Jiva DeVoe wrote:
>
> To settle a dispute with someone:
>
> Would you pay for commercial software for Linux? Ie: Say, games,
> productivity applications, etc?
I would buy if there was no free (beer) alternative, and then the
price has to be low.
> If so, why does it seem that most linux commercial software ventures
> fail?
Because the margins are too thin. Look at the Windows world, with
an installed base of over 200 million computers (some statistic
I saw about two years ago). If the company can get just 1/10% of
that market, they just sold 200,000 units @ $60 each, they just
grossed $12,000,000. $12M will buy a lot of programming talent
and provide a nice return on their money.
Look at Linux, whose desktop market is about 1% of Windows'
(another statistic I saw recently). Let's say they capture
10 times as much market as the Windows product, or 10% of the
Linux Desktop users buy this thing: 2 million computers * 1% * $60,
they grossed $1,200,000, which means they will lose money,
as half of the gross goes to Production, marketing and distribution.
So they get $600K. If they pay 10 programmers for one year,
they are out of money.
To make money, they have to charge much more, and people won't
pay it. Would you pay $100 for a game that cost $40 for Windows?
I believe the keyword here is "economies of scale" and Linux
desktop software will cost more.
Of course the company can port it to Linux, use emulators (like
Corel), or write it in Java (IBM), to cut programming costs and
piggyback it onto the main market (Windows).
George
> (Distribution vendors are exempted from the above statement.)
>
> --
> Your temporary financial embarrassment will be relieved in a surprising manner.
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)