"Free" and "pro" versions

  • Thread starter Thread starter fjghdhg
  • Start date Start date
F

fjghdhg

I'm writing an app I intend to sell. Would a version with a few
restrictions be classed as freeware? My concept is: the only
difference between "free" and "pro" is that the "free" one would
not support as many user-definable commands as the pro. Compare
to a macro app: a "free" one might support only F1-F12 keys, but
the "pro" version might support all keyboard keys. So if I have
a version of my app that doesn't support as many items, is that
still okay to call "free"?

From what I've seen here, that's okay by you guys. I've seen
other apps here that act similarly (restrictions on free, with
an option to purchase pro, with the free getting big kudos here
and recommended often).
 
I'm writing an app I intend to sell. Would a version with a few
restrictions be classed as freeware? My concept is: the only
difference between "free" and "pro" is that the "free" one would
not support as many user-definable commands as the pro. Compare
to a macro app: a "free" one might support only F1-F12 keys, but
the "pro" version might support all keyboard keys. So if I have
a version of my app that doesn't support as many items, is that
still okay to call "free"?

From what I've seen here, that's okay by you guys. I've seen
other apps here that act similarly (restrictions on free, with
an option to purchase pro, with the free getting big kudos here
and recommended often).
Click to expand...

Crippleware IMO.
 
I'm writing an app I intend to sell. Would a version with a few
restrictions be classed as freeware? My concept is: the only
difference between "free" and "pro" is that the "free" one would
not support as many user-definable commands as the pro. Compare
to a macro app: a "free" one might support only F1-F12 keys, but
the "pro" version might support all keyboard keys. So if I have
a version of my app that doesn't support as many items, is that
still okay to call "free"?

From what I've seen here, that's okay by you guys. I've seen
other apps here that act similarly (restrictions on free, with
an option to purchase pro, with the free getting big kudos here
and recommended often).
Click to expand...
According to what is generally accepted here(Big emphasis on Generally),
your free version would not be considered freeware. It would fall under
crippleware, which depending on the app and its use would again be
suitable to some here.
Consider this: Make your app available to acf posters who would test it
for you extensively and you could then go shareware at a later point in
time when all bugs are identified. You get free testing and the testers
would ask for a free copy of your app. This would satisfy some here,
save the freeware purists who cringe at the thought of shareware on
their pc.
Best,
POKO
--
P. Keenan - Webmaster
Web Page Design
Manitoulin Island, Canada
http://manitoulinislandwebdesign.it-mate.co.uk/
(e-mail address removed)
 
POKO said:
According to what is generally accepted here(Big emphasis on
Generally), your free version would not be considered freeware. It
would fall under crippleware
Click to expand...

No, crippleware is when something doesn't work at all in the free
version, but does in the paid. Nothing would be crippled in my
app; it just wouldn't support as many commands. Again, take a
macro app as an example: a free one might support 50 macros, but
the paid would be unlimited. I've seen such restrictions posted
here with no objections by anyone -- take TMPGEnc for example,
which is free but you can pay to get more features (MPEG2 support).
 
fjghdhg said:
No, crippleware is when something doesn't work at all in the free
version, but does in the paid. Nothing would be crippled in my
app; it just wouldn't support as many commands. Again, take a
macro app as an example: a free one might support 50 macros, but
the paid would be unlimited. I've seen such restrictions posted
here with no objections by anyone -- take TMPGEnc for example,
which is free but you can pay to get more features (MPEG2 support).
Click to expand...

1. I think you are to be commended, both for wanting to offer something for
nothing and asking here for opinions. I wouldn't call it crippleware
either.

2. My observation is that many in this group are exceedingly anal about
"free"...they would really like you (or others) to spend countless hours
creating a piece of software that answers their every desire, give it to
them free, respond immediately to their problems when they screw up because
they didn't read the help file and provide them with an annuity for their
old age because they foolishly spent every dime they saved by paying zip for
software.

So there :Þ

--
dadiOH
_____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.0...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
____________________________
 
dadiOH said:
2. My observation is that many in this group are exceedingly anal
about "free"...they would really like you (or others) to spend
countless hours creating a piece of software that answers their every
desire, give it to them free
Click to expand...

