Message #824

From: JohnG <jwgibson3@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: commercializing cubing
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2010 05:26:04 -0000

I think it’s a great idea. The 5D version everyone in this group uses (i.e., the one you made) is fantastic, and I have no qualms about a $5 donation to defray any expenses and to compensate you for your time.

All the best,

John

— In 4D_Cubing@yahoogroups.com, Roice Nelson <roice3@…> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Here’s a non-technical question I’d be curious for any and all to weigh in
> on. I’m on the cusp of releasing another (beta) Rubik analogue program I’ve
> worked on a bit over the past half year, and was planning to post it free
> as I’ve done with other hobby projects. Then this blog
> post<http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2010/01/22/make-something-and-sell-it/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+TheEndeavour+%2528The+Endeavour%2529>shows
> up in my reader today describing "the radical idea that you should
> sell what you make." I’m curious what others think of this. Is it
> unrealistic to expect people to pay, say $5, for a Rubik like program?
> Would doing something like that injure the commercial-free spirit of
> communities like this? Is the Rubik software market simply supersaturated
> with freeware, such that it’d be hopeless to try to charge anything for yet
> another Rubik program? (I tend to suspect the answer to the last is yes.)
>
> These projects are an incredible amount of fun, but an equally incredible
> amount of work. I happily pay for physical puzzles on a regular basis, but
> have always downplayed the monetary value of the software versions. How
> come? I don’t think I’ve had any fundamental reversal in my plans or
> anything, but the blog entry at least made me want to post this.
>
> I’d love to hear your thoughts,
>
> Roice
>