Ask HN: Is anyone making money selling traditional downloadable software?

[101008]

Curious if any HNers are running successful businesses selling desktop/downloadable software with a one-time payment model - not SaaS, not subscriptions. Something like the old days. How's the market for that? What's your experience with support and updates?

[lefstathiou]

My brother acquired an aging app (from an aging founder) built on Delphi used by many dozens (or low hundred) of the world’s leading shipping, energy and commodities companies, used as a standard to calculate “laytime” and “demurge” (myriad of fees associated when a ship docks into a port). It used to cost $5k for a perpetual license tied to usb based key that had to be plugged in to activate. If you wanted to use on two machines, you had to buy two licenses with two keys.

Customers in the US and Europe hated the usb, especially during COVID. In random places of Africa, where they greatly valued the single perpetual license, it persists. From my perspective, I don’t see anything positive from being an installed application for this use case - he had to hop through so many security hoops that when he rolled out the web solution IT departments breathed a huge sigh of relief and thanked him.

Over a period of about 2 years he converted almost everyone to saas and 4x’d the annual revenue. That also generated enough fcf to hire more developers to ship more features.

Saas is generally the way to go. Installed apps are common in financial services and industrial applications. I can think of a bunch of other niche examples but I personally would never pursue this model. We put bugs into production from time to time and it is nice to be able to instantly roll out updates.

[satvikpendem]

Thanks for stating this. Some customers (who are often the vocal minority) don't like SaaS likely due to subscription fatigue but most don't realize the amount of manpower it requires to continuously update software that will atrophy without them, not to mention adding more features.

The business reality is often not understood by the users and that's why every company is moving towards SaaS, it allows the company developing the product to continue to stay in business rather than providing a product then shuttering because it couldn't sell enough.

The former is simply more sustainable than the other, much as some (like the vocal minority) might disagree with this fact.

---

That being said, there are many who sell one-time licenses, especially in the indie hacker space on Twitter, such as NomadList and BoltAI. Their model works because they make enough money from their products to retire on, as solo devs, and their products aren't necessarily ones that require constant updates (well, maybe BoltAI as new AI advances come out all the time that need to be implemented, such as RAG, parsing PDFs, storing "memories" like OpenAI, etc, but most advances come through new models, which is just an API call away).

[adriand]

> used as a standard to calculate “laytime” and “demurge” (myriad of fees associated when a ship docks into a port).

Nitpick: I think you mean “demurrage”: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/demurrage.asp

[jakeydus]

Very demurge, very mindful

[zxvkhkxvdvbdxz]

He inherited a existing customer base in a niche field. That's not exactly easy to replicate from scratch.

[Waterluvian]

Really shows you just how valuable the application sandbox that is a web browser can be to many.

[fullstackchris]

Nitpick here: both models are still SaaS, the only difference is the first way was deployed via (desktop?) app and the second via web.

But indeed, web is typically the most flexible option unless you are leveraging something on the OS that would otherwise be cumbersom or impossible via web (not often the case)

[cyberneticcook]

If I may ask where did he buy the app from? Some online marketplace ? I’d love to browse these kind of deals.

[ensemblehq]

That's an awesome story. How did your brother find the opportunity to acquire the aging app?

[charliebwrites]

How did he price out the SaaS model vs the USB perpetual license?

[stakhanov]

Legal changes are making it increasingly very difficult to sell perpetual licenses. For example, in Germany, a new law recently took effect that clarifies that if you sell a software license for a given period of time, you're liable to provide whatever updates/support the customer may need over the course of the software's licensing period to enable the customer to keep running it, at no additional cost, regardless of what it costs you. I'm not a lawyer and may be getting this wrong, but if you're contemplating getting into the business of selling perpetual licenses in software, definitely check with a lawyer. It's not like it was in the 90s.

In the 90s, a large driver of recurring revenue for software was that when the OS and hardware landscape changed, you made a new version of the software adapted to that change, and then, if customers wanted to upgrade their OS or hardware (frequently for reasons unrelated to your product), that made them come back to you to pay for the new version of your product. Under the new legal regime, you would be forced to give them the update for free, so if you sell an actual perpetual software license, you have a fixed amount of revenue on one hand, and a potentially unlimited liability to incur additional costs on the other.

[Delphiza]

That is a good point that US-based developers may not be aware of. The EU CRA (Cyber Resilience Act) mandates "an obligation to provide duty of care for the entire lifecycle of such products", mostly by requiring updates for security vulnerabilities. Any software that connects to the network (or Internet) has to be assumed to have a vector for vulnerability at some point in the future. This means that it has to be updatable, and cannot be a perpetual license.