I'm starting to think the same. Like I said, I've seen lots of apps
recommended here that are "free" but with a paid "pro" version, so
it beats me why two responses so far are calling mine "crippleware".

Another popular example here is Mail Washer. It has a dumbed-down
"free" version AND a paid "pro" version. Why is that, and TMPGEnc,
both free of the "crippleware" tag but my suggestion is not?
 
I'm starting to think the same. Like I said, I've seen lots of
apps recommended here that are "free" but with a paid "pro"
version, so it beats me why two responses so far are calling mine
"crippleware".
Click to expand...

Add a third, but I'm one of those who doesn't draw a distinction
between crippleware and liteware. If you make the free, watered-down
version of your app useful enough, people here will use and recommend
it.
 
fjghdhg said:
I'm writing an app I intend to sell. Would a version with a few
restrictions be classed as freeware? My concept is: the only
difference between "free" and "pro" is that the "free" one would
not support as many user-definable commands as the pro. Compare
to a macro app: a "free" one might support only F1-F12 keys, but
the "pro" version might support all keyboard keys. So if I have
a version of my app that doesn't support as many items, is that
still okay to call "free"?

From what I've seen here, that's okay by you guys. I've seen
other apps here that act similarly (restrictions on free, with
an option to purchase pro, with the free getting big kudos here
and recommended often).
Click to expand...

IMO,



A ‘lighter’ version of a program can be considered freeware if:



1) There is no sign of functionality that can not be used.

2) All functionality, basic to the function of the program is amiable

3) The differences between the ‘lite’ and the ‘full’ version is not too
much.



1)

If you would make the freeware version a part of the full version (iow:
disable some parts of the full version and then recompile it as a light
version) I would consider the program.



For a program to be considered freeware, I think all menu items and options
should be available. Any functions from the full version that does not work
in the light version should not be present (neither in the code, nor in the
documentation) With the possible exception of mentioning you can buy a full
version in the documentation (but only once or twice) and maybe in the about
box. Any more I’d consider Nagware or Crippleware.





2)

the users of a freeware application will expect that any basic functionality
will be available.

If you would create a photo editing program, but the light version will not
be able to save as a normal JPG file, it will be considered crippleware or
demo, since all other packages, even the-one-who-is-not-to-be-named
(regulars will know) can save an image as JPG.



3)

If you have written the best program ever (witch you do, of course), and you
are offering a lite version of it, this lite version should be an acceptable
representation of the full version. (or call it a whole different program).





All with all, I find

Topstyle lite (http://www.bradsoft.com/) to bee a good example of a lite
ware I would actually consider freeware:

They have written a separate lite version, you can download and use without
restriction (well for personal use that is). They only have a separate
chapter in the help file referring to their pro version.
It has all features a beginner or intermediate user wants in the program.
The ‘pro’ version features some advanced functionality witch would not be
missed by most users.

Still, Topstyle lite gives a good feeling about the use and features of the
pro version



Just my 2 cents
--

http://www.it-hulp.nl/
http://fotoalbum.it-hulp.nl/

gmx.net is the mailserver of mightykitten
start subject with *ping* or the antispam monster will eat it.
 
No, crippleware is when something doesn't work at all in the free
version, but does in the paid. Nothing would be crippled in my
app; it just wouldn't support as many commands. Again, take a
macro app as an example: a free one might support 50 macros, but
the paid would be unlimited. I've seen such restrictions posted
here with no objections by anyone -- take TMPGEnc for example,
which is free but you can pay to get more features (MPEG2 support).
Click to expand...
If your "Free" program isn't severely limited, and just doesn't
support as many *commands*. Then you might want to classify it
as a "Lite version" and your other the "Pro version"
 
were I you, I'd just go ahead and not worry too much what the anals or
anoraks think ~ if it's good software, people will use it and spread the
word.
 
fjghdhg said:
No, crippleware is when something doesn't work at all in the free
version, but does in the paid. Nothing would be crippled in my
app; it just wouldn't support as many commands. Again, take a
macro app as an example: a free one might support 50 macros, but
the paid would be unlimited. I've seen such restrictions posted
here with no objections by anyone -- take TMPGEnc for example,
which is free but you can pay to get more features (MPEG2 support).
Click to expand...

