
Our experience launching a paid, proprietary product on Linux - kevkav
https://blog.hiri.com/a-year-on-our-experience-launching-a-paid-proprietary-product-on-linux-db4f9116be08
======
magduf
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 for this?

This is a product for businesses. The dynamics are different: businesses can
easily be convinced to pay for software, since they do so already. If it
solves a business need, this is an easy sell.

The way to make money with Linux software has _always_ been to focus on the
business market, because you're just not going to get any significant number
of home Linux users or enthusiasts to pay for your software. And then, ignore
the home/enthusiast users. No, I wouldn't pay for an email client either, but
I don't need to connect to a Microsoft Exchange server at home. If my
workplace were trying to switch to Linux, however, I'd readily recommend such
a product to management.

~~~
dpower
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 Hiri, it
wasn't enough. IT departments don't want to support more than one email
client. 100% adoption is simply not an option.

So we pivoted to the current model. A bottom up strategy that has made the
company viable. 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.

Another interesting find - the growth stage of any given company has a role to
play too. Younger companies (both the age of the company and the age of the
staff) seem to be more open to trying new software. I guess they don't bring
any legacy issues to the table. The problem is that a lot of these young
companies choose Gmail. This is why we have chosen to support Gmail.

~~~
mattl
> 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 long-term users.

A little understanding would go a long way.

~~~
wendy0x2
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.

~~~
mattl
I don’t want “Linux desktop software” to grow. I want computer users to have
zero-proprietary software.

The problem with thinking of GNU/Linux in the same way as Windows and Mac OS X
is that it assumes a world where proprietary software is the norm, or is okay.
I believe that is isn’t okay, and that it is harmful.

~~~
glangdale
Yes, it's pretty terrible if consenting adults choose to pay for software,
isn't it?

I love FOSS, but people like you (yes, "fundamentalists") can't deal with the
idea that some forms of software are probably better as paid transactions
between well-informed parties. The laughable state of open source office
suites and any serious competitor to most of Adobe's products suggests that
this model has its limits.

~~~
mattl
You assume I’m for open source. That’s the problem.

~~~
glangdale
This isn't really germane to any point I made, but I presume this is the
standard point in the discussion where you lob this particular bombshell ("I
did so NOT see it coming that the guy who writes 'GNU/Linux' everywhere is a
Free Software purist").

Whatever I wrote about the limits of "FOSS" software can be multiplied by a
solid order of magnitude for "free only".

------
zaarn
Quite a neat insight and somewhat confirming what I think personally; Linux
users largely don't use Linux for FLOSS reasons. People who do use Linux for
FLOSS reasons are however rather loud.

I would probably not be wrong when saying that most Linux users will happily
pay a developer for the binary of an application if the dev is "doing it
right". Doing it right largely involves "don't treat the customer as a walking
wallet" and "don't fuck over the customer".

Most people would probably happily give you cash for that but I suspect
Windows people and especially Mac people are more used to paying cash to get
software ... sort of and then being treated like a walking wallet. Example:
Anti-Virus vendors and Adobe.

~~~
dlkinney
As one of the "Linux for FLOSS" users--and, yes, quite loud about it--I am
inclined to agree.

I would pay good money for a high quality application on Linux. But in large
part, one of the less-philosophical, more-practical things that I value about
FLOSS is the opportunity to fix things if something doesn't work right. While
I would gladly purchase an incredible, closed source application, I would much
more value the distribution of the source code (with a workable build chain)
along with that purchase.

In that manner, I KNOW I'm not just a buck in their wallet. It protects my
purchase, to some degree, and demonstrates a good faith relationship with the
developer. Even if I'm not allowed to distribute the code, and much prefer
FLOSS, the right to maintain my purchase is incredibly important to me.

Of course, that's almost never an option, but to my mind, that would be a fair
compromise...

~A Loud FLOSS Supporter

~~~
TimJYoung
I've always thought that this is the key to bridging the gap between
proprietary and OSS, and it's what we do with our software. In our case, the
source code _does_ cost extra, but that's because we're selling developer
libraries and we typically need to provide extra support to customers that
purchase the source code because they are also (typically) customizing the
source code in some way.

