PDA

View Full Version : How much would you pay for a Linux port?



Gotou
October 7th, 2006, 11:50 PM
Money greases the wheels of progress.

With that in mind how much would you pay if you were able to buy a Linux port of a Windows/Mac program that you need?

Th question is posed with hopes that the software developers of such programs get a feel for the type of market the Linux community would provide.

Gotou
October 8th, 2006, 12:04 AM
Wanting to keep the original question open to all walks of life, I didn't include my two cents.

So here it is, my two cents. Possibly a nickel's worth.

My decision to switch to Linux was because of MS Windows, not because of the programs written only to work under Windows. I have tried emulators and virtual machines. Sadly, dual-booting has proven to be the only workable solution.

I believe one of the many reasons hampering Linux's acceptance as a desktop OS is the lack of programs needed by small business. Time is money and small business owners don't have the time to tinker with and tweak applictaions just to get them to work let alone be usable.

I have a part-time business, but I'd probably make more money at a part-time job. I enjoy what I do and I do it on my terms. That being said, I am not rich by any means.

However, as a business owner I would rather pay $400 for the latest version CorelDraw than waste countless hours trying to get it to work with Linux. For example 10 hours fiddling with Linux unsuccessfully trying get a program to work could have been 10 hours of billable time. Those 10 billable hours could pay for a Linux port of the program if it were available.

So if anyone from Intuit, Corel Corp and Adobe are reading this, you have a potential Linux customer.

Bloch
October 8th, 2006, 02:23 AM
Getting the operating system and office software for free should leave linux users with some spare cash for other programs. But linux users have a history of preferring open-source apps even where they are not as developed as commercial software.

I think google is testing the waters with their google-earth and picassa. If google ever begin to sell software insted of giving it away they'll know they have the interest of linux users.

maniacmusician
October 8th, 2006, 03:47 AM
about the google thing; maybe, but not really. i dunno about google earth, but am I not right in assuming that picasa runs under wine? IMHO, every wine program comes out looking like crap. Picasa looks nice under windows; our version has some of the same nice looks, but the ugly that comes from running in wine clashes with it. I don't know...google has the code for picasa, and an enormous amount of resources. Even lots of people that are linux-able. they can't make it run natively in linux?

Personally I love google...I use as many of their products as I can. I just wish we got treated a little better.

TheMono
October 8th, 2006, 03:53 AM
Picasa does use an internal Wine implementation on Linux, yes.

3rdalbum
October 8th, 2006, 05:25 AM
My video capture box cost $200 with included capture, editing and DVD authoring software. I would happily pay another $200 for Linux ports of this software. (before you ask, no it's not compatible with V4L or Xv or anything).

DoctorMO
October 8th, 2006, 05:34 AM
Ahthen what you need is a driver, most software that comes with hardware is not very good; I don't know why this is by my PCTV card windows software (windows 98 only) it's quite poor compared to V4L which allows me to do anything with the video stream I want (I even scared an msn user by using it as a webcam), same thing for the scanner (although at least windows is a little better in this area)

the best this to do for your capture hardware is get the specifications from the hardware makers. that way open drivers can be made and you can rest easy tht your hardware will be supported in every new version of linux.

Polygon
October 8th, 2006, 06:18 AM
i know that google earth is a native linux port, so maybe they are working on a native picasa port as well. google is a good company, im sure they wont abandon us

aysiu
October 8th, 2006, 06:35 AM
If there is not already a Linux port of an application, money would be better spent developing a native Linux application instead of donating to a closed source Windows-based application for a Linux port.

I know most people who need Photoshop actually need it right now to make a living, but if you're not a professional, you probably should be spending your hundreds of dollars donating to GIMP's development instead of buying Photoshop. Just a thought. You don't have to agree.

maniacmusician
October 8th, 2006, 06:39 AM
i know that google earth is a native linux port, so maybe they are working on a native picasa port as well. google is a good company, im sure they wont abandon us
i'd like to think that. I really do adore google. but they do have their commercial status to worry about so naturally, we're second class.

but yeah, at least they're doing something. their products are usually pretty sensational and thoughtful. for example, i like the accessibility search...erhm, off topic.