I think you are quite right. There are loads of 'lite' apps discussed in
this group and the difference between 'liteware' and 'crippleware' is so
often a question of semantics... or whether a lite build offers the
functionality that a purist requires. :-)
 
fjghdhg said:
I'm writing an app I intend to sell. Would a version with a few
restrictions be classed as freeware?
Click to expand...

No. It would be "liteware" or "crippleware." Which it is depends on
two things:

1. are the restrictions of critical functions or not (i.e. is the
freeware version still useful)

2. how the "pro" version is promoted within the lite version.
My concept is: the only
difference between "free" and "pro" is that the "free" one would
not support as many user-definable commands as the pro. Compare
to a macro app: a "free" one might support only F1-F12 keys, but
the "pro" version might support all keyboard keys. So if I have
a version of my app that doesn't support as many items, is that
still okay to call "free"?
Click to expand...

I'd call it lite. Tweaking the definition of freeware in order to
promote a more feature laden version that costs money is an example of
the "hidden agendas" I've been warning this group about for years.
From what I've seen here, that's okay by you guys.
Click to expand...

Not if you call it freeware. It wouldn't be. It would be "liteware" or
"crippleware."
I've seen
other apps here that act similarly (restrictions on free, with
an option to purchase pro, with the free getting big kudos here
and recommended often).
Click to expand...

Recommending pro versions that cost money is off topic and unwelcome here.
 
I'm writing an app I intend to sell. Would a version with a few
restrictions be classed as freeware? My concept is: the only
difference between "free" and "pro" is that the "free" one would
not support as many user-definable commands as the pro. Compare
to a macro app: a "free" one might support only F1-F12 keys, but
the "pro" version might support all keyboard keys. So if I have
a version of my app that doesn't support as many items, is that
still okay to call "free"?

From what I've seen here, that's okay by you guys. I've seen
other apps here that act similarly (restrictions on free, with
an option to purchase pro, with the free getting big kudos here
and recommended often).
Click to expand...

G'day mate,

From what I've seen of some of the followups to this question of
yours, I suggest you release your free "crippleware" under a
different name, then everyone will be happy. ;-)


Cheers, Phred.
 
fjghdhg said:
I'm writing an app I intend to sell. Would a version with a few
restrictions be classed as freeware? My concept is: the only
difference between "free" and "pro" is that the "free" one would
not support as many user-definable commands as the pro. Compare
to a macro app: a "free" one might support only F1-F12 keys, but
the "pro" version might support all keyboard keys. So if I have
a version of my app that doesn't support as many items, is that
still okay to call "free"?

From what I've seen here, that's okay by you guys. I've seen
other apps here that act similarly (restrictions on free, with
an option to purchase pro, with the free getting big kudos here
and recommended often).
Click to expand...

Could it be called freeware?...... definately not

Could it be called crippleware?..... yes

Could it be called "lite" ware?..... yes

In my opinion, I make no distinction between "liteware" and "crippleware"
(they're the same thing IMHO), but thats just me (I tend to be extremely
picky when it comes to what I do and do not class as freeware).

--

Regards

Steven Burn
Ur I.T. Mate Group
www.it-mate.co.uk

Keeping it FREE!
 
MightyKitten said:
IMO,
A ‘lighter’ version of a program can be considered freeware if:
1) There is no sign of functionality that can not be used.
2) All functionality, basic to the function of the program is amiable
Click to expand...
1)
If you would make the freeware version a part of the full version (iow:
disable some parts of the full version and then recompile it as a light
version) I would consider the program.

For a program to be considered freeware, I think all menu items and options
should be available. Any functions from the full version that does not work
in the light version should not be present (neither in the code, nor in the
documentation) With the possible exception of mentioning you can buy a full
version in the documentation (but only once or twice) and maybe in the about
box. Any more I’d consider Nagware or Crippleware.
2)
the users of a freeware application will expect that any basic functionality
will be available.
If you would create a photo editing program, but the light version will not
be able to save as a normal JPG file, it will be considered crippleware or
demo, since all other packages, even the-one-who-is-not-to-be-named
(regulars will know) can save an image as JPG.
Click to expand...

