"Stephan Rose" <nospam.noway@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:HeednXDkfeMb4UjbnZ2dnUVZ8qLinZ2d@xxxxxx
Quote:
> Far more people in the linux world are willing to pay for software than
> you can imagine. Most people have no problem spending money on software if
> said software is worth spending the money on.
You claim that you believe that but then tell people that Vista is a waste
despite the millions who have paid for it.
Quote:
>
> Now true, I can see how there linux market is smaller than the windows
> market (disregarding user base), because many of the 3rd party utilities
> that are required to get windows usable just aren't needed under linux.
>
> Example, Windows I need the following:
>
> - Alochol 120% to mount DVD or CD images on a virtual drive
Use deamon tools then.. its free.
Quote:
>
> - DVD Region Free & CSS Free to turn my DVD player into a region-free
> player.
dvd43.. free.
Quote:
>
> - A decent defragmentation utility such as Diskeeper.
Doesn't need anymore than the one its got.. free.
Linux doesn't have one even though its file systems are no better than NTFS.
Quote:
>
> - Decent E-mail Software, Outlook express surely isn't it.
Use anything you like they are all on windows and linux.
Quote:
>
> - Decent C/C++ Development environment. Under windows, I'd only use MS
> Visual Studio.
That's free too.
Quote:
>
> - Decent DVD Player software that unlike Windows Media Player is actually
> useful.
It plays DVDs.. whats the problem?
Quote:
>
> - Decent Newsgroup software. Outlook express again doesn't fit the bill.
It works OK for millions.
You can always download pan for windows.
..
Quote:
>
> - Basic office needs, word, spreadsheets, etc.
Use openoffice.
Quote:
>
> - CD/DVD Burning software (no version of windows can burn an ISO image)
Quote:
>
> Just adding up all the licensing costs there I'd easily exceed 2 grand.
> Visual Studio alone runs 1,500 for the professional version.
Mine was free.. but there are free versions that will do for 99.9% of
people.
I doubt if you need the features of the proffesional version if you can
manage with what you get on linux.
Quote:
>
> That just roughly scratches the surface of all the commercial software I
> need under windows and that I need to cough up a license for under windows
> for every computer I own.
Funny that I can get free software to do everything you need to pay for.
Do you want to buy a bridge? I have this nice swing bridge in London that i
can sell you.
Quote:
>
> Linux on the other hand, it isn't that I wouldn't be willing to pay for
> the software. I simply just don't need to so I don't.
>
> - Out of the box support for mounting any drive or ISO image to anywhere I
> want. Alcohol 120% not needed.
Nor for windows.
Quote:
>
> - Out of the box support for DVD playback and CSS support is installable
> in less than a minute. I have no need for the DVD Region/CSS software I
> would need under windows.
nor for windows
Quote:
>
> - Ext3 does not need defragmentation so I have no need for a
> defragmentation utility. No need for Diskeeper.
nor for windows
Quote:
>
> - Out of the box very good e-mail software with all the features I need.
> I'd have no need to pay for MS Outlook or other third party.
nor for windows
Quote:
>
> - Eclipse 3.3/CDT4.0 perfectly fits my needs for C/C++ Development far
> better than MS Visual Studio. No need to buy anything.
nor for windows
Quote:
>
> - There are plenty of Media players available for DVD and other media
> playback. I have absolutely no need to buy something like PowerDVD as I
> used to use under windows.
nor for windows
Quote:
>
> - Plenty of very good Newsgroup clients available at no cost. Again, no
> need to pay for something like Agent which I would need under Windows.
nor for windows
Quote:
>
> - Open Office meets all *my* basic word & spreadsheet needs. So I
> personally have no need to pay for something like MS Office.
nor for windows
Quote:
>
> - Burning CDs & DVDs is trivial, ISO images included. No need to buy
> something like Nero or the like.
nor for windows.
Quote:
>
> Total Licensing cost? 0 and all my needs are perfectly met.
Sounds like windows does everything you want at no extra cost.. if you
bother to think about it.
Quote:
>
> See what I am trying to get at? It's not that users like me are unwilling
> to pay for software. For most software, there is no need to and therefore
> it'd be very difficult for a software developer to compete in that market
> segment. They'd need to be significantly better than the open source
> alternatives before I or anyone else would be willing to cough up any
> money for it.
>
> So when it comes to the software, it is exceedingly difficult to compete
> in the everyday needs for commercial software because generally speaking,
> everyday needs are already met at no cost to the user. It's all already
> there and available.
>
> The areas for Linux where there is a commercial software market, and
> there'd easily be more than enough people willing to pay for this is
> software that addresses special needs that go outside the everyday
> spectrum.
>
> Accounting, photo editing, video editing, audio editing / recording,
> CAD/CAM, EDA, custom business / commercial management software, and so on.
You can get most of them free for windows too BTW.
Quote:
>
> Basically, anyone that wants to make money with Linux software needs to
> target the professional market...you aren't likely to make much money with
> the mass market like in windows because the needs are already met for
> those who don't expect everything to work 100% identically to windows and
> are willing to learn. Ultimately this is a good thing for the User as it
> reduces the Users costs. I can see though that Corporations might not like
> it. =)
You need to offer service guarantees and SLAs to make money.. something
people appear to find difficult with linux and easier with windows.
Quote:
>
> The only mass market I see for Linux are games. Games are probably the
> only major category for Linux that I see viable commercially on a mass
> market scale since a Game is about the specific title. And you know what?
> Plenty people wish and would definitely pay for games if more of them were
> available for Linux. I know I would in a heartbeat. Matter of fact, if you
> offered me the identical game at 20 bucks for windows and 40 bucks for
> Linux, I'd buy the Linux version.
I bet you would.
I bet you wouldn't be here posting about how you were being ripped off for
being a linux user either.
Quote:
>
> The willingness to pay for software is there in the Linux Community.
> Companies simply need to offer the right software.
That would be why so may linux companies are struggling to make money then?
Linux not being the right software.