[anonzzzies]

But it can be possible to have a license that allows you to run it at your own risk forever right? I mean, open source licenses do that, so you can make those and sell those as well. The 'support' being whatever updates happen to appear. Or the support is separately sold (again, like open source), so you pay once and for all year and you get updates forever, however, no support after 1 year; you can buy more. I have used support for downloadable paid products (turbo pascal, delphi, visual studio etc) in the past exactly 0 times, so not sure if support isn't just a check box for larger companies and they can buy it then yearly.

[numba888]

> you're liable to provide whatever updates/support the customer may need over the course of the software's licensing period to enable the customer to keep running it

Does this include new layers for games, so that customers don't get bored? More seriously, this law is probably targeting big US companies. But smaller companies are suffering the most.

[losses]

I spent six months working full-time developing Rune, an open-source music player and management software that offers a modern experience with a beautiful, Zune-inspired interface design.

As an open-source project in a niche market, establishing a sustainable development model has been challenging. I set the price at $10, which gives users privileged access to feature requests and effectively makes them stakeholders in the project's future direction. While I acknowledge this might seem high for open-source software, the development costs and ongoing maintenance require significant resources.

So far, I've sold about 60 copies. After platform fees of roughly 40%, the revenue covers only a fraction of the development costs. Some users have criticized this as "money-grabbing," but they may not fully grasp the complexity involved in creating such software from scratch. The development process demands meticulous attention to various aspects, including accessibility features, elegant design implementation, and cross-platform integration.

Maintaining my dedication to the project while seeing modest financial returns has been challenging. There's constant pressure to add value and justify the price tag, which is leading to burnout. Finding the right balance between making the software accessible to users while ensuring sustainable development has proven to be a complex challenge.

The path of independent open-source development, while rewarding in many ways, comes with its own set of unique challenges that aren't always visible to users.

This isn't an easy path to follow.

Source code here: https://github.com/losses/rune

[bsnnkv]

I started selling commercial use software licenses on 01 January 2025 for installable/downloadable software I have been developing for about 5 years. The software targets Microsoft Windows.

As the software is of the nature that it will require updates indefinitely (as OS updates come and go), and given the fact that the license is specifically for commercial use, I decided to go with a subscription model instead of a one-time payment model to ensure its long-term sustainability.

I am lucky that this specific software is very "sticky" and already has a die-hard fan base. It also helps that people in the Windows ecosystem are used to paying for commercial use software licenses.

This month to date I have made $800 on license sales. It will be interesting to see how the license sales continue to progress (or don't?) throughout the rest of the year.

[worthless-trash]

When you started this, did you target a specific area that needed your skillsets or knowledge or did you research and find an area that needed better software ?

[Tsarp]

Side project not a business. I have a tiny dictation app for Mac on the app store.

One time payment since it runs whisper locally. Autoupdates through the app store, and I have a lot of folks emailing me positive, negative and improvement feedback.

It is a lot of randomness. Some weeks are low and when it got a small mention in a popular article I saw a sudden inflow of traffic, downloads and purchases.

So far Ive been ok paying the apple tax. Its a little hard going through the hoops to get it through the app store( I kinda understand why they do a lot of it ) but it provides a lot of free discovery and I spend 0 time on payments, refunds, disputes, handling a CDN to distribute binaries etc. Negative reviews without basis are the only thing that bother me, for some reason I seem to take it personally.

[tones411]

You should look into the App Store Small Business Program to see if you qualify for reduced commissions.

[longnguyen]

I’ve been running BoltAI[1] and it generates enough revenue for me to work on it full time.

I follow the “perpetual license with one year of support/updates” model. So far it’s working great. My customers love it as they’re in control of the software. Some users can run BoltAI entirely offline.

But I’m adding the subscription soon as this model is not sustainable when I’m adding other cloud features such as cloud sync and other collaboration features.

I think the pricing model should reflect the value and cost of the product. If it’s more on the software side (think winzip or other smaller desktop widget where there is no or low operational cost), it should be one time payment. If it’s more on the service side (cloud sync, collaborative features, fast changing niche where you need to update the product constantly…) then it makes more sense to charge a subscription.

But the tricky part here is that potential customers might not see it that way. Many assume it’s just like another desktop app, therefore it has to be one time payment. So in my experience, I’d start with no cloud feature and offer a perpetual license. Then I’ll add a subscription and with other cloud features. Basically 2 different offerings.

[1]: https://boltai.com

[satvikpendem]

Great app, I actually mentioned you in my other comments as a good example of a one-time payment model and why it works for you, at least until you add the more service oriented features as you mentioned.

