Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on July 25, 2002 02:30 AM
The general consensus is that linux users are not willing to pay is pure bull. Most windows users don't pay either, the precentages are probably the same. It's just that the small percent who do pay come from a much larger pool in the windows market. Most all companies pay, even ones who use linux. But your average family has most of the downloading being done by teenagers, college students etc. and they aren't paying. The ones paying are a much more mature group and they are a small minority even in windows world. The only way that shareware gets paid for is if there is some real need for the individual and their software has a timebomb installed to cut them off. Companies buy there software outright, unless they are evaluating the product. If it's not worth it, a company will just move on. Most business software packages are available only for windows because that has been the defacto standard for years. It's a catch-22, business don't buy linux desktop software because there isn't much of it available, and commercial developers are reluctant to port their products to linux because most businesses don't use linux on the desktop.
What most shareware developers don't get is that you can create the demand by releasing their product for multiple OS's. Then they remove the "My favorite app isn't available" problem and more users will try linux. As more users use linux, the developers profit grows. But by not making their software available in linux, eventually some open source developer takes on the task. If the open source version is good enough, it usually get ported to multiple OS's case in point: Apache, OpenOffice. And if the open source version is better than the previous shareware, that developer just lost revenue their source. Linux has really only been viable as a desktop OS for a short time, but look how it continues to evolve. If the shareware developers don't move quickly, they could wake up one day and wonder what just happened. I don't believe that overnight linux will rule and windows will rollover and die. I think that microsoft will slowly degrade to irrelevance, mostly by their own doing. Think about it! Has anyone ever maintained an absolute monopoly forever? Ford, AT&T, IBM, Xerox have all lost their absolute grip, so will microsoft. It is inevitable.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Paying for shareware
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 25, 2002 02:30 AMWhat most shareware developers don't get is that you can create the demand by releasing their product for multiple OS's.
Then they remove the "My favorite app isn't available" problem and more users will try linux. As more users use linux, the developers profit grows. But by not making their software available in linux, eventually some open source developer takes on the task. If the open source version is good enough, it usually get ported to multiple OS's case in point: Apache, OpenOffice. And if the open source version is better than the previous shareware, that developer just lost revenue their source. Linux has really only been viable as a desktop OS for a short time, but look how it continues to evolve. If the shareware developers don't move quickly, they could wake up one day and wonder what just happened. I don't believe that overnight linux will rule and windows will rollover and die. I think that microsoft will slowly degrade to irrelevance, mostly by their own doing. Think about it! Has anyone ever maintained an absolute monopoly forever? Ford, AT&T, IBM, Xerox have all lost their absolute grip, so will microsoft. It is inevitable.
#