Share via

Paying for software

  • Article

In his blog, Omar talks about his adventures in getting a good deal on Photoshop.

My take is slightly different: it's amazing what people will go through to avoid paying $20, $50, or $100 on a piece of software they would use every day for a few years, while having no qualms about spending several times that much on hardware, music, videos, movies, cable, cell phone bill, a single dinner out, or useless trinkets.

Why does software -- even good, useful software that exactly matches what someone wants -- seem to rank so low on the scale of voluntary expenditures? It seems to be less prevalent among (non OSS) developers, but I've seen lots of computer savvy people waste days or weeks searching for a freeware alternative to the perfectly good shareware app they already have, just because the shareware app will expire in 30 days unless they spend the $20 on registration. Some will even willingly endure spyware and adware to use a free piece of software over the for-pay alternative, even though they're more than capable of affording it.

Over the years I've been approached several times by people asking me to write software that can be easily found as shareware or shrink-wrap for < $100. Clearly it does not make sense for me to spend all of my weekends and evenings for months (or years!) writing custom software that could be readily purchased with two hours of salary, but what is it that makes people think requests like this are even rational? Is it a misunderstanding of the time and effort it takes to create good software?

What can we (as software developers, not must Microsoft) do to better communicate the value that software provides?

Comments

  • Anonymous
    February 18, 2004
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    February 18, 2004
    Hey, what happened to the comment about subscriptions that I was commenting on?

  • Anonymous
    February 18, 2004
    Sorry about that. Yeah, subscriptions are often seen as a solution but I completely agree that it's not the way to go for most types of software.

    Even worse is when the subscription is based on usage. What better way to discourage your customer base from using your product or service than to make them consciously aware that they have to conserve time, bits, etc. to save money?

    The only time in recent history I've opted for a subscription over purchase is my TiVo, and that decision was largely based on the fact that the subscription isn't transferable should your TiVo break, and that I'll probably upgrade to Windows Media Center soon anyway.

    (Of course, I've got to get cable first. Haven't subscribed to that either for a few years, but the low quality over-the-ar reception in Redmond is getting old :-)

  • Anonymous
    February 18, 2004
    I don't really thing that Consumers don't have the money for it (not talking about $500 for PS, more the $20-$40 for most small/shareware apps). Consumers just don't think that it is worth that much to them. Is Photoshop worth $500 to me... well no, guess that's the reason I don't own it. Tho, I would have to say that is true of most applications, they just aren't worth the list price.

  • Anonymous
    February 18, 2004
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    February 19, 2004
    Some interesting observations.

    Perhaps part of the reluctance has to do with 1) how much will I really use this, and 2) will it really work for me.

    For example, I still can't find VCD/DVD creation software that does exactly what I want, which makes me reluctant to spend $50 on anybody's package. Yet, I'm perfectly willing to spend that same $50 dinner/drnks with friends.

    Another cause might be the human tendency to see different "piles" of money. The money spent on dinner is somehow different than that same money spent on software.

    I don't know if I have an answer, but I find myself doing the things you mention - and I too write software for a living.

  • Anonymous
    February 19, 2004
    Could it be in the nature of software? Software is knowledge manipulated by machines.
    Knowledge is everywhere and software encodes that intelligence in a form that machines
    can manipulate.

    People tend to strongly associate value with physical tangible assets and software is
    strongly associated with information freely exchanged intangible assets.

    The essence of the challenge of making software sell is that many people find it difficult to compare the value of a transient, intangible piece of code to that of a tangible physical real world asset. It is a bit of an instinctive view of value and a lot of strong environmental programming.

    Selling software to enterprises works because companies have done the job of correlating software to productivity and profits while the non enterprise user finds it hard to create such a correlation.

  • Anonymous
    February 20, 2004
    I think it is a question of visibility. Stealing software is a private, hidden sin. Robbing a bank, mugging an old lady, walking out on a bar tab, those things will be seen by people and you may get caught.

  • Anonymous
    March 01, 2004
    Maybe the reason why so many people can't find software that does exactly what they want has to deal with licensing of the sources?

    When you've a nice open/free license, you can actually empower yourself to find yourself or others that can get the software to do exactly what you want.

    Hence, open/free licenses are cool. ;)

  • Anonymous
    March 06, 2004
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    March 21, 2004
    Smart cards... That will do it. Remember the days when Lotus 1-2-3 made you insert the uncopyable license key diskette in order to start the software ? I am not saying we should start using floppies again, but with the proliferation of cheap USB keychain drives you might as well ask them to purchase a license key that installs itself on that keychain... Also, remember game cartridges ? People are will to pay for those because they are a physical asset. When you download something you tend not to think of it as a physical asset.

  • Anonymous
    March 27, 2004
    Stronger DRM will only limit illegitimate users, not significantly increase legitimate ones. Subscriptions have some caveats, but I still predict that, done right, they will be a big part of the information industry. More:

    http://www.tallent.us/CommentView.aspx?guid=11331881-1ab4-471b-ae69-9c123af4e6b6

  • Anonymous
    May 11, 2004
    The comment has been removed

  • Anonymous
    July 12, 2004
    There is good software and bad software. Just like there are good cars and bad cars, good restaurants and bad restaurants, etc.

    The fact that your phone's software is buggy may or may not be the fault of the programmer.

    Sometimes managers pressure programmers - something like "we need to have the phone on the market ASAP, so cut every corner that you can, the software must be ready in at most 2 weeks or you are fired".

  • Anonymous
    January 01, 2008
    PingBack from http://movies.247blogging.info/?p=4005

  • Anonymous
    January 20, 2008
    PingBack from http://softwareinformation.247blogging.info/tony-schreiners-weblog-paying-for-software/

  • Anonymous
    May 29, 2009
    PingBack from http://paidsurveyshub.info/story.php?title=tony-schreiner-s-weblog-paying-for-software

  • Anonymous
    June 15, 2009
    PingBack from http://debtsolutionsnow.info/story.php?id=8387

  • Anonymous
    June 16, 2009
    PingBack from http://lowcostcarinsurances.info/story.php?id=3758