Forums

Whether it's "fair" or not, who cares? The authors went in with eyes open, knowing what they would get. While I agree with Mueller to a certain degree, and I think his arguments are reasonable, I just don't get why he's making a big deal out of this. How is it harming HIM? It just sounds like he's choking on sour grapes.

And I don't really care if Phill & Co. are making money on this venture. Why shouldn't they? Why should they do it all for free? I bet they're actually going to net a lot less than people think, with all the hosting and bandwidth charges they'll be facing at the end of the month.

Considering 500 gigs a bandwidth a month now costs about $10, even if they were going through 50 terabytes a month, that'd only be a $1000

John seemed to be looking at this with somewhat of an agenda in mind (maybe to stir up controversy), and what probably offended me the most was him basically calling all 10 bundle developers idiots for joining.

They're not, and there are three pretty important reasons why they each took a long, hard look at the agreement and decided it was worth it.

1) Huge publicity and exposure. So far, many of the developers involved are actually seeing boosted sales of their products on their sites due to MacHeist, possibly from people who decide to purchase their application full price vs. the bundle. And, now everyone will be exploring the rest of the apps by these developers. Here's a quote from Wil Shipley in an Ars Technica interview:

And no, Wil Shipley is neither an idiot nor a bad businessman.

2. Not all bundle customers are lost "real customers". This is something people seem to be "overlooking" with some fuzzy math. In their math, they tend to assume that every single person who purchased the bundle would've bought the app... which is an insane, insane exaggeration. Bundle dev Oliver Breidenbach (FotoMagico) shed some light on this situation in his MacDev Center post:

3. Upgrade fees. Yes, bundle customers, you are now customers. And as common in the shareware business, every couple years, with a huge major upgrade, there tend to be upgrade fees. And this factored in as well. Again, Wil from the Ars Technica interview:

There's a lot more to say... but Gruber doesn't say it. Which is why you should take his article with a grain of salt. It's biased, extremely biased.

Co-Creator of MacHeist, Clear, Partner at tap tap tap | follow me on twitter

Why should he? This site is a major promotion, and he's basically getting free promotion for himself by attacking it. It's not like this is an uncommon tactic. I suppose for me, what sums up the whole issue is, if there is no value to this, why are the developers participating? Clearly it's a bit of a gamble on their behalf, but they think it has the potential to help them. While they could be wrong, it could also easily work out. There is no magic formula that will work for every developer, and I'm just glad the developers are part of a promotion that's so fun.

Silver Snakes Assemble!

Join Dropbox today and get an extra 250MB. Click here for details!

Um.. Given all that has been going on Phill, how did you find time to post this?  LOL!

Been Drinking the Mac KoolAid since 1984
See You in the Land Of The Useless
Neon Charity Films

Well, for better or for worse, I felt you guys should get my thoughts on this before anyone else.

Co-Creator of MacHeist, Clear, Partner at tap tap tap | follow me on twitter

Gruber, Dvorak. Same kind of people, drive people to their sites by being controversial and outrageous. Works every time, sadly enough.

Don't be afraid...of the dark...
There's a light...at the end of the tunnel...
And a pot of gold...at the end of the rainbow...

Whoa, now. Let's not compare Gruber to Dvorack. Gruber actually produces a shareware application people like and use. Dvorak just produces a lot of hot air.

True. That came out a bit too rude actually. What I meant was that both like to stir up some tension, like this bit, or the other one about Disco. Sure enough, he has some good bits as well, while Dvorak..well, he's just sad.

Footnote: I actually read Daring Fireball on a regular basis, but I do not always agree with what Gruber writes, that's all.

Don't be afraid...of the dark...
There's a light...at the end of the tunnel...
And a pot of gold...at the end of the rainbow...

Well, Gruber says what he thinks and is not poiltically correct. I prefer that to hypocrisy (ie: counting the charity money instead of the total money; remember, they're directly proportional). But marketing is alway hypocritical, a necessary evil.
By the way, what is John Gruber's app?
Davide

I have a couple of opinions on this..

First. If Phill managed to convince the developers to sell for a flat fee, then he is a much better business man than I originally gave him credit for. And congratulations for that. I would love to be in your shoes Phill.

Another point that everyone has failed to mention is that MacHeist discourages piracy. Even if the developers aren't getting rich, they're not getting ripped off. Like many others in this thread have stated, if they did not want to participate, they would not have.

http://forrst.com

Yeah, normally I agree with what Gruber says, but he has his “moments”. The developers knew exactly what they were getting into, so I see no problem. Who cares if the “standard” cut is 10%? All that matters is that everyone involved is happy, and I think they are. This is capitalism at its best.

What Gruber is against is not the fact that this IS a deal, and both parties profit of it. The DF article is against the cheesy rethoric of the happy community supporting the indie developers. People is doing this for money, I bought the bundle because it was a deal, etc.
Phill is a genius, a marketing genius, but this is not a website supporting the developers community. It's an enterprise, a successful one. As Sage wisely said (pun!) this is capitalism, and even at its best, it's based on self interest. Charity's just a bait.
Marketing folks are free to use their jargon, but anyone is free to criticise their assumptions. And, again, the 'NewsFire counter' set to the charity money is laughable, as if it was WWF issuing the app...

