I’m getting to the point with tasks and photos where I’m no longer adding features that are just things that I want, but things that my users are asking for. This isn’t a bad thing. It makes the products better. It also takes a lot of my time.
I initially released everything as donationware because the software I built was something I wanted to use (I’d build it anyway). As that changes and I don’t see many donations rolling in, I’m considering my options for future releases.
- I could keep them donationware and let development slow down considerably.
- I could make them shareware, but I’m not sure that would do much better than donationware.
- I could add those annoying nag messages (nagware) or remove functionality (crippleware). I don’t like this option.
- I can try the $1 per download approach I proposed earlier.
- I can make them cheap commercial products that you have to pay for. Similar pricing, but no free download or try before you buy. I’d probably have to offer installation support for this option.
I’ve got a few more months to decide before I roll out tasks 2.0 and photos 5.0 – what do you think I should do?
Do you have a handle on who the users are that are currently using your software? If so, are many/any of them commercially based?
If so, it may be worth talking to them about sponsorship. In my experience, having two or three companies support your efforts is far more effective than any of the above proposals and will serve to keep your software alive, whilst adding a comemrcial angle to your offering.
The pay off for the company/ies is [1] increased exposure and [2] a possible furutre product line (commercial release of your product).
I hope this helps!
I have several sponsors for the multi-user version of tasks, and that is the reason why I’m close to having a beta (feature complete) of the multi-user version ready. However, even with these generous sponsors, my hourly rate isn’t good. 🙂
Thanks for offering a good idea. I wonder if some of the newspapers that are using photos would be willing to sponsor it.
Hi Alex.
While I have nothing against paid software (as long as it is affordable) I realy don’t go for software I can’t test first.
I actually made a donation for photos (after I ironed out some problems with my linux instalation, with your help) but only after I had it running for a day or two in order to get a feel for it.
I have in the past heard and read about software I thought was good but since they where paid and there was no way to try them before buying I decided against them without ever giving them a try.
So my point is: make it paid software if you want to, it sure is good enough, but give your users the abillity to test it with either a trial site (not so good, I think), nagware (a better possibility) or even a time-limited package.
Well, those are my 2 cents.
Hi Nuno–
Thanks for chiming in with these points. I think a number of people share these sentiments. A time-limit of sorts is not a bad idea, but difficult to do when you are giving people access to the source code. 🙂
I remember the trouble you went through with your linux install – thank you for your donation.
I’ve seen some software out there (for instance some blogging tools) that has a two level scheme: Free for individual users, and commercial for corporate users.
Personally, I never use anything that I can’t test for a while for free. (And I think I was one of the first people to donate $ for Tasks!)
Another option might be to make money offering Tasks as a hosted service for those who don’t want to install it themselves.
Kerim–
You were one of the first to donate (actually it was a bribe if I recall correctly 😉 ) for tasks.
I think the method I have now would work great if more people were like you in that they donated for software they are using.
Unfortunately, that hasn’t proven to be the majority case yet.
A hosted service is an excellent idea and a definite possibility, I’ve been discussing that with a friend of mine. We might put it in play once I get the multi-user version up and running.
Hi,
I’m really not sure here what the right approach is. Your products are **outstanding** and worth paying for. I do wonder about some kind of personal / commercial distinction on the license terms.
Scott
Hi Scott–
That is a good option for me to look at as well, thanks for the suggestion.
I think you need a corporate licensing strategy. Once you’ve got a multi-user version with more configuration ability, I think you’ve got a legit solutions for small-medium business. These folks have mucho cash and can likely fund you through the single man effort into the multi-man effort. This is the goal… don’t sweat donationware or the kindness of others…. corporate is where the cash is.
Downside. Corporate means some type of scalable support strategy. If someone is paying real dollars for Tasks then you’re going to have to have some type of support team that is willing to answer questions in a timely manner and with a professional demeanor. Your job is development, not support. Better said, you are more valuable writing code than answering questions… even though answering questions will give you insight into What To Do Next.
Hi rands–
Good thoughts. Installation and upgrades are something else I’d have to account for.
I like the proposed commercial licensing strategy. It still makes the software available to single users and you will get money from corporations that have money to spend.
Another option is to open the project up on something like sourceforge. That way you could get more developers to help with the projects taking some of the load off you. The only problem with this route is that sometimes the project loses some coherence and splinters. You would also probably have to share any income from the project with the other developers.
Sourceforge requires a GPL (or similar) license. I’m not ready to allow derivative works and branches at this point.
I find the comments about companies having “mucho cash” interesting – I have to fight for every dollar that I have in my budget…
However, I also understand your point about getting paid: been there, done that. I also agree with other posts about the desire to “try before I buy”.
With that in mind I think that a good demo site is a very workable solution. You might go so far as setting up an account that a client could use for say 30 or 60 days. Restrict access so they wouldn’t have to deal with other folks playing in their sandbox. If they want to buy in, send them the source as well as the DB with their current data. You can maintain control of the source, but the client can play with the real thing in a decent evaluation period – without wasted effort. Just a thought…
Having a ‘trial’ site as you describe is a very interesting idea. I like it!
In a former life I did ASP coding and we would often build a restricted site for clients to beta on. In our case we did ccustom dev work and more time and effort went into the setup. In your case the overhead should be fairly low. Additionally you should be able to get some decent feedback as to feature/bugs.
The demo of tasks looks very good, something that I am interested in exploring. I need multi-user with the ability to assign tasks to people. Also need the ability to pull reports on overdue tasks, etc. I work for a long-term care facility with a maintenance staff of 9 people who could use PDA’s and our WI-FI net – very interesting possibilities. Wish list stuff would include staff being able to submit task to “gatekeeper” who would approve/reject task without rekeying.