How many other people do you employ? This isn't an attack, but I've seen many other projects
I run a consulting business based on free software (that is free as in
speech, not free as in beer). I have a product (VishwaKarma) that is
a free software control panel for web hosting companies. It was
originally created for a client; the deal subsequently fell through
and I enhanced it and released it under GPL.
Today I can categorically state that I have made more money from
installing and customising VishwaKarma than I could have from
marketing and selling it. A good product doesn't need too much
marketing -- word of mouth and Google are the software developer's
best friends today. I also get invited to speak at conferences about
VishwaKarma and related topics, which is a sort of indirect marketing
too.
similar in scope try to grow beyond the initial developer, and they don't all succeed.
The client, on the other hand, feels comfortable with having fullI've not come across too many clients that actually use the word 'comfortable' dealing
control over the software s/he is deploying and s/he feels that s/he
is getting the best support possible for VishwaKarma (after all, the
author knows the software best, right?).
with almost any aspect of 'free' software. It's often the opposite - they've been told
the stuff is technically better than 'closed' stuff - in many cases this is true. But it's
generally technobabble half-baked documentation and lengthy installation and/or compilation
instructions that greet them. Feeling like you're dealing with a single person who is
your only conduit into this strange new world is discomforting to many people, especially
the more technically adept who can install a CD and point/click through installing most
Windows-based software with wizards and moderalte intuitive GUIs.
If *all* we had was support revenue from the LogiCreate system - at this point - we'd
be pretty bad off. It basically just works. 2-3 phone calls or emails gets people through
the initial stages, and they're off. They don't NEED long term support, because we've
done our job making a (if I may say so) solid platform to build on.
All this while the client isDoes someone *have* 'full control' over the software if they have to keep coming
also comfortable with the (implicit) advantage that s/he isn't
dependent on me for support -- if I stop supporting the product
tomorrow, the client will be able to hire any half-way competent Perl
programmer to maintain the software, or develop the skills to do so
in-house.
back to you to have new changes put in, get training, have you install it, and rely on
you for bug fixes? They should be relying on you - after all, you're the one who wrote it.
Yes, it's 'open' and 'anyone can fix it', but you don't promote that viewpoint when you're
also selling the services yourself.
Why can't they just hire someone else in the first place then? Oh - there's an advantage
to have you - the author - work on their requests directly. So, implicitly, you're saying
that if you stopped supporting it, they'd get - at best - second rate support.
IMO writing and supporting free/libre software is a payingIf you made a good installer which handled multiple scenarios - and documented how
proposition. In your situation, off the top of my head, I can see
enough opportunities for making money out of the package that you are
proposing:
- You can consult in installing it.
to work it - you could charge money for that. That way, you could make money from
everyone.
- You can charge for extending and customising it.Those are all good ideas. However, the base point that is being glossed over - and is
- You can sell commercial licenses for use of the software in
proprietary (non-free) products a la Qt, MySQL and Berkeley DB.
- You can create industry- or vertical-specific versions of the
package (e.g. CMS for hospitals, CMS for software development houses)
and sell those wile keeping the base free. Work with industries
within which you have experience and contacts.
- You can build other products on top of your free engine and sell
those, a bit like selling a financial accounting package while giving
the database and schema away for free.
often glossed over - is mindshare. To get a name for the product, you need to have
other people using it - there are too many other packages out there already you're
competing against. To get people to use it - even the free version - you need to
support it. That takes time and money. So, develop something - give it away - spend months/years
answering questions from people who will never give you a dime but may use
your system for their own gain - simultaneously work to build vertical apps specific to
certain industries (and hope those industries don't slide into industry-wide recession).
Finally, the biggest advantage of giving away your software is anI'd say it had more to do with the control he exercises over Linux regarding quality
intangible one called `reputation' or `respect'. I agree that it is
impossible to quantify a direct monetary benefit from this quality.
The benefit exists despite being unquantifiable, however; Linus
Torvalds didn't become a millionaire by being just a good programmer,
he became one by giving Linux away free.
and features than simply the 'free' aspect to it. There are other free systems which
didn't make anyone money. It's because he was willing to play the 'dictator' role
as long as he has which has caused Linux to flourish. It's about control as much
as freedom.
Michael Kimsal
http://www.logicreate.com
734-480-9961
--
http://cms-list.org/
trim your replies for good karma.
