Free would be awesome. If not, an untimed free trial would also work well for me.
Actually I don’t think many people paid for Sublime Text…
Yeah, I believe it works just fine without ever registering it. I know plenty of people who use it unregistered. Though, I personally don’t.
It would be great to get confirmation of that from a Githubber on here. I feel like it would be very difficult to have a hacker-friendly editor where the core is closed-source.
the price will be… one young gnu
I really like the payment model behind Sublime Text. Being able to use it free, or pay for it to get rid of some not-too-obnoxious “please buy it” message. And the price is really reasonable too. It’s just somewhat important that—whatever it will be—the license will be per user, and not per machine or something.
Microsoft has a 3-year subscription for Office 365 for ~80€.
Tekkub above didn’t deny the claim, so I would guess it’s true. See also this thread.
Mojombo’s answer in that other thread prevails. We’re still figuring out the details on licensing for atom’s nucleus. For packages github releases for atom, we plan on using the MIT license.
I agree with @poke. Per user not machine is ideal. I’m a Sublime Text user now and purchased it as I was able to try it, tweak it, learn it long enough where I was comfortable paying. A carpenter has to buy a hammer at some point - a professional dev should to pay something for professional tools some time.
Everything I needed to know and a good call to aim for competitive pricing. Thank you.
+1 to per user pricing.
I’m a developer and my tools are really important to me - especially the text editor I use. I therefore don’t mind paying ~$100 every few years but I would expect there to be new features released every few months (e.g. not like sublime).
I’ve always considered the money I spent on dev tools to be cash well spent: tools like Sublime, Querious, Tower (sorry GitHub) have paid for themselves many, many times over.
That being said, I’m really attracted to the idea of an editor that I can hack changes into - and if its in the ballpark of other tools (say $100 or less) then I’ll be picking up license.
However, at the moment Atom has two primary issues:
- There are many small bugs. Things like auto-indent behaving in an odd manner or the scrollbars sometimes ignoring styling.
- The 3rd party plugin system hasn’t had a chance to grow up.
I think both of these issues will be addressed via time - and if Atom matches my expectations I could easily imagine switching to it as my primary editor.
Do you realize how many you’ll have to sell just to break even? The tooling market is not very big and developers are cheap. Like seriously, work out how many you need to sell just to break even.
Awww, GitHub gave me a free Micro-Account, So I was really hoping I would have Atom too… Atom is such great editor I’ll buy It if I can, but I have no money for things like $60… If it was priced at something like $4.99 it would be awesome because everyone wouldn’t try to abuse the trials (like I do with ST3) and you’d make more money that way!
$4.99 is a rather impractical price to wish for from my POV. GitHub’s developers are talented and surely their time is very valuable. It makes very little sense to me to have multiple developers invest lots of hours in a product that’s intended to be sold, only to undercut the price of competitors like Sublime by over 90%. Enough people will still pay that $60-70 for a good product that they’d be leaving substantial money on the table to go that low.
I’d gladly pay $60-$100 without even thinking about it, that’s inline with other text editors I’ve bought before. I wouldn’t complain if it was higher.
I do hope they charge and they charge a lot more than $4.99. Developers more than anyone should be willing to pay for software, we understand how much work goes into these things.
My vote (if I get a vote) is for $50.
- Cheaper than Sublime
- Expensive enough to pay the devs
- I’m a student, so anything more than that would probably bankrupt me
Atom should be priced at what it’s worth, based on what the market will bear and what the developers’ time costs. For people willing to pay for their editor in the first place, $60-70 isn’t particularly out of the question. As much as they’re a force for good in the open source world, GitHub is still a business and I’m sure they’re looking to be rewarded for the time and resources invested by their staff on this project. As we’ve already seen in a few places in this thread, people are willing to shell out plenty of money for a good editor.
GitHub has a pretty good relationship with students, so we might see a specially-licensed or otherwise qualified version for student use at a discounted price, but I suspect most of us are looking in the same ballpark as Sublime Text, RubyMine, etc based on @mojombo saying it will be “competitively priced”. For me personally, that’s well worth it.
Users who can’t afford that sort of pricing still have plenty of other options, from open source editors to nagware like Sublime. They’re not obligated to price it in a range that makes sense for absolutely everyone, because I don’t think “world domination of text editors” is on their road map, and because there are some people who’ll never pay for an editor no matter what the price is.
There is a GitHub account called jonroran, and it is a member of the GitHub org. I don’t know if the IRC account is the same person as the GitHub account though.
Pricing is worth some good thought, especially now as pricing is trending towards free on software. The key is a good solid installed base of active users who work in creating the add ons. So maybe start really low, $25ish then step up as the add-ons improve the value proposition, a la Sublime, except think about a 10/15 year roadmap instead of 3 years. Just my two cents.
I’m assuming that by “free and open source” they mean it’ll be pretty cheap: