cmcmanis@sun.uucp (Chuck McManis) (05/05/87)
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()!edwards@vms.macc.wisc.edu.UUCP (05/05/87)
In article <18006@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.uucp (Chuck McManis) writes: >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. The article probably is basically right, but..... There are some observations I would like to make. I have several shareware programs on floppy disk. I do not use them, one because I didn't want to learn how, and two I have not found a need to do so. The Big Question is should I pay for them? If I had to buy them from the store or a mail order company I would not have. If shareware means to keep a copy you must pay for it, then I'll hit the BIG rm key, del for you messyDOSers. It is a nice feeling though that they are there if and when I need them. If I find them that useful I will pay for them at that time. If and when that time does come, there probably will be a newer, more improved version out. So I will send in my money and find this out. What happens if the version I have is severely out dated and the asking price is also improved to the authors benefit. Of course I will want the newest version, so how much is it going to cost me? It probably would have been cheaper if I had gotten a copy of the newest version and payed for that one instead of what I had. If I want the latest version of MSC I look in the magazine, and call the mail order firm with the lowest, reliable price. I have a better chance at getting the most recent copy from a mail order place than from ye ole BBS. Do I have a money back warrantee if after really using the shareware program I find that its defective. I realize that the chances are bad with other software from major firms. From observations on BBS and Usenet I see an awful lot of new and improve version of programs, shareware and otherwise, after the umpteenth update my pocket book is complaining and might not I have been better off, not to use it, or purchased a different product. I do realize it is the nature of software to be updated, but somehow it seems that some of the programs, including shareware, were lacking in the first place and through the distribution the product was improved. Another problem I have is what happens when the OS is improved so much that the shareware program no longer functions? I think one of the ways that MicroSoft has gotten so rich, is that they have nickled and dimed everyone so much with their new and improved versions. And now it seems with OS/2 they have found a way to change those nickles and dimes to $5 and $10. It also seems that in the end whatever OS MicroSoft will have, will look and feel much like the present day Unix system. Of course they may make a more user friendly user interface (whatever that means). But meanwhile MicroSoft has made a bundle, or some other company moved in on their business and cloned Unix, OS/2 or whatever it happens to be. My last observation on shareware and its failure is advertising. How can people buy something they know nothing about. Is the range of the distribution of shareware as great as the range of MS or other companies? I think not, what percent is it? My very last observation is about the shareware message I see when I brought up PC-WRITE, everytime I brought it up I saw the send X amount of dollars to some place. Does this disappear when I send in my money? That message does not look professional to me, it looks cheap and very commericial. Almost like the author should pay me everytime I call PC-WRITE up, because he is using my screen like a billboard, or an add in a magazine. Just some Idle thoughts (flames > /dev/null) mark edwards@vms.macc.wisc.edu {allegra, ihnp4, seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!edwards UW-Madison, 1210 West Dayton St., Madison WI 53706
toma@tekgvs.UUCP (05/07/87)
In article <1474@uwmacc.UUCP> edwards@uwwircs.UUCP (Mark Edwards) writes: >... My very last observation is about the shareware message >I see when I brought up PC-WRITE, everytime I brought it up I saw the send >X amount of dollars to some place. Does this disappear when I send in my >money? ... Well, when you register for PC-WRITE (which costs a whopping $89 -- I'm glad the term "shareware" is winning out over "freeware") you can get a copy of the sources and then can eliminate that screen. Having cut my micro-computer teeth with CP/M, I have seen a lot of PD programs (no shareware back then) and most of it has been trash. But I have been a registered user of PC-Write for 2 years, and have just registered for Don Kneller's NDMAKE program. I am also a dedicated user of the PD CED program, but am guilty of not contributing (yet) for the wonderful PKARC. In general, the PD/Shareware utility programs have been excellent; as good as or better than the commercially available versions (I use dozens of the PD programs, and have written several of my own). But these individuals, typically writing in their spare time, just cannot turn out large programs. I used several PD compilers back in CP/M, but all the compilers I use now are commercial. My experiences with shareware communication, database, spreadsheet, and outlining programs has been universally bad. But I do use the PD Kermit and MEX (CP/M). Too many recent shareware programs are just broken versions (either missing functions or vital documentation) of commercial products. (I am afraid that PC-WRITE is now in that category since it costs $45 to buy documentation which used to be on the disk.) As such, the should be considered as preview copies which allow examining the software before buying it. But low cost commercial products should be considered as well. I ended up paying $70 for VP-Planner getting a genuinely useful spreadsheed program for little more than the registration costs of the awkward shareware program. Likewise the easy to use, well documented KAMAS (for MS-DOS) outline program sells for $75. Tom Almy Tektronix
leder@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Leder) (05/07/87)
In article <1474@uwmacc.UUCP>, edwards@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Mark Edwards) writes: > In article <18006@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.uucp (Chuck McManis) writes: > >TITLE: A long tirade, being my opinions. > > The problem with shareware ... Second, it hurts little companies.. I would disagree in that a lot of software would not be available at any price if it were not for shareware. Authors might ship their stuff to the public domain, but many would find it not worth the effort. Secondly, if there is sufficient support for a program (in contributions) the author has an incentive to support it. I can remember many programs on cp/m that appeared only once with no updates or bug fixes because the author had no good reason to do it. > The Big Question is should I pay for them? If I had to buy ... In my opinion (and we all know about opinions) the whole idea of shareware is paying for what we use. I think that we are doing the author a favor and a honor if we retain a copy that we may someday use or distribute (and pay for if we do decide to use it). > Do I have a money back warrantee if after really using the shareware program You must be dreaming. At least with shareware, you can get some idea of the usefulness of the program before you purchase it. Ask LOTUS or MS about the "no cost updates to fix bugs" (this is a joke). You probably would have better luck with a shareware author because the guy selling you the software would be more embarrassed by the error(s). Bob Leder - just using up those idle cpu cycles
wmf@chinet.UUCP (Bill Fischer) (05/10/87)
In article <2265@tekgvs.TEK.COM> toma@tekgvs.UUCP (Thomas Almy) writes: >[...] My experiences with shareware communication, database, >spreadsheet, and outlining programs has been universally bad. > I am sorry to hear that. My experience with PD / Shareware packages has been generally good. In particular; PROCOMM 2.4.2 is an EXCELLENT communications package, available complete from the "BBS distribution" with docs and a "timed release" program registration request that disappears after 15 uses or so. PC-DBMS is a "flatfile" data base manager that was suprisingly easy to develop and use. It uses a somewhat unconventional user interface and command set, but it's no weirder than most commercial packages. There are a million spreadsheets in the PD, and while there certainly is a lot of crap, I've found that in some simpler applications it's easier to get some- one up and running using a "strippo" spreadsheet than to inflict something like the LOTUS 123 command set on the new user. PCO or BBO, Brown Bag Software's Shareware outline package is functionally complete with the "BBS distribution" and has all the functions and features a casual user could want along with a simple, "makes sense" interface and command set. The above examples are specific answers to Thomas Almy's comments. I would like to add PC-Deskteam as a good example of Shareware. This TSR, SIDEKICK type of package is, in my huble opinion, better than any of the commercially available stuff. One last comment, KERMIT is NOT PD. Columbia University holds the copyright on KERMIT but allows unlimited UNMODIFIED copies to be distributed so long as no charge for the program itself. This allows Columbia to maintain control of "official" versions of KERMIT so this package can mature gracefully not haphazardly. -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Bill Fischer "When the gods wish to punish us, | | ...!ihnp4!chinet!wmf they answer our prayers." - Oscar Wilde | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+