What is shareware? What was shareware?

[David R]

Some time ago, maybe 6 or 7 years ago (which is a very long time in terms of
the Internet) I used to think that shareware was:

"Software available for downloading from public networks and bulletin board
systems, usually at little cost. Note: At the end of a trial period, users
are asked to pay the software developer a small amount for use of the
software."

Nowadays it seems to me shareware has become rather expensive. It now seems
that someone writes something like a simple but useful routine and he wants
to sell it. So these days he charges a price which is not far off the price
charged by overtly commercial software written by software companies but
which contain significantly more function.

I know this is not true in all instances but it seems to be getting too true
of too many cases.

I have seen some awful stuff being offered as shareware at prices which seem
decidedly high. And I have seen some very good commercial software being
offered for not much more than that sort of shareware price which are very
good.

What do others think? Do they have similar observations? Or maybe I am
seeing only a small part of the shareware world.

 

[Livewire]

Some time ago, maybe 6 or 7 years ago (which is a very long time in terms of
the Internet) I used to think that shareware was:

"Software available for downloading from public networks and bulletin board
systems, usually at little cost. Note: At the end of a trial period, users
are asked to pay the software developer a small amount for use of the
software."

Nowadays it seems to me shareware has become rather expensive. It now seems
that someone writes something like a simple but useful routine and he wants
to sell it. So these days he charges a price which is not far off the price
charged by overtly commercial software written by software companies but
which contain significantly more function.

I know this is not true in all instances but it seems to be getting too true
of too many cases.

I have seen some awful stuff being offered as shareware at prices which seem
decidedly high. And I have seen some very good commercial software being
offered for not much more than that sort of shareware price which are very
good.

What do others think? Do they have similar observations? Or maybe I am
seeing only a small part of the shareware world.

I suspect that nowadays a lot of shareware is stuff that the authors
would really like to sell as fully-fledged software but that they either
can't afford to market themselves or can't sell on to a software
distributor.

So they sell it as shareware and pitch the price a little below
commercial alternatives -- ie making it a "bargain" in their eyes.

If they sell loads, then they make a killing as their overheads are so
low. On the other hand, if their original hunch that it was something
people would want proved wrong, they won't sell many and will hardly get
a reasonable return for the time they have put in.

 

[Conor]

I suspect that nowadays a lot of shareware is stuff that the authors
would really like to sell as fully-fledged software but that they either
can't afford to market themselves or can't sell on to a software
distributor.

So they sell it as shareware and pitch the price a little below
commercial alternatives -- ie making it a "bargain" in their eyes.

Neither of you have understood what shareware is.

Shareware is a freely distributable limited, either by time or
functionality, version of a program designed to give you an idea of
what it does. Then to either unlock the extra features, add levels or
remove the time limit then you pay the price they want.

Shareware does not mean the software is cheaper. The price is set by
the developer at whatever they choose it to be.

Examples of commercially priced programs released as shareware:

Doom
Doom2

 

[REM]

David R <[email protected]> wrote:

Some time ago, maybe 6 or 7 years ago (which is a very long time in terms of
the Internet) I used to think that shareware was:

"Software available for downloading from public networks and bulletin board
systems, usually at little cost. Note: At the end of a trial period, users
are asked to pay the software developer a small amount for use of the
software."

Yes, it was pretty much the honor system back then (1992 or so). The
fact is people will pay only for a unique and outstanding program they
personally WANT to help support.

Telix was the first program I recall that started enforcing the time
limit by placing "turds," files useful only to the developer that are
left when the program is uninstalled to enforce the time limit.

On one hand there was very little what we term today, freeware
programs back then. On the other, some shareware programs began
mucking up drives. Luckily the following generation of young
programmers realized that just freely releasing apps to the public was
a better idea and it caught on.

Nowadays it seems to me shareware has become rather expensive. It now seems
that someone writes something like a simple but useful routine and he wants
to sell it. So these days he charges a price which is not far off the price
charged by overtly commercial software written by software companies but
which contain significantly more function.

