OS/2 Shareware BBS: 8 Other/08-Other.zip/week_1.zip/Types.txt

Text File | 1996-01-01 | 18KB | 471 lines

#: 69304 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    24-Dec-95  14:50:20
Sb: #types of innovation
Fm: Jon Duringer[IdeaFa 71732,3361
To: Esther Schindler 72241,1417 (X)

Do we have to take as given that our product is a discontinuous innovation,
with all of the marketing problems that go with that?  How can we convert a
discontinuous innovation into a continuous one, to sidestep the whole problem?

The first marketing step might be to recognize that the same product can
represent either a discontinuous or a continuous innovation, depending upon
who it is marketed to.

I'm not sure, but I think that meterware might be an example.  For existing
shareware authors it would be discontinuous, but for computer programmers who
haven't released a product yet, it might be a simple continuous innovation.

There is 1 Reply.


#: 69317 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    24-Dec-95  20:06:26
Sb: #69304-#types of innovation
Fm: Esther Schindler [EXEC] 72241,1417
To: Jon Duringer[IdeaFa 71732,3361 (X)

Personally, I suspect that almost ANYthing on a computer is a discontinuous
innovation. To be really a true continuous innovation, it has to work
similarly to the way the person did it before, with some enhancements that
make it worthwhile doing.

About the only example I can think of, off the top of my head, is the original
Quicken. It looked like the checkbook people were used to. If you already had
a computer (which was a big IF back then) it mimicked "what you knew" almost
one for one ... but it had the benefit of doing the math, and reporting, and
printing checks automatically.

I've listened to Scott Cook, the founder of Intuit, talk about the work they
put into Quicken seem THAT easy. They took a bunch of people off the street
and had them use the program, watching behind a one-way mirror. (One clue is
that they looked for what was WRONG with what they'd done, not at how good it
was; this is a common mistake for programmers who are allegedly debugging, but
it applies equally to marketing tactics.) Scott said they noticed that nearly
everyone got frustrated with lining up the checks correctly in the printer; it
was obvious (to him, I guess) that if the checks were off-center, people would
grow so frustrated that they'd not use the application.

So, despite the fact that the engine was 100% done, they went back and
completely redesigned how they loaded checks into printers. (Whatever they did
was so remarkable that they got a patent or award or something over it.) THAT
is how important the notion of making the product as "continuous" as possible.

So no, meterware is NOT an example of continuous innovation. You're telling
people who are already doing something (writing programs) to do it
differently, to change their methodology, their marketing, their distribution
methods. Don't fool yourself by pointing at the people who haven't done it yet
-- because those programmers are going to ask their buddies for advice, and
the buddy will tell the new programmer how *she* does it.

Your product is _very_ discontinuous, Jon.

--Esther

There is 1 Reply.


#: 69330 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    24-Dec-95  22:09:54
Sb: #69317-#types of innovation
Fm: Jon Duringer[IdeaFa 71732,3361
To: Esther Schindler [EXEC] 72241,1417 (X)

>> Your product is _very_ discontinuous, Jon.

Yes, you are right.  This is an example of the biggest trap in software
marketing: wishful thinking.

There is 1 Reply.


#: 69345 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    25-Dec-95  13:48:35
Sb: #69330-#types of innovation
Fm: Esther Schindler [EXEC] 72241,1417
To: Jon Duringer[IdeaFa 71732,3361 (X)

Ah yes, wishful thinking *is* a terrible trap. It reminds me of an anecdote
from another book I read a while back, about high tech venture capital. The
authors point out that a high number of technologists say, "The market is X
size, and if we get only 10% of that...." At one point there were 15 new hard
drive manufacturers being funded... ALL of which were saying that they'd
capture 10% of the market.

Look for what you're doing wrong, or for what your weaknesses are -- and then
figure out how you can fix the problems.

--Esther

There is 1 Reply.


#: 69366 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    26-Dec-95  04:47:29
Sb: #69345-types of innovation
Fm: Jon Duringer[IdeaFa 71732,3361
To: Esther Schindler [EXEC] 72241,1417

>> Look for what you're doing wrong

Ok, I'll play that game.  What is IFO doing wrong?  IFO's biggest problem is
that no meterware titles are available.  To solve that problem, we have plan A
and plan B.  Plan A is for Terry Norton to recruit computer programmers to
write some meterware.  Plan B is for me to write some meterware.

