We probably all get them - spam ads for CHEAP SOFTWARE. (My blog is probably blacklisted now for having mentioned it.)
Looked at one way, these offers are too good to be true. I mean, 75% discounts? And the offers invariably arrive as email spam. Several folks have
commented on this.
Just for fun, I had a look through the web site linked in one of these "Cheap Software" spams this weekend. It all seemed very reasonable until I saw this notice in a FAQ:
Note, that you will not be able to register the software with the manufacturer and get their support
Well, that seems clearcut, doesn't it? Even if they're unwilling to
support cheap versions of their software, those companies offering OEM versions seem always to be willing to let you
register if only to let them sell you upgrades! In my experience, anyway. I guess the naysayers are right, and at least some of these offers are in fact bogus.
But I can't see
why they're bogus - they appear to be in the interest of the software manufacturer. Consider:
- Software is truly an information good. That is, there is essentially no reproduction cost (manuals and CDs aside, but that's only for copies physically shipped) so incremental copies approach being pure profit.
- For many of these products, increases in size of installed base are highly important to the manufacturer to create network effect.
- There is in fact legitimate big-vendor software, eg Windows, that one can buy as OEM versions with hardware from licensed system dealers, at a very large discount.
- OEM hardware is available at wildly improbably discounts, frequently around 50%. Eg OEM versions of video cards from reputable manufacturers such as Matrox or ATI. This even though the hardware has a significant manufacture and distribution cost.
So very cheap software makes sense in many cases. (Same as music and movies in fact. Hmmm.) But because many old-school content publishers don't get it, we instead get cheap software as scams; Napster; and an open source industry that allows a collection of users, whose collective licensing costs exceed the cost to redevelop, to supply themselves.
links: digg this del.icio.us technorati reddit