Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!pyramid!oliveb!sun!cmcmanis From: cmcmanis@sun.uucp (Chuck McManis) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Another View on Shareware Message-ID: <18006@sun.uucp> Date: Mon, 4-May-87 18:53:07 EDT Article-I.D.: sun.18006 Posted: Mon May 4 18:53:07 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 5-May-87 06:29:24 EDT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Mtn View, CA Lines: 134 Keywords: Shareware is bad for your health Xref: mnetor comp.sys.amiga:4484 comp.sys.ibm.pc:3761 The following has been cross posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc because those folks can learn something from it too. But to fill you in, we have had some people over in comp.sys.amiga worrying that Shareware was dying, followed by some others saying that this might be a good thing. Well I brought it up on BIX and this message came from Bruce Tonkin one of the 'little guys' trying to make a living selling good software for the IBM PC... TITLE: A long tirade, being my opinions. The problem with shareware is twofold. First, the users don't know the difference between shareware and public domain software (or maybe they just don't *want* to know the difference). Second, it hurts little companies and not big ones. Big companies can just raise prices and put a couple dozen programmers to work adding features to distinguish their work from the shareware or small-company stuff. Small companies can't. Let's take some examples. I called those local clone manufacturers to find out what they were doing; it was just what I was afraid of. Let me tell you what the *purchasers* of those clones are doing: 1. They're figuring that they *bought* the software since it was included with their machine. If you tell them they didn't, they simply won't believe you. If they can't get support, they will gripe about it and figure that's what *all* small companies do. This is NOT SUPPOSITION. It's happening right now in my area, and it's widespread. Go to a user's group and watch what's going on! Maybe the shareware guys don't like it, but what can they do about it? The software is, in fact, being given away. The clone guys aren't claiming it's public domain, and they aren't charging for it. Bob Wallace and the others can scream all they want: they don't have a leg to stand on. 2. They're going with established companies when they must buy software. They think they already *have* experience with small companies, right? They don't need that garbage. So they'll pay $500 for a database or a word processor. Well, they'll pay that when they *have* to. That leads to: 3. Since prices for "good" software are so high, and since their clone cost almost nothing compared to the prices being asked for software, they figure they're being ripped off. They pirate software as a matter of course and figure they're morally justified to do it. When I was at the West Coast Computer Faire, a guy stopped by my booth and told me that exact thing. He worked at an office where they had 40 PCs. Good deal, I told him. We can give you a site license. "Why would we want to do anything that stupid?" he wanted to know. "We only buy one copy of anything, anyway. Why not get the best?" I tried to tell him our stuff *was* the best, and he just laughed. "If you're that good, you'd be as big as Microsoft." Catch-22. You can't prove you're good without sales, and you can't sell unless you're that big. I talked to Andy Fluegelman a couple of times about shareware, and I told him I thought he was hurting the industry, not helping it. He didn't agree with me, because it was working for him. Dave Bunnell didn't agree either. Well, good and fine. I've done shareware in the past, and public domain stuff, too. Some of my stuff is here on BIX, and more of it is on other boards around the country. I know very well that it is being used. I've got one program I've distributed with at least 5,000 program disks over the last three years. I was nice about it: I asked for $5 to become a registered user and get information about updates. I don't know *how* many copies now exist, but I can tell you how many people have sent me $5. Two. Is it useful? Sure. It's a sort program, and it's fast and good, and all that other stuff. It's in PC-Sig libraries all over the country and even in Europe. I've got other programs that are NOT public domain or shareware. There are public domain and shareware programs in the same categories. Mine are better than the shareware programs, and I can defend that statement objectively; I can show reviews in major magazines and compare features, and do all kinds of other stuff. I can even quote comments from shareware authors! It just doesn't matter. I can point out that the shareware stuff actually costs more than mine *if it's registered*. That doesn't matter, either. As an example of WHY it doesn't matter, I can refer you to a local community college. They wanted to consider buying one of my programs for the students in the school. I quoted them my educational discount, and the guy told me he didn't think the school would go for it, even at $15 a copy. Why not? Because PC-xxx was "free". I told him it really wasn't, but he didn't want to hear it. He *knew* I was wrong. And the shareware author got nothing, and I got nothing. Of course, the shareware author may *eventually* get a .1% return on a million copies distributed; I'll still get nothing. I can't be any good. I'm not as big as Microsoft. Who is being hurt? Tell me again how shareware is really a good thing. Pardon me if I don't believe you. Look, let's be honest about all of this stuff. People really don't want to pay *anything* for software. They pirate stuff as a matter of course; laws against that sort of thing are obeyed about as regularly as the 55 MPH speed limit used to be and the 65 MPH speed limit probably will be. They won't contribute for the shareware stuff unless you shame them into it, and that's the reason for the ever-more-coercive labels on the shareware programs. All shareware does is give people the idea that it's all right not to pay for software; that you ought to pay only if you feel like it--if you're a wimp, or weird, or something. If you were running a small software company, you'd be feeling the heat on this. I do, and I am. One observation I can make is that all this *pleases* the bigger companies. They know they can keep going longer than the little guys like you and me. Where is their competition likely to come from, after all? All software companies started out as small operations and grew. When they got big enough, a formerly-large company died. If you kill all the little guys, you'll only have to worry about one of the other big guys. That's a whole lot easier, isn't it? So look at history: Borland and Lotus were the last two companies to make it big. That was what--three, four years ago? Who has done anything even remotely like that since? Before Borland and Lotus, there were Software Arts, Microsoft, Ashton-Tate, MicroPro, MultiMate, dozens of companies. There were one or two major successes every year. Since then, nothing. Do you ever wonder why? And the bigger companies are now merging a whole lot more than fighting. Latest rumors have Microsoft buying Borland. In case you don't remember, Ashton-Tate bought out MultiMate, and Lotus bought out some others (and is buying more all the time). Shareware is a short-term problem, I'm sure. In a couple of years, no one will even bother. All the low-end business will be dead forever and all the big companies will have everything to themselves. If you want to be a small software company, you will be forced to write accounting programs and other one-off deals for individual customers. Want more evidence? Take a look at what Microsoft has done to Windows developers. There's a rather plaintive message in the Microsoft conference from someone who bought the required hardware and software to do that development: it cost him $7,000. Now, OS/2 is out. All the old stuff is worthless, and it'll cost another $3,000 for the OS/2 toolkit. Does that sound nice and friendly to you? Does that sound like Microsoft is really concerned about small developers? Nor is Microsoft alone, of course. Check out Apple's plans with Mac software. I'm still on their developer's lists, and I regularly get solicitations for hardware and software to do development on that machine. A clue: it ain't cheap at all, folks. The days when you could buy a $2500 computer and do commercial development are long gone. Long, long, long gone. In short, the little guy is being squeezed out of the commercial market. The only way the little guy can survive is by writing games, and even that avenue is closing off because of piracy. At the low end, shareware is killing a lot of the rest of us. People who don't see that are being a little short-sighted at best, or just plain foolish. Sorry for the length of this message, but I'm just a little angry. If you want to post this or re-print it anywhere, you have my permission. Just include my name as author; I won't become famous or even make enough money to live on from my software any more. Maybe writing will be a little kinder. I'm just trying to make an honest buck, that's all. I never thought I'd make a million. Bruce Tonkin 34069 Hainesville Road Round Lake IL 60073 -------------------------End of Forwarded Message---------------- To respond to Bruce log into BIX and join the sw.author conference. -- --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These views are my own and no one elses. They could be yours too, just call MrgCop() and then ReThinkDisplay()!