One of these 'I agree' posts....
But I will emphazise the Nagware aspect. Be moderate on the advertising
of the 'pro' version. Almost nothing is more irritating that big nag
boxes....

regards
 
John said:
Recommending pro versions that cost money is off topic and unwelcome
Click to expand...

Explain why TMPGEnc and MailWasher get regular recommendations here,
as both of these are "free" and "pro" as I intend my app to be.
 
fjghdhg said:
Explain why TMPGEnc and MailWasher get regular recommendations here,
as both of these are "free" and "pro" as I intend my app to be.
Click to expand...

Thats an easy one......

...... because some people aren't as "strict" (for want of a better word)
when it comes to defining freeware, as the rest of us are.

--

Regards

Steven Burn
Ur I.T. Mate Group
www.it-mate.co.uk

Keeping it FREE!
 
fjghdhg said:
No, crippleware is when something doesn't work at all in the free
version, but does in the paid. Nothing would be crippled in my
app; it just wouldn't support as many commands. Again, take a
macro app as an example: a free one might support 50 macros, but
the paid would be unlimited. I've seen such restrictions posted
here with no objections by anyone -- take TMPGEnc for example,
which is free but you can pay to get more features (MPEG2 support).
Click to expand...

This is my opinion on the subject. To be thought of (by me) as a
generous person, and to be paid for writing good software, if that is
your goal, I feel you can do one of four things:
1. Require users to pay for phone support / guaranteed response
email support.
2. Mention subtly, only if they go looking for it in your about,
help, or readme, that you would appreciate, but not require donations.
(Most authors complain this is not very effective).
3. Require only corporate users to pay.
4. Get hired by a big company because they have seen the program as
an example of what a great programmer you are.

If you cripple software, demand that people pay, annoy them with ads,
then I will not feel you are being generous- it makes you no different
than AOL or Microsoft.
The difference is about being on the same side as the users, not their
opposition.
If you are limiting your program in any way, the goal is to ANNOY
someone enough that they feel forced to pay. Likewise with nag boxes.
It may start out subtle, with one or two disabled features, but after
enough years of you not getting the income you feel you deserve, you
may start disabling more and more, adding more and more nags.
When do I feel a program is crippleware ? - The answer is, when I have
a desire to use those missing / limited features. If I never want
them, then I won't feel it is crippled - but on the other hand, I
won't have any added incentive to buy based on them being missing.
The only way limiting or disabling features can help you, the author,
is if the lack of those features is a major inconvenience to someone.
And, if you are not careful, instead of paying, they will say, f this,
and will find another choice.

But if your only motivation to write software is to hope to make
money, then I doubt you will succeed and I suggest you find a better
way of spending your time. People who don't enjoy what they do, but
are just thinking about the paycheck, usually do very sloppy work.
 
fjghdhg said:
Explain why TMPGEnc and MailWasher get regular recommendations here,
as both of these are "free" and "pro" as I intend my app to be.
Click to expand...

John is quite strict in his definition of freeware. I dare to say, without
checking, he has never said these programs are freeware.

The word 'freeware' is very subjective, and is topic of many discussions in
this group. John is quite stickt in his definitions. Though not appriciated
by all, I think his view is a good callibration point, and therefore quite
valuable.

Myself, I'm less strick about what is freeware, but I also have my
limitations. For me, ther is a very thin, but very clear (at least in my
head) line between crippleware and liteware. As I've written before in this
tread, one of those aspects is 'lite'ware being seperated from the 'pro'
version.

Pleasign all members of this group is... well... impossible...

MightyKitten

--

http://www.it-hulp.nl/
http://fotoalbum.it-hulp.nl/

gmx.net is the mailserver of mightykitten
start subject with *ping* or the antispam monster will eat it.
 
Explain why TMPGEnc and MailWasher get regular recommendations here, as
both of these are "free" and "pro" as I intend my app to be.
Click to expand...

The version of MailWasher on the Pricelessware list is the last uncrippled
version.
My understanding is that the licencing terms for MPEG-2 require payment of
a fee for each user. When this fact was bought to the attention of the
developers of TMPGEnc they dropped support for MPEG-2 in the free version,
makes sense really.
TMPGEnc ver 12a (with MPEG-2) is still available for
download, although not listed on the Pricelessware list.
So both programs are freeware, aren't they?
 
Back
Top