Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Fairware: an interesting experiment in getting paid for Open Source
Paul Keith:
Lol, no problem. It's weird to hear you say that. Often times I'm the one called/implied this way in conversations and it's the first time I found myself hearing someone say they're on the side of that fence, it's really a weird feeling. Thanks for the convo though.
40hz:
IMHO Apple is largely irrelevant to any technical or business discussion in that the sociological factors surrounding it have a far more significant bearing on its success than any of it's claims to creativity or technical excellence.
So beyond being the central subject in what might be a fascinating study of group dynamics and psychology (i.e. herd behaviors) and shared culture and belief systems (i.e. cult meme formation) I find studying Apple - as a business - to be a largely useless exercise.
Apple is a one-off.
It was in the right place, at the right time, and took significant risks - many of which paid off. And it created a unique and highly motivated entourage in the process.
It routinely gets commended for behaviors which would not be forgiven, let alone tolerated, were any other company to do the same.
Apple holds a uncommonly privileged status in the eyes of the world. Perhaps it's the only company in the world that does hold such status.
It's not the sort of thing you can plan for in business.
Or duplicate...
:)
Paul Keith:
Perhaps it's the only company in the world that does hold such status.
--- End quote ---
Google, Facebook, Nokia, HP, Blackberry, cheap Chinese commodities (the latter not so much the status but the privilege)
It's not the sort of thing you can plan for in business.
--- End quote ---
It's not a direct comparison but I thought instapaper, Dropbox, the many white space of popular blogs, Angry Birds, Evernote/Springpad, Instagram, Twitter - all have something very Apple to them.
Not that I'm claiming these concepts all took and mainly planned to mimic Apple's business model but from an end user standpoint, there's enough usability feel to them that just like gamification, one can extrapolate something Apple-like in these things that are the cause for their popularity. Even going so far as fitting the sizzle to create a pop psych book laying out how you could duplicate partial Apple "magic" from looking at the similar patterns these examples provide to some of Apple's hardware/software designs/feature route.
superboyac:
IMHO Apple is largely irrelevant to any technical or business discussion in that the sociological factors surrounding it have a far more significant a bearing on its success than any of it's claims to creativity or technical excellence.
So beyond being the central subject in what might be a fascinating study of group dynamics and psychology (i.e. herd behaviors) and shared culture and belief systems (i.e. cult meme formation) I find studying Apple - as a business - is a largely useless exercise.
Apple is a one-off.
It was in the right place, at the right time, and took significant risks - many of which paid off. And it created a unique and highly motivated entourage in the process.
It routinely gets commended for behaviors which would not be forgiven, let alone tolerated, were any other company to do the same.
Apple holds a uncommonly privileged status in the eyes of the world. Perhaps it's the only company in the world that does hold such status.
It's not the sort of thing you can plan for in business.
Or duplicate...
:)
-40hz (September 22, 2011, 06:47 PM)
--- End quote ---
Hmmm....food for thought! Dammit 40! My gut response is to ask, "Why can't it be duplicated?!"
wraith808:
If they need it they will willingly pay isn't necessarily true, either. Many people have a need for software that fills a niche, but they make do with other alternatives (of which there are always several) for the simple reason that people don't want to pay.
-wraith808 (September 22, 2011, 03:53 PM)
--- End quote ---
I would politely disagree with this based on the definition of the term "need". If there are alternatives that are free, then it's not really a need. Financially speaking, a need is something you will HAVE to pay for if you want that thing. Or else you will not be able to fulfill your need. If you can fulfill your need with a free alternative, then that thing that costs something is not a need anymore, it's a want.
If you HAVE to have something and only one company makes it, then you will HAVE to pay for it. That's a need. Of course, if the price is so high that you will choose to not pay for it, then it's not really a need is it? So this can quickly turn into a whole chicken/egg argument, but I'm not here to argue. It's all life/death stuff. A need is something that moves the bar away from death and closer to life.
-superboyac (September 22, 2011, 04:34 PM)
--- End quote ---
There are no *needs* in terms of software then, by that definition. Show me a software package that there are no alternatives for that aren't incredibly niche so that the market is very small. Even with that limitation, I know and have worked in some niches that are so small as to be almost nonexistent, and still there is competition. I might restate it as you have to convince you client that they need your software. But truthfully, by your definition, there is no one piece of software that is needed that there aren't alternatives for.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version