The way I see it, Gruber and the others whose articles I read are hypocrites as well.  They try to pass themselves off as for the indie developers...yet in their articles they try to take away the very independence of the indie devs by saying how every dev should sell or market (actually, not market) his or her software.  Not only are Gruber and Mueller coming down on MH, they're also coming down on the devs who agreed to participate.  It's a case of "you have the right to be independent and do as you please...as long as I agree with what you do".

But really, DID the developers know what they were getting into? They may have known exactly how much they would get paid, but there was no way to tell how many copies of their software would be sold in the bundle. At least if they got a percentage they would know how much they would be making per copy.

Pot calling the kettle black...?

They knew what they were getting to. Our sales so far are in the range of what I told them we were expecting.

And no, "pot calling the kettle black" doesn't apply. Gruber supposedly has a reputation of being, like, a relatively professional "journalist"/blogger. In which case, he should be attempting to paint both sides of the story. I'm simply the target of his attack article defending myself.

Co-Creator of MacHeist, Clear, Partner at tap tap tap | follow me on twitter

also... it's one thing to say... look how much money they are making now.

But there were no guarantees.  What if it didn't sell?

$5000 per dev (if that's true) is a safe choice for the developer.  MacHeist took on some risk to put up that money without knowing exactly how many sales.

Would people be saying devs got a bad deal MacHeist they only sold 1000 units for the week? Total earnings ~$40,000 - $10,000 (charity) => $30,000 revenue and $50,000 in costs?

(I don't have any inside info on the prices, just going with the blog postings)

arn

You sumed up my thought perfectly. I'm a fan of Daring Fireball, but John Gruber does have "his moments". This is one of them.

Back on my two feet

The funny thing is that are saying that this is hurting all of the "real independents" and they are encouraging people to go buy some shareware at full price directly from the developers site. One developer (who doesn't even have a product to sell) bought 5 apps for $104 as his way of protesting the MacHeist.

Of course, why are they doing this?

BECAUSE of MacHeist!!

So the "cause" of the thing they say is hurting shareware generates all of this non-bundle shareware purchasing? So how is this bad again?

(\__/)
(='.'=)   This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(")   signature to help him gain world domination.

I don't see any problems with how MacHeist is dealing with this whole thing. I actually see them as almost venture capitalists. They are taking a risk with their own resources (time, money, and reputations) and helping many small shareware developers (I've never even heard of FotoMagico before the bundle was released). They're being backed by some big names, Delicious Library and NewsFire for example, to help with publicity.

Did they stand to lose anything? Yes, the bundle could have sold poorly and they would have been out a lot of money to many different groups (developers, advertisers, hosts), but they took a chance and they will profit dearly. Almost every venture capitalist, or anyone who is doing something to support others in a capital-based system is also doing it for their own benefit. Problems arise when the investors benefit but those they intended to help do not. I don't believe this is the case here as I see all sides benefiting.

1. the small developers: Many of them would have never have earned this much (in revenues or publicity) on their own. Yes they are loosing money through the bundle compared to selling their app at full price, but they would never see anywhere near this amount of customers.
2. the larger developers (Delicious Library and the like): I see them gaining in publicity. Would they have gotten the business of many MacHeists if their app was not in the bundle? I think they would. Pinky von Pout posted about how she bought the app shortly before the bundle, and I personally would have bought it when it went 2.0. Where they gain is in publicity. As popular as their apps may be some people don't know about them. Through macheist they are spreading their sphere of influence, which they depend on for their sales. (I remember reading somewhere that DL brought in $150k in its first two days after being released mainly due to word of mouth on peoples' blogs.)
3. the directorate: They took a chance on an idea that they thought was clever, and it truly was, and are now profiting from it. Even though they could have offered better deals to the developers they found found takers in a realtivly short time (i'm assuming due to only one developer complain about the offer he turned down).
4. charities: they get donations, which is good, need I say more.
5. the buyers: Who doesn't love a great deal. For those people who own little or none of the bundle, MacHeist has turned out to be a great deal.

The losers:
1. Currently well established developers who wouldn't have benefitted from MacHeist. These are the people complaining and rightfully so, as they are having new comers encroaching on their success.
2. developers who turned down the deal: They are really a neutral category as they don't get the $5k (or whatever the flat rate is) and publicity, but they didn't loose the revenues of full price sales.

Overall MacHeist benefits a good number of groups despite the protests of a select few. In the end I get some great apps, the developers of those apps are compensated in some way, and the  middlemen that offered me this discount are also profiting (I think phil's tuition is payed for now ). You will always find those opposed to your idea no matter how good it is, but if yourself and others benefit does it matter?

You know, I've been watching MacHeist with a critical eye because I've been suspicious of marketing for as long as I can remember.  I've already discouraged people from it, exactly because of the "version-lock does not make a full-priced app" that I've said before elsewhere here.

