Regarding pricing policy of "OS4.1.7"

[Karlos]

I feel like I just fell into some alternate reality. TMHG is an OS4.1 user?

[Karlos]

@takemehomegrandma

I have an entirely serious question. Given the following, in what I assume is more or less chronological order:

1) You started off with OS4.0 in the A1 XE days
2) You had a poor experience (not atypical for the A1/OS4.0 combo)
3) You switched to MorphOS (presumably getting a Peg2 around that time)
4) You had a much better experience
5) You subsequently became one of the most vocal advocates of MorphOS, rarely missing an opportunity to point out it's superiority over OS4

Why *on earth* did you ever buy OS4.1 for the Peg2? It makes about as much sense as me buying pork chops and a crate of beer.

It really doesn't seem like a rational thing to have done for someone in your position. Long before 4.1 for Pegasos2 was ever available you'd already made the switch; I can clearly remember you advocating MorphOS long before 4.1 was available for any platform.

You said above:

I feel double-tricked, there is no way to move either forwards or backwards without either losing money already spent, or spend even more money.

While I do sympathise with the sentiment that you feel are losing out on second hand retail value, it seems like this was a situation you could (and by rights should) have avoided easily. There's an old saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

[Karlos]

Would your reaction have been the same if it had been MorphOS that had suddenly asked for 30 Euros for next update? I think many of us suspect that instead of that, you would have posted about how "MorphOS is now the cheapest, as well as the best OS" and "MorphOS is now allowing people to support their devs again after years of unpaid work!".

This.

Furthermore, there'd be nothing wrong with such a reaction. The MorphOS devs have worked hard and deserve some remuneration for their efforts. It's to their credit that they've managed to churn out so many free updates for registered users. I strongly doubt any of their userbase would complain at a paid for update, especially at a significantly reduced rate.

[Karlos]

Actually I would as it would:
- set precedent for following updates to also be paid for
- splinter the userbase into subsets running different versions of the OS

So, would you say that purchasing a license once ought to entitle the buyer for free updates for that installation indefinitely?

[Karlos]

I say with a "market" that small, thats the smartest way.

Entiltlement really isn't an issue here, but making sure that one doesn't change the rule midgame or comes around as a bunch of #### just in it for $$.

Surely that model only works as long as you continue to attract new users. It's a small community. If every halfway active amiga user today bought a license, at some point the flow of cash would dry up all together.

More to the point, it's hard to "be in it for the $$" in a market this small. Be realistic

[Karlos]

@Karlos
a) there are no new users to be gained in significant number
b) there are no new users to be gained in significant number

This only strengthens the argument *for* paid for updates. Once you exhaust all the new user registrations, all you have is unpaid support forever and nothing to cover costs. That means that either the covering of costs was never an issue (in which case the registration charge itself is an unnecessary charge) or something else has to change. Which implies one of the following:

1) All major (non contribution) development ceases because costs are no longer covered.
2) Future updates become chargeable in order to cover costs.
3) You adopt a donation based strategy in order to cover costs.
4) You bite the bullet and go free and or open source because covering costs isn't actually an issue in the first place.

[Karlos]

1) what cost are there ?

If there aren't any, then the registration charge, which is not insignificant, itself is unnecessary. I'm assuming there must be, because there is a registration charge, which you need to pay for each system it's installed on. Furthermore there are rules dictating how an existing license is transferred if your hardware dies. All of which implies the registration charge is necessary, or why go to that much effort to ensure users pay it?

With some smart and frugal accounting the sums collected for the initial licence can go a mighty long way

And then run out. And then what?

[Karlos]

Instead of selling updates you can sell more computers to existing users. Already have PowerMac, PowerBook and iBook? No problem, G5 is all you want

I can well imagine my wife's reaction to that ;-) But even if you were at least partially successful in that, once every user has saturated their collection as far as they can, then what?

I've no doubt that MorphOS development has reasonably low overheads (especially given the entirely electronic distribution), that the core developers all have regular work aside from working on MorphOS and that many of the developers/contributors do so as a labour of love. However, at some point, the money raised from end user registrations will die off (of course, old amiga users from many years ago might join in). Hosting / bandwidth will still have to be paid for. Replacement systems for developers will still need purchasing if/when they break down. Other, unforeseen expenses crop up all the time.