[mtlynch]

>But unlike them, we don't impose any licensing restrictions - for example, buying TinyPilot you find yourself bound by a subscription, and if you stop paying, your OS will no longer receive updates. With PiKVM, you don't need to do this - the device is yours forever, with updates until the end of time.

This is true and is a fundamental difference between PiKVM and TinyPilot.

TinyPilot charges a yearly subscription for customer support and software updates because those things have ongoing costs.

I don't think small businesses can realistically promise customers free support and updates for life. It may work in the short term, but at a certain point, it's not sustainable for a vendor to spend their limited support and dev resources on customers who purchased hardware five years ago and will never pay the vendor another dime.

[mdevaev]

Well, I don't know what you consider a short term, but PiKVM feels pretty good throughout its existence, and it has been for several years. It seems that we have set priorities differently at the start. My policy has always been that throughout the entire lifecycle of the device, the user must be sure of its security. In particular, this means that the user must receive updates. There is nothing more important than security when it comes to equipment, and I hate when a device turns into a unsafe brick after a few years. That's why we put it into the business model even before the first Kickstarter.

Another thing that made it possible to do this is the automation of all routine processes, such as testing and package builds. In PiKVM, the first component that was written was a build system to solve this issue once and for all. In this vein, I made a huge contribution to the "pre-launch" before flying. BTW, to be honest, I was somewhat surprised that you used Ansible instead of packages, it seems that this caused you a giant overhead for support.

Of course, in the future we plan to provide some paid services, but this does not concern the regular OS and access to updates at all, they should remain free.

[mtlynch]

>* BTW, to be honest, I was somewhat surprised that you used Ansible instead of packages, it seems that this caused you a giant overhead for support.*

Why didn't you tell me three years ago?!? : )

Yeah, Ansible was a huge mistake.[0] I knew it wasn't the right tool for distribution, but starting out, I just stuck with the tools I knew. We finally purged it in our last release and moved everything to standard Debian packages.

I'm glad to hear that PiKVM's stragegy has been working. I know our two projects are often pitted against each other, but I think there's ton of space for both of us to win back market share from the huge enterprise players and their consistently weak KVM offerings.

[0] https://mtlynch.io/solo-developer-year-5/#ansible-and-git-ar...

[mdevaev]

> Why didn't you tell me three years ago

You didn't ask :P

> Yeah, Ansible was a huge mistake.

I have some experience operating large clusters and distributing software, and these damn things like Ansible have never led us to anything good. So either packages or the whole chroot (docker, whatever).

In fact, I'm a fan of the good old time-tested solutions. You know, Makefiles, packages, maximum integration with native OS tools. A lot can be done with simple tools, and although the start will be difficult, the support will be simple.

> there's ton of space for both of us to win back market share from the huge enterprise players

Ofc. In addition, users clearly benefit from competition.