
Ask HN: Would you pay for a UI framework? - mstijak
We&#x27;re working on a powerful UI framework that offers many advanced features such as a touch-friendly component library with form elements, advanced data-tables and charts, form validation, data-binding, visual themes, etc.
For developers, such a framework boosts productivity tremendously by saving time they would spend developing or integrating individual components from multiple sources.
Even with professional support and all these features, we don&#x27;t see a lot of interest and we&#x27;re wondering why that is.<p>Would you ever pay for such a product? 
Do you think that commercial frameworks of this kind need to have a large company behind them in order to succeed?
What would lead you to pick a commercial framework in favor of many free alternatives?
======
dvfjsdhgfv
I might if it's a one-time payment and not a subscription service. However,
these days before I choose something I base my decision not only on the actual
merits of a given product/project, but also on its popularity. Like it or not,
if there is a large user base, everything is easier (on average), from
documentation to support. If you can replicate that and convince users you're
a viable choice and unlikely to disappear soon, you have better chances. I'm
not going to invest my time in learning and using a product that might get
abandoned next year, and if it's not open source I'm really screwed up then.

~~~
mstijak
Thanks for the very valuable feedback.

We provide source code on GitHub, but the project is obviously not open-
source.

We offer perpetual licenses and one year of support which includes new
releases. If you want to use the latest version after your support has
expired, you need to extend your support subscription for approx. half of the
original price. Do you feel that one-time payment should entitle you to
receive support forever?

~~~
dvfjsdhgfv
No, there is no reason why one-time payment should entitle anybody to more
than a limited support period (one year is more or less standard).

------
Lan
There are already a plethora of fly-by-night Javascript frameworks. Outside of
hobby projects, I'd wager that most people prefer not to use frameworks that
lack an established track record. For a business, the cost of switching
frameworks after the fact is simply too great. Unless the framework has a
sizable userbase and has been around for a few years, I wouldn't use it in any
serious projects. To get a large enough userbase that people will feel
comfortable using it in serious projects, you're going to need them to use
your framework in those hobby projects. However, those projects are the least
likely to have a budget, and the most likely to utilize free resources. This
is why I do not think a commercial framework can succeed.

------
kapilkaisare
It depends on how much the framework costs. I spent 3 years of my career using
Sencha ExtJs[0], a framework you could use commercially by paying a license. I
was in India back then, and could not afford the license to use it for
personal projects I hoped to turn into a side business. By the time I came to
the US, they changed their pricing model so that you now needed to buy a
5-pack license to be able to use it.

There is a lot to like (and a little to dislike) about the Sencha family of
frameworks, but the licensing alone made me look at alternatives inspite of
being familiar with it.

[0]: [https://www.sencha.com/](https://www.sencha.com/)

~~~
mstijak
I see Sencha strategy used elsewhere in the industry. For example, Netlify
recently changed their pricing model and introduced a minimum of 5 users in
paid plans. From this standpoint, I understand why that is happening. If you
divide an amount equal to several developer monthly salaries with the expected
number of licenses sold per month, you get a pretty high number. A large
framework is a big battlefront as each widget needs to be tested, documented,
and accompanied with examples.

------
petepete
I think that as there are quite a few decent quality free frameworks, the
paid-for alternatives have to offer something extraordinary. This is
exacerbated by the fact that community support and shared code/instructional
blog posts will be harder to come by.

~~~
mstijak
That's true, but I would argue that commercial frameworks offer professional
support, have a nice documentation and offer many examples which may save you
a lot of time in the long run.

------
mbrock
By default I'm very reluctant to use proprietary libraries because I would
have to invest time into learning something that I can't use freely in future
projects, and I might even expose myself to some kind of risk of patent
infringement or something.

Basically, if there's no freely available way to do what I want, I really
prefer to come up with such a solution myself, so that I can then use that in
my hobbies, nonprofit projects, etc.

I would be more likely to consider it if there were clear licensing terms that
allow use in open source or nonprofit projects.

------
muzani
I would say don't try to do everything. A lot of frameworks - bootstrap,
WordPress, etc start off quite well, then become extremely tedious because
they try to be too powerful. I've stopped building "responsive" altogether and
just go for simpler websites that look good on both web and mobile.

But I would pay for components.

I would pay for form validation for example. Or something that makes data and
chart look good on a touchscreen. Just don't force me to take everything else
bundled with it.

~~~
mstijak
The problem is that it's very hard to ship form components and form validation
separately. Developer experience is much better if all components implement
form validation and other things in the same way.

Our framework has top-notch form components and multiple form validation
options. We also offer responsive charts. Our charting library is based on the
same principles as the rest of the framework. The experience is much better if
all components are designed to work together.

------
thiagooffm
We already pay for inspinia here. It's great. I think the business is legit.

You just need to make a very good brand for it and be able to show people that
they need it. Once they use it, they'll see that they are getting something
better than the bootstraps that you can find(which is still great, but for a
professional project you might need something extra).

Also, work on your pricing. Maybe sell a basic version with the option to pay
for the (very expensive, hard to maintain) components separately.

------
mstijak
Thank you all for very valuable feedback.

For those who seem interested, you can find more about our product at
[https://cxjs.io](https://cxjs.io).

It's free for non-commercial use. We would be very happy to assist you to
start using it, either for a hobby or a business application.

------
miguelrochefort
There are dozens of such frameworks already... how do you differentiate?

~~~
mstijak
There are dozens of frameworks, but few of them provide a complete set of
features. For example, it's very hard to find a really good grid (data-table)
implementation, a complete set of form components + form validation, and
charts in the same package and most business oriented apps need all that.

------
supermdguy
Such a framework would need to be extremely flexible in order to really
support _all_ use cases.

~~~
mstijak
It's impossible to support all use cases. Our philosophy is to support most
common use cases and allow custom components that are specific to the app.
Almost all apps need forms, admin pages, dashboards, but some may also use
advanced components such as schedulers, pivot grids, rich HTML editors, etc.

