Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!obsolete.UUCP!nazgul
From: nazgul@obsolete.UUCP (Kee Hinckley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: RE: Piracy and EVPs
Message-ID: <8905200046.AA22347@obsolete.UUCP>
Date: 20 May 89 00:46:23 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 77


        Many people have attempted to draw parallels between software upgrades
    and cars.  To that I respond as others have done: there is no such thing
    as a disk drive that can duplicate automobiles!

If someone invents a pocket laser that can open bank vaults does
that make it okay to rob banks?
    
    I said that often upgrades have the same suggested retail price as the 
    original version.  Since people who have older versions must pay EVPs for
    those upgrades it means that the upgrade costs are being absorbed by only
    those who have paid the upgrade penalty - not by the people who have the
    new improved version at the same old price!  This causes some people to

No, no, no.  Development costs are the costs up until the product
ships.  Presumably (if this company is surviving at all) it paid
those off with the first release.  In the meantime they've been
doing more development.  When Release 2 comes out the cost isn't
covering the cost of producing Release 1 anymore, it's covering the
cost of producing Release 2!  If I expect to sell as many copies of
Release 2 as Release 1 then I can afford to charge you a minimal
upgrade charge.  If on the other hand I expect that I've already
saturated the market with Release 1, I'll probably have to charge
more for an upgrade, since the number of people buying Release 2
for the first time won't offset my development costs.

I think you are confusing two things.  You don't pay for software
on a per feature basis.  If you did it would make sense to only have
a minimal upgrade cost (and to have the new product cost more).
You are paying for *development cost*, which may or may not be 
directly related to the number of features.

    either use pirated versions until they buy what they consider to be an
    advanced enough version (if they buy one at all) or to pirate newer versions
    after buying an old version.

All you are doing is screwing over three people - yourself, the
developer, and everyone else.  When you steal software, it screws
up the developers accounting.  Gee, not as many people bought the
thing as they planned.  Assuming they managed to survive that (and
I know a few firms where one or two people stealing their product 
could easily make the different between whether they survive or go
bankrupt) they'll now have to raise their prices next time around,
and that screws everyone else.  Where do you get bit?  The next time
they come out with something you really *do* need to buy.
    
         The car analogy has another flaw - if the price of one car is too
    expensive you can buy a cheaper one because once you know how to drive
    one car you can drive others.  This doesn't hold true for software.  You

It certainly does.  If you can't afford Appleworks, go get FrEDWriter.
The only cases where you won't see this is in new technologies where
there is currently only one supplier.  And guess what, you don't see
it in cars there either.

    have to start using new commands and even new operating systems - so
    software users don't exactly have as much choice in moving, say, to a
    lower cost spreadsheet.

Now we're talking look and feel issues again.  Personally I have
no problem with cheap look alike clones - Apple obviously does.
    
         If a publisher wants to upgrade, fine!  Just put the additional
    upgrade costs (if any) on the new versions and let the people who have
    older versions trade them in for the new stuff and pay the difference
    in cost; that way, they are paying for the original software development
    and the upgrade expenses as well!

As I said above - the original software development costs are probably
already paid off, and if not the publisher usually does exactly what
you suggest.  I recently bought upgrades to two pieces of Mac software
where the new price was substantially higher than the old (Freehand and
MacroMind Director, for what it's worth).  And guess what?  The upgrade
price was higher than normal too, just as I expected.
    
						-kee
-------