[dcreater]

That's surprising. The free version of Msty is better

[paradite]

I'm making very small amount of money (1k USD a month) selling 16x Prompt for lifetime license.

Many people have told me to switch to subscription but I just don't think it's the "right" thing to do with a desktop GUI app.

https://prompt.16x.engineer/

[phaedrus]

I want so much to be in the business of selling my own traditional downloadable software, that I've thought about (in the absence of an idea) just putting together a do-nothing application with payment, installer, configuration dialogs, bug feedback - everything but a raison d'etre.

The irony is in my day job I am developing a traditional downloadable Windows application which will come with an immediate user base. But although I have considerable discretion over the project, it isn't mine (in an intellectual property sense), and I'm not getting rich off it.

[0xbadcafebee]

I believe they are called "apps" now, it's a $500B market. As far as desktop software, it's the same as it ever was... you make a product, you release it for download, you sell a license. No mystery to it.

But it often makes more sense to sell it as a subscription; you can make it very cheap for the user up front, and get a continuous revenue stream. Subscriptions make more sense if you provide constant updates, support or online services.

If you don't do those things, one-time purchase might be better. Require a new license for major versions, put your killer new features in there. Traditional vendors like Microsoft do this with their software.

You can also just combine the two, and let people purchase it once for one release, and subscribe to get support and more services/features.

[gregmac]

Yeah, at the core of it I see this as a value problem.

If you charge a lot, it's a tough or impossible sell for users who aren't yet sure they'll get that amount of value from it. If you charge too little, you're leaving money on the table from big customers who would be willing to pay much more.

Setting the up-front cost also requires you to estimate a bunch of things: what will it cost you to build (including future time to get to "feature complete" for this version), how many do you think you are going to sell, how much time is each customer going to take up? In other words: this is what you value your time at, but you can't know most of the numbers used ahead of time. You need this for subscriptions, too, but there's a bit more latitude to change, and you don't necessarily have any obligations should you decide to just stop at the end of the next billing cycle.

Longer term, there's also an incentive problem for you as the vendor. If you're very successful and saturate your market, why build new versions? Your incentive switches to making a "major" version with huge upgrades, which has a whole ton of downsides (which smart customers see, or learn the hard way). It's riskier than frequent, small releases: your first major real testing and feedback comes after a ton of massive changes. It incentives change for the sake of change (so you can justify a "major" version) as opposed to real improvements. Even fixing bugs becomes purely a cost, the only real incentives are pride/reputation, and hoping they'll buy the next major version.

Subscriptions help even this out, and tying the cost to some usage metric can make the cost reflect the value even more, even as the usage changes over time (eg: the customer grows).

The worst thing with subscriptions is when the cost doesn't reflect the value. If as a user, you pay $20/mo for something that enables you to make $2000/month, that's a no-brainer. When you have to pay $20/month for something that is useful 4 or 5 times a year, or when it's really hard to figure out what, if any, value you're getting for your money, that's when it becomes a problem.

[rkagerer]

Yes, I did so for 10+ years, about 15 years ago. It launched my business (which then evolved to include a lot of consulting).

I charged for major version upgrades that introduced substantial new functionality (discounted for existing customers); minor version upgrades were free.

I was probably too generous with support, but it resulted in very satisfied customers and a solid reputation that paid in spades with the more lucrative opportunities.

Not sure how the market is these days for that model, but I can give you a datapoint of one in that I strongly prefer it over subscriptions in almost all cases (the exception being when there's legit ongoing service being delivered).

[DougN7]

I do almost the same thing, except I also offer a monthly subscription. The reason being that I’ve run into some companies that absolutely only want to pay monthly, and others that absolutely only want to pay once. I figure it’s best to make it as easy as possible for them to pay.

[Gigachad]

Development cycles are getting faster making this less viable. You can’t afford to hold on to finished features waiting to bundle them in to a major release. Your competitor just released a feature, you have it finished, but you’re holding it for a release. Users will get frustrated and move to the software that’s always ahead.

[msds]

I'm not running the show, but I am working at a place that does this. One time fee for a perpetual license for the current major version, free support, and historically ~6 years of updates per version.

Users tend to be quite happy about it, and we're profitable enough to pay comfortable salaries and have...a lot...of runway.

Of course, this model is possible because there was never any outside investment.

[turbojet1321]

I used to work somewhere that had a similar licensing model. I believe it was perpetual access to all updates (minor or major) released within 12mths of purchase, along with free support. Once your 12mths were up there were no further updates.

