SHARE ARTICLE
Let’s talk about something near and dear to you: your pocketbook. When Windows Home Server was released to the computing world, a small group of adventurous souls started writing add-ins for WHS. Those souls generally fell into 1 of 3 categories:
- Individuals who wrote perpetual-in-beta free add-ins.
- Individuals who wrote commercial add-ins that required payment to use, some (most) after a trial period.
- Corporations that wrote commercial add-ins that required payment to use, some (most) after a trial period.
Over the past few months, I have noticed a change in the way “free” WHS add-ins are being promoted in the marketplace. Some are transitioning from free (beta) versions to some form of commercial paid version. Some are being released from the get-go as some form of commercial paid version. Is this a good thing for the end user? Or a bad thing? Or perhaps do you see a benefit (new or perceived) from your favorite add-in requiring a payment for updated/new versions? That is what we are here to discuss today.
Perspective: User
I am going to present just a couple of thoughts from a User perspective. I am sure there are as many thoughts about this subject as there are individuals out there. If I do not include yours, that is what the comment section at the end of the article is for. As I am a User, hopefully I have a few thoughts of my own that might be similar to your ideas.
Thought 1: If it is digital, why should I pay for it?
First, I must present the Jim Clark version of history. In the “old” days (before the Digital Age), we had analog data. Specifically, we had vinyl records and 8-track tapes. We had the movie theaters and eventually we had VHS tapes. From records, one could make cassette copies of those records. One could make a VHS copy of a VHS tape.
The problem with those “free” copies was that the copy was normally not as good as the original. An analog copy of an analog source just was not as good. But it was free. There might have even been a few enterprising souls out there turning the crank to make cheap profits.
I made cassette tapes of my records so that I could play them in my car. I made cassette tapes of my records so that I could take them to parties and not have my favorite album destroyed. We call it a back-up copy these days…
The analog age transitioned to the digital age with the introduction of CD’s and PC’s. I have no idea when someone first made a copy of a CD, but I am sure that it was probably the day after the CD met PC. The really cool thing was that copy was *identical* in quality to the original. The rest is history in that the CD is on it’s deathbed and has been replaced by mp3’s and iTunes. Which is nice in that there is now a pay-for-it-model in the form of iTunes and others (Napster, oh my!). I was in on the hey-day of the “real” Napster and I have to admit my digital library of music blossomed there. Hey, why pay for it when you can get it free?
Ahem, get your mind out the gutter!
I do not think that was the only incentive, as I was also buying CD’s like crazy during this time. I bought 95% of mine as used CD’s, which I found quite palatable vs. the cost of new CD’s. I felt I was getting value at used prices and felt ripped off with new CD prices.
So where are we now? There is that segment of the population that will always feel entitled to getting something (everything?) for nothing. And there is that segment of the population that does not mind paying for something of value, as long as they feel they are getting good value for their money.
The RIAA and member companies did not get the message that CD’s did not contain enough value and that the consumer felt ripped off. Or perhaps because it was too easy to get for free??? If that were so (free), why are the alternative digital stores (i.e. iTunes store) doing quite well? Value of product, perhaps?
The main gist of all this is:
- a digital copy is identical to the original.
- a digital copy is quite easy to make.
- I truly believe that people will pay for a product if they perceive value in it.
Although there does seem to be a very dedicated anti-corporate segment of the population who feel they have a right to get everything for free. “Why pay for it when I can rip it off?”
Thought 2: It used to be free, why should I pay for it now?
That is a very valid thought. What has changed? Perhaps a little, perhaps a lot. Am I getting more value when I pay for this software now? This is just food for thought here, as I really wish to pursue this question when I present the other side.
So, think about it from your perspective. Perhaps I will answer this question satisfactorily in a bit, perhaps not.
Leave a comment.
Thought 3: ?
You tell me, as in:
Leave a comment.
