Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
What does it mean when I say "successful freeware"?
40hz:
It seems to me that the underlying assumption is that unless you "confess", you must be up to no good.
-Renegade (February 14, 2011, 09:39 AM)
--- End quote ---
Not at all. It's merely some of us suggesting transparency as a means of avoiding misunderstandings.
There's no reason at all to be up front about what you are doing and why. -Renegade (February 14, 2011, 09:39 AM)
--- End quote ---
Actually, there are many very good reasons why you might want to do so. (see above)
Very few people do that. -Renegade (February 14, 2011, 09:39 AM)
--- End quote ---
From my experience, a good many people do. Regularly.
It doesn't make them dishonest. -Renegade (February 14, 2011, 09:39 AM)
--- End quote ---
Agree. No more than being completely candid guarantees someone's honesty.
In the end, it all comes down to the intent that guides the behavior.
In my case, I've discovered being completely open with people is the most effective and easiest way of dealing with others. Probably comes from my martial arts background.
Try thinking about a saying attributed to Miyamoto Mushashi who was possibly the greatest swordsman that ever lived: Open on all sides, nothing can oppose me.
He often argued for something that has since come to be known as the open stance.
In his youth, when he had the reputation for being a formidable and exceptionally talented Samurai, he was often pictured like this:
In his later life, when it was universally acknowledged he had become totally unbeatable, he was often pictured in the open stance.
Draw what conclusions from those two pictures you will. :) :Thmbsup:
Paul Keith:
I still think they key is being honest with your users.
--- End quote ---
I disagree. Marketed freeware or otherwise, this should and is the standard because no one will want to participate in dishonest software once they found out. Mostly idiotic big businesses or developers who don't know what they are doing do this and in an age of social networks, it is success suicide to not even abide by this.
Freeware is a buzzword now. I dare to say that simply making a good utility and throwing it into the cloud would not work like it worked 15 years ago. Current tools need online presence - at least a web page, but a blog and a forum is almost a must. They may even need a big marketing campaign (Chrome) to succeed. When we refuse to do the non-coding stuff, the chance of success are slim.
--- End quote ---
That's close to what I mean.
Not as far as my memory serves.
There was quite a bit of professional and bloody useful freeware out back then. Most of the bulletin board world (harbingers of today's web) ran on freeware.
Indeed, it was almost a truism back then that freeware and shareware offerings were far better choices than their commercial counterparts - when there even were commercial counterparts.
--- End quote ---
Like vlastimil's quote above, I'm not so much saying freeware was crappy then as much as it was perceived as crapware.
I wasn't around at the time though so I might be wrong. My impression was that bulletin boards were so disjointed and small back then that it was easy for a small group of elitists to have their say on what good freeware was but they were mostly the same guys who reject talks regarding usability, regarding design, and it was more of a "at least you are getting something functional for free and how dare you question this developer's hard work" and it was mostly shareware who tried to do more of the quality software. In fact if I'm not mistaken, part of why Linux in the beginning got so much hype, was because Linux was close to the only great freeware around. Not that the kernel wasn't worth talking about on it's own but that it was the first time something free managed to come close to the quality and power of a professional software.
There's no reason at all to be up front about what you are doing and why. Very few people do that. It doesn't make them dishonest.
If you're not doing anything wrong, not tricking people, not installing malware, then there's nothing wrong with not revealing your motivations.
--- End quote ---
Not so much wrong as much as it's an ineffective way of developing successful software and you are killing the ease by which your users can give you feedback and the motivation for them to donate to you.
But I digress, I'm shifting the topic away from dishonesty because like I said prior, honesty can be easily faked. Not being up front however is just symptoms of a poor design waiting to happen which would only lead to a poorer updated software.
I would like to emphasize however that I believe being up front is different from being open or showing your dirty laundry as in the corporate world that's how it's often perceived. Examples like what 40hz are just basic customer service.
I'm just curious about how well it works practice.
Because while it seems to be working very well here, I'm sure most of us would also qualify that by pointing out just how unique (or perhaps totally unique) DC is. If you don't believe it, just look at the results of the last fundraiser. I've never known any fund drive that got double their target before I saw it happen here.
But websites are websites and software is software. So I'm also curious how donations made to a website compare to donations made to software authors. Without meaning to pry (so no specifics please) is there anybody, whose portfolio of software is earning a them even a modest wage purely from donations? By wage I mean it would be equivalent to what you might earn from an unskilled part-time job.
Please somebody say "yes."
You have no idea how much I want to believe this concept can work.
--- End quote ---
Again from Freedom came Elegance: http://blog.linuxmint.com/?p=1647
Oh and this is just another example of why up front and honesty are the standard. It's not mega million oh my god spam PPC money but if you take into account size of staff/speed of user base growth/age of software - it's pretty impressive. Easy to excuse this though as "well...it doesn't work for smaller freeware" but that's how it always is with marketing. It's isn't as good in debates as it is in real life.
rxantos:
I'm getting discouraged... It seems like everybody expects to get paid for everything...
Except for software...
-Renegade (February 14, 2011, 07:19 AM)
--- End quote ---
Well, if someone breaks the law, the police puts them in jail for free. Or at least, instead of charging the lawbreaker, they charge the taxpayer. :)
A lawyer might do a case pro-bono, but is not expected to. A doctor might also fo a pro-bono. But is also not expected to.
cranioscopical:
Draw what conclusions from those two pictures you will.
-40hz (February 14, 2011, 11:48 AM)
--- End quote ---
It's time for a better pair of trousers?
Paul Keith:
Draw what conclusions from those two pictures you will.
-40hz (February 14, 2011, 11:48 AM)
--- End quote ---
It's time for a better pair of trousers?
-cranioscopical (February 14, 2011, 05:21 PM)
--- End quote ---
Oh man cranioscopal, now you have me thinking about those pics.
It has to be said though that the wider stance by the younger is best suited for the younger and the tighter stance is best suited for the veteran. Think athletes like Jordan and Kobe who adopted a tighter way of playing as their athletic ability dwindle down.
Still man...from freeware to Miyamoto...this thread has indeed gone a long way.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version