The Linux crowd has a reputation as a group that doesn’t like paying for things. That stereotype may or may not be fair, but either way, it hasn’t stopped Canonical from introducing more than a dozen for-purchase software packages to Ubuntu Desktop users over the last 10 months. Here’s a look at what the company has done, and what it says about end users in the open source channel.
It might be hard to believe, now that the Software Center has assumed such a central role in Ubuntu for adding, removing and maintaining software applications, that back in the day — until 2009, to be exact — the Software Center didn’t exist at all.
Moreover, when it did make its debut during the Ubuntu 9.10 development cycle, the tool was controversially dubbed the Ubuntu Software Store. It was only at the last minute that Canonical decided to rechristen the application as the Software Center, placating users concerned about the commercial implications of the original title.
Appellations aside, the Software Center gained its first for-purchase application in September 2010, when Fluendo’s DVD Player became available. Since then, the lineup of titles available for non-free download has steadily increased, indicating that Canonical and its partners have put serious stock in the willingness of Linux users, miserly though they stereotypically may be, to shell out cash in exchange for quality software.
A Look at the Lineup
And just what does the Software Center offer those willing to pay? As of today, it lists 15 titles ranging in price from a couple of simple games at $2.99 to Illumination Software Creator priced at $39.85.
A solid majority of packages available for paid download are games, most of them fancy and modern but some — particularly the cheap ones — of a more “retro” quality. A handful of the packages serve other purposes, including trials of the CrossOver emulator for Windows applications, Fluendo’s DVD Player, a general, all-inclusive Fluendo codec pack and the Illumination software development tool.
The ratings system, introduced to the Software Center in late 2010, allows potential purchasers to read other users’ comments on applications before buying. The number of comments currently available is less than abundant, but most of those that do exist are thorough and helpful.
The comments are also surprisingly positive, implying that most users are quite satisfied with the applications they paid for; if it weren’t for the small smattering of negative comments (such as David Strauss’s warning that Vendetta Online “made my Compiz explode”), and the fact that most conspiracies turn out to be figments of the imagination, I’d almost suspect censorship. (I’m joking; Canonical is a serious company with a reputation to uphold, not to mention better things to do with its employees’ time than censor ratings.)
The Future
Canonical’s not the first company to try selling software to Linux users, but it does enjoy a desktop user community of unprecedented size in the open source world, as well as strong partnerships with a variety of third-party developers. Given the steady expansion of the for-purchase section of the Software Store since last fall, and the apparent satisfaction of most of those who have used the feature, this seems to be an area worth watching.
And it’s not just Ubuntu users and developers who should care. On the contrary, anyone with an interest in the open source channel would do well to pay attention to how Ubuntu’s Software Center plays out, since Canonical just might prove false the age-old assumption that anyone who runs a free-as-in-beer operating system must be a tightwad and/or GNU lunatic unwilling to pay for any software. Stay tuned.
Sign up for The VAR Guy’s Weekly Newsletter, Webcasts and Resource Center. Follow The VAR Guy via RSS, Facebook and Twitter. Follow experts at VARtweet. Read The VAR Guy’s editorial disclosures here.
Read More About This Topic
Share This Post
Tags: Ubuntu 11.04 Natty Narwhal | Ubuntu 9.10 Karmic Koala
Interact: Add a Comment | Trackback Link | Permalink
Subscribe: RSS Feed
Don't miss Charlene O'Hanlon's weekly columns...
dude,
did you crawl out from under a rock? the myth that linux users dont want to pay for anything is just that, a myth. probably started by mr gates during a fud campaign but definately picked up by people like you who spend all day reading forums all the way back to 1990 and reissuing it as truthdom. free as in speech is what linux was born from. free as in beer is what the software available was because it was the only stuff that worked or could be hacked to work. if you want to pay $ for something that i can get or make and give out for free go right ahead but do not assume anything other than what was just said.
I would tend to think that the Humble Indie Bundle would have proved some time back that we Linux users are willing to pay for good software.
Yeah… This is a rather funky piece of hogwash. Me and several mates that wreck face in HoN all paid for our copies (not to mention coins… Ahem…. amg lulz).