Perspective: Software Author
My story
Let me just say this. A looooong time ago, I wrote a piece of software called shareware. It was written in Turbo Pascal (anyone remember Borland?). It was written for DOS. What did it do? It gathered the contents from a diskette, and allowed you to produce labels and inserts for 3-1/2” and 5-1/4” diskettes. I think I asked $15 for it. I had even written hooks into the program to allow one to read data from disk cataloging programs and print labels from them.
IMHO, it was a pretty cool and full-featured program. It was called DLS and the only thing one had to suffer through was a slight delay at the beginning and end of the program. If I remember correctly, I think I had ~100 people pay me for a registration number. For each of those 100 people, there were probably a 500 users who did not pay for it. Which was OK. I wrote the program because I needed a program to do what this one did. I originally wrote it for me!
At some point, HP started making laser printers (nasty print language to format!) and Microsoft came out with this operating system called Windows 3.0.
DLS ceased development soon after that. Why?
I really did not want to learn C, which is what was the “in” computer language to learn at that point. I really did not want to rewrite the complete program from scratch to work in Windows. I really did not want to figure out all the printer codes to work with laser printers. I was most definitely not going to invest in a laser printer.
But mainly, I had better things to do with my life besides invest all the time, energy and money into producing a program with little return on that investment. Time-wise or cost-wise.
Perhaps those people who have no problem getting something for free have never worked long hours on something that defined just a bit who they were and what they could do. Free is free, no matter how it got to be free.
In the end, I was truly thankful of the people who supported me. I did not mind those users who did not pay for it. I did have a beef with one person who sent me a check. It was written from a closed account. Which meant that not only was I out the registration fee (no big deal), but I had to cough up the bad check fee. Needless to say, my next version had a bit of code to exit the program if that serial number was used.
The Windows Home Server Coders
Some time ago, I emailed several add-in authors (individuals) who are either transitioning to a commercial model or have always been in the commercial arena. I wanted to know their thoughts on why they charge money for their software. I wanted to give them an opportunity to present their reasons to you.
So, without further ado, here are some of their thoughts.
7. March 2010 at 6:05 pm
You can definitely see a difference with the newer AdminiMe and Disk management addin from there previous version. However the pricing should be reasonable or some users will just abaondon them. I like the option of a nag or a compact and full version for these types of addins.
7. March 2010 at 6:13 pm
Pay models for add-ins are ok as long as developers remember to keep the prices reasonable ($10.00 or less depending on the functionality). For end users it is difficult to justify spending hundreds on the server it self and then spending hundreds more on add-ins that only have one function. Also developers need to consider if you plan to charge for software, it must to be unique and innovative and not just mimic functionalities of other free software with added WHS console access. To me it does not make sense to pay for a disk defrag software or disk utility software, or any other system utility. I can just as easily use free software to perform the same tasks using remote desktop so why should I have to pay for these functionality? Paid add-ins should be geared more towards entertainment features and remote streaming of content and not add-ins that perform simple system tasks. The other consideration for developers is that once you start charging for software, customers will have the right to demand relatively bug free software with full developer support and not just an add-in that gets released with many bugs and never has updates or support from software author.
7. March 2010 at 6:27 pm
"customers will have the right to demand relatively bug free software with full developer support"
At the risk of sounding cynical, you must not use Microsoft OS's! Sorry, I could not help that one!
8. March 2010 at 10:42 am
A bad workman blames his tools!…. but joking aside::
For European residents there may be some legislative help on the way. The EU is keen to put software warranties into law.
I`m sure small software houses and one-man-bands are not happy about it, but I am.
7. March 2010 at 6:41 pm
I'm all for developers being able to charge for their time and effort but on the understanding that the add-on (as JC24 points out) gives me a lot more than the currently available free version, or functionality not already present in the many add-ons currently available.
I have already stumped up for AdminiMe (excellent functionality and interface) and LightsOut (no other add-on provides this functionality). However other add-ons that are changing to the paid model I have not found nearly as impressive, either offering only very limited additional functionality,adding useless features to distinguish them from the previous core functionality that other add-ons provide, or are vastly overpriced for the job that they do.