With that in mind, I also was thinking "pot calling the kettle black" with regards to Phill's most recent explanatory post, but not because I think he ripped off the developers, but because of the comment, "John seemed to be looking at this with somewhat of an agenda in mind."  Seemed to.  Somewhat.  Horrors.  Unlike the agenda of marketing, if marketing is anything but agenda.  Tell me the decision to showcase "$ Earned for Charity" was not in part driven by the desire to get people in a feel-good state and excited about purchasing the bundle.  Agenda.  Pot.  Kettle.

Before someone brings up the word "reporter", John Gruber isn't a reporter, he's an Apple-pundit and technology analyst/blogger who is normally up-front about his bias (though I too feel that he dropped the ball on this one).  Just because he's getting page hits out of it doesn't mean it's not something worth talking about.  Please leave the straw-man alone; he has a Wizard to go see.

It's sad that this has become an angry discussion.  I don't think either side is listening to what the other side is saying, because they're too busy reacting to personal attacks.  Phill's "riding our coat-tails" passive-agressive slam is just as bad as Gruber's "the MH devs are idiots" knee-jerk.

So this is an appeal for people to think not in the terms of us-vs-them, even if you're an us, or a them.  Otherwise, this is just another internet flame-war fueled by nothing but belief.

Which is exactly what Macintosh Independent Developers do not need.

And I'd rather get back with all of you guys throwing eggs at Microsoft.  Thanks.

John Gruber is generally a nice read. Hardly, if ever, objective though. Read enough blogs and you will find enough opinions for and against anything. John has a tendency to believe that his opinion is the most astute, and in the market he is trying to play in that kind of attitude is needed. I have read enough of his writing over the years to honestly just enjoying his writing, like an old Journey song you don't want to admit you like, but not really take his opinions to heart…after all they are his opinions.

Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves…Abraham Lincoln

And of course people seem to forget that yes, while we are Mac users, no, we're not made of money. I'd love to spend $100 or $200 supporting both top-tier and lesser-known quality Mac products, but I don't have that much money to spend on that, and I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that a lot of people don't either. I guess that lands me in the category of "greedy" and "selfish", as made by other people who've commented on MacHeist.

?

Sad? It's sad that you and your side have to pile all of this collective hatred and invectives on The Directorate, the devs who took part in MH, and on the people who took part in it. So in your view, Phill, John and the others should just grin and bear the collective slammings of people from all across the Mac Web/Mac Community, with no entitlement to defend themselves or explain their position at all. Convenient for you, isn't it?

If you and others like you really hate MacHeist and The Directorate as much as your collective posts here and on other forums and blogs seem to suggest, why don't you do something constructive with your discontent and anger?

a) Make your own MacHeist - try to one-up Phill et al. by creating your own version of the MH bundle with a set of apps where the pricing scheme is something more that you would approve of. You've certainly got the backing of devs like Gus at Flying Meat, the people at ThinkMac, and probably the people at Rogue Ameoba...

b) Buy it all yourself - maybe you yourself have $104 to spend on Mac software; and if you object to the way that they're contributing to charity, why don't you match it with a contribution of equal amount to a charity of your own choosing?

In fact, here's a better idea: how about you guys set up a website, call it, oh, I don't know, "AntiHeist" or something where you can make up a pool of people to contribute money to a kitty which you can use to buy a whole bunch of apps with/or donations to charity. Or how about you a site which you could call "Match Me", where you get people to buy Mac shareware apps, and for every dollar they spend, you could match that with a charitable donation?

There are whole bunch of better ideas I'm sure. And I'm also sure they'd be much more "Fairer" in your book than what Phill is doing. Why don't you concentrate your energies into something like that rather than to just spew out accusations and ivory-tower/moral high-horse judgements on others?

I'm fine with a little friendly disagreement and structured, civilized dissent, but this rash of people feeling all high-and-mighty with their outward righteous indignation is just lame. I get enough of that crap from Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, James Dobson et al.

Marathon Forever.
AppShelf: MacHeist 3 Loot
AppShelf: nanoBundle 1
Check Reciept Page for nanoBundle 2 AppShelf Files.

I'm not on anyone's "side".  I think a lot of people have been acting foolishly and think they should stop and take a breath.  If I'm on anyone's side, I'm on the side of finding conversation instead of making disparaging personal comments and assumptions, which a lot of people on both "sides" have been making.

(*ahhem*)

Some other points...

Version lock:

iLife 04, 05, 06
Quicken 2000-2006
OS X & Windows

If I bought any of them was I "version locked". After all, when the new one comes out I have to pay again if I want it.

Second, I've bought THOUSANDS of dollars worth of software over the years and in 99% of the cases, I didn't get some sort of special bundle deal. So while there may be some people out there who may only take advantage of a super deal, there are plenty of us out here who have paid full price a lot.

(\__/)
(='.'=)   This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(")   signature to help him gain world domination.

Well, your post seems to suggest that you've taken a side, by actively discouraging people from taking part in MacHeist. You could have just said to people, "hey, here are a list of links for and against what Phill is doing - I don't like it myself, but you can form your own opinion about it".

And how does "version lock" make the apps that we've been given not real apps? We get minor-point releases and bug fixes, just like the paid owners of those apps do (see 1Passwd, CTM, and Cha-Ching); we have to pay for major upgrades, again, just like what they generally are called to do. If "version lock" means that apps aren't "real" then by extension MS Office isn't "real"; neither is iLife, or iWork.

