Re: Major interview

[Malonowa <malonowa@wanadoo.fr>]

Bill Ries-Knight wrote:

> I could suggest that the issue with schools is the cost of a SITE license.  When you
> pay upwards of $1000 per school for each of say 30 software titles, that adds up rather
> quickly.  It is ENTIRELY possible that this model, with a REDUCED site license, would
> be useful in relationship with an OS that did not require a per seat cost.  If you look
> at a minimal cost profile for Mirosoft and its planned model:  for the desktop OS, say
> $100, PLUS  the Server cost of say $3000 per year, Plus the client acess cost of $50
> per seat, PLUS...  The savings in a school with 150 computers could amount to over
> $30k per school each year.  That would get the attention of MANY districts.
>

All of the software I've ever written has included a site licence for free - I think
they're a rip off and so do most teachers. And they're right to think that. This is what I
mean by "fair" commercial software. I've always provided unlimited tech. support for free
too.

This is a compelling argument and one of linux's greatest strengths. The problem is that
this sort of data needs to be put before the eyes of the decision makers and then persuade
them to let go of all the ties they have with wintel,mac hardware/software vendors that
they've so expensively nurtured in the past few decades. Decision makers in authority will
often whinge about overbearing costs but at the end of the day it often boils down to a
"better the devil you know.." scenario. People just don't like change and are often too
afraid of it.

>
> My Argument would be, reduced development tool costs for Linux vs Microsoft or Apple
> platforms should result in lower cost product.  This could be used to save money at the
> school level.  More unit sales because of lowered unit costs, means more revenue
> Happier and healthier Ed-Soft companies.

Development tool costs are negligable.

The most expensive side of edsoft tends to be gfx and sound recording. Sound studios charge
$1000+ per day for example. Artists can be expensive - animation is very expensive.
Programmers often work for royalties in edsoft in my experience that keeps development
costs down.

Imagine history software where there are many photos. as sources of evidence each one
costing more than $50 to licence. Then you have diary entries and other data which has
various licences. Postcards, newspaper comic strips etc. Add exhorbitant royalty and
licensing fees for radio and video footage and your reaching development costs that are
just way too high to give a program away. Especially if you can only license necessary data
on a royalty basis - you're then legally bound not to give away the product.

That said, companies should try to keep their prices down as much as possible. I'm not a
great believer in expensive licenses or support or even expensive packaging. Whatever I'd
port to Linux commercially I'd insist on being "No Frills" with site licence included for
free.

Roman.