Plan B could take 24 months, so really isn't viable.  Plan A hasn't produced
any results yet.  We need to find a way to attract programmers to the concept
NOW.

I still think that the trick is to convert it from a discontinuous innovation
to a continuous innovation.  For IFO, this means finding a way to get 90% of
all OS/2 programmers to try out the toolkit, just so that they can say that
they've created a meterware program and are familiar with what is involved.

We need to make sure that the toolkit works.  Then we need to come up with
some way to get EVERY OS/2 programmer to try it.  Once they've done that,
meterware becomes a CONTINUOUS innovation, because it becomes familiar and
trivial.


#: 69377 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    26-Dec-95  11:05:15
Sb: #69366-types of innovation
Fm: GREGORY BOURASSA 76150,1166
To: Jon Duringer[IdeaFa 71732,3361 (X)

Jon:

>>finding a way to get 90% of all OS/2 programmers to try out the toolkit<<

After you've tested it, offer the toolkit to the DevCon organization.

Regards,

Greg Bourassa


#: 69384 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    26-Dec-95  11:28:36
Sb: #69366-#types of innovation
Fm: Esther Schindler [EXEC] 72241,1417
To: Jon Duringer[IdeaFa 71732,3361 (X)

Jon,

You're trying to make your discontinuous innovation into a continuous one,
which is a good idea. But I don't think it will work in this case, because you
ARE changing the method by which people will pay for software. You can't
pretend otherwise, and to attempt to do so will confuse people at the very
least.

The biggest problem you have is that it's easier for people to continue the
way they are than it is to change. You have to give them major, compelling
reasons to change, reasons *they* perceive as painful and necessary to fix.
For me with OS/2 it was "I want to be able to switch between applications and
have the machine keep running," which I phrased as "I want a Desqview that
works." That had me interested in OS/2, but within 5 minutes of seeing Golden
CommPass run, I *knew* I _had_ to get a copy of OS/2; it pointed out that I
had been in pain (no multithreading of online sessions) and hadn't even known
it.

So your problem isn't the lack of applications... it's the *reason* for the
lack of applications.

--Esther

There is 1 Reply.


#: 69422 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    26-Dec-95  17:15:47
Sb: #69384-#types of innovation
Fm: Terry Norton [IdeaFarm] 71540,3161
To: Esther Schindler [EXEC] 72241,1417 (X)

 >> you ARE changing the method by which people will pay for software.

Following Moore's definitions of continuous and discontinuous, Jon is falling
in a middle area.  The customer will still pay for software the same way they
are accustom to paying for it, such as mailing a check, or SWREG, etc.  So
that's no change for the customer, therefore it's continuous.

The discontinuous part is that the customer isn't accustom to buying software
without paying full price first.  So the present, established methods ARE
painful, especially financially, but the customers don't know this yet because
they don't know about any other method, yet.

 >> So your problem isn't the lack of applications... it's the *reason* for
 >> the lack of applications.

We've been approaching this "new way" from the author end, trying to explain
their benefits.  Perhaps it's the customer that needs to tell the authors that
the present way is painful.


Terry

There is 1 Reply.


#: 69431 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    26-Dec-95  19:24:43
Sb: #69422-#types of innovation
Fm: Guy Scharf [Sysop] 76702,557
To: Terry Norton [IdeaFarm] 71540,3161 (X)

 > Perhaps it's the customer that needs to tell the authors that the
 > present way is painful.

Ah, but do in fact customers experience that pain?  Do you have evidence of
that?

Guy


There is 1 Reply.


#: 69441 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    26-Dec-95  21:30:45
Sb: #69431-#types of innovation
Fm: Terry Norton [IdeaFarm] 71540,3161
To: Guy Scharf [Sysop] 76702,557 (X)

 >> Ah, but do in fact customers experience that pain?  Do you have
 >> evidence of that?

I don't have any evidence, just real life.  Haven't you ever wanted to buy
things, anything, but couldn't because you didn't have enough money, or credit
line?  Was it a pleasant experience, or did it feel more like it leaned toward
the "darn-it" side?

