-11
Frankie The Coin 6 years ago • updated by bizoo 6 years ago 3
Hi 

Licensing dev releases in my opinion is not the best idea. Most of us it's using to make test on it. Help during development create some ideas. 

In other hand paying for not stable (development) release it's no really a best idea either. I'm really looking forward to pay for sublime. But not when the future is a bit fogy. 
+1
Don't agree.
ST2 is my main editor for months now, ST2 dev builds are what other companies call final build.
Never had any problems with it.

When you buy a license, you get a license for ST 1.x and get a free upgrade for ST 2 as bonus, including the current dev builds.
The future of this product is sunny and the license reminder not very annoying.
So open your wallet and give this product the money it deserve.
I don't want to argue about if sublime become a professional editor or not. I strongly believe that will be and I will give up on emacs for good. 


The point was to pay for dev release. You see there is a logical error in text that you pointed out. I don't really think that sublime 1 is very useful, but paying for dev (aplha) releases of sublime 2 (which is much better and I really liked) in my option will reduce feedback information. 


This post is not about "I want sublime for free". I'll will be first one to pay for it (after stable release)

+1
I understand your point but not agree with it:
  1. When you register you get ST 1.4, an already stable useable product. Sure ST 2 is better (otherwise why the need for it) but right now you already buy something real and not the development of a future hypothetical product.
  2. Development takes time and money. Why don't give money to help finish quickly a product that you like. If Jon (the only person behind ST) stop working on it, you will never see a final build. Sad. This economic model work great when people participate, look at Minecraft.