Slashdot Mirror
How Do You Sell Linux Software?
smelroy asks: "My software company recently released a Linux port of our business instant messaging product, but we are not sure of the best way to sell it, since to many people selling Linux software is an oxymoron. Users on each end of the computer knowledge spectrum associate any and everything Linux with free. Even when we tried to get people to beta test it for us they said, 'It runs on Linux so why isn't it free?' Another comment from a reporter in response to our telling him of our Linux release was 'So it is open source then right?' So my question to the Slashdot community is when is Linux going to be prevalent enough on the desktop that people will pay for applications and not always assume they are free? Better yet, where are the people who feel that way now?"
Maybe the problem is that the world doesn't need yet another proprietary instant messaging platform.
No offense, but IM is infrastructure that should be under control of a standards body, or at the very least open source and distributed, not jealously guarded by a bunch of companies each with their own extremely evil EULA.
Perhaps your customers rightly recognize this state of affairs. I know I do, and that's why I prefer Jabber for IM.
I and the people I work with purchase all kinds of linux software, from development tools to high-end graphics applications, to games. Perhaps your problem isn't linux, it's your product.
Perhaps you could release a scaled down version of the product for free to help garner interest and produce another version with more bells and whistles for sale. Also, I think the traditional model for making money off of "free" software is to charge money for support and services associated with implementing, running and maintaining it.
Just my 2 cents.
Co-founder and designer at Music Nearby: http://musicnearby.com
Oh please. First, closed-source does not have to be "payware" and open-source does not have to be free (as in beer). Second, there are many application fields where open-source and freeware still have a long way to go before they even catch up with the commercial software world. Paying for software does have its place. For example, just because you can get by with GIMP doesn't mean Photoshop isn't more cost-effective in a business situation. In some fields, open source is at a significant advantage, most notably security/encryption, but generalizing that to all applications is simply wrong.
I use Linux at home exclusively and as much as I am able to at work, but I don't have any problem with paying for a product that performs well and is well engineered.
Given the nature of the way things work in the Linux world though, If you are trying to sell me a product that already exists in open form, it had better be much better designed or supported than open source alternatives. It had better have good documentation too, or I'll just puzzle through the piss-poor excuse for documentation that comes with many (if not most) open source projects instead.
This is an ex-parrot!
If there is a compelling reason to do so. Lots of people have bought programs like Oracle or VMWare for Linux.
Expecting to sell an instant messenger to anyone is a different story. You have low-to-no cost competition from Lotus, Microsoft Exchange and Jabber.
Instant messenging is a mature product that has already begun to consolidate into a few big players.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
Make Good Linux Software?
Do I prefer to pay money for good software rather than use some buggy unsupported hack? Hell yeah.
Problem is, there's a lot of good, free, open source software for Linux. If you want to sell something to that crowd, it better be damn good.
Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
Perhaps is the server AND the client were available for GNU/linux you'd have a better chance.
Also providing a cut down 'free for ever' version would help get it through the front door.
???
Users on each end of the computer knowledge spectrum associate any and everything Linux with free. Even when we tried to get people to beta test it for us they said, 'It runs on Linux so why isn't it free?' Another comment from a reporter in response to our telling him of our Linux release was 'So it is open source then right?
I think this might be an "urban legend", or perhaps your choice of sample for your researched was biased in some unintentional way. For example, Oracle is available on Linux, and it's very much a pay-for product. Oracle, as far as I know, haven't come under any serious pressure to make the Linux version free (speech or beer) - at least not any freer than it is on any other platform. I don't think anyone seriously expects MATLAB or Houdini or any other serious application to be free on Linux either.
If you face any expectation of no-cost it's most likely because MSN, ICQ, AIM and all the rest are free. You're better off positioning your product as something other than IM/chat and selling it on what it does that free chat doesn't.