Posts
Imagine this:
Radio frequencies are scattered with the ever popular band Survivor, suspenders are still in style, and computer code is just waiting to be written. You explore the world of code and watch the debut of the internet as a way for scientists to share data and evolve from there. You consider a new way to communicate from computer to computer, like writing digital letters. What will you call it? Amail? Qmail? How about... Email? You figure your career is set, and millions will pay to use your low cost communication service. Then, 1996 rolls around and some guy from Stanford named Larry Page has an idea to create something called Google. You think "no big deal" and publish your Email program to the world.
It's no big deal.
However, soon Google creates their Email service, Gmail, and gives it away to everyone for free.
13 years later you're teaching hordes of rowdy high school gamers Java, reminiscing about the "good ol' days" as you tighten your suspenders and select "Eye of the Tiger" on your Walkman.
While this scenario is purely fictional, there is some truth to the idea behind it. Software is becoming completely free, namely thanks to Google. While the goals of the Free Software Foundation are noble, they tend to make life a bit harder for independent developers. As free software becomes more available, people expect everything to be free. Just look at the iTunes App store, reviewers seem angry and any developer who dares charge more than $0.99 for his months of coding. Worse yet, consumers become critical of free software. Look at the reviews on my first game ever with ActionScript 3.0. The user is getting the software for literally nothing, and yet yet they often are angry at the developer if it does not meet their standards.
While free software makes it nearly impossible for developers to take advantage of the consumer (no, only big companies are allowed to charge their users $999.99 for software. *cough* *cough* Adobe) it also makes it hard for the developer to earn enough to support himself.
I fear the day when everything is free, and the only money circulating through software is via advertising or worse, only goes to Microsoft, Apple, or Adobe.*
Footnotes:
*: Don't get me wrong, these are three great companies, they just make the indie developer's life a bit more interesting.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Theoretical Thursday: My Thoughts On Free Software
Posted by Brennon at 9:29 PM
Labels: computer science, Theoretical Thursday
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
My Thoughts on Free Software:
Free software works the same way as any other. If a game is priced at £10 and a better one is released for £8, then people will have higher expectation of the higher priced game. The solution is to sell the lower quality game for a lower price. The problem with free software is that, short of paying the user, you can’t show the distinction between higher and lower quality software as they are the same price.
Companies like Adobe, Microsoft and Apple can afford to be pricey because they have a pretty tight stranglehold on the market. Adobe’s products are the industry’s standard and few individuals or organisations would be able to truly function effectively without a Microsoft or Apple OS.
Cue Google riding in on a proverbial white horse to save the day and offering free and fully functional alternatives to the penny-pinchers’ software. Why use MS Office and Windows when you could use Google Docs and OS? Because ultimately, Google is the same creature in a different outfit. Though their work in promoting and supporting not-for-profit organisations can’t be ignored, Google’s myriad of free software is just another means to an end. It serves the primary purpose of filling Google’s coffers, not with money from sales, but with advertising revenues.
Google, Microsoft, Apple and Adobe all know exactly what they’re doing when they release free products. If you’ve already got a free piece of software from a company, your much more willing to pay a little so that the next thing you but will integrate nicely with your existing software. FlashPlayer’s free, why not get a copy? How do you create content that will run on this ubiquitous player? By buying Flash of course... and you’ve got iTunes huh? I’ve heard that it works really well with an iPod...
But while some may say that “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”, there is still hope. As you say, the causes of organisations such as the Free Software Foundation, the Apache Foundation and Wikipedia are indeed noble ones. Their goal is not to undercut independent developers, but to provide an alternative to the software giants’ monopoly.
The question is: How do we create a way for all these business models to coexist while still promoting innovation and independent developers?
Our indie developer has spent hours coding and testing his software; he can’t give it away for free after all that work, and anyway he needs to support himself.
He could compromise, offering a free watered-down version to fend off an open-source project while at the same time supporting himself by selling a fully featured version. But though this works to an extent, free versions are often so featureless they’re either hardly worth the effort of installing them, or else users get greedy and find a cracked version instead.
But there is hope. Just as in any market, there are those who would rather buy a high quality indie product than an inferior one for free. It is these people that our developer must sell to. If he can create something unique that meets a real need in the market then he will flourish. But how is that any different from what the software giants did in the beginning...?
Well said, but can a team of 3 or 4 indie developers compete with Adobe?
No, of course not. The Indie developers, like any other startup, must offer something different that sets them apart from competiton like Adobe. Whether it's a higher quality product, filling a gap in the market or providing excellent customer support, they must find something that makes them unique and a real alternative to a big software company.
If an Indie team releases a game that's better than the one being sold by EA Games then people will buy the game. The fortunes of Indie developers and software giants are controlled by the same market forces, just on a different scale.
Post a Comment