Marathon Forever.
AppShelf: MacHeist 3 Loot
AppShelf: nanoBundle 1
Check Reciept Page for nanoBundle 2 AppShelf Files.

I love MacHeist. I love Daring Fireball. I'm a member of both. Doesn't mean I haven't had issues with them (I'm still waiting for my DB t-shirt ). Gruber is a very good writer and has been a great source for mac related news for me. I most assuredly don't agree with him here though.

Yes there is a lot of spin in MH's marketing but so what? As a consumer I'm getting a lot of apps I'm fairly interested in but never would have been able to justify paying full price for. As developers they're getting a bit of money and exposure to me that makes it much more likely I'll at least give their product a try.

Delicious Library is a great example for how good this can be for them. I may or may not have purchased it when 2.0 comes out and when I've been able to save up for an Intel Mac but now he will absolutely for sure be getting my upgrade money. I never would have paid the $40 for the 1.x version due to being a student and all the crap that goes along with it. I've always been a fan and this just further strengthened my feelings toward Delicious Monster.

I've always thought one of the greatest benefits of communities/situations like MacHeist is the community in and of itself. It brings the developer closer to their users and vice-versa. Will even mentions that concept in his interview. User base loyalty is one of the most sought after and difficult things to solidify for any developer. Anti-posts/blogs don't make me more loyal even if I agree with a person's point. Being involved in one way or another with a community that I appreciate and enjoy most assuredly does. It just, in some small or large way, makes me feel closer to the dev.

"It has become appallingly clear that our technology has surpassed our humanity."
- Albert Einstein

Please allow me to have original thoughts based on personal expectations and belief.

Also please don't assume I don't do this.  In seeing me as one of "them", you assign me baggage that makes any discussion with you difficult.

See how that works?  Now, imagine if Macintosh shareware industry folk are doing this.

If I said "real" I should have meant "full".  My apologies on this.  I'll give an example.  (Skip ahead if you're not interested in how I came up with this.  And thanks for the Directorate for letting me be less than Sunshine McLovesALot.  If I'm wrong, I see it as academic review; things tested make them stronger.)

Say I pick up YummyFTP from MacAppADay.  (Which I did.  I love the thing.)  Say I find a bug in it, and I mail the developer.  Then, say, YummyFTP 1.6 comes out which solves my problem.  The developer is completely within his rights to say, "Yeah, sorry, we don't support free apps." While if I pay for the app (which is exactly what the developer hopes I do), I'll get the full treatment, fixed bugs, tweaked features, and all the other point-release goodies that people paying for an app expect.  Otherwise, I might as well assume I'm stuck at 1.5.3.  After all, I didn't pay for the app; what right do I have to their privileges?  And thus, version lock.

Nothing's wrong with this; I'm giddy that Yummy decided to do it this way because I have as long as long as I want to review the app.  (No, I couldn't do it in 30 days.  Yes, I know, I suck.)  But if I'm not getting the full treatment, I don't consider having a full app.  If I don't have a full app, I certainly don't have $25 worth of goods.  (From MacHeist, Chat Transcript Manager is my golden catch.)

The point of my comment about version-lock at all was to cast doubt on the sanctity and forthrightness of MacHeist, who tells me that I have, say, $26 worth of goods in DrawIt.  I'm told this not because I have a full application, but because it makes MacHeist look better, and it raises their percieved value based on a half-truth.

Am I wrong?  I don't think so.  Am I looking a gift horse in the mouth?  Oh yes, definitely.  Am I ungrateful?  No, but that doesn't mean I'm giddy with excitement, either.

(By the way, I have no idea if DrawIt suffers from version lock; it was just the most expensive one in the free batch.)

(By the way #2, I'm not ungrateful for even version locked apps and see it as extended trialware and the gift that it is.  I think it's a fantastic idea.  I'm objecting to the way the value was distorted.  I'm not frothing at the mouth about that, either, it just feels wrong.)

(By the way #3, There's a lot I agree with MacHeist about.  I just think enough people are hitting those points that I'd be another Me Too, and sitting around nodding at each other and patting one another on the back isn't a discussion.  Plus, this post is way too long already.)

... are, so far, exceptions.  Bravo to these developers, who are much braver than I would be.  I hope it works for them.  Even so, there shouldn't be an expectation for a developer to do what they are doing.  These developers are adding to the value by giving us all something we have no right to expect.

Others (Devon Technologies, for instance, via MacAppADay) are offering a discount to upgrade, which is also giving us something.  Both of these are tangible values, and even the act of offering is a huge intangible value.

Which is really, really cool.

---

I know none of this has anything to do with if MH is fair to developers; I'll agree that it's not at all unfair to the shareware developers who are in MacHeist, but to those who aren't, MacHeist is popular and popular things can change the norms.  I think Mac devs have every right to question what's changing.

Just as the MacHeist group have the right to defend their actions.

I just wish everyone would be nicer about it.

Interesting discussion, and more balanced than I might expect here in the belly of MacHeist.