I'm a student so the lack of money on my part prevents me from being able to pay for a linux port...i'm also a musician so that plunges me deeper into the wells of poverty. a reasonable price as a one-time fee? for commercial-quality apps? at least around $700 if you want to be fair at all to the coders. but since most open source projects are too understaffed to be professional/commercial quality, i think a fair price would be around $400 for a project. more if its expected to be maintained.

slimdog360
October 8th, 2006, 07:12 AM
for a good circuit analysis program Id pay what I have to pay in windows. But not more then $500 Australian.

henriquemaia
October 8th, 2006, 07:19 AM
If there is not already a Linux port of an application, money would be better spent developing a native Linux application instead of donating to a closed source Windows-based application for a Linux port.

I know most people who need Photoshop actually need it right now to make a living, but if you're not a professional, you probably should be spending your hundreds of dollars donating to GIMP's development instead of buying Photoshop. Just a thought. You don't have to agree.

I agree. I donate to several projects on that premise.

_lynX
October 8th, 2006, 07:30 AM
Money greases the wheels of progress.

With that in mind how much would you pay if you were able to buy a Linux port of a Windows/Mac program that you need?

Th question is posed with hopes that the software developers of such programs get a feel for the type of market the Linux community would provide.

I would pay the same amount I would for the Windows/Mac program, which is already more than I probably should be paying.

3rdalbum
October 8th, 2006, 11:39 AM
Ahthen what you need is a driver, most software that comes with hardware is not very good;

the best this to do for your capture hardware is get the specifications from the hardware makers. that way open drivers can be made and you can rest easy tht your hardware will be supported in every new version of linux.

What I want is the software (which just happens to include the driver) - QDvdAuthor is not quite everything I ever dreamed of :-)

I'm not even sure that the box itself could be made to work with any existing Linux framework, as it streams MPEG2 video through USB. And I did actually e-mail the manufacturer and ask whether its specifications could be opened up or a Linux driver developed. But thanks for your reply.

Anonii
October 8th, 2006, 11:46 AM
Well, if an upcoming MMORPG was ported to Linux (lets say Warhammer), and it was as stable as the Windows version, I'd pay happily the normal price, but no more. That would be great, but its not gonna happen.

Lord Illidan
October 8th, 2006, 11:50 AM
I would pay, or I know people who would like to pay for linux ports of successful programs.

Macromedia Flash - the authoring system not the playback
Dreamweaver
Photoshop ... I cant' stress how important that is.

and several other apps who don't work well in Wine.

Wine has the disadvantage of

1. Looking like crap. The theme looks v. W 95 ish, and coupled with the slow speed in most apps..make it a hell to use.
2. Runs barely 1/3 of what's out there, and then sometimes runs well or not at all.


That said, I don't want to discourage them. They are doing some good work. But they could make it look nicer, and improve it's speed..also concentrate more on office software than games.

cunawarit
October 8th, 2006, 11:57 AM
How much would you pay if you were able to buy a Linux port of a Windows/Mac program that you need?

I think a fair price would be the same they charge for the Windows/Mac version.

Lord Illidan
October 8th, 2006, 12:00 PM
Also, if you are already using a windows version, or have registered it, then the linux installer should be free, similar to Quake 4, etc.

slimdog360
October 8th, 2006, 03:23 PM
Also, if you are already using a windows version, or have registered it, then the linux installer should be free, similar to Quake 4, etc.
that should be a standard. Or at least give the source code out for people to port it over to linux a lot easier.

bastiegast
October 8th, 2006, 03:31 PM
Although im not really in habit of buying software(using linux not for nothing ;)) I would pay the same price as the windows version assuming it is a native port with the same features and no wine port or some stripped of version of course.

Gotou
October 12th, 2006, 06:51 PM
Certainly a few good points have been made.

