
TextExpander 6 or How Not to Launch Your SaaS - arm
http://rhymeswithdiploma.com/post/142315992434/textexpander-6-or-how-not-to-launch-your-saas
======
rbritton
I recently started using PHPStorm for some of my PHP coding. They have an
interesting hybrid purchase model that I consider very fair.

The way it works is that there's a monthly subscription to start using it.
While you're paying monthly, you get every update included. The twist is that,
after 12 months of payments, you obtain a perpetual license. If you decide to
stop the subscription at any time, you're able to continue using up to the
most recent update before you canceled.

~~~
dustinchilson
That is not the model they use, you fallback farther than you think sometimes.

[https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-
gb/articles/207240845](https://sales.jetbrains.com/hc/en-
gb/articles/207240845)

~~~
caseysoftware
Thanks for this link. I don't particularly like it but this is the clearest
explanation that I've seen.

On the plus side, it does encourage them to have a major release every year so
they can keep resetting that 12 month clock.

And if it's a trivial "major" release, then you can fallback to the last
version without much loss. If it's a useful major release, it's motivation for
you to hang around.

------
WaltPurvis
I hadn't heard this news. I'm sure it's not as insane as it sounds, i.e., I'm
sure they must have their reasons for thinking this is the way to go, but as a
long-time TextExpander user I'm disappointed. I would _never_ pay $5/month for
TE. I bought it, and paid for upgrades, because it suits my need as an
individual user. I have no need for "team" features and their decision to
intentionally break existing sync functionality in order to force users to
accept their new pricing scheme borders on extortion. I'll continue to use TE5
for the time being while I investigate other, more reliable options.

~~~
erikrothoff
Curious, as someone in a similar position as Textexpander: Don't you think TE
will be able to provide with more, stable updates thanks to the stable income
a subscription provides? Selling software is a lot like living under the gun
constantly . The sentiment seems to be that people use TE a lot, daily. Why
not support the developer(s) behind this service?

~~~
WaltPurvis
TextExpander has been around for a long time. I'm using version 5, i.e., the
fourth major version upgrade. There's little or nothing else that needs to be
added to the product at this point.

They charged an upgrade fee for new major versions. IIRC, it was $19.95 to
upgrade from v4 to v5. I didn't mind paying that, even if the new features
were minor (I can't even remember what they were -- and I think I actually
upgraded only because v4 wouldn't work anymore on a newer version of OS X,
though my recollection could be wrong).

That's the life-cycle of software products sold on the traditional model. At
some point you need to realize you've wrung all the money you can out of
upgrades, and if the revenue from new sales and (increasingly rare) major
upgrades isn't enough to live on, well, you better develop some new and
different products. Of course it's better for you as a developer if you can
convince people to pay you $60 per year in perpetuity for your small utility
app, rather than just collecting a one-time $30 sale and occasional upgrade
fees, but just because that's your super-dream-fantasy business model doesn't
mean it makes any sense for customers.

------
VengefulCynic
TextExpander has always been straddling the markets of "casual consumer with
$20 to spend on an app that reduces pain" and "professional customer willing
to spend $199 to reduce major time costs." It looks like they've decided to
focus on their professional customers... I hope that this works out well for
them.

As someone who doesn't need $5/month of TextExpander services, this also
leaves me in the market for a new solution.

~~~
steveax
Give Keyboard Maestro [1] by Stairways Software (headed by Peter Lewis, author
of Anarchie) a try.

No connection, just a happy user.

[1]:
[https://www.keyboardmaestro.com/main/](https://www.keyboardmaestro.com/main/)

~~~
jaymzcampbell
Just to chip in as another very happy user of Keyboard Maestro here - I have
been using it for text expansion as well as more general macros and it has
made switching to a Mac full time a pleasure. Combined with Alfred it takes
'power user' to another level.