I think Gruber has a point in calling MH on its spin. MH is 99% fluff and 1% meat. The puzzles are gorgeously designed, but are really just "find the URL" games with some good humor and some inventive twists and turns. Anything, and I mean ANYTHING, that smells so much of marketing and spin and viral whatsits should be examined closely to see whether there's any beef between the buns.

But then, I'm not sure this spin has much to do with people's actions. Read the forums here. There's more folks bitching about being poor students with no money who can't afford software and therefore they're entitled to get it for free. (And more than one has suggested that they'd crack/pirate the software if they didn't get it through this legitimate channel!)

I see nary a post that says, "I'm buying the bundle because I want to support United Way!" let alone, "I'm here to SUPPORT INDEPENDENT DEVELOPERS!"

No, we're all here for the free schwag. Some of us are also here for the entertaining puzzles, but we aren't above sneaking into the Backroom forum when the timer's running out on a heist and we really want that copy of Soulver or whatever.

Same goes for MacAppADay, MacZot, MacUpdate, etc... We like it cuz it's cheap.

It's up to the MH crew and the developers and the admins of all those other weird promo sites to determine whether the acquisition cost of a new customer (i.e. the potential lost sale) is worth the risk that you'll never convert that customer to a paying upgrader.

I'm sure every developer has a model (whether a formal one or something they just feel is right) that tells them that out of the thousands of copies they're giving software to, they'll get a hundred or so folks who will pony up when it comes time to get that next upgrade. Some of them encourage this by point-upgrade-limiting their software; some encourage it by giving you an old version of the software; others just hope you'll shell out for the next x.0 upgrade, and leave it at that.

So we've got an upgrade cycle or two to go before we know whether or not this will all bear fruit for the developers themselves.

And one last thought: The devs are a bunch of dirty stinking capitalists, too. Why are they more or less entitled to profit than the MacHeist folks? Why aren't they more or less entitled? And now extend that to every other industry; why aren't you equally entitled to a share of your company's profits as, say, the CEO with her six million dollar bonus plan and golden parachute?

iNik.net: Your best place for weird Mac geekery and crappy software!

Your point number 2 strikes me as amusing given the other outrage about MacHeist claiming to support indie developers.  It's in the Indie Developers' interest to point out the true value of their apps (that we're getting for free in a limited version for this limited promotion), not just or even mainly MacHeist.  I could care less how much they cost - unless I later want to buy them.  At first, I only care if it's something useful or interesting to me.  So that price being shown is a good thing, IMHO. 

Whistle while you work.  Patience is key.

One other comment I've been bursting to make on every little piece of this discussion I've read around the web: What about the ACTUAL, REAL MONEY that is going to charities?! 

Sure, dismiss it as marketing spin.  That doesn't mean real money isn't really going to charities?  Are all you peeps really so jaded that even (or especially) in the holiday season reknowned for peace and giving, that the charity angle is nothing more than an angle, the actual money going to charities is completely incidental? 

Sure, it has positive benefits for MacHeist to give to charities.  Doesn't mean they had to do it, and it could quite possibly been just as successful without that angle (especially if the majority of purchasers are as sadly jaded as most of the commenters here and elsewhere...). 

Note too, that if the "flat-fee" is true (I don't give a fig whether it is or not, unlike others I don't assume that the developers participating are dumb or being taken for a ride so they got a deal that worked for them), then the charity is basically all coming out of MacHeist gross - before expenses even. 

I'm going to stop here, or you guys will get a full-on three-page rant. 

Whistle while you work.  Patience is key.

hi, i'm a lurker here on the boards but felt the need to throw my support to Phil and the rest of the crew.

Phil, at the end of the day, remember that you're the one living up to the ideal that is Macintosh. You, the rest of your team, and the bundle developers are the ones who can "Think Different". All of this negitivity is comming from people who are still stuck in a microsoft way of thinking, sure Gruber and the VoodooPad guy might use a Macintosh; but they themselves aren't Macintosh.

While your building a community that is willing to be daring and take risks, they pick at what you do and insist that things should never change.

Stagnation only leads to failure.

~alea iacta est~

I would be less skeptical of the whole charity deal if it weren't so closely tied with the number of sales, and thus profit for MacHeist. Everyone who bought the bundle before the locked apps are release has a vested interest in getting more people to purchase the bundle. So by selling us the bundle, they just got a few thousand more people to advertise it for them for free. They even included a handy little counter for us to track our progress. All in the name of charity.

Brilliant, yes... ethical, not so sure.

Think about it this way. If instead of the charity money counter, they showed the "MacHeist profit counter", and said "we'll unlock these apps after we make $100,000 and $200,000" how would you feel then?

Of course the MacHeist people will say their true intention is to raise more money for charity, but how do we know that... for every dollar that goes to charity they make three more in profit (after costs are covered).

I’m here to support independent developers. That’s why I’m no buying the bundle.

I came to that decision today, even as we (or you) approach the $50,000 mark.

DL: I don’t need it, and use freeware applications instead. If I use them more in time, I’ll donate to them. (Books, DVD Attache)

FM: Don’t need it. I have Mousepose and think it’s great.

