HN Explorer

Ask HN: Would you pay for a UI framework?

8 points by mstijak ↗ HN
We'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't see a lot of interest and we're wondering why that is.

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?

17 comments

[ 0.20 ms ] story [ 45.3 ms ] thread
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).
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.
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.

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.
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.
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/

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.
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.

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.
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.

mstijak
Thank you all for very valuable feedback.

For those who seem interested, you can find more about our product at 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.