I'd guess that few "shareware" authors sell at a high volumn due to
the fact that almost any app required can be found as freeware. There
are a few gaps, but small and few.

This creates a situation where price goes up and demand goes even
lower. Will they exceed the price of commercial apps? That's a losing
proposition.

There are many eager programmers happy only in knowing that their
creation was useful to the public at large.

I know this is not true in all instances but it seems to be getting too true
of too many cases.

I haven't tried any shareware since I discovered freeware. Well, I did
install a couple of spam tools just to see how they work, but they are
long gone.

I have seen some awful stuff being offered as shareware at prices which seem
decidedly high. And I have seen some very good commercial software being
offered for not much more than that sort of shareware price which are very
good.

What do others think? Do they have similar observations? Or maybe I am
seeing only a small part of the shareware world.

How much of the freeware world have you seen?

What sort of apps are you interested in? Ask and I'll bet you get many
suggestions and personal experiences of people who have used the apps.

Most freeware are small, stand alone apps that perform superior to
bloated commercial apps IMHO. A large app will have many more bugs,
oversights, etc. than small apps. This is a given.

Browse one of the Pricelessware sites for some of the best freeware!

 

[Semolina Pilchard]

Some time ago, maybe 6 or 7 years ago (which is a very long time in terms of
the Internet) I used to think that shareware was:

"Software available for downloading from public networks and bulletin board
systems, usually at little cost. Note: At the end of a trial period, users
are asked to pay the software developer a small amount for use of the
software."

Nowadays it seems to me shareware has become rather expensive. It now seems
that someone writes something like a simple but useful routine and he wants
to sell it. So these days he charges a price which is not far off the price
charged by overtly commercial software written by software companies but
which contain significantly more function.

I know this is not true in all instances but it seems to be getting too true
of too many cases.

I have seen some awful stuff being offered as shareware at prices which seem
decidedly high. And I have seen some very good commercial software being
offered for not much more than that sort of shareware price which are very
good.

What do others think? Do they have similar observations? Or maybe I am
seeing only a small part of the shareware world.

As REM has said in his reply, many shareware programs are outdone by
freeware these days. Ten or a dozen years ago there were several real
"killer apps" in the shareware market, like pkzip, 4dos, list.com,
Shez, PaintShop Pro and Graphics Workshop. With the exception of PSP
and 4NT, both of which hover somewhere between shareware and normal
commercial programs nowadays, I don't think that shareware offers the
unique functionality that it once did. That role has been taken up by
freeware now.

Of the types of programs I use, only in the case of the dual-pane
Norton Commander-clone file manager is there a shareware offering that
is clearly better than the freeware programs, and one of these days
Pablo Commander or Free Commander will close the quite narrow gap.

 

[John Hung]

Most shareware offerings are clearly better than freeware equivalents.
This is the only explanation for quite a lot of people making a living from
shareware.
Don't be mislead into believing that buyers are fools,they are not.
Were most freeware any good, people would take it. The true is, most
freeware, 99% is pure junk. Were they not pure junk, the authors would be
selling it.

 

[Semolina Pilchard]

Most shareware offerings are clearly better than freeware equivalents.
This is the only explanation for quite a lot of people making a living from
shareware.
Don't be mislead into believing that buyers are fools,they are not.
Were most freeware any good, people would take it. The true is, most
freeware, 99% is pure junk. Were they not pure junk, the authors would be
selling it.

Excuse my quiet laughter.

 

[John Hung]

Semolina,

I don't know if you are laughing because you think people is idiot or
because you don't believe that thousands of authors make a living from
shareware.

 

[Franklin]

As REM has said in his reply, many shareware programs are
outdone by freeware these days. Ten or a dozen years ago there
were several real "killer apps" in the shareware market, like
pkzip, 4dos, list.com, Shez, PaintShop Pro and Graphics
Workshop. With the exception of PSP and 4NT, both of which
hover somewhere between shareware and normal commercial
programs nowadays, I don't think that shareware offers the
unique functionality that it once did. That role has been
taken up by freeware now.

