SQL Studio
sql.studio
sql.studio
I'm out. I'll gladly buy a license though, exactly once. Willing to pay you for your time, but I'm tired of "rental economy".
5,000 seats x $200 price = $1,000,000 cash realized, right now, no debt financing needed for funding development, regardless if said dev shop leaves you.
5,000 seats x $4 = $20,000 month. That kinda pays the salary of a single FTE, and development ceases if customer runs away, only safe option would be to finance further development to insulate yourself from churn.
$20 x 5,000 seats = $100,000 realized right now.
With that, he could invest it, finish the features, start work on 2.0 and charge and upgrade of $20 to all his customers when he has MSSQL, MySQL, pgsql, SQLite, Oracle. 2.0 could include cloud db’s.
Not everything has to be a subscription and if people continue to find value, they’ll upgrade if they think it worthy.
Subscriptions tend to be vampires on the wallet and are used to trap users into paying a developer indefinitely. I consider it hostile to users. The exception is if it’s a service that can’t run on my machine. Or a service that does back office for me.
I'm not convinced by unsustainability arguments. Now, it could be that competing with FOSS makes it a lot harder to make money now. I'm sympathetic to that, inasmuch as I can be for someone who wants to sell what others are giving away. That would be challenging. But why is it suddenly impossible to sell software, when they was the common model until rental became popular a few years ago? What's inherently different now that let someone sell programs for decades but now it's just impossible?
That matches on the supplying side as subscription revenue is also generally better.
$4 is targeting the hobbyist market. Within that segment, the tiny population of devs who'd actually be willing to pay for tools usually uses a large assortment of tools, and is not willing to pay a separate subscription fee for each.
e: Don't let this dishearten you, I only would consider a name change to be more of your own brand. When I saw 'SQL Studio', I assumed MS had created an online version of their product. This looks like a well-done passion project.
Also, if autocomplete is what we care about, PRQL support seems like it will offer the best experience. https://prql-lang.org/ PRQL queries transpile to SQL. Just having the `FROM` clause first does wonders for autocomplete.
What I really miss in DB Tooling is something like SQL Compare and SQL Data Compare from Red Gate. It used to work with SQL server, and would compare two databases and produce "diff" SQL statements to get from one to the other.
It was awesome for deployments. Most frameworks handle DDL via migrations, and that works well, but one-time data migrations that are tested in QA and should be pushed live... I've never found a better workflow apart from generating one-time scripts. Now with AI that's easier, but until recently, it wasn't.
Not sure if that's the plan for this app eventually, but I sorely miss it, wasn't sure if others felt the same.
Despite all of these really polished query editing experiences in these new apps, I reach for Redash every single time. Even though Redash's editor is horrible. The ability to generate even extremely simple sharable visualizations, and alerts is insanely useful.
So to any of the devs of these programs out there: ship visualizations and alerts and I will buy your product immediately.
What is the landscape for simple tools for writing to databases? We used to have Access and simple CRUD tools. I saw a demo of Steve Jobs demoing NextStep which had this beautiful CRUD generator which obviously does not exist today.
It seems like the landscape is basically Airtable, Retool, Google Forms or roll your own with a more sophisticated stack. I feel like it ought to be incredibly easy to build a form, either web based or native, which writes to a database. Yet it seems like we are farther away from this than we have ever been
It allowed for both HTML applications and Java apps (both JNLP and completely local). And before the transition to Java it was ObectiveC, and I think even had a scripting language (WebScript?). It was beautiful, fast, and for lots of things you could just wire up a small app to a database with almost no code (then later add the business code after the demo).
One of my first jobs was writing a web app using it, and those were fun days.
The EnterpriseObjects part (the part that managed data to/from the database) survived for a long time in parts of Apple's web back-end. And I have always thought that WebObjects was the model that Ruby-on-Rails was designed to mimic (in many ways, but not all).
Edit: here is some documentation I just found: https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Le...
My dream is to build such tool, I slowly doing in the side (https://tablam.org). Probably need to ask for funding too.
In concrete, what I want is a real alternative to Fox/Access that work, unrestricted, locally (including inside a phone/iPad). I don't mind have support for cloud stuff (that is what pay the bills mostly) but that is secondary IMHO.
Current computers, even mobile, have far much power than most need, and is a shame not much tools actually exploit it.
That’s a flimsy argument. Product sales can do that. Doesn’t need to be a subscription unless you know your market is weak or your data mining.
We can’t be ok with everything being a subscription. You won’t have any money left or, worse, only the rich can afford the tools. I’m much happier paying for $60 Steam games and forgetting about them after a month. Sell this for $20 forever and do it 50,000 times by building a good product. If you get to market mass where you need a dev team to keep up with all the bleeding edge changes to SQL that are coming out, then charge a subscription.
$99 for the current version forever with 1 year of updates. Once that expires you can keep using the last version you had access to forever, or get another year of update for $59.
Fair and flexible for everyone.
I like this pricing a lot too because you actually support and incentivize the development of new features.
That sounds like snark, I guess, but I’m actually jealous. AI would choke on the last few “DWs” I’ve used.
Visual Studio also had "Database Project" which was amazing. Not seen anything like it. I think everyone moved over to using EF or Fluent Migrations but I loved the Database Projects.
What is your timeline for Postgres support? I'll subscribe the moment it's available.
So its a pleasure to see a thoughtfully done product landing page (which strongly signals that the same care will have gone into the product). The page is performant, no gratuitous visual effects. It clearly highlights the core product value propositions in the context of product visuals. Addresses key hesitations clearly and upfront (e.g. no cc required, pricing information), and a simple, obvious call to action.
Hopefully more people follow this template than the slop generated by auto generators.
Can't say the same - The site shows me an empty white page in PaleMoon (with uBlock Origin Legacy enabled and web assembly and webGL disabled).
Too many free options, hard to get people to change habits, you can't charge enough because devs just don't want to pay if they can help it.
I decided we will build something else. That said, good luck to this developer, I hope their product takes off.
Everything we do is via agents or in code.
Now we hooked all that up to agents.
I can still do a join and often write sql queries by hand to execute in a shell.
I and many others are not in your we