Last I heard, they were still successfully running a (small - 3 or 4 dev) business on this model.

[DarrenDev]

I switched off sales of my last desktop app a couple of months ago. It was still bringing in sales of about $600 a month, but it felt like a weight hanging around my neck. Despite shutting it down I expect I'll still get a couple of support emails a month for the next 10 years.

We're building a desktop / SaaS app right now that we'll be selling using a SaaS model. A combination of desktop app built with Electron and a web app for managing accounts and teams. I'd never touch a "once off" pricing model again.

[tonyedgecombe]

>It was still bringing in sales of about $600 a month, but it felt like a weight hanging around my neck.

I had the same feeling when I shut down mine last year. In theory I could have left it running for some pocket money but after 23 years I had had enough. After a couple of really slow months I decided to discontinue it and retire.

[outcoldman]

I do. macOS applications. Generating between 1,000-2,000 USD monthly (so variable because no subscriptions).

Obviously this is still a hobby that I am trying to make more sustainable. But this is where I am right now after 3-4 years in this business.

https://loshadki.app - you can check the apps here.

[iKlsR]

OpenIn seems like something I've been hunting for for a while on Windows, use case is I primarily use firefox but I have so many google logins that it only makes sense to use chrome where applicable for several reasons the most annoying being it's hard to toggle between accounts when logged into multiple google accounts, I also use Notion Calendar which by default tries to open firefox when you start a meeting. So my workflow typically is click join meeting, go to the firefox tab, copy said link then open the appropriate profile and paste link. Ideally I'd want to click that link which launches Chrome where I select a profile and it continues to the link.

[coldtea]

How much "traditional downloadable software" do you have? How much other such software is sold and makes a living for those making it?

Just the music software industry alone, for example, sells about 4 billion dollars worth of VSTs, DAWs, etc every year, most of it without subscriptions.

[cageface]

Unfortunately even in this area there is now a strong push towards subscription models.

[_kush]

I've been building a break reminder app for mac since slightly more than a year and it's been growing really well - mostly through word of mouth. It currently nets $5k a month.

I sell perpetual licenses but I charge for updates beyond the first year. I do get 2-3 emails every day reporting bugs and general feature requests.

I have some other apps for iOS as well but they are all subscription based.

[fruit2020]

Is piracy a concern? Or are there good enough libraries to implement a client side license key mechanism?

[_bin_]

i buy very little software but i made an exception for that recently. i bought Alternative A2DP Driver (https://www.bluetoothgoodies.com/a2dp/) from Luculent Systems, a windows driver that allows extensive configurability of my bluetooth headphones. i have a sony WH-1000XM series that supports the higher-quality LDAC codec, not supported natively by windows, and can now use them at a great 990Kbps quality.

it was a one-time purchase of $5.99, though it's unfortunately locked to a specific computer, with a small charge to use it on another machine. no subscriptions, no ongoing charges.

if you use a windows machine and bluetooth headphones with reasonable quality, it's worth a buy.

[seba_dos1]

Yes, game developers.

[kelseydh]

Even when you buy a game by disc nowadays, you are forced into waiting an hour to install cloud updates.

[talles]

"Downloadable software", sure. "Traditional", I don't think so.

[oleksii88]

I have been doing this for the past 5 years with https://folge.me. A one-time payment alternative to Scribehow, Tango.us and myriads of similar apps.

I can't say that this is a very profitable business, especially given that I don't charge any fees for the updates, but I quite enjoy talking to users, finding out their needs, and improving Folge over time. I think Folge has become my hobby.

[Kelvin506]

I write bespoke software on this basis. There is a significant market for custom software in specialized industries. Security scopes, capitalisation rules, tax and privacy laws, etc., rule SaaS and subscriptions out for a lot of businesses.

[fxtentacle]

I know that Houdini (that VFX software used for Dr. Strange portal effects), Marmoset Toolbox (an alternative to Adobe's Substance Painter), and zBrush (a sculpting software) were all perpetual licenses when we bought them. And we chose these softwares specifically because they had perpetual licenses. SaaS vendors want to capture the margin of their power users, which means by necessity they price out casual users of their software.

=> For any software that might be used for hobby or casual use, perpetual licenses target a different market than SaaS offerings.

That's one of the reasons why the Spatial Audio Designer - targeting freelance audio producers and very popular with musicians - sells best with a perpetual license tied to a hardware USB dongle: https://www.newaudiotechnology.com/products/spatial-audio-de...

In my opinion, USB dongles also help with marketing because you make it easier for your power users / evangelists to borrow out the software to others.