Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!ico!isis!aburt
From: aburt@isis.UUCP (Andrew Burt)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: Paying for Shareware (Was: Re: v09i070: newsclip 1.1...)
Message-ID: <2877@isis.UUCP>
Date: 10 Feb 90 16:34:16 GMT
References: <13986@s.ms.uky.edu> <33975@watmath.waterloo.edu> <2488@cs-spool.calgary.UUCP> <34142@watmath.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: aburt@isis.UUCP (Andrew Burt)
Organization: Math/CS, University of Denver
Lines: 48

In article <34142@watmath.waterloo.edu> bstempleton@watmath.waterloo.edu (Brad Templeton) writes:
>...I still think it is improper to
>ignore such a restriction, law or no law, simply because I know it is the
>code that has the value, not the bits on the disk.  This "unsolicited
>book" mentality comes from people who think software should cost $2 because
>disks cost that.

I hate to jump into this fray, and I don't want to engage in any flame wars;
but...

As a software developer myself, one theme I find constantly popping up
among customers I know, including myself, is the cost/benefit analysis of
software.  This is almost universally ignored during these shareware debates --
but Brad brings up a point:  People are apparently willing to pay $2 for
a program that they're not willing to pay $30 for (or whatever the shareware
author requests in payment).

This suggests to me that software is vastly overpriced relative to what
(shareware) consumers are willing to pay for it.

I hate to use the book analogy, but considering the effort that goes into
a book is probably more than goes into a shareware program, and that the
information content of a book is quite often much higher than that of a
program (consider, if you want, a simple utility program) -- then why
shouldn't a consumer feel upset that someone wants $15, $30, $50 for
a program when a book with more information content costs $3, $5, $8 etc.
(paperback for example).  Even most high end books run less than $50 -- but
high end programs run in the multiple $100's.

To get people to pay for something they must feel it is worth the cost.
As a software developer (non-shareware, but I have nothing against it)
I am very critical of the software I use.  I've almost universally found
it's never worth what I pay for it.  I'm much happier with the software
the less I pay for it (and not just because I paid less hard cash).  I
think it may have something to do with expectations relative to other
cash expenditures of the same magnitude.

I know software is expensive to create, I'm not say it isn't.  But to
anyone who whines they aren't getting their just dues, consider WHY
people don't pay for it.  Maybe it isn't very good; or maybe it just
isn't worth as many $$$ as you think it is.

My $.02.
-- 
Andrew Burt 				   			uunet!isis!aburt
								or aburt@du.edu

       "And that, my lord, is how we know the Earth to be banana-shaped"