But not many Linux users that are going to pay for software written for
Linux.
It is the "free" bit on Linux that makes software limited not the technical
problems.
While users think software should be free where is the incentive to spend
money writing software?
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.
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
- DVD Region Free & CSS Free to turn my DVD player into a region-free
player.
- A decent defragmentation utility such as Diskeeper.
- Decent E-mail Software, Outlook express surely isn't it.
- Decent C/C++ Development environment. Under windows, I'd only use MS
Visual Studio.
- Decent DVD Player software that unlike Windows Media Player is actually
useful.
- Decent Newsgroup software. Outlook express again doesn't fit the bill.
- Basic office needs, word, spreadsheets, etc.
- CD/DVD Burning software (no version of windows can burn an ISO image)
Just adding up all the licensing costs there I'd easily exceed 2 grand.
Visual Studio alone runs 1,500 for the professional version.
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.
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.
- 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.
- Ext3 does not need defragmentation so I have no need for a
defragmentation utility. No need for Diskeeper.
- 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.
- Eclipse 3.3/CDT4.0 perfectly fits my needs for C/C++ Development far
better than MS Visual Studio. No need to buy anything.
- 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.
- 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.
- Open Office meets all *my* basic word & spreadsheet needs. So I
personally have no need to pay for something like MS Office.
- Burning CDs & DVDs is trivial, ISO images included. No need to buy
something like Nero or the like.
Total Licensing cost? 0 and all my needs are perfectly met.
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.
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. =)
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.
The willingness to pay for software is there in the Linux Community.
Companies simply need to offer the right software.
--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6
å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
