"Introducing New LiveCode Licenses"
curry at pair.com
Tue Oct 29 07:50:14 CET 2013
> All this said, I do think RunRev have probably got their pricing strategy wrong. The cross-platform tools with large growing user bases and decent profits (there aren't many of them) all have some kind of limited free commercial license - often both feature limited and with a revenue cap on the person/organisation. They also have more expensive full licenses than RunRev. Trying to cover everyone with a single license fee is almost definitely sub-optimal.
I disagree with this path. My virtual vote is against a free commercial
license. As you say, then the full license is more expensive - sometimes
astronomical. (Socialism at work.)
People can learn and get started or do non profit projects free with
open source. I say keep it paid when they go commercial and need closed
source. RunRev chose the OSS route, so having taken that route, now this
should be the only free version.
But I agree that a segment may be lacking - hobbyists and so on. People
who need closed source but are short on cash, and don't need all the
platforms. A smaller commercial package for one or two platforms could
fill this need.
I love the current buffet price for all the basic, popular platforms. I
hope that stays.
Besides the effort to monetize support options, perhaps the commercial
version could also diverge a bit from the open source version eventually
to offer some extra power in another higher commercial version.
More information about the use-livecode