Synergy (GPL'd Software KVM) switches to paid downloads
synergy-project.org
synergy-project.org
Yet Synergy appears to have a corporation behind it (Synergy Si) that only appears to work on Synergy. They have an office, and apparently provide free meals, Google-style 20% projects, and a variety of other perks. They're apparently hiring. They even offer stock options, despite my being rather bewildered at where the opportunity for growth is.
I donated years ago, and found myself occasionally receiving emails that just didn't make sense, making the whole operation sound giant. If they were working on other projects, too, but it seems like all they do is work on Synergy.
I'm not really sure how we can come across as a large company, there's only 2 of us right now.
Your post baffles me.
* There are still people that believe free-of-cost software cannot be high quality, which is likely a result of the well known relationship between price and perceived quality.
* If open-source developers are paid for their work, there will be more open-source software.
Interesting recent discussion on reddit about this: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/2hvtuc/dear_gnome_i_...
There are better ways to monetize open source software: Consulting/support contracts. Bounties for features. Paid SaaS features. "Enterprise" features, such as turning Synergy into a mass remote admin tool. (I bet this would be handy in schools.)
It took me 30 seconds to think of those monetization ideas. I'm sure Nick Bolton can come up with better ones.
> The revenue collected is minuscule
I think it also took you 30 seconds to assume that. Also, the dev already was doing various ways to get income from businesses, including some which you posted.
* Click here to download Synergy with support ($4.99)
* Click here to download Synergy with no support (free)
It's common to call the no-support option the "community" version.
Founder & CEO of Synergy Si, Inc.
Many people believe that the spirit of GPL licensed software is that you should not charge money for distributing copies of your software. This is a misunderstanding. Read more about this in the gnu.org article, Selling Free Software by the Free Software Foundation (the principal organizational sponsor of the GNU Operating System).
With that in mind, I have made the decision to charge a small fee for access to the Synergy download page. This will allow us to hire more engineers and improve Synergy faster than ever before. It turns out that given the option, only 0.002% of users will choose to donate, which just isn't enough to fund the team size required to maintain the program. The old donation model was just not sustainable. Synergy is still open source and "free as in free speech" (to quote Richard Stallman), except that now there's a small fee to download the software. As with all GPL licensed software, you are free to run the program, change the program, and redistribute the program with or without changes.
Thanks for your understanding. I hope you decide to buy Synergy and support the development of open source software. Nick Bolton Founder & CEO Synergy Si, Inc.
Someone else said it in this thread, over the years I have received strange emails that made it seem like Synergy was some sort of hip Google-like startup company, even a reference to a possible office in California. Yet Synergy seems to have been mostly the same as when I first ever used it and I do not see any other products from the company.
The second is that this will hurt the discoverability of the software. There's no way to try it now and see what it does and PC users are used to having that ability. Throwing up a paywall is going to strangle the community, IMO.
Third, you've now stranded anybody who downloaded it free from getting updates. What if there's a security flaw? Charging people $5 for what will be perceived as fixing bugs in the software is going to create a lot of grouchy users, I imagine.
An additional one is that the idea of "we're charging because we can" is something that I think has bad optics; using an FSF essay as your primary justification for charging for "free" software is going to rub several people the wrong way. A low (percentage) donation rate doesn't translate to a low amount of income, and I find it disingenuous to try to conflate those numbers.
For updates, all Windows/Mac software should be self-updating by now. Requiring users to download updates by hand is basically the same as no updates.
I hope this goes well for them and a higher percentage of their user base chips in, Synergy is good software that makes some painful stuff a whole lot better.