If developers can provide end users with functionality that is genuinely useful and offers unique features, then sure lets pay them. If however as a number of them seem to have done and continue to stick old products in nothing more than a shiny new box, then I say stick to the free alternatives.
7. March 2010 at 1:47 pm
From my point of view (as user and developer) it’s self-evident okay to charge money for a product, but I believe that it’s better to develop a module based software.
So you are able to sell each module for a lower price…
I think this way is best because if you look at steam or itunes, you can see that cheap products are often bought because you don’t have to think about such a low amount of money.
If I have to pay 20$ for software, I will think whether it’s the money worth or not, if I have to pay only 5-8$, I don’t have to think necessarily about this amount…
That’s why each “weekend-deal” in steam store is successful.
7. March 2010 at 7:01 pm
Took the words out of my mouth, on steam I don't even consider the money if the title seems like it could keep me engaged for a few hours. I buy much more 1-5 pound games than full priced releases.
Some valid points above and I think iTunes/Steam have set a very likable standard of being able to purchase in small quantities.
Im actually on the fence about disk managment becuase the storage tab combined with my perfet disk and SMART gives me almost all the info I need.
7. March 2010 at 9:05 pm
For the most part I agree with the comments so far. However, there is an exception. This exception is with the add-in AdminMe. Though, I love the interface, the new look, and I believe is a well developed add-in, I do not feel that the developer has offered me something that I could not have gotten already with other add-ins that are free or own my own, provided you understand Windows 2003. I don't see the real usefuleness. Now, AutoExit, did offer something useful.
I too am a developer, though I am not developing for WHS, I have written many applications that my company uses on a daily basis. I never have found server monitors a must in a home environment. I say this because as a developer I create applications that should already take into account CPU, memory, etc. I know, you may not agree with me but it is an opinion.
I simply feel that if a developer is going to start charging and closing the door to freeware, that is fine, as long as the developer is offering something that one can find useful and most of all, a unique approach, or idea. An example is Mike Haven and team, over at homeserverland.com, creating add-ins that extend the use of Quicken, Quickbooks, and soon an add-in to make it easier to find and install add-ins through a unified console. It is this uniqueness, like Lights-Out, WHS Download Manager, and the list goes on, that sets these developers apart and warrants the price for their time and ingenuity.
8. March 2010 at 9:39 am
Its not a great surprise that things are moving in this direction. Some devs look at the relativeley new "apps store" concept for selling small applications, and think quite rightly, "I want a peice of that action".
If you don`t like it, then blame Apple for monetising small applications so successfully!
8. March 2010 at 9:48 am
As a user, in this economy and job market, i have to decide where im going to cut the fat. For me its easiest to start with the non-tangibles and things that i dont NEED. Software generally falls under this category for most.
The smartest software companies be it games, utilities, etc. have shifted from pay-to-use models to other innovative means for making money while still keeping their users. Many of them using means that either shift the burden of revenue off the end user to advertisers or other companies. Others have adopted premium fees (support, extra features, etc).
The companies and devs that are able to either completely remove or alleviate the financial burden from the end user are the ones who will persevere through hard times and keep me as a user.
8. March 2010 at 11:03 am
I can't add too much to what has gone before except to confirm the idea that when we "End Users" see real value in an add-in (or anything else) we are for the most part content to pay a fair price for it. Obviously I don't want to get into some kind of "App Store" situation: with dozens of similar and largely poor-quality Apps clogging-up my "bandwidth" – in all senses of that word.
Stuff on the 'web is never "free". Much of it appears like the NHS (in the UK) "Free at the point of delivery", but someone somewhere has invested time, money, enthusiasm etc to produce it.
I believe it is essential that we support developers financially – they've got to eat too (even if it is only Pizza!). The issue is however what model we use. Personally I don't care for advert-based systems, so I'm happy to pay a fair price. A quick look at Adobe's UK pricing shows what an "unfair" price looks like.
8. March 2010 at 4:09 pm
I think paid add-ins are fine and, actually, inevitable. It's just like any other software. I think it'll potentially lead to a richer add-in ecosystem where someone with development skills sees an add-in they like but don't want to pay for (or want more features in) and an open source/free add-in will begin. Sort of like Adobe Photoshop vs. GIMP.
