DesktopX Pro Pricing Discussion
Thursday, November 20, 2003 by Frogboy | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Few products have gotten off to such an intense start. We're getting a lot of email from users who want DesktopX Pro but can't afford $499.
Their uses vary but boil down to this:
1) Being able to use for internal apps
2) Sending a "gadget" to a friend or family4 member.
3) Making widgets for personal use where they just want to run something they make on their various home machines and not worry whether they have DesktopX on all of them or not.
These are 3 types of people that we are not currently targeting with DesktopX Pro.
But what if we did this:
Have DesktopX Pro be $129 instead and put into the license that programs created with it may not be sold or used for marketing purposes?
So when you click to get DesktopX Pro, you would be presented with two options:
a) I will not be selling applications created with DesktopX Pro or using them for marketing purposes: $129
I will be using DesktopX Pro for commercial development: $499
The question is, would $129 still be "too high" for power users? Much less than $129 and it's really not worth it and gets too close to the Object Desktop price.
 |
|
Page 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
Reply #22 Friday, November 21, 2003 9:33 AM
Reply #23 Friday, November 21, 2003 10:48 AM
Without revealing anything, I can already say that we have well into the 5 digit range of deals selling stand alone DX applications to corporations in the works.
Let me give you one generic example: A website might want to have a downloadable widget that incorporates a flash movie promoting their stuff in a cool way that will stay on a user's desktop.
Another company might want to simply have a nice analog clock that is branded.
There are many uses for DesktopX Pro for commercial use. One just has to give the issue some thought. And if they don't, that's okay too because that leaves the field more open to us.
Reply #24 Friday, November 21, 2003 11:52 AM
Then have the $499 "Developer" version that would provide the capability and licensing for full and unlimited development. That way an enthusiast has a place to start with the potential to step up should his skills or desire develop. I don't know....I can just see A LOT of different directions a product like this could go now and over the coming years.
Reply #25 Friday, November 21, 2003 12:32 PM
Have you guys ever bought, say, branded pens, or baseball hats for a company? My lab is littered with pens, notepads, pencil holders, magnetic paper holders, etc., that people paid to just give away so that I would see their 'brand'.
Add to that the fact that we as skinners know that we can make money just selling branded skins. No application, just an themed skin... a bit of scripting and images. Now think of the company that could buy... *once*... a branded analog clock and let people download it *indefinitely*. Unlike pens and baseball hats they won't run out, and the will be much more visible to the person that uses it. They can even contain hard-coded links right back to the commercial site.
You don't think that even a reasonably small company wouldn't shell out $100 for such a thing? How long would $100 worth of branded baseball hats last before you had to reorder, a week? These could be distributed as freebies on hand-out CD-ROMs, bundled with software or games, whatever.
Give all this a rest. If you can't see how this could make someone $499, then you have no business with it and no business poo-pooing it. The app is there, buy it or not, review it if you like, but this conversation amounts to the usual "Man [whatever app] just isn't worth what Stardock is charging]. and regulars here usually take a dimmer view of such. Why emulate it?
Reply #27 Friday, November 21, 2003 12:42 PM
Pretty sure of that actually. Right now, it is not true unless you have alot of hustle (shoing people what it can do) and already have clients in the wings that you work for already.
Reply #28 Friday, November 21, 2003 12:53 PM
There are some others above that keep saying above and on the front page that you couldn't make your $499 back for the commercial license, and that is 'not the tool for the jobs', etc.
*cough* "I can't see the 499$ corporate version being worth the risk for a huge loss." *cough*
I think is easy to see how someone with even an average mind for business couldn't make their money back for the $499 version. My post was directed there, not at you.
Reply #29 Friday, November 21, 2003 1:16 PM
Taking all that in makes $499 look like a trip to Toys -R- Us. Non of this even makes note of the fact that my dumb hind end will spend 4 times that over the next year for crap I'll throw away the next!!
This is DEFINATLY something that I look at as potentially "Fathering" the future of GUI development.
Reply #30 Friday, November 21, 2003 1:48 PM
Reply #31 Friday, November 21, 2003 2:56 PM
Reply #33 Friday, November 21, 2003 6:59 PM
Reply #34 Friday, November 21, 2003 7:32 PM
( previous post in this thread )
Reply #35 Friday, November 21, 2003 7:58 PM
Bakerstreet: point taken, thank you. 
