable. Considering the amount of time we spend in text editors, the price is ok (I personally regard it as an investment in continued development of ST).

I still use vim or emacs for some tasks, and I was so far unable to use anything other than Eclipse/Netbeans/IntelliJ for nontrivial java applications (and even trivial ones get annoying pretty fast), but especially for dynamic languages like Clojure, CoffeeScript or Ruby I prefer the lightweight-ness of editors like Sublime (without actually sacrificing power!).

0 Likes

#45

Apple does not make money with OSX, they win money by selling hardware. OSX is just a way to make people keep on buying their hardware, that is why it’s so cheap.

There are plenty of free FTP clients for Mac OS such as Cyber Duck. But if you want to use a built in solution, there’s even an FTP plugin for ST.
wbond.net/sublime_packages/sftp

0 Likes

#46

One hour into a freelance project will easily pay for ST2, I wonder how many hours Jon put into developing ST2?

Do the right thing and support awesome indie developers.

0 Likes

#47

As a developer of exclusively open source software and freeware, ST isn’t affordable to me because I choose to give away the things I write with it. Kind of ironic in a not-really-ironic-at-all sorta way.

I know it’s by personal choice but it’s still a bitter pill to swallow.

0 Likes

#48

Dunno, I don’t make any money with ST2 either and had no problem buying ST2 after about 2 months of evaluation.
I bought a lot of software I really like even if there’s open source for it (FTP, Archiver, etc…).

I think it’s a matter of personal preference.

0 Likes

#49

I evaluated ST2 for a couple months, but after using it for 9-10hrs a day, 5-6days a week… more then happy to pay the small $60 fee :smile:

0 Likes

#50

About this “unlimited” evaluation period, when we can use ST2 without paying: is it legal to use unregistered copy on my work PC in office? I mean I’m agree to see those reminders during saving etc, and sure to buy legal copy in several month but in theory - is there any theoretical law violation in using it on evaluation terms in company, for work purposes?

btw, price is ok, I think. Usually, people who write code for money using such soft make 10, 20 or even 50 times (per month I mean) as ST2 costs. At least, in Ukraine.

0 Likes

#51

I agree… i would’'ve payed for a PRO license if the price was around $30 … $70 is way to much.
You know how rich Markus Persson became just by selling his Minecraft for a couple of dollars…
It’s all about quantity.

I bet if you sold the editor for around $30 you make it affordable for 3x more people

Less buyers with high prices = $$ (2x70=140)
More buyers with lower prices = $$$$$$ (6x30=180)

Has always been this way… and it will always stay this way.

0 Likes

#52

[quote=“niquedegraaff”]I agree… i would’'ve payed for a PRO license if the price was around $30 … $70 is way to much.
You know how rich Markus Persson became just by selling his Minecraft for a couple of dollars…
It’s all about quantity.

I bet if you sold the editor for around $30 you make it affordable for 3x more people

Less buyers with high prices = $$ (2x70=140)
More buyers with lower prices = $$$$$$ (6x30=180)

Has always been this way… and it will always stay this way.[/quote]

It has been proven that’s it’s not so simple (doesn’t have the reference link).
Some software writers had try to play with price and their conclusions was in the end the profit is approximately the same:
Divide the price by 2 and you sell 2 times more.

But if you sell 2 times more it means 2 times more questions, bug reports, …

0 Likes

#53

Australia must be suffering rampant inflation. 5 months on and now $70

I fritter away cash all over the place for great software and even I have to wince at that

0 Likes

#54

Hi !

I am using Sublimetext now for 2 Month and i think its worth every cent. I paid enough money for other Programs of any kind over the Years and i can’t even remember the names of some of them. :wink:

Sublimetext is really great, in my opinion. Everyone can test it for free. Everyone can use a free Editor, there are alot really good Alternatives.

Mfg Tobi

0 Likes