Mention anything about non-free software on identi.ca in one of the Linux lists (i.e., !Ubuntu) and you will be attacked for days on end for not sharing the neckbeard way of life. This is not some misconception that the author came across as a result of one of Microsoft’s fear/uncertainty/doubt campaigns–it is a stereotype that has been derived from the way that the loudest voices in the community behave toward commercial software of any creed. How dare any software author try to benefit from his creation!
Good to hear that that we should start paying! Lets start by making EVERYBODY pay to download Ubuntu! This will most definitely put a end to your myth! Every new Kernel released, if you want it pay for it. Restricted codes, PAY for it! We just can’t stop at Software Center, If you want to use software center PAY for it!. Lets PAY to have open source changed to mirco source! Man, wake up and smell your toast burning will ya? if you want to pay for quality software go back to microsoft.
Now all Canonical has to do is what Amazon did, make a way for others to publish their software in the Center (and taking a small fee along the way).
Linux need this.
This could lure some late Linux porters to eventually make a Linux version of popular windows applications available.
And no..not all Windows apps has gold Wine certification.
Inevitably is not a question of it is right or not. It is about giving consumers more choice and attracting developers that by necessity cant work for free.
wow. as a linux user, on the backend, frontend and everywhere else in between, i’ve spent far more money supporting the artists, programmers and companies then any of my windows peers.
windows users fall into a few categories:
stupid sheep – won’t pay for anything and has a machine that is either compromised or one step away from being compromised, they also have a real crappy bootleg of office, or an ancient dell oem copy of office (licensed only to the machine it was originally purchased on)
techies – these guys have huge cd/dvd binders of pirated programs.
small business – lots of pirated software, with a few programs purchased, they share a lot in common with the stupid sheep
large business – minimal pirated software, lots of legit programs bought, prompted by the fear that some jack booted thugs with semi-auto rifles might kick their door in.
I think this is dangeorous – not that apps cost money, but that the apps are proprietary. One of the reasons for GNU/Linux’s security is free software apps can be checked and verified to have no spy features and no DRM anti-features. Canonical’s previous position with Ubuntu was they were only going to include proprietary drivers in the kernel to make a system usable, but now they’ve gone off the deep end completely. More Wine apps or more ported apps is irrelevant if there is no software freedom. It just opens too many security holes.
And if there were, I don’t think people would have a problem paying for a copy or for support if they could afford it.
I pay for Codeweavers & Turboprint & Linuxant. All three are awesome and work well.
- CH
As a Linux user for 13 years, the last 11 using Linux as my main and mostly only OS, I’ve never objected to paying for either the OS or any software. What I objected to paying for was an OS or software which was unstable, buggy and easily infected. I have invoices for 22 consecutive boxed sets of SuSE, released through WindRiver, before Novel bought SuSE and changed it to SUSE. I have purchased boxed sets of Mandrake and then Mandriva. I have a box containing Corel WordPerfect and one containing StarOffice 1.0. I have a CD of X-Plane. I have purchased copies of CrossOver Pro, and several Linux games. I have been using Kubuntu since February of 2009 and would think nothing of paying for it because it is the best OS/desktop that I have ever used. I frequently donated to various distros. I have been a professional programmer since 1980. My last tool purchase was a commercial license for the Qt4 API. I retired 2 1/2 years ago but remain active at KubuntuForum.net, which I also support with donations.
IF there is anyone who is cheap it is Bill Gates. He sucked BILLIONS out of the community of computer users in exchange for a shabby OS and software which could best be described as virus magnets.
There is one program I am waiting for and would use when available for linux and that is steam, and only steam. That is what is keeping windows 7 on one of my computers.
mkshuttles is just an ass but does drop on a good point for 5 or so years down the line.
I would hapily purchase Ubuntu 15.04 or what ever it will be at the time if its a reasonable price. For example, if they arnt greedy and ask something like £5 or £10 then I would happily open my wallet. At the moment I would, but Ubuntu does not have enough of a true following to take such a drastic move. I feel linux as a whole would need to have roughly 25% of the desktop market before this or it would just turn people away.
Bah, donating to a distro and calling yourself a FOSS supporter is like donating to the United Way and calling yourself a philanthropist.
Most Linux pros I know will gladly pay for box sets, etc… if anything we buy garbage like World of Goo JUST because its on Linux.