But I still don't see it, short-sighted as I am. I mean, I can see now a few skinners wanting to take the risk, but I see few actually getting the contracts and their money back. Look at Windowblinds. How many skinners sell branded skins for companies. Maybe 3 or 4? Now, if only a 499$ version of Windowblinds allowed skinners to sell such branded skins, I'm sure quite few skinners would try out the experience, but only a small handfull would get their cost back and more.
BTW: I'm not blasting Stardock here. Stardock can decide to change whatever price they want for their software. When a sold product is expensive, the vendor isn't to be blamed, but the client may be if he buys a product he can't affort.
Again, I could be wrong. It's just my opinion, but I'm far from being infaillible.
Reply #36 Friday, November 21, 2003 8:20 PM
Don't think in terms of some guy hanging out a shingle offering novelty EXEs at the flea market. Think of this as one more marketing service someone could provide among many. Compare the cost of hiring an in-house developer to brand handmade software to $499 and the minimal skill it would take an less skilled person to turn this stuff out with DesktopX. Beyond the wages of the guy who makes them, a company would have nothing invested in the added products beyond the original $499. A nutty good deal.
Branded giveaway items are a huge business, and with connectivity stuff like this would be tons more powerful as marketing tools. This would just be another item that could be offered.
[Message Edited]
Reply #37 Friday, November 21, 2003 8:23 PM
Reply #38 Friday, November 21, 2003 8:38 PM
People tend to see 'pro' and think that it is just a more 'l33t' version of what they already have, instead of a feature they probably won't need. I noticed a couple of people that were asking for the price to be lowered that didn't seem to understand what the pro version even did. It is normally the people that beg for a lower price that later decide they didn't need it at all, oddly.I just didn't think people would be satisfied with even the lowered cost if they could only use the exe files privately. Whether they will stick to that remains to be seen. Frogboy pointed out several reasonable uses, so I guess if people need it they'll buy it.
Isn't up to me anyway. Feel free to ignore me if I am an annoyance.
Reply #39 Friday, November 21, 2003 8:40 PM
But what you suggest instead is that NVidia itself buys DX Pro to make to object themselves? OK, maybe so. Not sure though.
I actually work for a marketing agency, and I must admit I'd have a hard time convincing my boss to sell branded clocks to his clients. But then again, our clients are mostly in the construction/renovation business (windows, doors, sidings, etc). Not in the online business whatsoever.
Reply #40 Friday, November 21, 2003 8:48 PM
See I am thinking of some programs I've used in school like VB. You can get the academic versions for under $200, but you can't use those to make programs to sell (I don't think you can even make .exes, period.
You want the big toys, you gotta shell out the $800 or how ever much VB enterprise is now. So I am thinking of these two versions, like those.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 2 of 3 | |
|
|---|
Reply #21 Friday, November 21, 2003 9:31 AM
Nothing. Absolutely nothing as far as I read.
The restrictions on the Home Version seam to 'total' such that if the person 'thinks' they will just give widgets away on a website they will be violating the agreement.
Even as I read the comments on here and on the news story I can see people who say they will buy the 129 version coming back and feeling that they can't justify the cost and BLAMING the company for hoodwinking them into buying it.
Making a couple of widgets for family members? Friends?
==================
Sure not having to download and install DX is a plus, BUT I think end the end it will just be of little consequence to those who really want to use the widgets. As I have said before, everyone (9 out of 10) are amazed at what DX looks like and what can be done with it. The line of downloading/installing DX is not that thick (I'll admit its there but come on).
In the end, the 129 version being used by home power users doesn't add up to me. If I really understand what DX can do, even as a power user, I would just get the 499 version so I can do whatever I want with it.
paxx has a point about Flash, but I believe in a few years the same can be said for DX Pro; One contract can pay for the whole program.
I think coming up with a marketing solution for this would be better for DX then just having the new option of buying the 129 version (DX Pro Home).
E-mailing to find out who wants it is a good idea. In the end, I think if it is well liked, it should only be available for Object Desktop customers (people who understand DX and the whole skinning thing) and the few users who ask for it specifically.