~~~
seventhtiger
I really like how Epic is handling Unreal Engine 4. The source is available,
and the standard license is revenue share. It's not necessarily open source,
but it reaped so many benefits from public contributions. You can modify it
and extend it for your own use. The revenue share means they are actively
interested in your success.

Of course video games are highly public consumer products. So you can't
actually abuse their model because if your game is successful it will be well
known.

~~~
TimJYoung
I think you may be on to something here. For smaller companies like us that
are in niche markets, the source code being available isn't a big deal because
the level of piracy is fairly low (and you don't get support).

For larger companies in larger markets, it's much, much easier to see when
someone is abusing a license or pirating the software without paying.

------
0xcde4c3db
I think this piece (along with many, many others in the genre) is unduly
discounting the practical implications of a proprietary binary for users,
preferring to blame a preference for open source solely on a "fundamentalist
FOSS mentality". For example, my next GPU is going to be a Radeon largely
because I'm tired of the weird issues that come with installing/updating
proprietary drivers, the lack of transparency around bug reports, and the
general disconnects with the rest of the FOSS ecosystem.

The specific issues for applications are different, but there are parallels.
The key thing is that FOSS on Linux isn't just an ideology, it's also an
ecosystem and a set of norms and practices. When you ship a proprietary
product, users have to weigh the cost of opting out of all of that, not just
the sticker price. Nobody with any sense would ship a Windows package solely
as source code and expect Windows users to love it. I can't imagine anyone
blaming a weak reception of such a product on a "fundamentalist proprietary
blob mentality". But when they similarly sidestep standard practices on Linux,
any friction is almost reflexively attributed to the users being unreasonable.

~~~
kevkav
The intention of the article was in no an attack on the "FOSS mentality".

FOSS is a reality and is a great thing!

The point that was being made, was that promoting paid linux applications is a
challenge. And that that challenge becomes more difficult because we need to
operate in an environment where many of the biggest publications do not want
to know anything about non-FOSS apps.

~~~
antt
Then why kick a hornets nests?

As others have noted Linux for home and Linux for work are two completely
different things.

At work I use RHEL 7, packages 5 years out of date, don't have access to build
tools to incorporate patches myself and a million and one other things I would
never tolerate at home. Throwing some more money after a program that lets me
not touch outlook sounds like a great idea.

At home I do none of the above things I can't think of a reason why I would
ever touch a binary blob.

There are plenty of people who feel the same. Don't come into a hobbyist
environment selling corporate solutions expecting a warm welcome. Instead of
/r/linux go to /r/sysadmin or some such.

~~~
nambit
What? Do you see no use for proprietary software at a home linux setup? What
about video games? Do you expect all video games on linux to be open source?

~~~
antt
I'm pretty close to being completely free of proprietary software at home.

I have to use the proprietary bootloader for my newer machines and the wifi
firmware the machines I haven't gotten around to replacing the wifi cards for
yet.

About half of my machines are on coreboot and atheros cards.

Otherwise my user space is pure free software.

For games I play open source ones like 0ad when I have the time, which isn't
often.

------
cirgue
I am increasingly happy to pay for software and services as long as the
organization producing the software has no relationship with advertisers. I
would rather pay money than use something for free that includes advertising.
If there are good open-source alternatives I will always prefer those, but
there are definitely some things that open-source will never be able to really
make work effectively (notably anything that relies on having an attractive
and efficient GUI)

~~~
kevkav
Out of interest, what linux apps have you paid for?

~~~
swalsh
I've paid for RubyMine, and PHP Storm. Not exclusively Linux, but that was the
platform I was running it on.

------
bumholio
I don't understand, why is there such a hard dichotomy between "commercial -
binary blob" and open source? Why can't most commercial software ship with
sources, with a sane license that allows a license holder to study, recompile
and modify, but not publish derivative work?

90% of the people who want the source would not pirate the software, and 100%
the pirates are satisfied with a binary copy. And don't tell me about copy
protection, in practice it's just as effective as a line in the EULA: for any
worthwhile software, those who don't care about the license don't care about
copy protection either.

I have no problem paying for software, but I don't want to surrender all
control of my hardware for a 3rd party to run secret code on it.

