The Yamaha AN1x Synthesizer mailing list

Always an interesting debate. There are those who take the moral
high ground and say with great authority how wrong it is. Then there
are those in the middle who I feel are much more accurate in their
standing and then there are those who just leech everything and
ultimately do cost the developer money.

I am in the middle ground. I have software I have paid for and I
have software I am evaluating. The trouble is, that the software is
too expensive in the first place. Developers argue that they have to
price it high to combat the piracy, yet give away hundreds of copies
in order to get the software into the mainstream in the first place.
I evaluate software. If I like it and it is within my budget then I
will buy it.

The other thing for us in the UK to combat is that the software
costs up to 50% more over here.

For example Cubase new version top of the line whatever it is called
costs close to £500. That's $870. Would I pay that for a glorified
software sequencer. Not on your life. Their argument is that in
order to make a profit, they must sell at that price. But the price
limits sales. Selling 100 at $1 margin is the same as selling 50 at
$2 margin. More people would buy it if the cost was lower, that's a
fact. If the program is good, the more people that use it, generates
more sales by recommendation. Thats another fact.

You better believe they make tons of profit from this software. They
are of course entitled too. That's what business is all about. But
if they make excessive profits on something, that should be
reflected in a much cheaper upgrade path.

For example, my last company almost got into real trouble just
keeping up to speed with software upgrades. We ran a 20 strong pre
press department. Pre press means you need to have the latest
version of all the graphics software just to make sure you can meet
your customers demands. In one year alone, Quark Express updates on
12 Macs cost £7,600 ($13,200). Thats just one program!! In order to
keep everything legal, we purchased all the upgrades for all the
macs. We could have just purhased 6 and doubled them up, but no we
did the right thing. Well doing the right thing cost jobs as a
downturn in work meant we had to sacrifice people. Saving on the
$100,000 softare bill would have saved jobs.

So all you developers can cry and weep all you want. Reduce the
cost, increase the sales and pile those excessive profits into a far
cheaper upgrade path and all in the world will be well again.

Rant over.

V

Hi V,

Your "rant" (your words) is interesting, and you raise some valid points. Like most things, the question is where to draw the line:

>I am in the middle ground. I have software I have paid for and I
>have software I am evaluating.

I follow a very similar path, but I have a personal standard that I follow: If I evaluate a program and I'm still using it after 30-60 days, I go out and buy it, or I delete it -- plain and simple. From my experience, I'm in a very small majority. I have friends and colleagues who have been "evaluating" software for years.

>I evaluate software. If I like it and it is within my budget then I
>will buy it.

If you like the software, and it's NOT within your budget, do you refrain from using it, and find another solution? I do -- without exception. If someone loans me a program to try, I either end up buying it, or I cut up the disk and erase all traces of the program from my computer. If you don't follow this guideline, you're sending a very mixed message to the software developers: "I like it, but I'm not willing to pay for it." Now, you might MEAN "because it's too expensive," but there's no clear message of this fact being sent to the author. You're joining with the group of users who feel that any price is too much.

>So all you developers can cry and weep all you want. Reduce the
>cost, increase the sales and pile those excessive profits into a far
>cheaper upgrade path and all in the world will be well again.

Umm, I'm not all that sure that your idea will really fix everything up. Let's look at WinZip, one of the most useful, widely used programs ever made. Nearly every PC owner has a copy, but it's not SUPPOSED to be free: Each time the program loads, a 30-day evaluation message pops up, with an "I Agree" box that moves around between uses to prevent blindly closing it. The message clearly states that after evaluation, you're expected to pay for further use. The cost isn't much -- I think I paid about $49US in 1999, when I started my company, and have never been hit with an upgrade fee since. It only took a couple of minutes to pay for it online, and I wasn't prevented from using my copy until the registration code arrived. So how come I'm about the only person I know who actually paid for a registration ID? I even walk into client companies and find the engineers using unlicensed copies. It's clearly not a question of too much money, nor an unclear user benefit.

Or let's look at the number of musicians who "trade" software with each other. It's not like trading my AN1x for your MS2000R; we both get to continue to use our traded items. And it's not just a question of cost: I've played with many a musician who doesn't believe in paying for licensed MIDI files, sheet music, recordings, or software. Their position wouldn't change by dropping the cost by 50%, 60%, or more; they don't want to pay ANYTHING for these items, even though they gain benefit from their use.

Regards,

-BW
--
Bruce Wahler
Ashby Solutions™ http://music.ashbysolutions.com
978.386.7389 voice/fax
bruce@...

nuvalerium wrote:

> So all you developers can cry and weep all you want. Reduce the
> cost, increase the sales and pile those excessive profits into a far
> cheaper upgrade path and all in the world will be well again.

I take it you're not a software developer? You can only make big bucks
with software if you sell seriously large quantities, and music software
is simply not sold in those quantities. Microsoft is making a bundle,
but they are the exception to the rule.

Anyway, this discussion does not belong on this list.

- Peter