SS: Already have it, along with ALL of their products. I still wish they would update Echo, by the way.

DT: I have the Pro version, and have also purchased Devon Agent from them. Superb company with amazing products.

Disco: What can I say that I haven’t said before? I should AppZapp it. Even though I also have Toast, I may donate to Burn eventually. I truly hated seeing Disco as part of the bundle.

RW: Don’t need it. If Sandvox ever has a good offer I would purchase it instead. Those guys gave us the great Watson. They deserve our support. Nothing against RW, by the way.

iC: Already have it. From what I remember I have a free upgrade to version 4 when it comes out. Oh, and I also have ShadowClipboard, and donated to Butler.

That reminds me, I also donated for Textpander which evolved into TextExpander so I got the latter for free. It pays to support developers

PG: Enigmo 2 seems interesting, and years ago I played a lot of Nanosaur. I prefer not to spend on games now, but Enigmo 2 is definitely interesting. The arcade one reminded me of playing Missile Command, Centipede (or was it Galaga), and Asteroids. Anyone remember Defender?

NF: First, a developer that offers an application contingent on a number of donations is not my preferred choice. I already use MacReporter. After a few years I think I’ve been charged once for an upgrade. Love it.

TM: I don’t need it. I don’t know how it compares to Smultron or TextWrangler, which are free, but anyway this is not for me. And worse than NF in terms of being contingent upon sales.

I was unfamiliar with NewsFire and TextMate, and now I don’t want to do anything with them. Were they too good for us? Better than the other apps? Not for me.

I keep reading that the bundle is a great value, you save hundreds of dollars, even if you don’t need it you can gift it, and so on.

If I go to a store and see tampons on sale, 80% off, should I buy them? I guess some people will, but I won’t. They’re just not for me.

It’s great to see that many people are buying the bundle, charities are being helped, and most people are happy with MacHeist.
I know I’m happy with it. It’s been an interesting experience.

It would be interesting to know about the MacHeist audience. Some of the programs I think are amazing, such as Devon Think, are not that exciting to many users from what I have read. Some that I don’t care about or think that are awful are highly praised here, such as Disco.
Maybe an option of having 20 applications and letting people choose 10 would work if this ever gets done again.

Most recent software purchases:
SpellCatcher
NovaMind
Merlin

Great software that is not often mentioned: Chartsmith, WorkStrip.

Great alternatives to shareware/freeware: Pint-ware (FinderPOP), and some I don’t remember were Postcard Ware and Send-Anything-Ware (a button, a toy, a pebble, a poem, a drawing, but NO money).

Maybe if I hadn’t supported so many developers I would have purchased the bundle

Look Ma, no teeth!

Oh, Bob -- I *so* agree with you. I'm not buying the bundle either... I prefer to save money to buy other more needed and wanted applications as (1) upgrading from DT Pro to DT Pro Office, (2) the incredible amazing Scrivener, (3) File Buddy, (4) FoxTrot search application, (5) NetNewsWire.

And, yes, I was also shocked with the inclusion of Disco! I really am less than disappointed with it so far. (Even liking the UI.) Since when Disco is an award-winner of something valid? I'm still hoping it will improve, but -- really -- Toast is in a completely different league.

(Btw, I doubt NewsFire has won any award either.)

My only sorrow is about RapidWeaver. But I wouldn't be using it right now, so I'll wait and check other applications for webdesigning. (Hey, I might even be geeky enough to try Dreamweaver.)

☆ Dropbox referral ☆
Extra note: "I don't think I've ever been a part of a true disaster before."

Interesting thread.  I read the critical articles with interest as well.  Here's my 2c:

This entire exercise is a wager on the part of developers.  They are hoping that participating will get them market exposure, some bundle sales to people who wouldn't otherwise have purchased the product, and some upgrade fees from people who got the product in the bundle.  Note that Delicious Monster seems to be timing their pre-release marketing for Delicious Library 2 to go along with all of this.  They will get some value added over and above their license fee for the bundle.  They don't know how much because, correct me if I'm wrong, there are no good metrics for what participation in something like this will get you on the back end.

And on the other hand, as the critics point out, the developers will have to (or should) provide support for these folks.  An interesting calculation, but I think it comes out in favor of "what the hell" if you are a new player in the business or, as Phil puts it, at the bottom of the mountain.

What really drives the criticism seems to something unrelated to this core argument, ie. people think that the Directorate is making too much money for the amount of work that they have done and whatever value (your guess is as good as mine or better) the developers are getting from participating in the deal.  My response to this is, well, maybe.  I don't know.  We live in a weird world, where a first year lawyer in a big law firm makes twice as much or more than an experienced nurse at a hospital.  But it's hardly going to destroy shareware if we know it is some people cash in, even disproportionately, on a good idea.

The more interesting question for me is not whether this is a good deal for the developers, but what this whole exercise tells us about the state and value of shareware for the consumer.  I have to tell you that my own experience was pretty negative.  But that's another topic.

Great choices.
I was unaware of Scrivener until last week. I downloaded ScrivenerGold and ScrivenerGoldRCb4, but haven’t had time to try them. From what I’ve read I think I will like it

Look Ma, no teeth!

