carpeaqua

I bought CSSEdit not long ago, does that count?

Maybe I’ll buy it again… it’s good enough to warrant 2 copies!

Btw, couldn’t agree more: http://islayer.com/blog/?p=93

Good stuff. Also, it is okay to admit I just want to sit here and reload the page to get new header images?

I buy Mac software all the time, if by “all the time” you mean “when I need it”. NewsFire, OmniWeb, MarsEdit, Xyle Scope, I dunno — I’m probably losing track. Point being, I am more than willing to cough up between $20-$40 for a program which is actually useful. (As a side note, Delicious LIbrary — to me, is not useful.) Selling yourself for

Scott, Not only you :-) This is good reading stuff. Safari Only.

Ever since I got a job out of college I’ve been purchasing licenses for stuff I use.

Transmit
NetNewsWire
BluetoothElite
Launchbar
Textmate

And I’m just a ton more little things I can’t think of right now. I also just donated $25 to the developer of Firebug because it’s saved me hundreds of hours. I get paid for the stuff I make using their software, they deserve to get paid for creating such great stuff!

This is all recent, say within the last week or two:

Donated for the DailyGrind widget
Donated for 1001, Adriaan’s Flickr app
Bought CSSEdit
Bought ChronoSync

ANOTHER post that’s anti-MacHeist. Okay, I’ll take the bait; here’s my response.

All of these “Anti-Phill Ryu & Co” posts seem to miss the point. They all seem to assume that selling a license at a discount is losing a full-price license. Why can’t they see it as gaining a (paying) customer who might otherwise pirate the application or use something else?

I am not a rich person. I cannot afford all the shareware titles on the Mac that I want. Something like MacHeist allows me the ability to test an application long-term to see if it’s truly useful to me. If the application proves to be useful, then the dev has gained a full-price paying customer (on top of what he already spent on the discounted license). If not, I still put a little bit of money into the pockets of the developer for letting me test the app longer than I would be able to otherwise. Who really loses in that situation?

Also, I’d be lying if I said I knew of every shareware title available for the Mac. Through things like MyDreamApp and MacHeist, I’ve been introduced to no less than 15 applications I previously did not know existed. While these are not necessarily apps I will use, you can be assured that these are apps I can now recommend to friends as they switch to Macs.

I hear people argue that events such as these “devalue” shareware, but I simply don’t agree. The devs who have participated in MacHeist and MDA are hard working developers trying to get their product into the public eye. Why must people see raising awareness for you application as something to be admonished?

Like everything else, how you sell shareware must evolve. If you don’t like how it’s evolving currently, that’s fine, but don’t be surprised when your application gets left in the dust because you didn’t market or raise awareness for your application as well as someone else.

I’m giving away some licenses for x-mas as well, Xlye scope, tangerine, and TextMate are all going to some well deserving people. In the last year I have paid more shareware fees then ‘commercial’ app costs. Keep up the good work ‘independents’

Sam d

Chris, you really think MacHeist is doing this thing solely for charity?

And to the others that have posted with the logic that the developers should be happy they got any money at all because the alternative is piracy or no money, your argument is ludicrous. The next time I owe someone $50, I will give them $10 and use your logic. I’m sure it will go along way with my buddy who is out his $40.

SB,
There is a difference between selling apps as a bundle on your own site and having your apps included in a bundle on another site where the site owners benifit more then you from each sale.

“why the hell get mad at customers for getting a good deal on a bundle of software? Why not get mad at the developers for biting, instead?”

I dont think gus and this site have had a go at consumers. They both have a go at MacHeist not consumers which in my opinion as a developer is fair game ;)

The article linked to by Marc Edwards above is also a good example of having a go at the developers and MacHeist.
I dont have any problems with consumers who buy the MacHeist bundle. It would just be nicer if MacHeist didnt exist and the users were buying from the developers at full price

The problem we (sane) developers have with MacHeist is that the developers who have signed up with it are being fleeced. If MacHeist were a fair deal for developers, they’d be being paid per copy, not a fixed $5K fee.

MacHeist itself, however, is pocketing money per copy sold, so as the number of copies sold goes up, it is MacHeist that is making money, whilst the developers have rising variable costs (support, discounts on future upgrades, special offers for existing customers) but no increase in revenue.

The way the payments are structured, the best thing that could happen from the perspective of a developer involved with MacHeist is that MacHeist sells nothing. If MacHeist sells lots of copies of their apps, that is bad for the developer, even if a lot of copies go to “new business”.

