Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!clyde.concordia.ca!mcgill-vision!snorkelwacker!bu.edu!orc!decwrl!shelby!agate!bionet!ames!sun-barr!newstop!sun!stpeter.Eng.Sun.COM!cmcmanis From: cmcmanis@stpeter.Eng.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Does Shareware hurt professional software development? Message-ID: <136464@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 31 May 90 21:20:50 GMT References: <73042@srcsip.UUCP> <1395@lectroid.sw.stratus.com> <136211@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <1990May25.033040.12421@ameristar> <25291@netnews.upenn.edu> Sender: news@sun.Eng.Sun.COM Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca. Lines: 69 In article <25291@netnews.upenn.edu> (Colin Strasser) writes: >Sanity check: if Gnu C for the Amiga were as good as Lattice or Manx, then >why not use it? Simply because it's not commercial? I mean, the way the >free market works is that if my product is as good as yours for significantly >less money, then mine will be chosen over yours. Think of it this way, there is some absolute number of the people who are acquiring software for the amiga. Of this number, some percentage are in the market for a C compiler. Of that percentage there is a certain amount of price elasticity, specifically the price of the compiler has a measurable effect on the number of people who will buy it. We will presume that there is some "golden number" which represents the a price where the maximum revenue will be returned. As I've mentioned many times before determining this number is as much an art at writing a classic piece of code is. Once a developer has such a number and the error bars associated with it, they can estimate their costs make a reasonable guess at what the potential "profits" of such a project might be. Finally they can make a decision about whether or not to go ahead with the project. Given all of that, my personal preference is to buy a C compiler (although I could certainly port the Gnu CC one). The reason I want to buy one is because I don't have time write new code _and_ fix bugs in the compiler _and_ develop helpful development tools such as cross reference utilities. Further, when I do find a bug I want reasonable assurance from the "author" that the bug will be fixed in a reasonable amount of time. And yet, there are also people in the "percentage" I describe in the first paragraph that want a C compiler, will pay for one if they have to but won't if they can get one for "free". So when Gcc becomes available, the "golden number" changes, and the total revenue changes. If it changes enough so that Lattice or Manx decide that it isn't worth trying to sell a compiler in the Amiga market, well I'm hosed. So Chuck McManis would be pissed off that someone would port Gcc and put it out and forced my preferred compiler vendor out of the market. Lattice doesn't care, they have an established market in the PC world which is so huge it could support 50 different compilers easily. The comment was raised by Mike that the competition between Manx and Lattice was good for the Amiga. I agree, and Lattice and Manx can compete because they are both building compilers under the same constraints which include paying for a support staff, a compiler writer, a technical writer, and publishing expenses. They can compete on quality and service and know that the other company won't be able to just arbitrarily cut its price to the bone without also laying off some of the staff and hence decreasing their quality in some area. They can't compete against a project like Gcc that doesn't have those expenses. Maybe an analogy would be Sears (a department store) trying to compete against a Goodwill (charity) store. The reason Sears isn't worried is because the merchandise at Goodwill is used and worn, but donated software doesn't get "worn" no matter how much it is used. Anyway, it is a subjective argument and it has gotten out of hand. The use of the word "sucks" was too provacative in this case and I retract it. My assertion is and continues to be "The presence of a quality Free/Shareware product can and does negatively affect the availability of commercial alternatives." In my _opinion_ this is a problem because I would much rather pay $100 for a commercial product that has a name at the other end of it who will fix any bugs I find than have to "live" with the bugs in a shareware product that has no "owner". Further, I will freely acknowledge that in this audience (the Usenet community) I am in a minority. -- --Chuck McManis Sun Microsystems uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "I tell you this parrot is bleeding deceased!"