~~~
LarryL
> why is there such a hard dichotomy between "commercial - binary blob" and
> open source?

I see at least 2 reasons.

1) Mindset (and ignorance)

I've worked in big telecom companies, in their technical teams, which means
people who know about programming in big (BIG/HUGE) projects. Even there, many
of their -very- experienced tech people were AFRAID of anything open-source.
They were terrified that using anything that had the words "open" or "free"
(as in free software) would mean that they would have to "give" their code
"gratis" and lose their customers.

The irony? Those programs were BIG projects that were only useable with their
hardware (think stuff like devices' OSs & supervision UIs for telecom
equipments), it would not have worked with other devices and any attempt at an
adaptation would have cost more than developing from scratch. Add to that that
they only sold to a handful of companies (those hardware + software solution
are expensive) so they would immediately have noticed that something was
wrong, and you see how INSANE it was that they were afraid. They had
completely bought the FUD from Microsoft and the like.

And thoss were TECHNICAL people, I leave to your imagination the attitude of
managers... :-(((

2) Quality (or lack thereof)

A lot (if not most) of code done for "enterprise software" is of pretty bad
quality (and I'm being nice). I've seen such horrors that you are left to
wonder how anything AT ALL could work. The incompetence was staggering,
comments and tests inexistant, no source management, no documentation, "if"
conditions spread over hundreds of lines, 10 thousand lines of SQL in a single
file, config files thousands of lines long maintained by hand (which I showed
contained hundreds of errors), etc.

Showing how "sausages are made" (an horrifying view) would be bad, maybe even
suicide (once their ineptitude would be proven) for those companies.

On the other hand, the bad quality would have quaranteed that nobody used
their projects (LOL). Even compiling them was a HARD task. Real example: I had
just arrived on a project where the most experienced guy was unable to install
on my computer the tools needed for development... I had to write code
"blind": without linking & testing nor documentation. Am I surprising you when
I tell you it did not go well? (And they had the nerve of blaming me for their
incompetence!)

~~~
Nursie
There's a third issue - support.

I worked for a place about 15 years ago which was trying desperately to retire
its previous flagship product in favour of the new version. The new version
was better written and more scalable, but the major value for them was that
they had made a big mistake with the old one -

The gave away source code and allowed customers to customise the software, but
they still honoured support contracts. This had turned into a huge cost, as
engineers were having to go out to customer sites and spend days figuring out
what the customer had done.

You can't effectively support what you can't see, so you can only really
support OR allow modifications.

~~~
slrz
No sensible person is going to be mad with you for asking them to reproduce
their issue without local customizations applied if they want you to help them
with it.

Write it into your support contracts. Maybe offer smarter customers to review
and sign off on their modifications in exchange for a reasonable fee.