I agree with Aysiu's comment about professionals needing programs that work right now to make a living. Also supporting the native Linux apps that are needed.

Photoshop and games seem to be on top of the list for many folks. But what about business owners? What is top on their list?

Perhaps Wine/CodeWeavers is where business owners should invest some of their available funds. I think this because there are many, highly specialized (and highly proprietary) programs used by businesses that can't be found on the shelves of the local office/computer store. In the short term, if an application like Wine could run these programs as well as they do in Windows, that would be a big step. For the business owners, for the software developers and for anyone who uses Wine. This line of thought is based on the fact that professionals need things to work now. As soon as possible is too late.

Another thought, and I may be wrong yet again, is folks are used to using whatever programs they use at work and those are "some" of the programs they have at home. I gave a copy of OpenOffice to a lady who uses MSOffice at work. She was impressed but was going to stay with MSOffice because that is what she used at her job. So maybe if Linux became common place in business it would be more accepted on home computers.

OpenOffice definately has helped ease the strain on some pocket books. However, I've heard OpenOffice has a ways to go before it will satisfy the uber power users of MSOffice. Doesn't OpenOffice/StarOffice have the backing of Sun Microsystems? Sun Microsystems has deep enough pockets to support a project like OpneOffice to make it a significant competitor against MSOffice.

In any case, I believe Linux has to attract the attention of business owners before progress of leaps and bounds will be made.

seuaniu
October 12th, 2006, 08:11 PM
Just to throw my $.02 in:

I'd pay exactly as much as its windows or mac equivilant for software that gets ported to linux.

As an example of software:
I use Vegas on windows for video editing, which is a major part of my job function, and so far, nothing in linux comes close to its functionality. I got Cinelerra running yesterday, and it seems cool and all, but for what I do, its not a fit. Vegas costs about $139. I'd buy it again, just so I don't have to boot into windows.

As far as hardware goes, I do not buy hardware that isn't Linux compatible, and I don't buy hardware for my family, customers, or friends that isn't linux compatible either.

As a linux user, I may represent a small percentage of a hardware manufacturer's customer base, but I have great influence on many others' purchases. For every hardware manufacturer that doesn't support linux, there's about 200 people that won't even consider buying your product. Printer and webcam manufacturers, I'm looking right at you. Video device manufacturers, I'm looking right at you too.

Happauge has gotten lots of business because of me. They'll be getting more.

Lexmark and cannon have lost lots of business from me, and they'll be losing more and more until they get their asses in line with their all-in-one devices.

maniacmusician
October 12th, 2006, 08:14 PM
the problem is, that on linux, if you pay for a port, you're not just buying the program...you're buying the code, the effort that goes into it, and you're buying the ability for other users to use it in the future. IMHO, that warrants a higher price than just what its windows equivalent would cost. especially if you want the app to maintained in the future.

Gotou
October 13th, 2006, 04:25 PM
Perhaps "Linux port" wasn't the correct choice of words, but I think most folks get the idea I was trying for.

If keeping the code secret and proprietary means I'll get the programs I need to work in Linux faster, then I'll submit to that. The progams I need that are Windows only are proprietary and I don't mind paying for them because they work without comprimising my computer's security and don't prevent me from using my computer if upgrade several parts at once or even buy a new computer. Those particular issues are why I have developed a great dislike for Windows.

All this talk and I forgot to write down my "wish list". Ok, I know there are Linux alternatives like Gimp and GNUCash but this is a list of programs that I would much rather use if they were available for Linux.

My Top Priorities:
CorelDraw (Corel Corp)
Illustrator (Adobe)
Imagaro Z (Graphical Systems USA)
QuickBooks (Intuit)

My Second Priorities:
Signlab (CADLink)
Flexisign (Scanvec Amiable)

maniacmusician
October 13th, 2006, 05:07 PM
yes, but you're talking about hiring someone to do the coding. Even if you don't call it a port, the concept still applies.

I don't think anyone is just going to up and make these programs unless they have a guaranteed user base (yes, even open source programmers)