I use it for as much friviolous stuff as serious things
([http://i.imgur.com/YgE82eP.png](http://i.imgur.com/YgE82eP.png)) - having
never used TextExpander, I've not had any problems with the text replacements.
It's possible to open dialogs and very quickly make UIs too for more involved
stuff.

~~~
kstrauser
Does Keyboard Maestro support text fields where it prompts you for input
before sending the completion? For instance, TextExpander and aText let you
write something like:

    
    
      :foo expands to
      
      Dear [name], thank you for buying our stuff. We like you, [name]!
    

Then, when you type ":foo", it prompts you for "name" and fills out the
template with "name" inserted everywhere it's mentioned. This is enormously
useful for form letter types of things, or even more esoteric uses like
expanding HTML tags ("<[tag]>[content]</[tag]>").

~~~
leejoramo
There are a number of ways to do this. Native to Keyboard Maestro are:

 _Prompt For User Input_ [1] is the easiest method and allows you to build a
form fully within the KM's GUI.

 _Custom HTML Prompt_ [2] lets you make a full HTML/CSS/JS form. I have never
had need of this, but in principle you can leverage any web browser tools such
as jQuery and Bootstrap to make a complex form.

Check out the KM forums for examples. KM also allows you to fully integrate
AppleScript and shell scripts, so you could do all sorts of other crazy
workflows.

[1]
[https://wiki.keyboardmaestro.com/action/Prompt_for_User_Inpu...](https://wiki.keyboardmaestro.com/action/Prompt_for_User_Input)

[2]
[https://wiki.keyboardmaestro.com/action/Custom_HTML_Prompt](https://wiki.keyboardmaestro.com/action/Custom_HTML_Prompt)

~~~
kstrauser
Thanks to you (and everyone else) for the clarification. That's my single
biggest need from a TextExpander replacement.

------
filmgirlcw
I was talking about this on Twitter yesterday, on the whole of it, I agree
with TJ's critique -- this was NOT launched well. But I do sympathize with how
difficult it is to move a product -- especially a well-loved product -- to a
different model.

I use TE dozens of times a day and although I could use an alternative (there
is Keyboard Maestro which I also use, but for different stuff, aText and a
host of others), I'll just pay the $48 a year or whatever (I think it's $24
for the first year for existing customers) for the solo version. Simply put,
I've received enough value from the app over the years to make it worth that
to me.

That said, I don't think they have the right pricing. I think $5 a month for
single users is too high.I think $10 a month per users for teams is too high
too.

But the broader move to a SaaS in this case to me is troubling because my
instinctive response is, "Smile is doing this because they have to" \-- and
that says a lot about the current state of indie software, that a subscription
model is the only way forward. I've seen this with other Mac apps I enjoy and
in most of those cases, I don't use them enough to make the jump. With TE, I
do, so I will. But I do wonder how many will follow.

~~~
coldtea
> _But I do sympathize with how difficult it is to move a product --
> especially a well-loved product -- to a different model._

If it's well loved, then why move it to a different model?

~~~
MaysonL
Because they haven't been getting very much money any more from all the
customers who have it, and love it. They've probably come close to saturating
the market for people who would want the capability.

------
stblack
I make very good bank writing software an selling my services. I certainly
would not miss this trifling monthly expense. As a business owner I can write
it off. I absolutely LOVE TextExpander, it makes my life better.

No way in hell I'm paying $5 per month for it though. If I don't, hard to
imagine many who will. What idiots!

Also, now we'll see what Katie and Macsparky are made-of, won't we? I imagine
the hitherto well deserved fawning over an excellent, #winning product is
going to end PDQ. We'll see.

I expect an expeditious climb-down from whatever the folks at Smile have been
perching-on.

And what of PDF Pen? That's also a massively interesting question.

------
jwr
I'm a TextExpander user since 2010. I have been buying "major upgrades" as
they came out, without caring much for the features.

I would be very happy to switch to subscription-based pricing. I think we
should finally abandon the idea that software can be "purchased" once and used
forever. It's unrealistic. Developers need money to fix bugs and adapt the
software to new operating systems and environments. Users will not keep the
current OS version forever. And yet we still play that silly game where
developers have to announce "major features" in order to justify getting some
money once every several years.

There are several essential utilities that I'd gladly pay a subscription fee
for. I don't want new features, I just want the software to be regularly
polished, I want bugs to be fixed and I want it to work with newer OS
versions.

That said, I consider $48/year to be too high a price. I'd be willing to pay
$20/year for TextExpander. So for now I'm not subscribing, and I'll see what
happens. If the price doesn't come down, I'll have to look for other
solutions.

