I know sublime text is not open source and its not free either. But most people still use the unpaid version, so how does sublime text support itself ?
I have never paid for it, so I assumed most people like around 80% would be using it free. What would be your estimate of people actually paying for the product.
I don't have any meaningful data to estimate. Sublimetext is used in countless videos/webcasts, some of them by Google or Microsoft.
A quick google search brings the post [http://blog.leanpub.com/2014/01/leanpub-ebook-sales-guest-po...] with sales numbers of a book about Sublime text I never even heard of. 1000 sales of a book about a text editor! My best guess would be that the text editor itself sold about a couple orders of magnitude more copies.
Who said most people still use the unpaid version?
Tons of people (from forums etc) use v3, which means they paid for v2 (or pirated it). I have paid for v2 and use v3 myself.
He also hired an extra guy during v2 development, which means he made enough money to have that. And in general, it's a hugely succesful project with Windows and OS X users.
If John saw that the unpaid version was an issue, he'd just cancel it.
I never downloaded or paid anything for v2, but I did download v3 (the official build, from the official site) to give it a try. I didn't end up sticking to it, but I was definitely able to run it without buying a license, albeit with occasional popups.
6 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 16.6 ms ] threadSublime text v3 requires a license to work. Unpaid version means you have to use older software and to suffer frequent popups.
A quick google search brings the post [http://blog.leanpub.com/2014/01/leanpub-ebook-sales-guest-po...] with sales numbers of a book about Sublime text I never even heard of. 1000 sales of a book about a text editor! My best guess would be that the text editor itself sold about a couple orders of magnitude more copies.
Tons of people (from forums etc) use v3, which means they paid for v2 (or pirated it). I have paid for v2 and use v3 myself.
He also hired an extra guy during v2 development, which means he made enough money to have that. And in general, it's a hugely succesful project with Windows and OS X users.
If John saw that the unpaid version was an issue, he'd just cancel it.
I never downloaded or paid anything for v2, but I did download v3 (the official build, from the official site) to give it a try. I didn't end up sticking to it, but I was definitely able to run it without buying a license, albeit with occasional popups.
If he was hurt financially with people using the free+popups version, does it make sense that he would open it this way?