This is the result of a poll of shareware authors regarding the writing and publishing of shareware.
Because to the small number of respondents to the survey (approximately 20), the results cannot be considered statistically accurate. Also because of the small number I found it necessary as the editor to not include some responses which were clearly not in line with the general trend of the data and would have skewed the results into meaninglessness. What follows is, I believe, a good picture of the shareware field.
The number following each question is the numerical average of the responses. The numbers in parentheses are the minimum and maximum responses. Text in quotations are comments by the respondents.
Disclaimer: The comments express the opinions of the participants of the survey and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editor or of Soft•Lab.
1) How many shareware programs have you authored?: 4 (1 min, 15 max)
2) How many freeware programs have you authored?: 4 (0 min, 20 max)
3) How many commercial programs have you authored?: 1 (0 min, 4 max)
4) What shareware fee range do you ask for your programs?: $15 ($10 min, $30 max)
5) How many people have paid shareware fees for your programs (total for all non-commercial programs)?: 234 (4 min, 1500 max)
7) Your estimate of the number of people using your shareware programs: 12,000 (200 min, 100,000 max)
8) Your estimate of the percentage of people using your shareware programs who actually pay the shareware fees: 4% (1% min, 10% max)
Breakdown: Usage Responses
1% 40%
2% 25%
3% 5%
10% 30%
(Essentially the authors polled are split between 1 to 2% and 10%. The editor's experience tends to support the lower number; in fact, I tend to think that it is high.)
9) Your estimate of the total shareware fees you would have received if all users of your shareware were to pay the appropriate fee: $98,800 ($3,000 min, $1,000,000 max)
"$8000 or more. It would mean a new Mac, that's for sure."
10) Are shareware payments your main source of income?: No
"Well, a good half of it. The other (bigger!) half being commercial programs."
"No, I couldn't survive, and these are good programs, I think!?"
11) Do you depend on shareware payments in any other way (putting yourself through school, a budget for buying software, etc.)?: 50% Yes 50% No
"Yes, it pays for development software, manuals, etc."
"Yup! Paying for college!"
"Yes. New hardware & software."
"Beer money...I'm a programmer, right?"
"Yes (buying hardware and software)."
"It's become my "blank disk" fund."
12) Why do you write shareware (as opposed to freeware or commercial programs)?:
"I can get reimbursed for my efforts while giving good value to customers."
"It's a good way to get stuff out there."
"I enjoy having total control of the product, you don't have the hassles of dealing with a publishing firm, and it's a nice utopian concept. There are enough cynics in the world."
"Author receives a small portion of total revenues in a commercial program."
"The shareware cost, in my humble opinion, was to raise the value of the program in the eyes of others---if it is free, it cannot be good, is the attitude of some. It is also exciting to receive even a small cheque in the mail, though."
13) What is your opinion about the shareware system:
"A noble failure."
"Of course it doesn't work!"
"It beats not getting any money..."
"It's a nice system."
"I like it (although I wish more people paid for it). Without it, we never would see a lot of great and useful programs."
"Use "demoware" for all stuff not often used or highly specialized. PROVIDE SUPPORT TO YOUR CUSTOMERS!"
"The system has been abused, both by users AND by developers. It originally started out as a commercial venture with a non-commercial distribution medium; now every greedy kid makes their little "hack" shareware."
"One program had over 150 downloads from one major service - not a single payment!"
"It's good but even Ray Lau doesn't make a living!"
"Nice way to distribute software. Too bad we authors depend so much on the honesty of the users."
"IT SUCKS."
"I think that it can work, given two or three essential items:
i) Ease of distribution, i.e., electronic via commercial bulletin boards, local BBSs, Internet, etc."
ii) It is the type of program one uses more than once or twice: I think the attitude that "I only used it twice, and shall not anymore, so why should I pay?", is not unreasonable or uncommon. (No matter how important a job was completed with the software that one or two times.) If one is always using it, guilt will make most of the lazier users pay up in the end."
iii) Continuing support in form of enhancements or information. This makes the user feel that someone deserves some remuneration for the work. I think most Red Ryder users (Macintosh terminal emulation) paid up for their copies."
14) How do you feel about the shareware distribution companies (Educorp, Public Domain Exchange, etc.)?:
"I'm not too fond of them."