These problems can be solved.

~~~
bumholio
Actually, it seems like a huge wasted opportunity. If a company is so invested
in your software that it's willing to develop a custom patchset and an
internal team to maintain it, then it would make a lot more sense to buy the
service from the very people who wrote the software, that know it best and can
pull together multiple customer wishlists into standard solutions. That's why
the open source service model can exist, the original developer is uniquely
positioned to profit from these synergies and deliver value for the customer.

So you can have your proprietary cake and eat it too, you can sell "NO
WARRANTY, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED" commercial licenses at fixed prices,
but at the same time, earn much more profitable support and customization
contracts from select customers.

As for the people still opting to customize their own "NO WARRANTY"
installation, of course they won't get and don't expect any support for their
customization until they also buy a services license.

------
Klover
Regarding: "Forge strong relationships with your Linux users. Make it easy for
them to get in touch. Listen to them. Linux is a community — word will
spread!" Where _would_ be a good place to ask average users of desktop Linux
questions?

* Hiri went to Reddit. I would think that the r/linux community is a very tiny subset of users. Young and bored, who just want to be part of something? Criticizing the mainstream like Microsoft, Ubuntu, GNOME. Like goths and punks from before? That was the impression it gave me when I visited it a few months ago. Doesn't seem to be very representative of the average desktop Linux user.

* IRC is likely too technical. Finding sysadmins and developers there should be no problem, but they're likely not your average user.

* Since Linux is such a small section of the market, it probably won't be of any use to try other social media websites. You can find Windows and iOS users in any community, but not Linux users.

Unless there is no such thing as an average Linux desktop user. Maybe there is
no mom & pop, without geeky interests, careers outside of tech, who have
Ubuntu on their laptop. Maybe it's all sysadmins, developers, nerds, and
youngsters. In which case I don't think there will be a lot of reason to sell
anything there other than games and tools like Sublime, although the games
might be better on Windows and iOS.

------
TuringTest
_" 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 a problem with using proprietary source (and
those would be their natural clients), most got attracted to the platform for
the advantages of its open and freely usable code. IMHO it would do him good
to understand and respect the reasons why his potential users value free-
libre-open source software, and learn to communicate without disparaging them.

~~~
dpower
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 software. It's my opinion that
this is not a rational position. Proprietary software can complement FLOSS.
This is for the people who write to me and say "Not open source? Forget about
it!".

Personally, I am a fan of FLOSS. What's not to like? But sometimes private
companies compelled to compete in a free market produce better software. Seems
to be especially true of consumer facing software. Think Gimp vs. Photoshop or
Sketch.

Also, I don't think this is true anymore: "most got attracted to the platform
for the advantages of its open and freely usable code". It used to be true,
but I think Linux has wider appeal now. And I think that's a good thing.

~~~
massysett
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 what you say because you misrepresent their
position.

~~~
dpower
"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.

------
AdmiralAsshat
As a Linux user, while I would certainly _prefer_ to use a FLOSS app, I'm
perfectly willing to pay for proprietary software if it scratches an itch that
free software simply can't. I bought a license for SublimeText, because I
believe it still blows all other code editors out of the water. I purchased
InSync, because there's no comparable Google Drive client for Linux that just
works. I'd very much like it if the apps were FLOSS, and be allowed to donate
or something to support their efforts, but I believe it's important to be
willing to compensate the developer on their terms rather than on mine.

~~~
at-fates-hands
> I bought a license for SublimeText.

I did the same thing about six years ago and it was $75 then. Since then its
only gone up $5. For me, this is really impressive. As adobe continues to
increase the cost of their software seemingly daily, it's nice to see a
company invest in their product while still maintaining a very, very
affordable product.

I agree on the paid side as well. I just recently went "full Linux" and have
no qualms about buying quality software that makes my job as a developer
easier.

------
alexmorse
I would insta-buy a lot of linux proprietary software if it fit my needs. No
question, no hesitation.

Things like: lightroom, sketch, omnigraffle,

Your email client looks very well done! Doesn't apply to me, but if I had to
use outlook/office 365 I would probably snap it up.

~~~
sandworm101
How many people are actually free to use this product? My work uses
outlook+office but, due to 101 different things, we are locked into windows
and ie. How many people use outlook+office for email but are also free enough
from other restrictions to be allowed linux?

Our office is so locked imto win7 that the ongoing upgrade to win10 is killing
things. People are migrating to the few win7 machines to complete essential
tasks that now seem impossible on win10. Win7 laptops are being hidden from
the IT guys in padlocked security cabinets to prevent the upgrade. We are
doomed.

~~~
kevkav
A lot of people can use Hiri because runs on Windows and Mac too.

~~~
tinus_hn
Then again, so does Outlook.

------
siscia
I am trying to make a living with a software product, a database in
particular. RediSQL, SQL steroids for Redis:
[http://redbeardlab.tech/rediSQL/](http://redbeardlab.tech/rediSQL/)

So let me share a different point of view.

