I read a news announcement about a new freeware program that does some cool stuff. I check it out and it is vastly superior to an existing freeware program. Yet when I read the comments, the new, superior freeware program is being flamed. Why? Because the guy making it also offers a for-pay version that has more features.
I check out the forums of a game I enjoy playing. Normally people are singing the praises of this game. Now, the forum is full of flaming and angst. Why? Because the developer started offering optional premium content for players if they want.
Let me tell those complainers a truth about life: Money is exchanged for goods and services.
Before the current generation of l33t-speaking complainers became the norm on the net, we had a concept called shareware. Someone would make something cool and offer a version of it to try. This version might time out or it might have fewer features or it might just work on the honor system. If users liked it, they bought it. End of story.
Nowadays, we have it better. People make free stuff and release it. No nags. No missing features when compared to other "free" competitors. No time outs. But the developers will also release an even better version. And the complainers get vocal.
What annoys me is that the whiners are attempting to bully people from making stuff that many people like me want. I don't live with my mom in her basement. I don't begrudge paying a few dollars to someone who made something I want. I recognize that I already pay $80 a month for my cell phone and $60 a month for cable so bitching about paying $9 to $20 for something I want is pretty ridiculous.
And I certainly recognize that the mere existence of premium stuff doesn't hurt me. If I want it, I'll pay for it. If I don't, I won't.
Let me give you two examples:
The program ObjectDock is the best dock out there. We make it so I'm biased but it has far more features than any dock out there. It's also free. You want a cool dock on Windows, this is what you get. But there is also ObjectDock Plus. It's $20 but adds a ton of features like tabbed docks. And so what do people say? They'll say that ObjectDock is "payware" or "crippleware". Why? Because a non-free improved version exists.
Similarly, I love Team Fortress 2. It is a great game. And you know what? If Valve created a new character I could play as for say $10 I'd buy it in an instant. I want more characters in TF2 to play as. But you know the reaction they'd get. They'd probably get flamed because the parasite-class would argue that they should get that for free because buying something once to them means that the developers are perpetual slaves to them after.
I understand that we all want to keep from getting nickled and dimed but one assumes that we can make our own judgments as to whether something is worth it or not and allow others to make the same judgment.
Unfortunately one of the problems in our society today is that the most vocal people are often the most negative. If people can complain they will. If someone is satisfied though then little is heard from them. The thing is the complains end up seeming to outnumber the satisfied ones but I know that is rarely true.
So as a company you need to remember that there is more than one guage of a products success. You gotta learn to ignore the complainers (which isn't easy) and only pay attention those who provide valid constructive criticism.
Having to pay for product or service should be expected, and we should be glad when its free. Too often these days people feel entitled to stuff because so much is given away or there is a false impression it is being given away due to the ease of illegal downloading (just an example).
The companies that strive to provide what the people want are successful, Stardock is proof of that. Those who disagree can go find some other solution that may be free for everything but where to they go when something goes wrong or they want a new feature? Nowhere because they have no voice, money is your voice.
What I envy most about Draginol [nick as used here] is his 'privilege of position', aka 'CEO'. A position that has the option to 'speak one's mind' and damn the [commercial] repercussions [if any].
As CEO, customers are HIS. He can use/abuse/misuse to his heart's content, and since 'the buck stops here' with him all is well.
People who are NOT CEO have a duty of care [not to these 'customers', but to the CEO/Employer] to not precipitate any action that might have repercussions.
Over the past 7 years here I've seen much of the same angst-ridden tirades against Stardock's modus opperandi but am rarely afforded the opportunity to just say 'STFU'. Instead there's the traditional time-honoured process of arguing/defending/supporting "the Stardock side" of the coin...and with absolute certainty be labelled a 'Stardock Fanboi' [implying mindless parrotting of blind support of nefarious validity]....
The label 'unprofessional conduct' comes from the same antiquated tenet as 'the customer is always right'. Both are conditional statements open to wild disparities of interpretation. More often than not, 'professional conduct' is something that is not unlawful or legislated against.....otherwise anything is acceptable.
And 'the customer is always of the opinion that he is right' is sadly MORE correct...[maybe someone somewhere just abreviated it one time...and it kinda 'stuck']...
I definitely care about customers. They pay my salary after all. But I don't think a customer has the right to tell me what I can and can't say.
I.e. I respect people who buy a product or service based on the merits of that product or service. I have less respect for those who make purchasing decisions based tangential issues (like whether the CEO posts "professionally").
The Redone UP would be a $9.95 type thing and the redone events/political system would be a second $9.95.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
