PDA

View Full Version : Which software sell policy is the most effective one?



sept
04-11-2008, 01:01 PM
Here are some concepts I have seen.


(1) Payware only + frequently updated copy protection + only for registered costumers + hunting down warez:
The strategy is to make it hard for pirates by registering and custom branding the software with personal data of the costumer to prevent him from uploading it at warez community. If a versions getting leaked anyway ban the serial.
(2) Shareware + frequently updated copy protection + hunting down warez:
People may try the software and begin to like it. To use it for a longer time them are forced to buy it.
(3) Shareware + easy to crack copy protection + not hunting down warez:
Anyone pirate or legal costumer may use the software and spread it to get more famous and hoping there are some people who will pay.
(3 b) Just like (3) but "crack" you program yourself and then upload it to as much warez communitys like you can in order to get your program more famous.
(4) Lite Version for free and Premium Version for money:
Spreed a lite version but include a trick so people want to buy the premium version later. The lite version is to get more famous.
(5) Freeware + Closed Source + begging for donations:
Legal freeware and hoping people like it and spread it. Hoping people will donate.
(6) Open Source + begging for donations + hoping for people to donate source code:
Risk that someone grabs the source and makes a fork. But good to find some people who help to make a even better product for you for free. Therefore more wide spread and hopefully more donations. Firefox does this pretty successfully, them get money for example from google for the search box.
(7) Freeware + Closed Source + extensible with skins and plugins:
Nearly same as above but no risk that someone can make a fork. But as it`s not really Open Source therefore could be less people willing to contribute.


You may also introduce new concepts.

Which concept is most promisingly to get most money out of it?

brewbuck
04-11-2008, 01:04 PM
It's crazy to even speculate on sales strategies without knowing what the product is, what the market is, and who the customers are.

EDIT: Also, worrying about piracy is a waste of time. Instead focus on giving your potential customers what they want. Most people are willing to pay for quality. Those who will not, will not. Copyright protection is just a temporary annoyance to pirates. And if you are actually a super-genius and succeed in making uncrackable protection, the pirate still will not buy your product, he'll just give up.

Software companies don't fail because their products are pirated. Pervasive piracy of your product means that you are providing something with a high intrinsic value. Your failure to profit from this value is your own fault, not the pirates.

abachler
04-11-2008, 01:05 PM
They all work. It depends on your application and expectations.

Vicious
04-11-2008, 01:21 PM
While it does depend on the software in question. I can't help but think that subscription models are insanely effective (where appropriate). Like most of the MMOs out there, you buy the game at the same price as other games, yet somehow still agree to pay an extra 15 dollars or so every month you play it :) Sure, you need to consider the maintenance and upkeep of such games, but either way it seems to be effective.

abachler
04-11-2008, 01:29 PM
MMO's ar eonly one part of the gamign industry, and I think the OP was askign abotu applications in general, not just games. As far as MMO's go, saying that model is the most effecive is like saying if hot dogs are the highest selling item, all our food should be packaged in tubes. No one model is 'the best', they all have their uses.

CornedBee
04-11-2008, 01:51 PM
There are other models.

1) Ad-financed software. Freeware that displays advertisements so you make money. The customer can pay to have the ads removed. Early versions of Opera used this model.

2) Open-source and offering paid services. Zend, who manage PHP, have made a very successful business out of this. Services and certifications are the primary income source of the big Linux vendors like RedHat. MySQL mostly builds on that model.

sept
04-11-2008, 02:23 PM
I was just talking about software in general, nothing special.

What you think about pirating your own product? (spread to warez communitys under other identity) Does this help or is this stupid? It`s a serious question, honestly I don`t know.

Perspective
04-11-2008, 02:25 PM
Subscription based services are the future. The days of buying boxed software (literally or digitally) are numbered. The only exception I could see to that is an OS.

Vicious
04-11-2008, 02:33 PM
The only exception I could see to that is an OS.

Let's hope you're correct about that and Microsoft doesn't figure out how to market that idea to the masses :)


I was just talking about software in general, nothing special.

What you think about pirating your own product? (spread to warez communitys under other identity) Does this help or is this stupid? It`s a serious question, honestly I don`t know.

That's a tough one. It may depend on how you are able to market your product. If you can get a little hype started up by "allowing" it to be pirated, then it may prove worthy. If yo ucan get decent word moved around through the community and get your product recognized in that way it may be 6 in one hand half a dozen in the other. Then there's always the consideration that it will be pirated anyway.

heras
04-11-2008, 02:38 PM
Another model, used by Trolltech for their Qt:
- Develope an open, free(GPL) and gratis tool kit. Get gratis help from communities such as that of KDE.
- Sell licenses without the "restrictions" of GPL.


What you think about pirating your own product? (spread to warez communitys under other identity) Does this help or is this stupid? It`s a serious question, honestly I don't know.
the below is a result of me not reading properly
I'm just a user and much of a programmer, but ...
what brewbuck said. In addition, DRM is a great way of alienating what loyal customers you have left.

Vicious
04-11-2008, 02:42 PM
If there can be some sort of pirating protection that doesn't cause problems for legal users (such as the standard CD key that can only be used in one instance at a time) then it makes perfect sense to implement this. However, when you start restricing ways in which that customer can use your product (DRM) then you are getting into some greedy territory.

sept
04-11-2008, 02:42 PM
Subscription based services are the future. The days of buying boxed software (literally or digitally) are numbered. The only exception I could see to that is an OS.

You mean internet based software? The client has just an small client software but most of the work is done on remote in order to protect the intellectual property?

In this case it would become really hard for pirates.

The internet access becomes faster and faster and more and more cheap. When most people have access to the internet then this might become real. But until then it`s still a long way. In my country only 60 % of the country have access to cheap and fast internet, the rest is unlikely to become internet fast because it unreliable for the isps.

But I think there will be always a marked for boxed software. Imagine you have a buisness and need photoshop to create your publications. I think many won`t like the idea that another firm has also control over it. Them may say "you can run your account software on our servers and we will not spy on it but isn`t a good idea to build upon such promises".

brewbuck
04-11-2008, 02:50 PM
But I think there will be always a marked for boxed software. Imagine you have a buisness and need photoshop to create your publications. I think many won`t like the idea that another firm has also control over it. Them may say "you can run your account software on our servers and we will not spy on it but isn`t a good idea to build upon such promises".

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.

CornedBee
04-11-2008, 02:51 PM
What you think about pirating your own product? (spread to warez communitys under other identity) Does this help or is this stupid? It`s a serious question, honestly I don`t know.

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.

Perspective
04-11-2008, 02:53 PM
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.

abachler
04-11-2008, 02:56 PM
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.

sept
04-11-2008, 03:15 PM
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.


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.


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.

Vicious
04-11-2008, 03:52 PM
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.

Mario F.
04-11-2008, 05:00 PM
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).

abachler
04-14-2008, 08:27 AM
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.