No problem with what Canonical is doing, you can charge for free(libre) software, even the FSF says so.
I do have problems having closed proprietary software offered because it of what #9.Roman says above.
You seem to be talking about “consumers” and consumer level desktop software rather than enterprise customers, so I won’t veer into the area of corporate examples like SAP, Lotus, IBM, etc.
– - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
Linux users have always been willing to pay a reasonable price for good quality software.
But — and this is a crucial point — it has to actually be good — there’s lots of “good enough” free (both gratis and/or libre) alternatives, and usually “just as good” software, not to mention lots of “not quite as brain-dead, know-nothing, learn-nothing easy — but still very good” alternatives. As an added bonus, almost all of them are “we don’t treat our customers like crooks” software.
In addition, Linux users are better informed, and thus much less prone to confuse techno-glitz with substantive quality, or marketing with innovation. Slapping a pretty interface on standard utilities and straightforward functionality doesn’t merit Gee-wiz! prices.
In fact, as various cross-platform experiments have demonstrated, Linux users may actually be willing to pay MORE for good or creative software. Someone already mentioned the annual Humble Indie Bundles, in which Windows, Mac and Linux users are offered game bundles on a “name your own price” basis (they consistently find that Linux users pay twice as much as Windows users, and more than Mac users).
But second-rate software just won’t cut it. One good example was Nero’s initial foray into the Linux market. It wasn’t very good at all, but it cost $40, and Linux users sneered (with good reason). However, instead of whining that “Linux users won’t pay for software”, Nero knuckled down on worked to make a good product that measured up to the competition. Today, Nero’s current Linux product actually gets quite good reviews, has come down in price, and is even the preferred disk-burning software of some Linux users (go figure).
I remember when I first got into Linux. I started using Mandrake Linux and was a faithful customer of their boxed CD sets.
Every six months I would pay $75-$80 for their Mandrake Power Pack which had more software, utilities and polish than did their download version.
I remember thinking that if I would’ve stuck with Windows XP, it would have been cheaper. But I was interested in Linux as my only OS and, for a quality product, I gladly spent the extra money to get just that–and support, too.
The idea that Linux users do not like paying for anything is a myth that probably has its roots in the early days when Linux was more of a hacker’s OS instead of a mainstream OS.
One thing is clear: if one distribution starts to charge money for their OS/software, that software had better be worth the price of admission since there are many other distributions that can make a lot of features available for free.
I have switch to Linux Mint. Ubuntu will slowly go away. Ubuntu’s latest release, while the press says it is good, it terrible and unusable. And like Microsoft they now want to charge us for garbage.
You know, to make this worth it until desktop Linux is on par (loading drivers and their availability, Adobe and others support, etc) with MAC OSX and Windows it would be in Fluendo’s and others best interest to make the software available for multiple years or something. API changes, newer kernels, etc tend to break apps so at least this way if you purchased a license for $50 from Fluendo or Nero it would be good going into the future in upwards of Ubuntu 18.04?
Coldfusion, Oracle, DB2, Percussion, RHEL, SLES – I think you mean “the masses of Desktop users” have a problem with a price above $0.00
To me Linux is a reference point, even for Microsoft, it is what UNIX became. Its held up as a model for what an operating system should do and what people should expect of it.
Before UNIX there were “monitor” programs but most computing was a one off affair. Commericalizing or sustaining a development “market” for software had to be invented.
In my opinion Bill Gates took software from paperbook “add-on” to software “with a users guide”.
Next Waite took the “user guide” to a standalone software book industry.
Jobs redefined what we should expect of a computer, imagewriter, wyswig, fonts, Xerox Parc interface 1.0 for the home.
Visicalc redefined the game console as a business tool.
Wordperfect redefined the text editor as a writing tool.
App stores are redefining the traditional software marketplace and are just as transformative.
As a customer it can be really really hard to find a piece of software that does what you want, or to just “browse” apps to think up new ways of doing things. The App store does that, it puts the software on a common shelf for sale.
Its different than comissioning a app or building it yourself, learning a macro language or a scripting language and debug hell.
Just another change in the way we do things. Ubuntu, Android or Amazon its a was to make buying things easy and that’s the innovation. Incidental that it might help a distro to become popular.