"A necessary evil."
"I think they're a very good idea."
"Learn how to play their game (i.e. Demoware)."
"Some are reputable, and look out for the authors (e.g. Somak Software); others (e.g. EduCorp) don't seem to care."
"Somewhat redundant in their function (distributing software) when you think about on-line services or user groups."
"I find them one of the better sources of how my programs are distributed. They are fair."
"I gave Educorp permission to distribute my program on their disks. I think they help get one's products to those customers without BBS or Internet access. "I've ordered from them before I got my modem. I see them as beneficial to the users who don't have modems, or decent local networks, but I don't see how THEY sleep at night. Of course they do it for a profit at our expense. Hey, for the beginning author, it gets us exposure. I do think it inhibits the users from sending in shareware fees ('Hey, I already paid for it.')."
"Maybe they're OK, but I'm a bit suspicious of them."
15) Have you tried being your own publisher?: 19% Yes 81% No
"No, I looked into the issues and decided that I would rather spend my time designing and coding."
16) If so, what is your opinion of doing that?:
"It takes too much time away from 'productive' work."
"Too much work"
"Extremely positive"
"Taught me I'm not a marketing or sales professional. Next time I'll find myself a real publisher."
17) How long have you been programming?: 10 ave (3 min, 25 max) years
18) Which programming languages do you use?:
Assembler 47%
BASIC 20%
C 80%
C++ 13%
HyperTalk 20%
Modula-2 7%
Object Pascal 7%
Pascal 53%
19) Any other comments?
"It has never been my intention to make any money off of shareware because I know people don't pay the fee. But a lot of the stuff that I've written has taken HOURS to write and is not something that someone could casually 'whip' up, so I feel justified in asking for a token payment for its use. I receive a lot of 'fan mail' for the stuff that I've written. I enjoy the mail almost as much as the checks. It gives me a good feel for what people out there are wanting. You'd be amazed how often I'll get a check in the mail for $5 from someone along with a letter complaining that I've charged them for the use of my product. These people seem to think that software grows on trees and that the hours that I've invested in putting together a solid and useful application is something that is 'owed' to them."
"I find that people are extremely thrifty when it comes to paying for a product. It is rare that individuals pay for software. I believe piracy has a lot to do with it."
"It is important you provide quality code and support at a price 'reasonable' for your services. Don't be afraid of charging what your program is worth. Provide users with some form of 'receipt' when you get their money (like a user license). Keep them informed of updates, etc. In essence run your shareware service like a REAL small business and support your customers the way you want to be supported from ANY software vendor. I've received the BCS award for doing so."
Thanks to all the participants who took the time to answer the questions.
Shareware Author Survey by
Kevin Garrett
Soft•Lab
22704 Ventura Blvd. #371
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
America Online: SoftLab
CIS: 73707,570
CONNECT: GARRETTK
6/25/90
t ◊# ˇ ˇˇˇˇ # ◊
_ , Times
. ° d ONLN d 2 ˛ +P2Shareware Author Survey
° d ONLN d / 2 ; *%YThis is the result of a poll of shareware authors regarding the writing and publishing of ° d ONLN d r A 2 M d *
