Meanwhile they are more than willing to spend $5 on coffee yet wouldn't consider spending $5 for software. What makes even less sense to me is that when it comes to subscription based services they seem more willing to spend their money than they are for a one time payment.
Would love to hear your thoughts as to why this is.
If the software is good to start with, it is loved, but then the developers will decide to change it. Users have very little say in this, especially when the company behind it is beholden to some other kind of power instead of their damned users. People either live with the changes or they move on. I always move on. I am merely one person, so my word doesn't mean anything. Most people live with the changes. Or the company will gain new users who don't know how good things used to be and the old users stop mattering.
Recently, there was a paid app that came out with a new version of their paid app, so they made an update that rendered the previous version useless and they offered users a coupon to buy the new one.
You can miss me with that. I'm not paying for a double cheeseburger that can become two pieces of bread with ketchup on it that's been stepped on at any given time.
$5 software? Many of such priced programs don't really do all that much, they are kind of like a plug in or widget in older programs and OSs. Unless it is fairly unique I probably wouldn't jump, just because it is usually available without costs or other strings in the open source community.
For more comprehensive programs - I've bought software and will do again. I usually use the heck out of a program I purchased for at LEAST 5 to 10 years - or longer.
I don't rent software - if I bought it I expect it to work as purchased until I decide not to use it anymore. I can understand technically it may no longer work with newer computers/OSs, but I may want to keep using version 1 on some dinosaur PC when version 20 comes out.
The software can be transferred to new machines, I bought it I want to move it from old computer X to newer computer Y, I better have a way to do it.
Don't mess with with program features with free bug-fixes/upgrades. Too many times I had a perfectly good program running when the company does some sort of upgrade or bug fix that just dropped features. Usually its some shady marketing ploy along with "Oh, you can do that along with a bunch of other stuff by buying the pro version now!" (Apple, Adobe, Microsoft) Sometimes you don't know about it until you switch systems and the only download option is the new hobbled version.
I guess the main thing is give me installation media (or a download of a full off-line installer) and product key, and I'm set. The trend to buy stuff dependent on the long-term existence of the company or their activation servers is not comforting.
App store stuff is dependent on the app store still being able to service your device over time as well as you continuing to list the item or keep it available for reinstallation.
Real world example of non techies; most successful authors stick with the same typewriter, computer, or word processor throughout their career because the device has proven it's ability and now never gets in the way of the writer putting their thoughts to paper. Their world can come crashing down when their preferred device breaks, because they have to leave the "Making money by just doing my thing" mode to "OMG I am so lost with this new crap!" mode. People don't just keep buying new versions of the same stuff, especially productive people.
My other problem is that software usage is not consistent - I may need something badly this week but never again.
I'd be paying more and for more things if there was a smooth pay-per-use micropayments solution. Load up a wallet at start of the month. Every provider has a standard pay tip button which should be as easy to integrate anywhere as a "share this on twitter" link. Click the button, enter amount, and that's that. Software, news, content websites would all benefit. I think mobile games have solved this in a way through in-app purchases.
I think there are a lot of reasons: - Many do hobby projects and aren't looking for money. Users use these hobby projects and expect all software to be free. - Software is non-tangible, so it's hard to make the value connection to it. It's not material, so why do I have to pay? - The costs are hidden. It's hard to say software is $x because it took 3 months for feature y. Those are internal implementation details that users don't see or don't understand. - It is hard to justify need. Tool z might also solve your problem, so might as well use that. It's not as straightforward as I'm hungry, I need food. Software can solve a problem in one way, but only if you see it in that way. (Generality)
Probably 80% of the software I've ever tried, I hated and never touched again. That's a bummer when you've just paid for it.
Paid software is usually a pain if you want to use it on more than one device, or when you upgrade a device.
Also, as to your original question of why people are reluctant to pay for software, it depends a lot on the software. Much of the software that people sell (e.g., a game for a phone) is less useful to me than a cup of coffee, so I wouldn't bother downloading it even if it was free. And even if your software is useful to me, it has to compete with lots of free alternatives that are very good.
There are also the security/privacy risks that comes with installing software from unknown providers. A widely used open source program would be easier to trust than an app from some random person on HN that I've never heard of.
That said, I do buy software that's useful to me. For example, I buy tax prep software every year, and I pay for e-mail (Fastmail) and a web-based RSS aggregator (Newsblur).
- knowing that there is an easily obtainable alternative (piracy) makes buying feel like being cheated/ripped off. people don't like feeling like fools, they like to think they re on top of things
- copies are free to make, so nobody is being deprived or damaged by them obtaining a copy
- programmers are generally invisible, so no emotional guilt unless the programmer themselves makes a personal plea/fundraiser
- probably no emotional value before buying. after buying, perhaps there is a certain emotional commitment to the software/game and so they are willing to spend more .
- Apple is the exception. It has social signaling value and also emotional affect, so users are primed to and willing to pay no matter what
Another reason is that it's tough to compete with free. FOSS edges out paid developer and systems tools everywhere but the high end or specialized niches, and surveillance capitalism provides a model whereby huge SaaS stacks for social media and communication can be not only offered but aggressively pushed for "free." These are not free, but the cost is quite hidden.
Lastly I think the added friction of paying, licensing, and license management is a factor. Anything that adds friction slows adoption a lot.
* Offers no refunds
* Uses planned obsolescence
* Requires terrible EULAs
* Installs intrusive DRM
* Has a bad reputation for spying on you
* Installs Adware, Malware, Bloatware
I learned a lot about buying software when I was a kid in the 90s. There was no way to know if the stuff you were buying would be any good. Then once you found out it was steaming horse poop you couldn't return it. Then when you went to uninstall, it would fail and leave junk on your computer. Also there would be "Extras" installed like AOL, NetZero, and AdWare.
Not Physical: For me personally one of the reasons that I stopped playing for game was that they stopped shipping it on real physical discs.
More informed people still pay for software.