The only thing that worries me about paid add-ins is whether the authors charging truly understand what comes along with getting paid. Folks like me will expect full support and fast turnaround – if there's an issue I come across and I report it, you don't get to say, "Sorry, I'm on vacation for a week, I'll get to you when I come back." I paid. Part of that payment is an implicit contract that you'll support me (unless you clearly state otherwise prior to my paying). It sounded from the article like Rick Drasch gets it; do all the others?
8. March 2010 at 4:49 pm
Of course developers can charge what they want, and if so inclined they should be compensated for their work. How anyone could argue those points, is beyond me.
As for me, however, I have a definite limit to what I am willing to pay for an add-in for anything, and that limit is arbitrarily set to $10. Anything more, and I can live without it.
9. March 2010 at 4:50 am
I see now that Lights Out costs 22 bucks? I do not see the value in paying 22 dollars just to put my computer to sleep after a backup.
Whats keeping someone else from creating a free add-in that does this feature and more?
18. March 2010 at 4:56 pm
Well if you do not have the need then don't worry about it.
I DO have the need. I only want my machines to be running when needed.
This is THE BEST WHS add-in that I have seen yet. It combines the functionality that took FOUR (4) other add-in into one. Make WHS a GREEN system like NO OTHER.
My WHS Server ONLY runs when any PC is up OR when the backups are being done. Other than that they are powered down saving as much electricity as possible.
If you don't need this because all of your machines should be running or you handle this differently, more power to you. BUT for anyone who wants to conserve power, this is the way to GO.
9. March 2010 at 1:41 pm
Snowdins, I find it rather distasteful when an add-in developer such as yourself has the nerve to criticise what is probably the most useful piece of software available to the Windows Home Server platform when you clearly have very limited knowledge of it's overall functionality. This software has saved me more than the cost of purchase in energy bills alone and contrary to your statement it does not merely provide a mechanism to turn off a client.
P80 on the other hand is a security nightmare and provides little functionality not presented by other add-ins. In fact it's most useful features depend on the Autoexit add-in. Men in glass houses should not throw stones
9. March 2010 at 9:48 pm
Wow! Thats a fantastic response! Keep flinging stones buddy!
I know what Lights Out does and does not do. However I find that the price tag is high. I spent a nice chunk of money on a energy monitor for my home, so you can save me any comments on spending money to save money. I was responding to this article and to others that felt 5-10 dollars was a good price for add-ins. I agree that this is a good price, I do not agree that 22 is.
P80 won second place in 2 readers polls. I guess your comments about little functionality and security problems are based on ?, or perhaps your insinuating that the users of WGS and the other forum are not that bright? P80 was also demonstrated at a PC conference in Japan by a MS Japan WHS Manager. If P80 was crap then why would it be recognized as anything but.
I am unaware of any security nightmare that exists. If you know of one, then you are the only one.
9. March 2010 at 5:56 pm
Yes GOOD software does have a price.
GREAT software is always better and the developer can ask what ever they want.
They will know if they hit the right price point by the number of license requests they get.
It is perfectly normal and good that WHS is getting to this point.
I hope the market grows and grows and grows because this is a GREAT solution for the home and small businesses where there is NO IT expert there that needs to pet the system on a regular basis to keep it up and running.
Yes the pay for add-ins need to add enough value that makes them worth their price.
The BIG companies should allow the trail version runs first. I have had two such products that were too much for my machine and it is better to find out before I buy. I saves both myself and the company time and trouble. If I had paid for the software first and found out that it was NOT ready for the normal WHS machine I would have to fight to get my money back. With the 'try first' I can attempt to contact the company first if there is a problem and if they don't respond to a potential customers problems then they will be just as bad if not worse with the paying customers.
Put your best foot forward. First impressions last longer.
I thank ALL of the WHS add-in developers for their work, keep up the good work and show us what we are missing and why we need your add-in.