I find it extremely, extremely difficult.

As far as I know, if you need a solution for in memory SQL as cache layer or
also as main persistent layer it is the only available solution, on top of
that it works on top of existing, widely deployed solution.

But still I haven't received a single request for support or I have been able
to make a single sale.

Of course, I believe is mostly my fault, because similar businesses models
(sidekiq) seems to work but, if you ask me, it is definitely not worthed to
enter this market.

I will try to focus more on marketing for the following months but if it
doesn't work neither I am just going to remove the open source part and use it
as an internal advantage for my consulting business. I found it just too
convenient respect to Pg or MySQL or Mongo.

I really believe it is a pity, but I believe that if this product, by the end
of the year, doesn't work I will just stop developing product for software
developers. It is just not worthed.

~~~
jsty
A small amount of hopefully useful feedback from someone who purchases
business software:

1/ Your website gives a 'open source hobby app' vibe over 'professional,
dependable software business'. Selling support contracts in particular
requires some expectation that there's a solid business standing behind it
that won't just be gone tomorrow.

2/ The 'redirect to an external store to download / purchase' will probably be
making any sales funnel leak like a sieve. There's a complete discontinuity
between the design of the two sites, and along with trusting you with their
information / card details, they now have to trust a random third party.

3/ For a ~€1000 piece of software, I'd expect at least some period of eg.
email support, rather than just supporting through Github issues.

4/ I'd remove the option of having the open source edition available through
sign-up and just link clearly to the latest release. If you're struggling to
even get any interest on the commercial side, getting it out in front of as
many people as possible would be my priority. A clear and unambiguous 'Get
started' section that doesn't worry about open vs. Pro is probably a good idea
too. Worry about converting those to paid users later.

~~~
siscia
Definitely good feedback, thanks.

A major restructuring of the main pages is necessary, I agree.

I definitely need to re-word most part of the website, because selling support
should just be a small part of the closed source version that adds the
replication feature.

I would re-think again about selling it in a different platform, but setting
up a shop is not as easy as it is to just use plasso, maybe I can work better
on the platform to make the two more similar.

I am definitely more than keen to provide email support, but also skype or any
other meaning of support, I should definitely make it more apparent.

The idea to require a signup is to start building some sort of mail list, as I
said I didn't focus on the marketing side so much...

Thank you a lot!

Your feedback was really really helpful!

------
archi42
I believe having more proprietary software available on all platforms
(including Mac) improves the situation - especially something "basic" like a
mail client.

Yes, FOSS and Linux are "a more natural" match than proprietary and Linux, but
the truth is: You can't get everything you might want/need for free at an
acceptable quality .

Working for a company which sells niche-software for both Windows (most
customers) and Linux (some big $$$ customers), I am happy to see more
mainstream developers doing the same. If you're a making consumer software:
Please try to follow suit!

Internally, we develop on and for Linux, but our code is cross platform enough
(thanks Qt) to easily build on Linux and Windows. The biggest issue for me is
remembering which C++ constructs work with GCC/clang but not with the MS
compiler (which improved a lot in the last years - and which our CI usually
notifies me about).

------
robert_foss
Other than being engaged by Canonical, is there a reason the Snap platform be
preferable to the Flatpak one?

~~~
adsche
Snap does not even support systems where the home directory is not /home/$user
(e.g., a lot of NFS setups) so I'd be very careful. It's a long standing bug
and not even the (so far useless) error message has been adjusted.

To distribute to Ubuntu users it's good though, due to being well integrated.

------
sandworm101
"First stop, reddit"

Dont go to reddit for market research. You will only find extreem views on
reddit. They are the younger crowd. Try the ubuntu or mint forums if you want
to talk to average linux users.

I myself would pay for such an email client because no good foss one exists
atm. But i find it very odd that such basic software isnt yet free. I dont
like the idea of having my email handled by propietary software.

~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
> I dont like the idea of having my email handled by propietary software.

Fair point, although I'll point out that you're commenting on a story about a
client specifically designed for Microsoft Exchange.

