You're paying a premium because it's designed specifically for MacOS systems. Docker desktop is terrible on Mac, but Orbstack is awesome for this group of users.
I've heard Montessori before, and it seems like her approach aligns well with our interests. All the books sounds intriguing, I will take a look into them :)
https://arc.net/ ? If I didn't already knew about it, looks like vaporware. No download, only a link that brings you to a form asking bunch of random personal questions, no screenshots (the ones that exists are censored? What).
It’s intentionally vague; it’s a marketing trick. The growth is happening through the five invites a week users get, spread through forums, Discord, etc.
Same, Arc has been pretty great so far, and they just launched their iOS "version" which has been neat too. It's become my default on my macOS machines.
I have been using it for a while now, and it has been my go-to replacement for Docker. Additionally, I have Linux machines that allow me to test things that I can't on macOS. The product is excellent, and the CLI integration is phenomenal. I'm curious about the pricing scheme for this product.
Still working out the details (personal vs. business use, subscription vs. perpetual license, pricing, OSS and student discounts, etc.), but here are some preliminary thoughts (TLDR: difficult choice because people don't like subscriptions):
---
OrbStack is a product that requires continuous maintenance to components in order to improve over time and prevent security issues. Subscriptions are the only way to align our incentives with yours: we’re incentivized to keep improving the product and moving forward; you want improvements, and you can always cancel if you don’t feel like you’re getting that.
Lifetime: Unsustainable. OrbStack's components need continuous updates: compatibility with new macOS versions, Linux kernel, Docker, other assorted pieces, and new features to stay competitive. This would make it more likely to be discontinued.
Major version upgrades: This incentives us to withhold features for months when they would otherwise be released much faster; we'd rather deliver gradual improvements so you get constant value. Also, major upgrades have a high risk of introducing breaking changes, bugs, and other issues due to a lack of gradual testing. You don’t want massive changes in your dev tools every year, do you?
1-year updates + fallback perpetual: Isn't this more or less a yearly subscription in disguise? Just cancel if you don’t want to keep paying. I know JetBrains does a hybrid of this + subscription — not entirely opposed to it, but it shares a lot of these issues (e.g. incentivizes slower feature development). Realistically, would anyone revert to a year-old version and stay on it forever?
(Also, from our perspective: Sure, less people will pay if it’s subscription-only, but I'd expect long-term recurring revenue to be higher. I’d love to be able to keep expanding the project.)
All that being said, I'm still not sure. Compared to Docker, not being subscription-only could be an advantage, and I want to keep pricing simple. It's a hard problem.
---
There's more in the docs at https://docs.orbstack.dev/faq#free, but this is most of it. I'll have to figure out what the best choice is for OrbStack.
I'd like a high initial price and then lower subscription price. Like $30 initial, then a few dollars a month on subscription. If I stop paying subscription, I would like to still use the version I have, even if I won't receive updates.
Not sure I've heard of a model exactly like that before, but it sounds fairly similar to "1-year updates + fallback perpetual" which is the JetBrains model. I'm kind of leaning towards that, with a monthly option for a lower commitment:
- Monthly. No perpetual license.
- Annual. Perpetual license for the latest version as of your subscription renewal (a little odd, but matches JetBrains).
Both in the range of $5-12/mo total. I could also consider free/discounted plans for educational and non-commercial open-source development.
