Re: RE: CGIDEV2 -- WEB400

The cool thing about the software development business is the variety!I have no problem with any business approach as long as both buyer andseller know what they are getting. You have a great model as well, onethat a prior company I worked for grew on (and was bought and sold,twice, with). Being up front with customers is key. Letting them knowwhat support you will provide as part of the agreement is key. We havea fairly unusual, hybrid model that we operate with so the "give thesoftware away for free and charge for services" model isn't exactly theway we do business, but it is close.

I agree with all you say here Brad, and if I had a fee based softwareoffering I'd operate just as you do. I and love that orientation toquality. Yeah, if everything is done correctly, you should be as busyon the support end as the Maytag guy....(Microsoft, are you listeningin?....)


Pete


Brad Stone wrote:

I agree here.  I've tried open source and the biggest
question was, once they have the software, is any
communication with them considered "service" and chargable?


For instance, I get a lot of emails asking things like:

1.  Where did the CGIDEV2 site move to?
2.  How do I install CGIDEV2?
3.  How come HALLO.MBR doesn't work?  (Changed to HELLO in
later versions)

If I were the distributor of CGIDEV2 as open source.. do I
charge for those things?  What if it turns out to be a bug?
do I charge for that?   Where do you draw the line?  Or is
there one?

I sell software, consulting services, etc...  my business
model is the exact opposite.  Sell the software at a
nominal price (a minor fraction of my competitors) and
offer free support and software upgrades.  (some support
actually falls into the consulting area, and I am upfront
about that with my customers if it's obviously over the
line, like helping users set up an application to use
GETURI with their TP).

To me, this works because:

1. charging for support when it's bug related is wrong,
IHMO.

2. Reporting bugs actually is a benifit to the ISV...3. Getting input on software enhancements is also a benifit


As enhancements are added, you can raise prices
accordingly, as I do.  This doesn't affect the user of v1.0
until they replace their machine and purchase a new
license.

In other words, if you write your software well enough,
there should be very little support needed.  And with
thousands of installs of my software, I believe I've proven
that to be true.  At least in my case.

Brad
www.bvstools.com
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:27:47 -0600
Pete Helgren <Pete@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

My feeling is that it isn't that simple (giving it away
and then charging for support) and it isn't the "free"
nature of the software.  Yeah, you have lowered the cost,
but without one of two things you'd still be SOL: 1. You
need a great value add or 2. You need a supportive
community that enjoys the participatory environment.  If
you get both you will survive, even thrive.

Linux works not because it is free (IMHO), it is because
you have lots of geeks who love to get their hands dirty
in the code and love to hang with other geeks (reason #2
above).  It is counter-culture, anti-big business
(Microsoft) and can be cool if your contribution is
accepted and used.  Yes, there is a small minority of
folks who use it JUST because it IS free, but that isn't
the reason for faster Linux adoption.

Reason #1 above is gaining ground in the Linux world and
will be a threat as Linux becomes easier to use and has
broader driver and application support ( and easier
installation for those drivers and applications).  That
will improve the value add to the customer.  But there
are plenty of folks who won't install Linux even if it IS
free because it adds no value to the desktop (or that

value doesn't exceed the "cost").Crappy free software isn't better because it is free or

open source.  It is still crappy. There are plenty of
open source projects that go nowhere because they either
don't have much value add or don't have a supportive user
community.

CGIDEV isn't popular just because it is free. It is
because it has a great value add and a developer
community who embraced it.  I would think you could build
some revenue from CGIDEV consulting or deliver an
application that uses it and charge for maintenance and
support in that application.  You could also write

CrappyCGI and have no takers.That is my point. It isn't just free software, it's the

whole "package" that makes the Open Source / services
model work.

Pete


Don wrote:

Pete,

This kinda seems to be what ALOT of the linux community

is doing.

Basically giving their distro away or at a low fee, then

making their

money on support and services...

What am I not seeing here??  Other than linux is growing

a helluva lot

faster than OS/400...

Don in DC


On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Pete Helgren wrote:

Anyone who thinks that just giving away the software to

generate

services revenue will be a viable business model will

be disappointed.

--
This is the Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries (WEB400)
mailing list
To post a message email: WEB400@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400
or email: WEB400-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the
archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/web400.


Bradley V. Stone
BVS.Tools
www.bvstools.com