Comment How to Fix Shareware (Score 1) 898
The problem is twofold: First, many people simply don't have money, or don't have disposable money to pay on software, and second, the license agreement is just too easy to break.
Now, I personally think MS Office is good software. And a lot of it -- I'd gladly pay Microsoft $80 for it (if I had $80 which I don't.) How much does Office run these days, $400? ($488.22 from CompUSA, just checked.) So what do I do with my $80?
You can't possibly believe that MS Office is worth nearly $500, or if you do, I've got an assload of software I'll sell you at those inflated prices.
Now, if I were to pirate MS Office, then your argument that Microsoft loses money vanishes into thin air. I wouldn't buy it at $500, no matter what, so they're not losing money. Hell, I'd be glad to give them $80, and I bet that would cover all their development costs. Seen in that sense, piracy is not theft, since nobody loses anything.
The second part of the problem is that it's just too easy to pirate. This goes especially for shareware, getting back to the original post. Free download, free use, after 30 days it starts beeping at me. Big whoop, I can put up with that, it's a hell of a lot easier than cracking Office.
This is where GNU-style or BSD-style free software gets its kick: It's much harder to break the license.
Let's be honest, very few people read or care about the GPL any more than they do Microsoft's EULA. The difference is that it's much harder to break the GPL, since the things that people will do with software in the course of using it (use it, share it, customize it) are allowed by the GPL. Microsoft could learn a lesson.
So this shareware outfit is sick of people "ripping them off"? Then take these two factors into account: First, is it priced right? I'd like to reiterate to any Microsoft types who might be listening: I think Office is well worth $80, and I'd pay $80 for it. That's $80 more than you're getting off me now. The same applies for this shareware thing. I've seen simple shareware that wants $40, and is obviously worth $5. Who wants to guess whether I paid for that?
Also, make sure your license agreement doesn't get in the way of normal use. Allow people to freely copy and play with and whatever.
Thirdly, rather than a MS-like product activation process, you may want to consider Valve's World ONline system, which I think is the best solution yet. Every license carries with it a WONid. The software is freely downloadable, and you can have as many copies as you like. The catch is that on startup it transmits your WONid to a server, which kicks you if your WONid is already in use. (I assume -- I've never been kicked, but then I don't give out my WONid.) The result is that you pay for use, rather than for software.
Now, I personally think MS Office is good software. And a lot of it -- I'd gladly pay Microsoft $80 for it (if I had $80 which I don't.) How much does Office run these days, $400? ($488.22 from CompUSA, just checked.) So what do I do with my $80?
You can't possibly believe that MS Office is worth nearly $500, or if you do, I've got an assload of software I'll sell you at those inflated prices.
Now, if I were to pirate MS Office, then your argument that Microsoft loses money vanishes into thin air. I wouldn't buy it at $500, no matter what, so they're not losing money. Hell, I'd be glad to give them $80, and I bet that would cover all their development costs. Seen in that sense, piracy is not theft, since nobody loses anything.
The second part of the problem is that it's just too easy to pirate. This goes especially for shareware, getting back to the original post. Free download, free use, after 30 days it starts beeping at me. Big whoop, I can put up with that, it's a hell of a lot easier than cracking Office.
This is where GNU-style or BSD-style free software gets its kick: It's much harder to break the license.
Let's be honest, very few people read or care about the GPL any more than they do Microsoft's EULA. The difference is that it's much harder to break the GPL, since the things that people will do with software in the course of using it (use it, share it, customize it) are allowed by the GPL. Microsoft could learn a lesson.
So this shareware outfit is sick of people "ripping them off"? Then take these two factors into account: First, is it priced right? I'd like to reiterate to any Microsoft types who might be listening: I think Office is well worth $80, and I'd pay $80 for it. That's $80 more than you're getting off me now. The same applies for this shareware thing. I've seen simple shareware that wants $40, and is obviously worth $5. Who wants to guess whether I paid for that?
Also, make sure your license agreement doesn't get in the way of normal use. Allow people to freely copy and play with and whatever.
Thirdly, rather than a MS-like product activation process, you may want to consider Valve's World ONline system, which I think is the best solution yet. Every license carries with it a WONid. The software is freely downloadable, and you can have as many copies as you like. The catch is that on startup it transmits your WONid to a server, which kicks you if your WONid is already in use. (I assume -- I've never been kicked, but then I don't give out my WONid.) The result is that you pay for use, rather than for software.
