Local-First Software Is Easier to Scale

The reason it's easier to scale local software is that it does not rely on cloud resources. As a result it's cheaper for a startup to distribute local first software since they don't need the infrastructure of a traditional cloud app. The problem is there is no business model for local first software like there is for subscriptions with SaaS. Traditional desktop apps were sold as single purchase items on CDs. That just doesn't work for local first software, since you probably just navigate to a website to get the software.

> The problem is there is no business model for local first software like there is for subscriptions with SaaS.

I think this is too broad a stroke to paint with. There's local-first software that still connects to the cloud for additional features. Local-first can enable you to continue to work when offline, but the software can still be more useful when online.

You can just charge subscriptions for local first software. No cloud is irrelevant. Only the value to the user matters.

I remember Skype was local-first. I believe it was the only one commercially successful P2P project.

But over time and multiple hard-to-recover incidents they switched to cloud.

So your primary technical goal is to do local first, and you keep the cloud because it provides a business model that works? That feels very brittle. The way you're describing it, local first is an optional additional element for a cloud-based tool. I don't think that's the primary intent of the local first movement.

Sure, you can try it charge subscriptions, but what are you actually charging for? You're not storing any of the customer's data or providing a service that they need, since the software should work entirely without your help. Fundamentally charging a subscription without having a centralized server is pretty tricky. Even the traditional desktop apps that transitioned to the cloud, like Photoshop or Maya, have really worked hard to beef up their cloud-based service to justify the subscription fee. A mismatch between your business model and your technical infrastructure is not going to stand up well over time. Don't get me wrong. I'm just trying to figure out what business model works for local-first software?

> But over time and multiple hard-to-recover incidents they switched to cloud.

My understanding was that they switched to being centralized because phones couldn't run the decentralized version.

Developers can charge money, or subscriptions, for local apps as well. They can probably charge less, as they don't have a cloud provider to pay to host everything. This is pretty common with mobile apps.

> Traditional desktop apps were sold as single purchase items on CDs. That just doesn't work for local first software, since you probably just navigate to a website to get the software.

How does the reason you provide support the idea you provide it in support of? There are an infinite number of things that are sold as single purchases that you buy by just navigating to a website where you make the purchase.

There are an infinite number of things that are sold as single purchases on CDs that you buy by just navigating to a website where you make the purchase.

I think subscription models became associated with SaaS because cloud hype was at its peak around the time the first big corps were first migrating their products from perpetual licensing to susbscription, and just being on the cloud was seen as a selling point weighty enough to justify the price bump.

Now that cloud hype has died down, I don't see why subscription based would not be viable just because your product runs locally (assuming that all your competitors are already subscription based). ZBrush started selling local first subscriptions, so I guess we'll see soon enough whether that works out for them.

Where do you check their subscription in order to cut off the service when they stop paying? One of the nice bits about local first is that there's no need for logins. Do you install security software in your local first app, which, typically, includes the code in a format that's fairly easy to bypass? Pirating desktop software was a big issue for companies. Are we going back to that horrible world?

Subscription models are associated with SaaS because you're selling a service. The service is typically storing your data or providing capabilities on the back end. With a local first app, the company is not paying for back-end resources, so there's a mismatch between the expectations of customers who are actually providing the resources on their own computer, and the desires of the company to make money.

It depends on your customer base.The SCADA world is largely local, and believe me they have no trouble selling subscriptions.

A simple license key and monthly ping to license server (5 usd digital ocean) is enough.

Pirates is the cost of doing business. Just ignore them.

No need to make this too complicated.

Their customers would probably prefer that there where no subscription though.

So that kind of violates the principles of the local first software since you still need the cloud and license key in order to run the app. It also means more work for the developer, since they have no other reason to provide a server in most cases. It also means that they need to have logins which are not actually necessary for local first software and one of the benefits. Not so easy.

> Pirates is the cost of doing business. Just ignore them.

There are a lot of cracking groups that circumvent license servers on day one with software that have license servers.

I'm sure this is the reason that Adobe went to the cloud, Adobe couldn't ignore them as with other 'box software'.

A license key is not a login. And a server like that is not a big deal.

Source: me, I do this way.

> Traditional desktop apps were sold as single purchase items on CDs. That just doesn't work for local first software, since you probably just navigate to a website to get the software.

Did I misunderstand this part? A lot of local software is sold as one time purchase downloads.

Probably, but you'd be surprised how little that matters.

Interesting. I will contemplate. Thanks for explaining.