RE: RE: CGIDEV2 -- WEB400

"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 don't think that there is a clearly defined line for when to charge and
when not to charge.  I've noted that we can reason our way into never
charging for anything, or weasel our way into always charging for everything
depending on how we parse the problem.
I suppose that the key is to have well-defined rules on what you consider a
defect, and anything that doesn't lead to the opening of a defect is
billable.


 -----Original Message-----
From:   web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]  On
Behalf Of Brad Stone
Sent:   Wednesday, July 20, 2005 11:18 AM
To:     Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries
Subject:        Re: [WEB400] RE: CGIDEV2

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