Take the poor soul that moves from one OS to another.  Any OS to any other.
Since we're talking OS/2, lets assume that Joe User hates Win95, or Windows,
or DOS, or even a Mac, and decides OS/2 is the cat's meow.  AND, And, and he
wants all new OS/2 apps to really enjoy life, since anything less is just
having to compromise, which is what he's been doing with the other OS's.  So
he opens his new Indelible Blue or SofTouch catalog to buy some software and
says "Damn.  I guess I can get this and this, and this now, but I'll have to
wait to get that and that."

Shareware is no different.  He downloads all the apps he wants (needs?).  He
starts adding up all the registration costs and says "Damn.  I guess I can
register this and ..."

Is he in pain?

If he wants to buy $500 worth of software and can only spend $300, that's sure
a pain in my book.  If, on the other hand, he's also aware that everything he
wants is available to him NOW, because the apps are all metered...

Then there's Joe User that is all set to buy that new WP app, but Murphy's Law
comes first.  Darn it all, the kid just walked in the door and says he needs
to buy hockey skates because he just joined the team. So the WP has to wait a
bit longer simply because the author couldn't see how beneficial it would be
to spend an hour to make it metered.  What a pain!


Terry [IdeaFarm] (OS2BVEN 1)  OS/2ing on 26-Dec-95 at 9:24p Vermont time

There is 1 Reply.


#: 69445 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    26-Dec-95  22:50:34
Sb: #69441-types of innovation
Fm: Guy Scharf [Sysop] 76702,557
To: Terry Norton [IdeaFarm] 71540,3161

Terry,

But the catch is that it is the CUSTOMER who must personally feel he is in
pain.  You're thinking that he is in pain doesn't fuel the purchase process.

Isn't your marketing challenge to first get the customer to perceive that
he/she is in pain, AND that your product is the solution to that discomfort?

Guy


#: 69466 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    27-Dec-95  10:46:55
Sb: #69445-types of innovation
Fm: Terry Norton [IdeaFarm] 71540,3161
To: Guy Scharf [Sysop] 76702,557 (X)

 >> Isn't your marketing challenge to first get the customer to perceive
 >> that he/she is in pain, AND that your product is the solution to that
 >> discomfort?

Exactly!

That's why I said, in my original post, that the customers are in pain, but
don't know it yet.  Since not all computer users are rich, a great deal of
computer users feel the pain of not having enough funds for all the software
they want or need.  They may be very well be accustomed to the situation, but
it's still darn inconvenient.  I intend to remind them of their pain. (For
some reason I feel like I'm in a Star Trek movie)

The best message would be for just one very popular app, that's say $40 or
more, to be available as meterware.  The more expensive the app, the stronger
the message would be.  I personally have a few of apps that are in the $300+
range.  So if I had the opportunity to get them as metered, that sure would
have sent a message to me.  It wouldn't take a rocket scientist to make a
choice such as:

"Gee, do I want to get these three $300 apps and fork over $900 immediately,
or put $50 in my meter and add to it when necessary?"

However, most shareware is $40 or less, but there's a lot.  A user may want
ten shareware apps that totally cost $250.  It doesn't take long to add up.
All you have to do is buy FM/2, PMDMatch, Hyperview, TaskBar, FontFolder, ZOC,
SpellGuard, PMPatrol,....  These are pretty basic, but were talking some money
here, especially if the user just starting with OS/2 needs these right away.

Gee, this would make a great starter pack, and if it was metered...


Terry [IdeaFarm] (OS2BVEN 1)  OS/2ing on 27-Dec-95 at 10:07a Vermont time


#: 69708 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    29-Dec-95  22:28:35
Sb: #69466-#types of innovation
Fm: Buck Bohac 70670,2352
To: Terry Norton [IdeaFarm] 71540,3161 (X)

Hi Terry,

I think that changing the way people look at things is tougher than most
imagine.

 >  Since not all computer users are rich, a great deal of computer
 > users feel the pain of not having enough funds for all the
 > software they want or need.  They may be very well be accustomed
 > to the situation, but it's still darn inconvenient.  I intend to
 > remind them of their pain.