The measure of true selflessness is to give money to charity without trumpeting it.

I wanted to add that RealMac Software, the makers of bundle app RapidWeaver, posted on their blog about MacHeist. They pretty much have the same opinion as other participating developers: their standalone sales have increased, they're happy about getting more exposure, they're OK with the flat fee, and they're amazed with the charity money. Cool guys Read the post:

Be sure to read the full blog post for more and a list of links to debates of MacHeist around the web.

Back on my two feet

Well, the people who joined the Nazi party or Hitler Youth should have. Things would work a lot better if people made more conscious decisions.

In this case, I think it is the developers who participated in Hacheist that went in with their eyes open, not the fanatics who see it as a vile corruption.

Ouch! Godwin bites again.

For the record folks, it was this guy who invoked Godwin, not me.

Marathon Forever.
AppShelf: MacHeist 3 Loot
AppShelf: nanoBundle 1
Check Reciept Page for nanoBundle 2 AppShelf Files.

Another blog post by a bundle developer:

http://www.realmacsoftware.com/blog/fil … t_hate.php

(\__/)
(='.'=)   This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(")   signature to help him gain world domination.

It may make one feel good to silently do charity, but does it actually work better? Charity should be about getting results, not feeling more selfless than others.

As Will Shipley said in his interview, being vocal about charity encourages others to participate - thus increasing the effect of charity. A charity is not going to do much good if nobody notices.

The same goes for non-monetary charity. If people see you helping someone on the street - say someone who has been injured - they are more likely to help someone who is injured next time, rather than just walking past and ignoring it.

Why not use the sense of guilt for good? It's not like guilt is going away, just as greed is here to stay.

My 2 cents on this.
If I know I can get a piece of software cheaper by waiting for it to be on MacZot, or MacHeist, and I don't need it right away, of course I will wait for it, and I will not feel bad about giving less money to a developper since it is his responsability to value his software and to not participate in such operation if it doesn't seem fair to him.

It's a bit like p2p, the RIAA and MPAA argue that every piece of copyrighted material exchanged on the network is a lost sale, and lost revenue, which is NOT because people would never actually buy all the content they acquired illegaly.
Same goes for MacHeist, I doubt that the "big apps" developpers involved are all making 6000 sales a week, and I'm sure that a lot of the licences acquired through MacHeist would never have been purchased, so in the end, the balance between the devaluation of the software, the exposure and the money that is actually getting in their pocket is probably a good deal for them, otherwise they would not participate. And since it's a one off, it works well as an advertisement for future sale at full price.

Now it's a bit different when those things become regular.
Look at AppZapper or Disco, those software have no more value to me, I would never ever buy them full price, they seem to serve as filler and function only at marketing level.
So you can't really compare them to TextMate or Delicious Library for instance, which are more innovative and useful. But when you start to, because for instance they appear together on a discounted bundle, they start devaluating the value of those better software in the public opinion. But yet again, if the developpers agree to this, it's their problem
However, I can understand that other developpers are a bit bitter and angry, because by devaluating big apps, it does tend to devaluate the value of ALL shareware in general. So in the end they get only the bad aspect, and not the benefit, and in some way if we see more of those bundle, it might even force them to participate because that would be the new way business is done, and this in my view gives way too much power to the MacHeist people, and a lot of money too.
I don't think that the developpers involved in MacHeist really thought that through, and who can blame them, it's good for them now, but what about the future of Mac Shareware, I think it's a different story, and I think that's what the critics are trying to raise awareness of.

Well, I've been absorbing alot of what has been said here and in blogs such as DB. I think there is another factor that people aren't considering (or at least have glossed over) which is the concept of Commission.

Lots of retail places offer commission and bonuses for selling products.

What Phil and Co. here have done, brilliantly I will add, is promote shareware and Independant developers. In exchange for their services, Shareware makers that have joined in are getting free promotion and exposure. Advertising and marketing. All things that would normally have extra costs involved.

For a flat fee gained, the developrs have been guaranteed a certain amount. It was up to Phil and Co. here to provide the appropriate 'selling savvy' and with it, they can make a commission. If they are incredibly successful, they get a bigger commission.

The issue with post like the one on DB is that Developers are being fleeced by people who have, in essence, done all the selling. I would say this is far from the truth. (somewhere around Pluto I think... poor fella was downsized too!)

The numbers on DB are pretty suspect. The only real concrete data we can garner is that, if MacHeist sells $200,000 or $400,000 in bundle sales (which will work out to be roughly 4100 or 8200 bundles, given that each bundle will sell for an average of just under $49.00 because a small percentage of bundles will go for no less than $39.00 but at least $47.00 - that's 1-5 Shareware Bux coupons) that the higher the number of sales, the higher the commission will be for MacHeist.

This is, of course, absolutely true. But it is not as insane as the DB post tries to indicate. For comparison, I will use DB numbers, round out a bit for easier math.

The constant values will be the amount paid to developers (flat fee which is undisclosed but has been estimated at around $60,000 based mostly on heresay and guesswork) and the overall cost to the Directorate for actually producing the entire MacHeist experience. (which seems to be pegged at an unexplained $30,000 in 'Other costs' on the DB site).