Of the types of programs I use, only in the case of the
dual-pane Norton Commander-clone file manager is there a
shareware offering that is clearly better than the freeware
programs, and one of these days Pablo Commander or Free
Commander will close the quite narrow gap.

Which shareware dual-pane file manager do you use?

 

[Linda]

Some time ago, maybe 6 or 7 years ago (which is a very long time in terms
of
the Internet) I used to think that shareware was:

"Software available for downloading from public networks and bulletin
board
systems, usually at little cost. Note: At the end of a trial period,
users
are asked to pay the software developer a small amount for use of the
software."

Nowadays it seems to me shareware has become rather expensive. It now
seems
that someone writes something like a simple but useful routine and he
wants
to sell it. So these days he charges a price which is not far off the
price
charged by overtly commercial software written by software companies but
which contain significantly more function.

I know this is not true in all instances but it seems to be getting too
true
of too many cases.

I have seen some awful stuff being offered as shareware at prices which
seem
decidedly high. And I have seen some very good commercial software being
offered for not much more than that sort of shareware price which are very
good.

What do others think? Do they have similar observations? Or maybe I am
seeing only a small part of the shareware world.

http://www.snapfiles.com/shareware.html is one of about 180,000+ google hits
for the definition.

 

[Julian]

Semolina,

I don't know if you are laughing because you think people is idiot or
because you don't believe that thousands of authors make a living from
shareware.

I think the laughter was at the suggestion that 99% of freeware is pure
junk. There is some excellent freeware out there, unfortunately, when seen
from the perspective of someone who wants to make a living selling
software.

I think the reason a lot of shareware survives, is because buyers don't
have time to try all the alternatives (or even know how to search for
them.) Why would anyone pay for WinZip or any of the many other commercial
archive managers when they could have 7-Zip or UltimateZip for free?

 

[Semolina Pilchard]

Semolina,

I don't know if you are laughing because you think people is idiot or
because you don't believe that thousands of authors make a living from
shareware.

I'm not suggesting anyone is an idiot, John. I'm laughing at the
notion that 99% of freeware is junk. I use a lot of freeware and much
of it is very good indeed. I don't know whether or not thousands of
authors make a living from shareware. Good luck to them if they do.

I don't follow the shareware market as I once did, but there seem to
be less shareware programs that are household names than there used to
be.

 

[Semolina Pilchard]

Which shareware dual-pane file manager do you use?

Total Commander.

 

[REM]

I think the laughter was at the suggestion that 99% of freeware is pure
junk. There is some excellent freeware out there, unfortunately, when seen
from the perspective of someone who wants to make a living selling
software.

I think the reason a lot of shareware survives, is because buyers don't
have time to try all the alternatives (or even know how to search for
them.) Why would anyone pay for WinZip or any of the many other commercial
archive managers when they could have 7-Zip or UltimateZip for free?

Precisely!

You guys in the shareware groups should check the freeware programs
available for the cost of a download.

 

[Roger Johansson]

I don't know if you are laughing because you think people is idiot or
because you don't believe that thousands of authors make a living from
shareware.

I smiled too, when I read your message.
Very few shareware authors ever made any money at all from their program.

The freeware which is available today is so good that there is hardly any
need for any of the shareware or commercialware at all.

The only exception I know of, as somebody else also remarked a few hours
ago, is Total Commander, not time-limited nagware shareware.
TC is both making a lot of money for its author, and is generally seen,
even by its competitors, as the world's best best dual pane file manager.

The reasons for its unique popularity:
1: Exceptional quality. You can use it for years and still not realize
all its possibilities. 2: Generous not-so-effective protection mechanism.

Other shareware authors should follow that example, and maybe then they
could make some money in the long run.

But it is too late even for that now.

The increasing availability of very good freeware, and open-source
freeware, has made it impossible to make any money at all from software
for the general public in the future. The only programmers who will make
money from their work are the ones who create special in-house software,
for a certain company, for example.