~~~
sandworm101
I'm a bit extreme when it comes to my email. Work insists on outlook so I use
it there, but for private email I forgo dedicated software. I use webmail on
my phone (husmail.com). It is slower, but when the airport security guy asks
me to "unlock my phone" I can do so without revealing my email conversations.
I don't trust my Andriod phone in the same way I do my ubuntu/mint/kali linux
machines.

------
eberkund
I am optimistic about snaps even though after using them I found a lot of
kinks that still need to be ironed out. But for the users downloading free
software which is the main use case they are targeting first it works great. I
say "for users" because wrestling with snapcraft (the command used to build
snap packages) can be pretty frustrating for non-trivial programs. Cross
compiling for arm was one thing that I was struggling with and ended up just
doing my arm builds on a Raspberry Pi. A think many issues could be resolved
by having snapcraft use it's own repo sources rather than whatever the host OS
is using. Also for proprietary apps there is currently no way to have a
private "store" so you are limited to installing from a .snap package using
--dangerous --devmode flags and lose a lot of the benefits of using snaps in
the first place (mainly automated updates).

------
nailer
As an old school Linux desktop person from back in the day: whatever happened
to Evolution? The whole reason it was created was to sell an Exchange client
plugin.

~~~
keverets
I use Evolution every day with the evolution-ews plugin for accessing an
Exchange server. It's still a bit clunky as it always was, and has some issues
when switching between wired/wireless networks, but otherwise works fine for
email, calendar, and contacts.

~~~
noir_lord
Same, once or twice a week I have to close evolution and open it again to get
it to resync but otherwise it's less painful than Outlook 16 on W10.

------
lloydde
> Turns out there aren’t a lot of email clients for Linux users that work with
> Exchange / Office 365

Has Linux on the desktop really fallen so far in the last years? When did the
decay really set in?

How does open source friendly Microsoft not see Linux email clients support
falling behind at least as a problem in MS documenting its APIs, if not an
opportunity to participate in the major open source clients and influence and
attract developers?

~~~
pidg
Office 365 comes with a very good web verison of Outlook, which supports more
modern features than most email clients do (such as Office 365 Groups).

I suspect it doesn't bother them hugely that desktop client support is falling
behind on any platform.

edited to add: Oddly I can't find much marketing by Microsoft of the browser
Outlook, otherwise I'd link it here, but I'd say it's about 85-90% feature
complete compared with the desktop client.

~~~
kevkav
I do agree that the Outlook web app is good and is getting better all the
time. Personally though (and I think a lot of people would agree), I like to
have a standalone email client that doesn't constantly get lost in tab
clutter.

~~~
jrockway
Having used webmail for about 7 years (I used Gnus before), the tab clutter
problem is easy to avoid. Right click the tab, select "Pin tab", and you're
done.

------
turbinerneiter
Did anyone in here actually try?

I installed the snap, from there on it went downhill:

* after start, I get "Nouveau is known to cause crashes" -> restart for fixed rendering

* after I login, there are no mails showing up, but there is also no "Something went wrong with your login"

* when I click on the calendar, there is a "Sorry. We are unable to load your calendar"

* when I try to send mail: "Yikes, something went wrong."

~~~
calcifer
Any particular reason you are using Nouveau? Nvidia users on Linux
overwhelmingly [1] prefer the official binary blob.

[1] [https://i.imgur.com/mL98GZA.png](https://i.imgur.com/mL98GZA.png)

~~~
turbinerneiter
It's an experimental Fedora Atomic Workstation install - GPU drivers are the
least of the problems on this system ;)

------
afarrell
> And before you cry “support model!” — it isn’t going to work for us — our
> product simply doesn’t require that much support.

Indeed, a well-designed product aimed at people who would balk at putting the
product’s name on their CV shouldn’t.

------
erric
`“Hiri” can’t be opened because it is from an unidentified developer.`

Is it really expensive for a dev to get a cert from apple? I don't develop so
i've never looked.

