Which software sell policy is the most effective one?

This is a discussion on Which software sell policy is the most effective one? within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by CornedBee I fail to see the point in implementing or buying copy protection systems (both options are ...

  1. #16
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by CornedBee View Post
    I fail to see the point in implementing or buying copy protection systems (both options are costly) just to break them yourself. Why not simply ship the product without protection? It will be copied just the same.
    The idea behind 'cracking' it yourself is, you usually only 'crack' an older version of it.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  2. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by brewbuck View Post
    I think that in time, people are just going to get used to it. At least in my country, people seem less and less concerned about privacy anyway.
    Private people yes, not very much concerned about privacy. But firms are.

    Quote Originally Posted by CornedBee View Post
    I fail to see the point in implementing or buying copy protection systems (both options are costly) just to break them yourself. Why not simply ship the product without protection? It will be copied just the same.
    In case of photoshop many people I know pirated it because "it`s good, it`s cool and expensive". It`s about starting a hype. A "must have that also". Like "you also have photoshop already?". Imho stupid but it worked.

    Lot of high quality software which is free does not get a lot attention. Paint applications are a good example here again. Photoshop may be necessary if you are a professional.

    But just for my private fun I am pretty happy with the free paint.net and still don`t understand most of it`s features or don`t need it. Until I need a better application I would need a real education on using such applications.

    Just to get more known and to find potential people who see the "free advertisements" and buy it therefore. Good, expensive and cracked software gets more attention. That`s the point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Perspective View Post
    server side web services are one example. But it can still be local software with a subscription service, think about how your antivirus software works. And as previously mentioned, Red Hat sells support for an OS based on a subscription model.
    Ah, ok. I did not thought in that direction.

  3. #18
    i dont know Vicious's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    1,200
    Quote Originally Posted by sept View Post
    Lot of high quality software which is free does not get a lot attention. Paint applications are a good example here again. Photoshop may be necessary if you are a professional.
    I think in the back of todays average person's mind there will always bee the idea that something free is inferior to something that costs money. In most cases the free part usually does come with some sort of trade off for quality, but not always.

    I can't stand to hear teachers talk about open source and free products and say they are inferior because they are free and therefore come with no support.
    What is C++?

  4. #19
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,532
    Quote Originally Posted by Vicious View Post
    I think in the back of todays average person's mind there will always bee the idea that something free is inferior to something that costs money.
    Unfortunately this seems to be the case. Even when these free products' quality, stability and, above all, sobriety, is slapping them right in the face every single day of their lives.

    The Open Source 'scene' is however daunting for a newcomer. And not always that sober (I'm still trying to understand why PHP has PEAR and PECL and not just one, or why they are both so irritatingly hard to setup). But there is no doubt that I would put my life in the hands of the Open Source community before I even thought of doing it to some business oriented company. At the very least I know that the tool I'm learning today will not be discontinued tomorrow (blatant accusation at Microsoft).
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  5. #20
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by Vicious View Post
    I think in the back of todays average person's mind there will always bee the idea that something free is inferior to something that costs money. In most cases the free part usually does come with some sort of trade off for quality, but not always.

    I can't stand to hear teachers talk about open source and free products and say they are inferior because they are free and therefore come with no support.
    In a professional production environment, the benefits of having a common development platform should not be underestimated.

    "How do I get the photo to morph using method A?"

    "Go to Image->Tools->Morphs->Method A"

    "I don't see that menu."

    "What version of Product X are you using?"

    "I'm using product Y."

    "Product Y cant morph using Method A."

    "What do I do now?"

    "Send your employees back to college to learn product X"

    Hence why everyone just learns Photoshop and Visual Studio. They may not be the best, but at least your skills translate to a new job.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Software Design/Test - Redmond, WA
    By IRVolt in forum Projects and Job Recruitment
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-11-2008, 11:26 AM
  2. Why C Matters
    By DavidP in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 01-16-2008, 09:09 AM
  3. Adding trial period to software
    By BobS0327 in forum C Programming
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-03-2006, 02:13 PM
  4. Software Licensing
    By jester in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-30-2001, 06:42 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21