. ° d ONLN d 2 < +P-7) ° d ONLN d K † )FYour estimate of the number of people using your shareware programs: ° d ONLN d I † € ( -æ 12,000 (200 ° d ONLN d U K # ´ ( ? imin, 100,000 max) ° d ONLN d g M 2 Y < ( u P8) ° d ONLN d j M K Y„ )TYour estimate of the percentage of people using your shareware programs who actually ° d ONLN d ø _ K k æ *pay the shareware fees: ° d ONLN d ÿ _ æ k> )s4% (1% min, 10% max) ° d ONLN d Ó É K è Ñ ( ´ i
Breakdown: ° d ONLN d ˘ É ™ è » )_Usage ° d ONLN d ˇ É è; )^ Responses ° d ONLN d ï ™ ° ∫ ( Ω »1% ° d ONLN d ï ° )^40% ° d ONLN d ß ™ ≥ ∫ ( œ »2% ° d ONLN d ß ≥ )^25% ° d ONLN d π ™ ≈ ∫ ( · »3% ° d ONLN d π ≈ )^5% ° d ONLN d% À ™ ◊ ¿ ( Û »10% ° d ONLN d) À ◊ )^30% ° d ONLN d. Ô K ˚ø ( iP(Essentially the authors polled are split between 1 to 2% and 10%. The editor's ° d ONLN d K
“ *Xexperience tends to support the lower number; in fact, I tend to think that it is high.) ° d ONLN dÿ% 21 < (M P9) ° d ONLN d€% K1ÿ )VYour estimate of the total shareware fees you would have received if all users of your ° d ONLN d27 KC *+shareware were to pay the appropriate fee: ° d ONLN d]7C’ )»% $98,800 ($3,000 min, $1,000,000 max) ° d ONLN dÑ[ Kgf (É i;"$8000 or more. It would mean a new Mac, that's for sure." ° d ONLN d¿ë 2ù B (π P10) ° d ONLN dƒë KùP )4Are shareware payments your main source of income?: ° d ONLN d¯ëPùb (πn No ° d ONLN d˝µ K¡Ω (› iO"Well, a good half of it. The other (bigger!) half being commercial programs." ° d ONLN dN« K”s *@"No, I couldn't survive, and these are good programs, I think!?" ° d ONLN dè˝ 2 B (% P11) ° d ONLN dì˝ K – )NDo you depend on shareware payments in any other way (putting yourself through ° d ONLN d‚ K */school, a budget for buying software, etc.)?: ° d ONLN d ~ )”50% Yes 50% No ° d ONLN d#3 K?E ([ i6"Yes, it pays for development software, manuals, etc." ° d ONLN d[E KQ à *"Yup! Paying for college!" ° d ONLN dxW Kc Î * "Yes. New hardware & software." ° d ONLN dôi Ku *'"Beer money...I'm a programmer, right?" ° d ONLN d¬{ Ká *%"Yes (buying hardware and software)." ° d ONLN dÈç Kô ˆ *#"It's become my "blank disk" fund." ° d ONLN d
√ 2œ B (Î P12) ° d ONLN d√ Kœ» )LWhy do you write shareware (as opposed to freeware or commercial programs)?: ˇ
◊# ˇ ˇˇˇˇ # ◊
_ , Times
. ° d ONLN d K #Æ +i?K"I can get reimbursed for my efforts while giving good value to customers." ° d ONLN d M ) K 5 *)"It's a good way to get stuff out there." ° d ONLN d x ; K G„ *Z"I enjoy having total control of the product, you don't have the hassles of dealing with a ° d ONLN d ” M K Y‰ *Ypublishing firm, and it's a nice utopian concept. There are enough cynics in the world." ° d ONLN d. _ K k≤ *L"Author receives a small portion of total revenues in a commercial program." ° d ONLN d| q K }Â *W"The shareware cost, in my humble opinion, was to raise the value of the program in the ° d ONLN d‘ É K è *ceyes of others---if it is free, it cannot be good, is the attitude of some. It is also exciting to ° d ONLN d8 ï K °- *1receive even a small cheque in the mail, though." ° d ONLN dj À 2 ◊ B ( Û P13) ° d ONLN dn À K ◊7 )0What is your opinion about the shareware system: ° d ONLN d† Ô K ˚ û *$"A noble failure." ° d ONLN d¥ K
– * "Of course it doesn't work!" ° d ONLN d“ K Ï *#"It beats not getting any money..." ° d ONLN d˜% K1 ® *"It's a nice system." ° d ONLN d7 KC *^"I like it (although I wish more people paid for it). Without it, we never would see a lot of ° d ONLN dmI KU Œ *great and useful programs." ° d ONLN dä[ Kgø *L"Use "demoware" for all stuff not often used or highly specialized. PROVIDE ° d ONLN d◊m Ky