~~~
nhf
$99 per year.

~~~
GordonS
$67/y from K-Software if you buy 4 years' at once.

------
CMCDragonkai
I've wondered how proprietary software vendors distribute their software on
the myriad of Linux distros and their package managers. That is if you want to
keep the workflow of using the package manager to automate the installation
and uninstallation. Unlike app stores, there's no linux package manager that
allows payments before delivery of software.

~~~
oblio
It depends on the application. Many either deliver a generic binary of a DEB +
RPM. Or more recently a Docker container or one of the other containers (Snap,
etc).

Then that has a proprietary license checker based on either a license file or
a license service, basically the service phones home to check the license.

------
tiatia123
Well, I would be more than happy to buy a decent Linux IMAP client.

1\. I never heard about your product 2\. Can I use it as a regular IMAP
client?

I am waiting for a linux version of this:

[https://www.ivelope.com/invite/RunItUpTheFlagpoleHackerSeaCh...](https://www.ivelope.com/invite/RunItUpTheFlagpoleHackerSeaChange)

(shitty invitation link that gets me ahead in the queue)

------
seba_dos1
I would happily pay and already did in some cases, as long as it's not
proprietary.

(initial title was: "Will Linux users pay for apps?")

------
gytdev
I hope some people from Adobe are reading this. Me personally and my friends
are holding back on Linux as a daily driver only because it does not support
Photoshop and You have to learn GIMP

------
shmerl
_> This is going to be a very hard sell being a proprietary closed source
system to Linux users_

I agree. Closed source communication tools are not a good proposition in
general and especially for Linux users.

That said, Exchange itself is a closed mess and existing FOSS tools are trying
to working around a problem of MS lock-in.

------
RaleyField
People that use Linux and people who frequent Linux related websites don't
necessarily have a lot in common. I use Ubuntu daily, couldn't care less for
what some zealots have to say on Reddit. I use it because it's the least wrong
platform, not because it's FOSS.

------
zerr
What about suse, rhel and other distros?

~~~
sv12l
Install snap and off you go.

------
poelzi
I just recently payed 300 euros for bitwig studio, because it's really good
software and works nicely on Linux. I looked at the OSS DAWs out there and
found them all unusable or just no fun to use.

------
dopeboy
This was a great read. I've been using Linux since 2005 and I've always
wondered what selling paid-for software is like on Linux. Thank you for taking
the time to build a venture for Linux users, I really appreciate it.

------
skrowl
I'd imagine for most Linux users (not all, of course) that they're not
interested in paid proprietary products, which is why they chose Linux in the
first place.

~~~
pythonaut_16
There is little to no evidence of this.

I don't think I've ever seen someone claim to use Linux because it's free (no
cost). It's almost always because it's an open platform or because it has the
best tools for the job they're doing (e.g. development work).

So in that sense, a Linux user might be less likely to use a product if they
care most about the openness of the platform.

~~~
coldtea
> _I don 't think I've ever seen someone claim to use Linux because it's free
> (no cost). It's almost always because it's an open platform or because it
> has the best tools for the job they're doing (e.g. development work)._

Then those people are lying. Free is absolutely a factor for many.

~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
I'd wager that over 90% of desktop Linux users are running it on a machine
that came with a Windows license and Windows preinstalled, and went to the
effort of wiping it despite the fact that they paid for it and legally own it.

~~~
coldtea
The cost of Windows is assumed to be part of buying the laptop (and it's the
OEM version anyway).

I never myself cared for the sub-$100 Windows license attached, given that I
bought a $1500+ laptop. Since there were always few (and usually subpar)
selection of Linux-first machines (especially here), having a Windows license
was just the normal across all laptop brands -- so it was not a deciding
factor in comparing prices. It was either paying that, or being constrained to
pick from 1/50 the machine selection.

This doesn't extend to buying software in general.

------
alexnewman
I just don't buy it. I'd pay you if you opened your komono and had a github. I
just can't trust a tiny startup like you with my email.

