Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!cbmvax!daveh From: daveh@cbmvax.cbm.UUCP (Dave Haynie) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Shareware ideas Message-ID: <1818@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP> Date: Fri, 1-May-87 15:30:19 EDT Article-I.D.: cbmvax.1818 Posted: Fri May 1 15:30:19 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 5-May-87 04:40:27 EDT References: <3375@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> Organization: Commodore Technology, West Chester, PA Lines: 142 in article <3375@jade.BERKELEY.EDU>, mwm@eris.BERKELEY.EDU (Mike (My watch has windows) Meyer) says: > > We can hope so! Not always.... > I don't know about the people you've named, but I suspect they write > software for much the same reason I do: because they need the tools, > or want to see if they can make the machine do magic.... Once I've built > the tool/spiffy hack, there's no reason not to give it away. But there may be. Like, it works for me, and it does basically what I wrote it for. I could give it away, and hope that it would be really useful to the Amiga community. But maybe, with a little work, I could make it far easier to use, and even of commercial quality; beyond my immediate needs, but something that will appeal to more people. Now that that that's done, what do I do with it? I can still give it away... > Of course, you also overlooked that there _is_ a carrot. Every letter > I get telling me how much someone appreciates mg or small tex or in the blank> is a kick. It makes me want to do that kind of thing > again. Sure it does. I've put out a few how-tos/demos, a few ports of programs that I didn't originate, and one piece of shareware. I get the same satisfation when I'm written or called about any of this (unless its before around 10AM on the weekends...), and it certainly makes me want to do it again. So does and occasional $10 check or a can of Macadamia nuts. >> ********* Do We Really Need Shareware? ********* >> Yes we do! > > Oh, horse pucky. There's exactly _three_ pieces of shareware I've even > considered using... Hey, if you don't like the shareware, than you'd certainly not pay for it. The whole point of shareware is "if you like this, and you use it, then consider sending $$$". I've seen good and bad in PD, free, share, and commercial wares. And simple demo program that asks $50 for its use will not only not get that $50, but will tarnish the reputation of the person that wrote it. Just as a lousy piece of commercial/free software will tarnish the reputation of the company/person that put it out. Only, in the case of the commercial stuff, at least a few folks have forked over their $$$ before they discover the program is garbage. > The logo I wouldn't have considered using if it had had the standard > bloodsucker shareware notice. I don't understand this. Even if the shareware program promised denizens of demons would plague your sleep unless you paid for it, its still up to you. If the program's not worth using, then its not worth paying for. If nothing else, you get a laugh out of the fact that some bozo is asking money for this useless program. If the program is really great, that you shouldn't mind paying for it if you're morally (though probably not legally) obligated; a superset of these rules apply to commercial software anyway. > In other words, I don't need shareware. I've got a lot, but only > because I try to keep a complete collection of Fish disks, and he puts > shareware on them. If he didn't distribute shareware, I'd never > notice. That's fine. Truthfully, I've seen alot more free or PD stuff for the Amiga than shareware that I'd ever use. But the existence of this shareware doesn't bother me. Of course, like I said, I've tried the shareware method myself with moderate success. >>The primary benifits to the end user are that he gets to test >>the software before buying it and MOST IMPORTANTLY applications for which >>there is little apparent demand can still be distributed, for example the >>AmigaMonitor program (it saved my hide once so I paid up). > > The same arguments apply to free software. And given honest software > dealers, it's possible to return software for a cash refund. I bought > my first MANX compiler (for CP/M-80) on a "try it for 30 days" deal > they had. In other words, these aren't really benefits of shareware, > but benefits of free software and dealing with honest software > vendors. Its nice when you find a dealer who will accept returns, but this seems more the exception than the rule. And there's certainly no legal obligation for any return of faulty or poorly written software in most cases, much less good software that just doesn't meet my needs. > Ah, we get to the nub of the problem. Someone wants to make a few > bucks off of there program, but aren't willing to pay for a real > distribution. That exactly what I was looking for. "Real" distribution can be a mixed blessing. I could form a company, sell my program for $29.95 in the back of AmigaWorld and Amazing, etc. versus $10.00 for shareware. I've got to make up my advertising costs, contend with losses though piracy, purchase distribution media, etc. All of which I don't have the time for. Of I could try to interest a bigger software company, Aegis, EA, whatever, in my product, and that might work with some products. My shareware product was a program called DiskSalv, which does a pretty good job of recovering a trashed floppy disk. It a CLI based utility which presumes a knowledge of CLI and two floppy drives. And its the kind of thing that folks may need once in awhile, but not all that often (unless you've got a thing for pulling floppies with the red light on). This is not the kind of thing that I'd expect any large company to be interested in; you only need it once in awhile, its not flashy or graphic or anything. I originally wrote the program to recover a disk I had clobbered that was full of what, at the time, was really useful codes I had been writing. After that worked very well, I spent on the order of two months worth of spare time improving the program. The shareware scheme seemed the best distribution method available to me. > What you mean we, paleface? Of course, the software is yours, and you > can do with it as you like. Just don't expect me to pay for it if you > without providing evidence that you have real support. What exactly constitutes REAL SUPPORT? Say I form a company, DaveWare Ltd., and sell you my DiskSalv program at $29.95 from the back of a mag. You don't know anything more about DaveWare Ltd. than you do about me, possibly less if you've seen any PD programs I've put out. At least in my case, whether the program is sold directly by DaveWare Ltd. or though ShareWare channels by Dave Haynie, you're still going to be writing to the same address or calling the same phone number for information, complaints, etc. Certainly an Aegis or EA is going to have official support for their programs, where I (in either guise) could ignore any upgrade requests. But along the same lines, Aegis and EA aren't likely to give you the source code or respond with a version upgrade in a day or two. > You also loose all the cheap distribution channels you were talking > about earlier. What you're talking about doing is a publisher of cheap > software. That's been tried before. I don't think any of the people > who did it are still in business [anyone else remember JRT Pascal?]. > It may work this time, but I wouldn't bet on it. I remember Creative Computing Software; I wrote 4 programs (way back in '79) for them, my last commercial software venture. It didn't go all that bad for me until Dave Ahl took it over. My biggest mistake was writing for the wrong computer -- about 10% of the Exidy owners in the US bought my tapes, but at an installed base of around 5000 units, you can't make much that way. >