Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
What does it mean when I say "successful freeware"?
mouser:
I guess there are people out there trying to "make money" by writing freeware -- much in the same way that some businesses are trying to get rich developing Open Source software.
While that does seem to be possible -- to my simple mind, that way lies madness.
If you want to make lots of money, do things that make money.
If you want to create free software and have a rewarding experience interacting with your users -- freeware/donationware/opensource are the way to go.
MilesAhead:
If you want to make lots of money, do things that make money.
-mouser (February 13, 2011, 05:08 PM)
--- End quote ---
It would be nice if life was so simple. If you're a shoe string operation you don't have marketing money. I'm convinced much of the plethora of corporate sponsored "free" software is out there to preclude the possibility of a one man shop from producing the same product and getting a foothold. The days of one guy coding up an editor and making a buck are gone and it's no accident.
There are lots of boards where I give what amounts to free support but if I put my url in my signature, they'd kick me off. I don't see corporate sites spamming products on boards and a one man programmer getting legitimate exposure as both "spam". One is spam and the other is goodwill.
Goodwill is hard to come by these days.
Much of "donationware" started out as an attempt to sell a product, but when reality hits you figure you might as well hang out the donation shingle as you might at least get a few donations from individuals as a thank you for your efforts.
So in conclusion I'd say what makes "successful" freeware is some corporation paying you a salary to write the stuff so they can give it away. :)
40hz:
I think it ultimately depends on what your motives are when you release your creation as freeware. That and whether you primarily look inward, or outward, for personal validation.
To my way of thinking, something that is truly freeware was created for no reason other than the satisfaction and pleasure of doing it; and was released for no other reason than the desire to get it out where it could be used.
If it was done for any other purpose or reason, I don't consider it freeware. I see it as a software product that's been licensed for public use at no charge.
A subtle distinction? Perhaps. But it's an important one, since not making this distinction often results in a great deal of confusion for the general public, and significant bitterness and resentment on the part of the software community.
Such faux 'free' software may play a role in a larger agenda.
Or it may be part of a business strategy.
But the one thing it's not - is freeware.
At least not in my book... :)
So to your question: how do you measure the "success" of a freeware product?
Well...that would be for you (and you alone) to say. Wouldn't it? :)
Paul Keith:
To my way of thinking, something that is truly freeware was created for no reason other than the satisfaction and pleasure of doing it; and was released for no other reason than the desire to get it out where it could be used.
--- End quote ---
Of course the problem with this definition is that it sounds more like it's about open source software specifically. Most freeware developers may not consider their software as "releases".
If it was done for any other purpose or reason, I don't consider it freeware. I see it as a software product that's been licensed for public use at no charge.
--- End quote ---
Also problematic in that there are "free for personal use" freeware and "free for free" freeware "but get me famous/ego building" and finally the ever famous "free for free but only so I can get popular and sell you my new boosted program" freeware.
A subtle distinction? Perhaps. But it's an important one, since not making this distinction often results in a great deal of confusion for the general public, and significant bitterness and resentment on the part of the software community.
--- End quote ---
I think in order for the general public to be confused they have to be aware.
Most freeware users view freeware as being no different than paid software. (from a monetary perspective).
The term "I'll use it if I need it badly enough" so to speak.
Such faux 'free' software may play a role in a larger agenda.
--- End quote ---
Unfortunately, they are also often the ones with the better quality.
In the end, my entire point is that it doesn't matter how we define freeware. Open Source for example. Even fanatics don't really know what that means philosophically and they often cheer browsers like Firefox thinking it's somewhat of a true virgin counterpart to Chrome's gold digger pizzazz.
In the end, success often blurs the definition, not the course. Take Ubuntu and the "proprietary codecs" elites argument but also take the "interface elites" who won't try to make a better Ubuntu because "it's for teh noobs" until some developers actually go ahead and prove them wrong and becomes a dark saint in that shady argument.
40hz:
Of course the problem with this definition is that it sounds more like it's about open source software specifically. Most freeware developers may not consider their software as "releases".
-Paul Keith (February 13, 2011, 08:45 PM)
--- End quote ---
Free software has nothing intrinsically to do with open source software. Open source refers to the philosophy and practice of making source code available. Open source software may be licensed in a variety of ways including proprietary restricted. It can also be fully protected by patent or copyright. And just because source code might be available doesn't mean you can obtain a copy at no charge. There are several open source products that you need to buy in order to use in any capacity.
Repeat 10 times: open source is not a synonym for free.
---
By "released" I meant exactly what the dictionary definition means by "release" when it's used as a verb. I'm not using the word in the software industry sense as a noun. Try not to read too much into it. If you'd prefer a different word, feel free to substitute. ;D
Also problematic in that there are "free for personal use" freeware and "free for free" freeware "but get me famous/ego building" and finally the ever famous "free for free but only so I can get popular and sell you my new boosted program" freeware.
-Paul Keith (February 13, 2011, 08:45 PM)
--- End quote ---
Not at all problematic AFAIC. ;D
From my perspective, those are examples of misusing the term "freeware." If there's a condition attached, it ain't free. Nor is it "no cost" since the attached condition represents a cost. It's "no charge," which means absolutely nothing other than no money was exchanged.
I'd prefer to say "This software is licensed at no-charge for personal use only."
The second example (free for free but...) isn't freeware either. It's a business marketing strategy. As such it's really more an advert or come-on. The fact it incorporates a piece of software is wholly incidental since its real function is to be a sales tool which gets you to buy something. In this respect, it's no different than offering a "free" t-shirt or product sample.
And...I'm gonna have to leave it here for a while. Just got a server alert that needs attending. Let's call it for now and pick up on the rest of your points later. Apologies. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version