OK. Here’s my analysis of the situation. Both sides have valid arguments, but I don’t think the ferocity and tone of either side is merited, constructive, what have you.

Let’s start by analyzing motives:

A developer chooses to offer his program for a reduced price for a spike in publicity.

This happens all the time in every market. Whether it be in the form of clearances (for inventory purposes) or, more similarly to the present case, promotions (to yep, promote the software). No one seems to have any gripe with a developer choosing to offer a sale on his or her own site. No one, presumably, would have a problem with a developer choosing to lower the price of his app to increase its appeal and spur more sales (possibly resulting in greater revenue. Possibly.)

The issue seems to come in when there’s a middleman. That’s what’s really getting these devs’ goat.

Yes, it’s unfair that a dude with a website can cut deals with people who slave over really amazing software programs and take a cut just because he’s made a name for his website. But brand and marketing is a valuable commodity. Would that every developer could pimp his brand like mad while at the same time devoting himself to his program. But marketing is a horse of a different color, a different kettle of fish, insert idiom here. That’s why all sorts of companies have dedicated marketing departments or outsource their marketing. That’s what MacZot, MacHeist, etc. essentially are. They’re a marketing ploy. They’re being paid for their ability to raise awareness about an app. In this regard, MacHeist is actually oodles better than MacZot, for instance, because of the effort that went into the heists, the major advertising for the bundle, etc. MacZot, on the other hand, is a WordPress blog. And let’s compare this to another real-world example. Disney got 50% of Pixar’s profits on films just because they lent their marketing and brand to Pixar’s movies. No ingenuity at all required (unlike Heist, which you have to admit had a pretty cool hook).

Here, in the end, is what it seems to boil down to, and what everyone may be able to agree on: it’s the disingenuousness of the slogan pushing the bundle. “Week of the Independent Mac Developer” makes it sound like Mac developers are getting a great deal. I don’t know how the deal will shake out for the people involved with this bundle; you’ll have to ask them. But I truly believe that most of the bitterness would be resolved if Heist had termed it “Week of the Independent Mac Software Enthusiast.” But see, that’s a terrible slogan. Has no ring to it.

I respect and appreciate independent Mac developers. I love the Mac development community. It produces better products than its Windows counterpart and is generally friendly and collegial. That said, I take advantage of promotions. I just graduated from college, am looking for a job, and have too little money to justify purchases of many amazing apps at retail price. When I have a job and some disposable income, you can bet that I’ll spend some of it (probably too much) on Mac shareware. In the meantime, I’m not going to feel guilty for taking part in promotions. Yeah, so I’m paying some money to some kids who came up with a great marketing plan and executed it pretty well. Maybe they don’t deserve as much as they get. They certainly don’t according to some indy mac developer values. But some of my money is going to the developers I admire, and some to charity. Can’t beat that. Paying Phill and crew as well isn’t going to keep me up at night.

Bottom line, I understand the frustration at feeling as though the MacHeist crew is saying that bundles are good for developers. I also understand the reluctance to accept marketing middlemen. Independent Mac Software should be, well, independent. Its ethos is nothing if not DIY. And promotion sites fly in the face of that.

Sorry for the drawn out post, and congrats to all who made it through. Hopefully it resonates at least a little.

The only thing that I’ve heard as a negative is that authors were paid a flat fee for participation, regardless of the number of licences sold.

Fair enough, but back when I was looking at developing PalmOS software, there was heavy discussion about the revenue “sharing” agreements with sites like Handango: the developer had to fork over as much as 60% of the cost of the licence to list their product on Handango, IIRC—and were restricted from charging a different price on their own website (to reflect the theoretical lower overhead of not going through Handango). If a sale price were offered, it had to be offered on the Handango website as well as the developer’s home site (or just on Handango).

Looking at all of this, the devs participating are choosing to trade a smaller fee for marketing and exposure. That’s an important thing; I suspect that the sort of hype and marketing that has been generated by MacHeist over the last few weeks has been more than worth it for the participants. (I would imagine that the authors of the freebies given away during the heists themselves were paid something as well.) Finally, the charity angle is cynical, but useful: the applications involved will be associated with charitable giving, and generate warmer feelings that way.

I just don’t see what you’re getting all bent out of shape about. The authors of the apps in question can participate in this promotion or not, as they see fit. Customers can likewise buy the bundle or not, again as they see fit. There is no moral issue here, period.

-jcr