------
Ocha
FYI website is unreachable through [https://hiri.com/](https://hiri.com/)

~~~
kevkav
Aww man :(

Thanks for pointing that out.

Please use [https://www.hiri.com](https://www.hiri.com) instead.

------
bachmeier
Nice: half price offer

Not so nice: expires in about three hours so you give up the ability to try
the software first

------
yAnonymous
It's good to have a working Exchange client for Linux, proprietary or not. I'd
hope that they polish Hiri a bit before they implement Gmail and IMAP support
though, because it does have some rough edges, mostly with the UI.

As for the FOSS enthusiasts, I'd recommend ignoring them.

------
spicyusername
Definitely interested in a Gmail web client alternative

------
green7ea
The app looks very nice. Which UI toolkit does it use?

------
Separo
If Sketch was available on Ubuntu I'd switch.

~~~
thepumpkin1979
There’s a bigger chance Figma comes to Linux faster than Sketch, Figma since
is based on Electron. Sketch is heavily dependent on Cocoa and Mac.

------
aargh_aargh
Thank you for your honest thoughts, Dave, I appreciate you openly talking
about both the positves and the negatives.

------
pmlnr
Completely unrelated to the contents:

Please, publishers, I beg you: walk away from medium. It's terrible for us,
your readers. Set up a static blog, with a domain, go WordPress, Grav, Typo3,
anything, but without stupidly large sticky header/footer and without heavy
javascript _.

EDIT: _apparently 121KB javascript is not heavy. I still believe it's an
overkill for 30KB content.

~~~
olalonde
Why is it that I only ever hear those complaints on HN and never elsewhere...
Are you all still using Pentium 3 PCs and 56k modems?

~~~
pavlov
Maybe it’s the same reason why you hear professional designers complain when
they see Comic Sans used for body text, but laypersons rarely will mention it.

A pro will notice things about implementation that interfere with the content,
while the layperson often can’t articulate it even if they sense it’s not
quite right.

~~~
bunderbunder
A lot of people don't even realize that better is possible.

I've had plenty of friends and acquaintances observe that browsing the web on
my computer is very zippy compared to doing it on theirs, and ask what I do. I
hate to then have to explain to them that it's because of a fairly hard-won
set of JavaScript-blocking rules and suchlike.

I especially hate it because the best alternative I can suggest to someone who
doesn't understand tech well enough to manage such a thing is to just keep on
trying to keep up with whatever fancy kit Web developers are working with
these days. Which invariably means sending ever more money to Comcast. And
regularly giving money to Best Buy to replace a computer that isn't really
broken; it just can't keep up with the latest fashions among ad networks and
reactjs developers.

~~~
tomcam
> I've had plenty of friends and acquaintances observe that browsing the web
> on my computer is very zippy

Wait, how often are people peering over your shoulder to even notice? Have
been a programmer for 30+ years and no one has ever made an observation either
way about my screen responsiveness...

~~~
nsomaru
sometimes people in a social context will share my laptop to change the
spotify song or settle a google-able debate.

------
craigsmansion
> There is a lot to be said for products that have been shaped by free market
> forces.

So, not only are Linux users "fundamentalists", they are communists as well?

> If Linux as a platform is going to succeed, Linux users [..]

So adopting proprietary software is going to make Linux "a success"?

> think about the richness of the entire ecosystem rather than seek to limit
> it.

FOSS "limiting the richness of the entire ecosystem"? That's rich, indeed.

------
pytyper2
The authors thought "..tracking exactly where those Snap installs are coming
from isn’t possible at the moment.." was interesting. My opinion is that this
is a good thing and I don't ever want it to be possible to see where those
installs are coming from.

------
wink
Step 1: excited. An email client I've never heard of?

Step 2: interested: read article, read webpage

Step 3: meh. They call it email client, but it's only for Exchange/Office365

Some additional notes on the website: it's nice that there's a 50% discount,
it usually helps to show the before/after prices ;)

