Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

  > I have a lot of trouble understanding this mentality.
Like, say, tipping at a nice restaurant.

You may not like the food, but it seems others did, and they want to demonstrate that to the chef.

As I said: I can understand Marco wanting to pay. I didn't like my meal, Marco did, and he should feel free to give a great tip.

I'm focused on the people who are saying that Macromates should charge users for the upgrade they said would be free. This would be equivalent to someone saying that, because they enjoyed their meal at the restaurant, the restaurant should charge a mandatory 25% tip to all current patrons of the restaurant. That's a very different situation.

I think you're right that everyone shouldn't be charged because Marco and others think the product is worth it. Some bought it on the promise of a free upgrade.

An upgrade to version 2 wasn't part of the "value" I attributed to TM when I bought it years ago, so were it not free, I'd seriously consider buying anyway (even though I do little coding nowadays, and am impressed with SublimeText2).

So, count me as mixed on the whole thing. I wouldn't balk at a nominal upgrade fee, and don't begrudge those who want to pay more, but sympathize with those who bought on the promise of an upgrade years ago.

I never would have bought TM1 w/o the promise of TM2.

Even with that, I kind of regret buying it. For how I used it, it was a decent text editor that allowed me to experience the spinning beach ball of death at least 10 times a day.

I thought the free upgrades forever deal for Minecraft was great. I only rarely get to game and if I had to upgrade every six months to play with everyone else it'd be prohibitive.

It's a big obligation that the maker of Textmate and Notch of Minecraft took on but founders do sillier things (look at the deals VCs cut) for funding.

Accidentally down instead of up voted you. Apologies.

This is exactly what I was thinking. If Macro wants to give someone more money than power to him. There are developers who I've bought additional licenses for friends in the slim hope that they would use the app but worst case I supported the developer.

Forcing everyone to support your love for a developer is asine. Macro may be head over heels for TextMate but there are a lot of people who are extremely frustrated with broken promises from MacroMates. Forcing them to pay more is a slap in the face.

Then here's an idea that may make everybody here happy: the price for the software new is $60. The price for the software with a code from the previous edition is what you want. You can put in $60, or $0, or $256. How 'bout that?

Marco's position, which I support, is a little like Warren Buffett pointing out that his taxes are too low, which I also support.

People who reply "Well if you think your taxes are so low, make a voluntary contribution" are probably-deliberately overlooking that the goal isn't for an individual to pay more, it's to provide meaningful support to the entity which needs the revenue, whether that's Allen Odgaard or the US government.

People didn't agree to pay taxes because they were promised that their taxes would remain at X rate for Y period of time.

People did agree to buy TM1 because of the promise of a free upgrade to TM2.

I'm not suggesting a "voluntary contribution" (i.e. a donate button beside a free download link.) I'm suggesting a real payment/checkout process, with a lot of inbuilt social pressure to put in a number that's not zero. You know, like how the Humble Indie Bundles work.

I believe (and imagine this is what grandparent meant) that this looks more like a case of "every table will leave a tip, so just charge more than the original menu price when the bill comes".

IMHO If Mr. Pink does not want to tip he should have the right not to do it, since that was the original agreement.

Not a great analogy: while almost everyone else at the restaurant works for tips, the chef doesn't.

Your example is horrid. Tips are in no way a signal to the chef.

In fact, you're "supposed" to tip about the same for a poorly cooked meal as a good one so as to avoid unreasonably short-changing your server who had nothing to do with the quality.

Tips are merely how restaurants get away with lying about their prices. They don't pay their employees minimum wage knowing you'll be gullible enough to pay the unannounced post-bill markup without a fuss.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact