3 ms·

as you say, its about fighting users that have their mind set on stealing. the vast majority of people who actively steal your application have the mindset to

by noodle 18y ago

as you say, its about fighting users that have their mind set on stealing. the vast majority of people who actively steal your application have the mindset to steal it, and almost definitely wouldn't have paid you anyway. the point i'm trying to make is that the subset of people who are actively looking to steal your application is smaller than the subset of people who will passively steal it by not registering it as commercial. you're providing the "do you want to steal this application?" button straight away yourself, making anyone, whether their mind was set on stealing or not, have to actually make that choice. if you're looking to make money off of this, why would you even give your users that option?

huhtenberg 18y ago
> the subset of people who are actively looking to steal your application is smaller than the subset of people who will passively steal it by not registering it as commercial Well, yeah, I hear you. Your conjecture is exactly what I'd like to validate. My guess is that it's not that much smaller and that a commercial trialing period may steer passive stealing crowd towards buying. Consider the case when a user is super happy with the application, the purchasing process is streamlined and he can in fact afford buying it. Do you think lots of people would cheat ? Especially considering he's a commercial user and the $$ come from company's pocket.
- noodle 18y ago
  i don't necessarily think a lot of people will cheat, but i think you're lumping two different types of trust into one. the one trust is trust that your users won't steal your stuff -- trust that they won't actively look to break the license. the second trust is the trust that your users will not be lazy or incompetent -- trust that they won't passively or accidentally break the license. with both personal/commercial licenses and lite/pro licenses, the people who break the first type of trust will always exist. you'll have your pirates and thieves no matter what. however, only with the personal/commercial licenses will you have the second group. only with personal/commercial licenses can you break the license without actively looking to do evil.
  - huhtenberg 18y ago
    It's a good deconstruction of the problem. I agree with the split. There are two things I am counting on: 1. Having just a single product is simpler to understand and thus it may result in a larger user base. And so this difference would compensate for the presence of opportunistic/passive cheaters. 2. Parts of both passive and active cheaters are going to be swayed towards buying if left alone for a while. Partly because of an expression of a "good will" on developer's part, which causes some people to simply reciprocate. Having further thought about this, I think it might help to have one or two features under a commercial license. Something that's very easy to understand and that is in fact useful only in a commercial setup. Like an access to a tech support. In any case - thanks for your input, it was useful and interesting. Gave me some stuff to mull over.

by noodle 18y ago

huhtenberg 18y ago

> the subset of people who are actively looking to steal your application is smaller than the subset of people who will passively steal it by not registering it as commercial Well, yeah, I hear you. Your conjecture is exactly what I'd like to validate. My guess is that it's not that much smaller and that a commercial trialing period may steer passive stealing crowd towards buying. Consider the case when a user is super happy with the application, the purchasing process is streamlined and he can in fact afford buying it. Do you think lots of people would cheat ? Especially considering he's a commercial user and the $$ come from company's pocket.

noodle 18y ago
i don't necessarily think a lot of people will cheat, but i think you're lumping two different types of trust into one. the one trust is trust that your users won't steal your stuff -- trust that they won't actively look to break the license. the second trust is the trust that your users will not be lazy or incompetent -- trust that they won't passively or accidentally break the license. with both personal/commercial licenses and lite/pro licenses, the people who break the first type of trust will always exist. you'll have your pirates and thieves no matter what. however, only with the personal/commercial licenses will you have the second group. only with personal/commercial licenses can you break the license without actively looking to do evil.
- huhtenberg 18y ago
  It's a good deconstruction of the problem. I agree with the split. There are two things I am counting on: 1. Having just a single product is simpler to understand and thus it may result in a larger user base. And so this difference would compensate for the presence of opportunistic/passive cheaters. 2. Parts of both passive and active cheaters are going to be swayed towards buying if left alone for a while. Partly because of an expression of a "good will" on developer's part, which causes some people to simply reciprocate. Having further thought about this, I think it might help to have one or two features under a commercial license. Something that's very easy to understand and that is in fact useful only in a commercial setup. Like an access to a tech support. In any case - thanks for your input, it was useful and interesting. Gave me some stuff to mull over.