[ricardobeat]

The "it is working right now, you didn't lose anything" line keeps popping up.

What if I'm not completely happy, it doesn't work as expected, there are bugs to be fixed, performance to improve? And what happens when there is a major change in the OS that requires significant updates to continue working?

Is bringing the SaaS model to the desktop a solution? It's only going to make things worse for users, now you don't even own a copy of what you bought; if it's gone, it's really gone and you're never going to see that software again. Companies have thrived on "one-off" sales for decades. Want more money? Develop something new, the work is already paid off.

[nl]

Companies have thrived on "one-off" sales for decades.

Name one in the consumer space. Most struggle, and the few that don't really make their money by selling upgrades and new releases.

There are very, very few non-game companies making good money in the consumer softwear space unless they have a SaaS model (think of virus softwear companies)

[adambenayoun]

I tend to disagree with that statement.

"Companies have thrived on "one-off" sales for decades. Want more money? Develop something new, the work is already paid off."

Not because this is wrong, but because the implication of that statement means that we're doing more wrong to the indie developers than good.

This is right that companies are thriving on one-off sales but from my observation the companies in question are big companies with lot of marketing muscle backing their products and not the indie developers.

If you think about it, you'll need to have a huge distribution to reach more and more customers and keep that recurring income you need to keep your business afloat.

Some companies opt to roll out updates or new version for an additional price. Some are trying to upsell some support licenses to earn more money on top of the customers who need more personal and frequent support (and possibley have the financial means).

I keep looking at indie developers who release great software but their price it too low, and have problem distributing it (either because this is a nice market or either because they're doing a piss job at it).

They sell a few hundred of copies and then sales just halt, what do you think happen next? They close shop and stop development and support on the product. The result is the same as what happened with Sparrow but in that case the developers are financially broke and need to get back to corporate life against their will.

Now I don't mean we need to agree to a SaaS model or something, I just say that we need to aknowledge the problem, If developers have trouble monetizing their software (but are still doing a great job at it) and then end up selling their companies to bigger companies, this is great for our eco-system.

It means more people will give it a try in the future knowing that if they utterly fail at marketing their products, they can still sell their companies and what they build to a bigger company who will know how to capitalize on their hard work.