*SUPPORT TO YOUR CUSTOMERS!" ° d ONLN dÙ Kã *X"The system has been abused, both by users AND by developers. It originally started out ° d ONLN dMë Kù‰ *Sas a commercial venture with a non-commercial distribution medium; now every greedy ° d ONLN d°£ KØ *)kid makes their little "hack" shareware." ° d ONLN dõ K¡Ë *S"One program had over 150 downloads from one major service - not a single payment!" ° d ONLN d!« K”< *3"It's good but even Ray Lau doesn't make a living!" ° d ONLN dVŸ KÂÌ *V"Nice way to distribute software. Too bad we authors depend so much on the honesty of ° d ONLN d≠Î K˜ } * the users." ° d ONLN d∫˝ K é * "IT SUCKS." ° d ONLN d« K] *>"I think that it can work, given two or three essential items: ° d ONLN d! d- k +i) ° d ONLN d ! x-Á )REase of distribution, i.e., electronic via commercial bulletin boards, local BBSs, ° d ONLN d^3 x? ∂ *Internet, etc." ° d ONLN doE dQ n (m Çii) ° d ONLN dsE xQ‰ )PIt is the type of program one uses more than once or twice: I think the attitude ° d ONLN dƒW xc *Pthat "I only used it twice, and shall not anymore, so why should I pay?", is not ° d ONLN di xu‡ *Gunreasonable or uncommon. (No matter how important a job was completed ° d ONLN d]{ xáÿ *Pwith the software that one or two times.) If one is always using it, guilt will ° d ONLN dÆç xô] *1make most of the lazier users pay up in the end." ° d ONLN d·ü d´ q (« Çiii) ° d ONLN dÊü x´„ )JContinuing support in form of enhancements or information. This makes the ° d ONLN d1± xΩË *Muser feel that someone deserves some remuneration for the work. I think most ° d ONLN d√ xœ÷ *IRed Ryder users (Macintosh terminal emulation) paid up for their copies." ˇ
◊# ˇ ˇˇˇˇ # ◊
_ , Times
. ° d ONLN d ) 2 5 B +PQ14) ° d ONLN d ) K 5„ )RHow do you feel about the shareware distribution companies (Educorp, Public Domain ° d ONLN d W ; K G ö *Exchange, etc.)?: ° d ONLN d j _ K k À *$"I'm not too fond of them." ° d ONLN d á q K } § *"A necessary evil." ° d ONLN d ú É K è È *#"I think they're a very good idea." ° d ONLN d ¡ ï K °0 */"Learn how to play their game (i.e. Demoware)." ° d ONLN d Ú ß K ≥⁄ *U"Some are reputable, and look out for the authors (e.g. Somak Software); others (e.g. ° d ONLN dH π K ≈ Ÿ * EduCorp) don't seem to care." ° d ONLN dg À K ◊ *U"Somewhat redundant in their function (distributing software) when you think about on ° d ONLN dº À ◊È ( Û- ° d ONLN dΩ › K È ‘ ( i line services or user groups." ° d ONLN d› Ô K ˚ÿ *T"I find them one of the better sources of how my programs are distributed. They are ° d ONLN d2 K
c *fair." ° d ONLN d: K *Z"I gave Educorp permission to distribute my program on their disks. I think they help get ° d ONLN dï% K1Ö *Bone's products to those customers without BBS or Internet access. ° d ONLN dÿ%ö1 (M∏"I've ordered from ° d ONLN dÎ7 KCà (_ iQthem before I got my modem. I see them as beneficial to the users who don't have ° d ONLN d=I KU‚ *Umodems, or decent local networks, but I don't see how THEY sleep at night. Of course ° d ONLN dì[ KgË *\they do it for a profit at our expense. Hey, for the beginning author, it gets us exposure. ° d ONLN dÒm Kyfi *YI do think it inhibits the users from sending in shareware fees ('Hey, I already paid for ° d ONLN dK Kã b *it.')." ° d ONLN dTë KùI *5"Maybe they're OK, but I'm a bit suspicious of them." ° d ONLN dä« 2” B (Ô P15) ° d ONLN dé« K” )+Have you tried being your own publisher?: ° d ONLN dπ«”w )œ19% Yes 81% No ° d ONLN d Î K˜fi ( iU"No, I looked into the issues and decided that I would rather spend my time designing ° d ONLN d ˝ K á * and coding." ° d ONLN d-3 2? B ([ P16) ° d ONLN d13 K? )+If so, what is your opinion of doing that?: ° d ONLN d^W KcH *$5"It takes too much time away from 'productive' work." ° d ONLN dïi Ku † *"Too much work" ° d ONLN d¶{ Ká ¨ *"Extremely positive" ° d ONLN dºç Kôfl *X"Taught me I'm not a marketing or sales professional. Next time I'll find myself a real ° d ONLN dü K´ * publisher." ˇ û ◊# ˇ ˇˇˇˇ # ◊
