Re: trading policy for IIe

[mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon)]

Jeff Blakeney replied:

>The problem with this is, if you are giving away copies of Wizardry,
>why would anyone pay for Silvern Castle?  This is just an example, as
>Silvern Castle is now freeware because Jeff Fink got so few people to
>actually pay the shareware fee but it does illustrate my point.
>
>Just in case my point isn't clear enough, here's another example:  Why
>would anyone buy a new word processor, database or spreadsheet program
>if they can simply download AppleWorks or any of a huge pile of other
>programs that do the same thing?  Because people are gaining access to
>illegal copies of older software, there is no need for them to seek
>out legal software, request certain types of software be developed or
>purchase any new software that might exist.

In both of these cases, Jeff, the only reason that a person would
buy the new stuff is because it is a sufficient advance over what
is already available that it warrants buying.  This is a sane policy.

There is no merit in simply encouraging development of the same
functionality over and over.  The point of new development is that it
offers new functionality.

In the event that a developer offers a piece of software that does
something that a sufficient number of people need (because they
can't already do it with existing software), for a price that they are
willing to pay, then he or she is in business.  Frankly, there have
been few offerings of new functionality that I am interested in having
on my Apple II's in the last few years (not _none_, but few).

>And people wonder why Apple II software development has slowed down so
>much.  :-)

Don't you think it's reasonable that Apple II software development
has slowed down because:

1) The Apple II market has diminished to hundreds, if not dozens,
   from the hundreds of thousands that it used to be, and
2) Of the remaining Apple II enthusiasts, fewer rely upon Apple II's
   as their primary computers, and
3) Collectors have little interest in actually using old systems, and
   if they do use them, they are not interested in _new_ software, so
4) There is little money to be made, and talented developers are
   more inclined to spend time where they can make a living.

FWIW, there is not much development in _any_ of the platforms
of the 80's--it isn't just Apple II's.

The development that does get done is done by dedicated folks
who enjoy the platform and do it for love--and would continue to
do it whether compensated or not.

Several years ago, I developed some software that extended the
capabilities of the Apple II platform.  Doing it consumed a fair
amount of time and effort, and I thought about distributing it in
the cheapest way I could think of:  as $5 shareware.

Then I thought further about it, and realized that, first, I'd never
make more than $100 or so, and second, that releasing it as
shareware would reduce the number of people who would feel
good about playing with it.

So I released it as freeware, asking only that I be acknowledged
as its author.  I've never regretted my decision.

-michael

 Email:  mjmahon@aol.com
 Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/