(Git) Tower

Algaris · 2020-02-26 12:21:41

I just found out my favourite version control software is now free for teachers, students, and educational institutions.

https://www.git-tower.com/education

This means I can finally upgrade from Tower v2 to Tower v4 and avoid the subscription fee. I do wish they’d provide a way to purchase the software without an annual subscription though.

gaekwad · 2020-02-26 16:33:00

Algaris wrote #321922:

I do wish they’d provide a way to purchase the software without an annual subscription though.

100% this. I appreciate there’s a different revenue model these days, and updates cost money etc, but I’d much prefer a one-off cost per version.

Sadly, I haven’t yet found a libre Git GUI client for macOS that comes close to Tower.

Bloke · 2020-02-26 16:45:34

I’ve heard good things about Fork but haven’t tried it. I’m hardcore: command line, FTW :)

EDIT: There are a bunch listed here for those that want to play.

Last edited by Bloke (2020-02-26 16:46:56)

gaekwad · 2020-02-26 16:50:19

Bloke wrote #321927:

I’ve heard good things about Fork but haven’t tried it. I’m hardcore: command line, FTW :)

Yeah, Fork is pretty good – not libre, sadly. Free at the moment, will be $50 soon, and I haven’t used it enough to justify the outlay.

(That sounded less cheapskate in my head.)

gaekwad · 2020-02-26 16:54:17

The best macoS libre Git GUI I’ve found to date is GitUp – ironically, because Tower 2 works just fine for me (for now), I haven’t really given it a fair spin.

I suppose command line stuff might be a useful skill. Grumble.

Algaris · 2020-02-28 09:00:50

Until Fournova made made Tower free for educational use I was using Tower 2 and not looking elsewhere.

The problem I have now is that I can’t use Tower 4 at home for non educational projects. I like the look of Fork and $50 isn’t too much in the long run. I might give it a test drive to see if it’s worth moving from Tower 2 on my home iMac.

I really don’t like the idea of subscriptions for software, otherwise I would have upgraded to the latest version of Tower long ago.

Last edited by Algaris (2020-02-28 09:01:51)

colak · 2020-02-28 09:36:43

Algaris wrote #321974:

I really don’t like the idea of subscriptions for software…

I so much agree with you. I also hate the current trend with companies receiving your money without selling you anything. It appears to be the case with a lot of digital content recently.

Bloke · 2020-02-28 10:07:27

Not wishing to derail the thread but paying subscriptions for software is a bugbear of mine too. Take Adobe. Creative Suite is fabulous. I have an ancient bought copy of Photoshop – from before they did CC and subs. I use it maybe once a month or, if I’m lucky, ten times a year for touching up photos or making a poster for the odd client. It’s great. I have GIMP but it’s clunky and annoying.

Shelling out $x per month for a licence seat of the entire suite isn’t worth it. I appreciate it’s high end software and Adobe’s business model is geared towards people who can pass the subscription cost onto paying clients (and it’s waaaay better than having to find a lump sum) but for me, if there was the option to buy just one of the tools, or a related bundle at a reasonable cost, it’d work better for me.

So when Pete told me about Affinity Photo, I evaluated it, loved it, and bought a copy in the black Friday sale last year. It reads PS files, it’s fast, and does most of what PS can (minus the 3D stuff I never used anyway) with very similar shortcut keys so the transition is painless. $35 one-off cost and free upgrades. Bargain! And it’s legitimately a business expense, since I use it for work.

Nothing much against Adobe. Their software is generally good. But as I’m not on their 80% catchment of professionals who use all their tools all the time in a pro capacity, I can’t justify the expenditure for occasional use.

jakob · 2020-02-28 11:34:43

I have mixed feelings about it:

For my “main job”, I do use the core Creative Suite products regularly and have to exchange files with other partners in the work process without stuff getting lost in conversion. Being able to spread the cost as a monthly fee makes that a more manageable expense than stumping up the 2500€ it used to cost as a package. The same goes for CAD software and the like which is generally even more expensive.

While you could plan and save for the expense yourself, most people don’t do that or don’t know when they want to update. I see that with my co-working colleagues on CS6 or CS5 who are constantly running into compatibility difficulties (and in the end rely on me to convert back and forth for them).

If you create something from beginning to end, you can choose to use another product because only the input files and the end product / output file count. If you work with others in the process, using an alternative product requires problem-free interoperability.

…

At the other end of the scale, I feel for the indie software authors who need a significant number of regular ongoing sales to live, especially when the product is low-cost. And the more they sell, the higher the support effort often is both time and money-wise.

Consequently, you see many software authors who have many programs that do small things, which then get relegated to “legacy software” when the maintenance load becomes too great. Or authors who migrate an existing product into a new name and version to generate upgrade sales (where the value proposition for users is not always obvious). Sometimes some software producers wander through a series of eventually slated products until they find one that sticks and generates enough revenue (like the authors of Sketch for example, and that now also has an annual cost). So, sometimes a manageable fee at intervals would be preferable to a product being ditched.

The question is the price point. I totally appreciate that someone has done their sums and know they need a certain amount of money to live from and base their pricing on that, but from the user’s point of view, it quickly begins to add up when more or more of one’s software requires a monthly payment. Pooling subscription initiatives like Setapp are an interesting response in this respect for users (not sure about the producers) though “core use” apps are lacking a bit there.

I find git-tower a bit on the pricey side for my level of use of it, but they have continually expanded on what it can do or made more complex tasks easier so the product has grown. They’ve also invested in providing good documentation, tutorials and webinars.

colak wrote #321975:

I so much agree with you. I also hate the current trend with companies receiving your money without selling you anything. It appears to be the case with a lot of digital content recently.

I agree with you too … but would personally place the emphasis on companies receiving your money without selling you anything. If there is additional value and the price point is not exorbitant, it can have benefits for both users and authors.

Algaris · 2020-02-28 14:31:47

jakob wrote #321977:

Pooling subscription initiatives like Setapp are an interesting response in this respect…

Funny you should mention Setapp. I have an active subscription as it has most of the software I use on a daily basis which makes it worth while for me.

As much as I dislike software subscriptions Setapp currently works out cheaper for me than subscribing to or buying the individual apps (especially with the education discount). Also if I’m going to have a software subscription I’d rather pay just one and get access to everything I use.

gaekwad · 2020-02-28 14:50:51

Bloke wrote #321976:

So when Pete told me about Affinity Photo, I evaluated it, loved it, and bought a copy in the black Friday sale last year.

And I’m not on commission, so everyone’s clear!

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#1 2020-02-26 12:21:41

(Git) Tower

#2 2020-02-26 16:33:00

Re: (Git) Tower

Algaris wrote #321922:

#3 2020-02-26 16:45:34

Re: (Git) Tower

#4 2020-02-26 16:50:19

Re: (Git) Tower

Bloke wrote #321927:

#5 2020-02-26 16:54:17

Re: (Git) Tower

#6 2020-02-28 09:00:50

Re: (Git) Tower

#7 2020-02-28 09:36:43

Re: (Git) Tower

Algaris wrote #321974:

#8 2020-02-28 10:07:27

Re: (Git) Tower

#9 2020-02-28 11:34:43

Re: (Git) Tower

colak wrote #321975:

#10 2020-02-28 14:31:47

Re: (Git) Tower

jakob wrote #321977:

#11 2020-02-28 14:50:51

Re: (Git) Tower

Bloke wrote #321976:

Board footer