 

[Bruce the Shark]

The increasing availability of very good freeware, and open-source
freeware, has made it impossible to make any money at all from
software for the general public in the future. The only programmers
who will make money from their work are the ones who create special
in-house software, for a certain company, for example.

The only real exception to this would be games.

 

[Julian]

As REM has said in his reply, many shareware programs are outdone by
freeware these days. Ten or a dozen years ago there were several real
"killer apps" in the shareware market, like pkzip, 4dos, list.com, Shez,
PaintShop Pro and Graphics Workshop. With the exception of PSP and 4NT,
both of which hover somewhere between shareware and normal commercial
programs nowadays, I don't think that shareware offers the unique
functionality that it once did. That role has been taken up by freeware
now.

I don't see any distinction between shareware and freeware, except in
price. Ignoring the GNU / Free Software exponents, who have their own
political / idealistic reasons for developing free software (and have
well-paid other jobs to allow them to do so) why would anyone develop
freeware?

The only reasons I can see are:

- they are not professional or trained programmers, writing software
perhaps for their hobby, and their software doesn't meet the standards of
professional software (or they don't think it does);

- they are unable or unwilling to take on the support responsibility that
comes with selling a product, so by making it freeware they feel they can
offer it on a "take it or leave it" basis, and quit developing the program
at all when it suits them;

- they are developing it as a loss-leader to hope to interest people in
some other, paid-for product;

- the product was released in a half-completed and unsaleable form, and is
still evolving with the help of its users. These products often become
shareware (sometimes by way of donationware) once they are established and
successful. Or else development suddenly stops, though loss of interest.

Freeware is an aberration that does not deserve to exist, because even if
a developer is prepared to write the software for nothing, if you
have more than a few hundred users there are real costs that somehow have
to be paid for. Costs such as web hosting, and providing support, which is
increasingly time consuming if a product is successful. Because some
people are willing, for a time at least, to donate the time and money to
make products free, they distort the market by encouraging users to
believe software *should* be free.

This is not only harmful to those who are simply trying to earn a living
by writing software, but it also hurts products that started off free but
need to raise money to survive because they have become successful and the
time and effort needed to support and development now exceeds the free
time of the software author. For an example I cite Patrick Kolla's Spybot
Search and Destroy, which was once excellent but now seems to be falling
behind its commercial rivals. It already asks for donations, but I predict
it will either eventually cease develoment (like many of other freeware
products) or else be bought by a big company unless it goes shareware.

 

[*ProteanThread*]

Some time ago, maybe 6 or 7 years ago (which is a very long time in terms of
the Internet) I used to think that shareware was:

<SNIP>

It used to be most shareware cost the users no more than $5 or $10 at the
most. Now, i wouldn't pay more than $19.95 for shareware *IF* and only *IF*
a freeware alternative could not be found.

 

[Martin Seibert]

[..]

Freeware is an aberration that does not deserve to exist, because even if
a developer is prepared to write the software for nothing, if you
have more than a few hundred users there are real costs that somehow have
to be paid for. Costs such as web hosting, and providing support, which
is increasingly time consuming if a product is successful. Because some
people are willing, for a time at least, to donate the time and money to
make products free, they distort the market by encouraging users to
believe software *should* be free.

LOL

Users are no idiots. They only get an additional option in terms of
software to use. You sound like a shareware writer who doesn't make much
money.

 

[Andrew Gibson]

The increasing availability of very good freeware, and open-source

freeware, has made it impossible to make any money at all from software
for the general public in the future. The only programmers who will make
money from their work are the ones who create special in-house software,
for a certain company, for example.

I'm sure the acquisitions manager at Digital River will be running to the
hills screaming after reading your prophecy ;-)
I suspect that the only people who are convinced that the death of shareware
is imminent are failed shareware authors. Who else would give a shit?

Regards

Andrew Gibson
Http://www.jellypie.co.uk