Take me for instance.  As a potential consumer of a meterware product, my
initial reaction is that I would rather wait until I could afford the software
and then own it outright, or at least have an unlimited use license.  Metering
seems to me like paying rent.  I'd rather be in a little pain but have some
equity.  But then again, maybe I don't understand meterware.  How do you
respond to these questions?

I guess my real question is, which market should you focus on?  You are
selling directly to developers, but the end users will ultimately decide
whether or not meterware is successful or not.  Have you done any preliminary
surveys to end users?

Buck



There is 1 Reply.


#: 69814 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    31-Dec-95  16:03:45
Sb: #69708-#types of innovation
Fm: Terry Norton [IdeaFarm] 71540,3161
To: Buck Bohac 70670,2352

 >> How do you respond to these questions?
   >> unlimited use license.
   >> wait until I could afford the software
   >> own it outright
   >> have some equity.

All very good questions, and my job is to wash away the preconceived
misconceptions.

Meterware is nothing more than another way to BUY the software.  You are NOT
renting, any more than a user would be renting if he paid by credit card and
made monthly payments.  Meterware is better because:

 -the user isn't paying any credit card interest;
 -no credit line required;
 -no "pay full price" first, which shrinkwrap and, usually, shareware require;
 -no payments due monthly, whether the app is used or not.

License:
 This doesn't change.  Once again, how you decide to pay for the software:
 credit card, cash, check, precious stones, T-Bill, meter, etc., has no
bearing
 on the use license.

Own outright:
 If you save up first to buy - Say you save for 3 to 4 or more months to buy
an
 app, you pay your money and own it.  Now lets say you download a metered app
-
 you use it and reach the cap (full price) in the same 3 to 4 or more months,
 you've paid your money and own it.  Either way, you've paid the price,
there's
 no more costs, but as a metered app, you were able to use it those 3 to 4 or
 more months instead of just wishing you did.

Jon and I have been trying to excite the developers, but because of
misconceptions, and the fact that it's different, they appear to be ignoring
the potential.  Two potential areas are greatly increased user base, and as a
result, more income.

As an example, an author can sell app XYZ for $40 to 1 user and make $40.  Or
he could sell it for $10 to 4 users; or $4 to 10 users.  Either way he makes
$40.  But the users have to buy it first.

As metered, the author isn't requiring a user to pay first.  More users will
be willing to look at an app that's fully functional from the get-go.  If a
user doesn't continue to use the app, it's probably because the user has
decided he doesn't need it, or perhaps it's not as good as something else,
or..., but it won't be because the price got in the way.

I haven't seen any studies, but I'd bet there's a price "sweet spot" for
shareware.  Too much higher and sales decline due to the price to buy; too
much lower and sales decline because it's not worth the hassle.  Metering
would enlarge the "sweet spot."  The low priced apps and utilities simply are
paid for quickly and the user doesn't have to do anything except use them.
High priced apps would still be high priced, but not having to fork over all
the dough at once makes it easier to buy.

 >> Have you done any preliminary surveys to end users?

No, but I'm working on it.


Terry [IdeaFarm] (OS2BVEN 1)  OS/2ing on 31-Dec-95 at 3:15p Vermont time

There is 1 Reply.

#: 69445 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    26-Dec-95  22:50:34
Sb: #69441-types of innovation
Fm: Guy Scharf [Sysop] 76702,557
To: Terry Norton [IdeaFarm] 71540,3161

Terry,

But the catch is that it is the CUSTOMER who must personally feel he is in
pain.  You're thinking that he is in pain doesn't fuel the purchase process.

Isn't your marketing challenge to first get the customer to perceive that
he/she is in pain, AND that your product is the solution to that discomfort?

Guy


#: 69468 S20/Marketing OS/2 Apps
    27-Dec-95  11:13:55
Sb: #69445-types of innovation
Fm: Jon Duringer[IdeaFa 71732,3361
To: Guy Scharf [Sysop] 76702,557 (X)

>> PMJI.  Isn't your marketing challenge to first get the customer to perceive
that he/she is in pain, AND that your product is the solution to that
discomfort?

Yes.  That is exactly why we need to focus on getting some meterware released
rather than just talking up the concept.