~~~
etimberg
> think we should finally abandon the idea that software can be "purchased"
> once and used forever.

I certainly hope not. If I as a consumer want to use a certain software
version locally then I should have that right. Why should I pay for developers
to make features that I don't need / want?

------
girzel
I always liked the Tinderbox pricing scheme. You pay X amount for a year of
updates. It's not super cheap. You get your year of updates, and then you
coast on the last version you got, until the next time you decide to shell out
for a year of updates. If you like the software you can pay every year on the
dot, and always be up to date. If you're ambivalent you can pay for one year
every five years, and just accept the fact that you're using out-of-date
software for four years. Or mix and match. Seems pretty reasonable.

[http://www.eastgate.com/Tinderbox/](http://www.eastgate.com/Tinderbox/)

------
dvcrn
This reminds me of an app called "Spendee", a expense tracker. I bought it in
it's previous version and was very happy with it. Then they decided to release
an update with a subscription based model ([http://www.spendeeapp.com/spendee-
pro](http://www.spendeeapp.com/spendee-pro)) instead.

I can still use the free version which is very similar to what I bought before
but I think it is ridiculous to note what they give you for $2/month: Multiple
wallets, share wallets, syncing and budget planning.

Multiple wallets and budget planning should have been a one-time purchase.
Syncing built in. I just don't understand why I should pay a monthly fee for
the ability to create multiple wallets.

Then on the other hand there are apps like parcel
([https://parcelapp.net](https://parcelapp.net)) that charge you $2/year for
having a tracking server that pushes parcel updates to your phone. I would
have been easily ok with spending more on it.

~~~
arvinsim
The same thing happened to
YNAB([http://www.youneedabudget.com/](http://www.youneedabudget.com/))

I understand the reasons for moving to a subscription model. It just doesn't
sit well with some customers though(that includes me).

------
protomyth
At what level of pricing does a Netflix-style service for indy mac developers
work? I would guess the judging who gets the money will be just as fun as
streaming music, but I am honestly wondering if we have hit death by a hundred
$5 subscriptions. Its a real shame we never got to the frictionless / no-per-
transaction fee micropayments.

~~~
natch
Eww what a horrible idea, I hope it dies quickly. It will bring in bundling
(more eww) and the idea that you need to keep paying $10/month for "$600 a
month of value" when all you really need is one or two little utility apps
that should have cost a one-time payment of five bucks. From the greedy
business side, this sounds like a great deal, but for users, it's a really bad
deal, and their choice is diminished to the extent that any software gets
swept into this kind of system.

Part of the problem is software developers (I'm one) who feel entitled (I
don't) to a lifetime of full income for one project. TextExpander seems a
textbook case of what should be a light utility becoming a hungry beast of a
business that needs constant feeding, at the cost of its users.

~~~
protomyth
I'm not sure its any worse for the consumers than Netflix itself. I'm also a
software developer on the side and looking at the landscape right now, I
cannot help but think the App Store concept has failed. I don't think the
average user would stick to 1 or 2 utility apps if given a choice of having an
App Store worth of content to play with.

------
kstrauser
Very late, but I just got an email from the 1Password gang. They've also
adopted a subscription model, with the key difference being that it's 100%
optional. The free version still gets you a completely usable product complete
with syncing through iCloud, Dropbox, etc.

For about the same annual fee (actually less because 1Password gives you a
permanent upgrade discount), I can share Netflix passwords with my kids and
bank passwords with my wife. That's tremendously more valuable than the
possibility of sharing a email signature snippet with her, and 1Password
didn't gut their app to force upgrades on anyone.

Two companies launch subscription plans, for the same price, at the same time.
One is universally praised and the other widely trounced. Some b-schooler will
be writing a compare-and-contrast case study on this in the very near future.

------
iMark
For a relatively simple service, I'd instinctively be happy paying $5-10 per
year.

To ask that per month is going to be difficult.

------
jonstokes
No mention of Typinator? I switched to it a few years ago because the
performance on some version of OS X (don't remember which) was way better than
TextExpander's. It does its job, so I've never bothered to try out anything
else.

