Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Deluxe/Pro versions: Good or Bad?

<< < (2/4) > >>

jpfx:
I'll bite!

The idea that lite/basic/pro versions are released as some form of benevolence I consider absurd.
Surely it's all market driven and based on what the target buyer can afford.
The seller knowing full well that given the choice, most want the 'pro' version (often offered overpriced). Rather than lose the sale, here's a 'basic' version which leaves out something that is useful to everyone, but is significantly cheaper:

The lite version being free, with all the useful features disabled.
The basic version being a fair price for the pro version.
The Pro version being overpriced.

(I have this battle with the price of wsw btw, though I would not apply this to fookes software notetab range).

mouser:
i definitely agree with you jpfx -
the absurdity is really that software has no cost to reproduce.

so the bizarre nature of capitalism means that it would cost them $0 to give you the pro version; but they sell you the lite version because they need to force you to pay the maximum you will pay.

in other words, if a company KNEW you would never buy the pro version then they should just give it to you for price of lite version (or in fact for whatever price you would be willing to pay for it, even if it was $1).  but because no one can trust each other to pay what they think something is worth, we are in a game of trying to figure out ways to extort the most money from people as possible, and as consumers we are in a game of trying to pay as little as possible, regardless of worth or our financial situation.  it's depressing.

Sentinel:
I have no problems with standard/pro/whatever versions.  You pay for what you need.  If you don't need the features you don't pay for them and the associated development time.  Choice can only benefit the end consumer.

Sentinel:
i definitely agree with you jpfx -
the absurdity is really that software has no cost to reproduce.

so the bizarre nature of capitalism means that it would cost them $0 to give you the pro version; but they sell you the lite version because they need to force you to pay the maximum you will pay.

in other words, if a company KNEW you would never buy the pro version then they should just give it to you for price of lite version (or in fact for whatever price you would be willing to pay for it, even if it was $1).  but because no one can trust each other to pay what they think something is worth, we are in a game of trying to figure out ways to extort the most money from people as possible, and as consumers we are in a game of trying to pay as little as possible, regardless of worth or our financial situation.  it's depressing.
-mouser (August 13, 2005, 09:33 AM)
--- End quote ---


Wait, wait, wait.  Although the reproduction cost is $0, the development cost can be rather high.  Offering a lite version to occasional users helps cut down piracy (better to make some money than no money), allows the developers to make money from selling bulk licenses to resellers (hardware manufacturers etc) without having to bear the associated distribution/bandwidth costs etc and offering a pro version ensures they get to eat and experienced and devout users get what they desire.  Where is the probelm with that? 

If software developers were to offer a pro version for a tiny margin above a lite version it would be a kick in the teeth for both lite and pro customers who have invested in a product to date.  I think as regards pro version are concerned 'reassuringly expensive' is the appropriate term.

mouser:
yes there are development costs for sure,
and on one hand i agree that offering different versions is a way to make the software available to everyone and get more money from serious users while letting casual users off easier.

but what i am reacting to is the core peversity of the system.
the reason that the lite version has less features is because the author has no other way to force people to buy the pro version.
it doesnt cost more to sell the parts of the pro version.

the reason the lite version has less features is to insure that people who can afford to will pay more for the pro version.
ideally youd like to offere a lite and pro version with same exact features and say, those of you who can/would pay more for pro version send me a bigger payment please.  no one would.  so we have this game of trying to figure out the right number of features to remove in order to nudge the most lite users who can afford to to buy pro version.

or imagine you get a call from a poor doctor in some third world country who wants to use your $10,000 medical program; his hospital has no money to pay for medicine let alone this luxury software.  now what do you lose by giving him a free copy? nothing, he wasn't gonig to buy it anyway so you've lost nothing, and quite possibly gained much in the way of good will.

thats why im loving the new trends to offering the same program with multiple licenses, ie if you are using this for business then you pay this amount, if for personal non-profit use than a lesser amount.

i know its a pipe dream, but part of why i want to do donation software is to get around such games.  if both sellers and consumers could come to a mutual agreement of paying what its worth to the person then there would be no point to play these games.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page