_ , Times
. ° d ONLN d 2 B +P-17) ° d ONLN d K )&How long have you been programming?: ° d ONLN d * • )Δ 10 ave (3 min, 25 max) years ° d ONLN d G ; 2 G B ( c P18) ° d ONLN d K ; K G )(Which programming languages do you use?: ° d ONLN d t _ K k Ç *$ Assembler ° d ONLN d ~ _ ¥ k à )i47% ° d ONLN d Ç q K } p ( ô iBASIC ° d ONLN d à q ¥ } à )i20% ° d ONLN d å É K è T ( ´ iC ° d ONLN d é É ¥ è à )i80% ° d ONLN d í ï K ° d ( Ω iC++ ° d ONLN d ñ ï ¥ ° à )i13% ° d ONLN d ö ß K ≥ Ñ ( œ i HyperTalk ° d ONLN d § ß ¥ ≥ à )i20% ° d ONLN d ® π K ≈ ~ ( · iModula-2 ° d ONLN d ± π ¥ ≈ Δ )i7% ° d ONLN d ¥ À K ◊ ë ( Û i
Object Pascal ° d ONLN d ¬ À ¥ ◊ Δ )i7% ° d ONLN d ≈ › K È l ( iPascal ° d ONLN d à › ¥ È Ã )i53% ° d ONLN d – 2 B (; P19) ° d ONLN d ‘ K ≤ )Any other comments? ° d ONLN d È7 KCÿ *$Q"It has never been my intention to make any money off of shareware because I know ° d ONLN d;I KUÓ *\people don't pay the fee. But a lot of the stuff that I've written has taken HOURS to write ° d ONLN dò[ Kg„ *Yand is not something that someone could casually 'whip' up, so I feel justified in asking ° d ONLN dÚm KyÓ *cfor a token payment for its use. I receive a lot of 'fan mail' for the stuff that I've written. I ° d ONLN dV KãÎ *Yenjoy the mail almost as much as the checks. It gives me a good feel for what people out ° d ONLN d∞ë Kù⁄ *Vthere are wanting. You'd be amazed how often I'll get a check in the mail for $5 from ° d ONLN d£ KØÔ *Ysomeone along with a letter complaining that I've charged them for the use of my product. ° d ONLN dbµ K¡– *TThese people seem to think that software grows on trees and that the hours that I've ° d ONLN d∑« K”‡ *Zinvested in putting together a solid and useful application is something that is 'owed' to ° d ONLN dŸ K j *them." ° d ONLN d˝ K Á *$\"I find that people are extremely thrifty when it comes to paying for a product. It is rare ° d ONLN dw Kü *Nthat individuals pay for software. I believe piracy has a lot to do with it." ° d ONLN d«3 K?‘ *$V"It is important you provide quality code and support at a price 'reasonable' for your ° d ONLN d E KQfi *Vservices. Don't be afraid of charging what your program is worth. Provide users with ° d ONLN duW Kc» *Qsome form of 'receipt' when you get their money (like a user license). Keep them ° d ONLN d«i Ku– *Rinformed of updates, etc. In essence run your shareware service like a REAL small ° d ONLN d{ Ká— *Mbusiness and support your customers the way you want to be supported from ANY ° d ONLN dhç Kôg *<software vendor. I've received the BCS award for doing so." ° d ONLN d•√ 2œÑ (Î PIThanks to all the participants who took the time to answer the questions. ˇ‰ ◊# ˇ ˇˇˇˇ # ◊
_ , Times
. ° d ONLN d ) 2 5 ∫ +PQShareware Author Survey by ° d ONLN d M 2 Y r *$
Kevin Garrett ° d ONLN d ) _ 2 k \ *Soft•Lab ° d ONLN d 2 q 2 } Ø *22704 Ventura Blvd. #371 ° d ONLN d K É 2 è ¥ *Woodland Hills, CA 91364 ° d ONLN d d ß 2 ≥ ® *$America Online: SoftLab ° d ONLN d | π 2 ≈ } *CIS: 73707,570 ° d ONLN d ã À 2 ◊ ∞ *CONNECT: GARRETTK ° d ONLN d ù Ô 2 ˚ V *$6/25/90 ˇ