~~~
veidr
I use Typinator too, for similar reason (had some trouble with TextExpander
many versions ago). So far, Typinator's not given me any trouble to justify
switching to anything else.

------
ishu3101
They should consider using maintaince instead of versioned licensing model for
TextExpander like PhraseExpress is doing now since Phraseexpress v10. See
[http://www.phraseexpress.com/maintenance.htm](http://www.phraseexpress.com/maintenance.htm)
to find out more about the maintenance license PhraseExpress uses.

------
1123581321
The author confuses subscription pricing with the increased cost in this
essay. If TextExpander 6 had a one-time cost of $60 (3x increase), or a SaaS
pricing model of $1/mo (about the same cost), I couldn't tell which of those
the author would pay. I can imagine different objections to each.

~~~
watty
I think he's trying to focus on the model, not the price. I'm not sure why you
think he'd object to a $60 base price or what that has to do with his point.

~~~
1123581321
I agree the gist of the article is about the model. About half of the essay
deals with price relative to value, which gets into the actual costs in that
model.

 _" Is TextExpander worth ½ of Office 365?" "I don’t see anything that I
really need in TextExpander version 6." "TextExpander makes things a little
easier, which was enough to justify the initial price of TextExpander and
upgrades, but not a monthly fee."_

I think the author would object to a $60 base price based on those comments.
Since Smile effectively made two pricing changes at once when they switched to
$60/year, it's hard to consider one of them independently.

What does this have to do with his point? He may have been harsher on the
subscription model than he intended and other developers with a low-cost, one-
time fee model might not understand why. I think the essay illustrates why a
company should consider trying hard to make only one pricing change at a time.

------
pdenya
The Hit List, a list app for OS X and iOS did this a while ago. I actually
stopped using the app for years because of the fee but looking again now, the
syncing service has been made free and is included with subscriptions!

------
ViViDboarder
Check out Dash. Primarily feature is offline docs searching, but includes text
expansion and snippets as a side feature, but does them pretty well.

------
nickmain
This caused me to investigate the native text substitution on OS X and I found
it that it is actually OK for most basic needs.

------
melling
Are there any open source text expanders? I guess even a blog on how to build
one would be helpful.

~~~
maxerickson
It's not really germane to this discussion as it is Windows only, but there is
AutoHotKey:

[https://autohotkey.com/](https://autohotkey.com/)

(It does a lot more, but configuring text replacements is straightforward)

~~~
arm
Was about to reply that the URL is actually _ahkscript.org_ , but it seems
like the current developers finally got a hold of _autohotkey.com_ last year:

[http://ahkscript.org/foundation/history.html](http://ahkscript.org/foundation/history.html)

------
sickbeard
To answer the author's question, TextExpander is asking 5$ a month because
you're lazy and can afford it, or convenience as they call it.

------
zeveb
Why would I pay a monthly fee to expand text snippets when yasnippet[1]
exists? It's weird the things people pay for. Why, I've heard some folks buy
operating systems for their computers!

[1]
[https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/Yasnippet](https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/Yasnippet)

~~~
mrknmc
It's not really the same product. TextExpander works globally not only within
Emacs.

~~~
zeveb
> TextExpander works globally not only within Emacs.

That's why we emacs users like to do all of our typing in a single
environment. It really is an OS sometimes!

------
deedubaya
If you don't find value in a product, don't pay for it.

If you find value in a product and they charge for it, pay for it.

Bitching about how someone shouldn't charge for a service they created is
juvenile. I suggest OP a) finds another service which has a price they can
agree with or b) build their own since it's so trivial.

~~~
watty
They're doing exactly what you recommended by speaking with their wallet and
letting others know about the bad business decisions.

There's nothing juvenile about sharing an opinion.

~~~
philprx
+1 In fact that's probably one of the greatest gift of the net, wide ranging
(business) recommendation. Invaluable imho.