So from these numbers it looks like Macheist has just taken a potential of $110,000 in profit (using DB numbers to prove my example)

The breakdown:
• The entire 'Take': $400,000 (approximately 8200 bundles sold)
Minus:
• Developers are paid (as a whole) $60,000 (According to DB)
• Cost to completely run MacHeist (minus salaries) $30,000 (according to DB)
• 25% goes to Charity: (either $50,000 or $100,000 depending on which plateau is used) Lets use the big number $100,000.

The leftover money becomes $110,000.

These are using assumed numbers. But another factor that the DB post doesn't also point out is that where the $60,000 for Developers is split into smaller shares, so will the 'profit' amongst those that are 'employed' by MacHeist and it represents a commission based earnings. There is no salary. (which is better represented by a flat fee such as the Developers income).

If there are 22 people to pay that are employed by MacHeist, then there is an equal share of $5,000 per head ONLY IF $400,000/8200 sales plateau is reached. Anything smaller than that ultimate goal reduces the overal earned commissions. Doesn't seem so astronomical now, does it?

Of course, this is also speculation based on numbers provided as well as numbers I chose for easy math because it's past 1AM where I am.

All these numbers don't even take into account any (as has been used before) of the 'halo' effect that the promotional aspects of MacHeist has accomplished for the developers that have become involved with it.

This breakdown is what I like to call 'The glass is half full'. Everyone involved benefits. The 'Sales employees' of MacHeist earn based on how well they do. Not by scamming people. And the amount earned looks more realistic when it is broken down further and in a logical enough manner. The DB post only carries it so far (possibly to try and prove their point correct) but it is a flawed assumption It conveinently neglects some valid points to prove their own numbers.

Truth be told, the only ones who will know for sure will be the Directorate's team of crack accountants

Phil, you and the rest of the MacHeist team have done a wonderful job. And although there are some people that are questioning your motives, and others that have downright accused you of scamming, I for one bow to your accomplishments, both here and with My Dream App.

Strongblade!

"What Phil and Co. here have done, brilliantly I will add, is promote shareware and Independant developers. In exchange for their services, Shareware makers that have joined in are getting free promotion and exposure. Advertising and marketing. All things that would normally have extra costs involved."

I cannot agree with that, you can't be that general, MacHeist promoted some Independant developers, those who are willing to compromise on the cost of their software for exposure. For the others, those who do not participate, or refused to, it  is not a promotion, because the public sees now their product as too expensive and wait for a price cut (on a smaller scale, a simple look at MacZot comments is a perfect example of how it is happenning)
Furthermore, you can't say it is free promotion and exposure, it is not, software might be immaterial, but let's pretend it's not for a second, if I give away 6000 iPod a 25% of the normal price for a publicity stunt, I wouldn't say it's free exposure, mainly because I don't make a 75% profit on my normal sales!
Your "free" argument rely on the misconception that 100% of the price of software is profit, it's not.
When they make a deal with MacHeist, they "pay" for the exposure by decreasing their price. The money they don't get for the sale is the same money they would have to pay for advertisement. The problem that most people have is what part of those "advertisement cost" goes to MacHesit pocket.
I'm not saying MacHeist is not good marketing, I'm saying good marketing is not necesseraly very morale...

Another opinion

Don't be afraid...of the dark...
There's a light...at the end of the tunnel...
And a pot of gold...at the end of the rainbow...

Interesting. I don’t agree with a lot of what was written, though, including a couple of the pros and cons.

After reading this I checked my Application Enhancer settings, since I know I disabled some haxies. These are Shape Shifter, X Sounds, Mighty Mouse, and Menu Master.
I know that the first two have given me problems in the past. I don’t know whether the other two caused any problems, but I don’t use them.
I do find Font Card, Window Shade, and Fruit Menu useful additions to my system, but I don’t trust haxies 100%, and I know that many developers do not like them. I did a search and found the following:

http://www.redlien.com/blog/?p=32

http://www.glorifiedtypist.com/2005/11/ … vices.html

By now some issues may have been fixed. I have no idea.

If I didn’t have any of these programs, I would be interested in purchasing 2. I do support shareware, but for the most part these are not the programs I would purchase. And there doesn’t seem to be a minimum standard in the selection of these applications. Award-winning? Right
By the way, I regularly use a lot of software that probably has not won any awards, yet it is very useful and of high quality. Always remember that Jethro Tull won a Grammy for best Metal band, and not Metallica

Look Ma, no teeth!

All I know is that I can definitely agree that after purchasing one shareware app, you are more likely to buy more mac shareware apps.  I went from never purchasing them to purchasing them all the time.  Since this bundle was released, I've visited all of these developers' sites and I'm now considering buying some of their other products.

This being said...

I also think that this debate is kinda like beating a dead horse.  People seem to be overly divided on this issue and it seems that no one is able to sway anyone else's thoughts on this.  It's a definate matter of opinion where either side can bring up facts to support what they believe, but no one can prove their side with any degree of certainty because no one really knows what would happen if the situation was different.

What tragic failure! If Metallica would have gotten the Grammy for best metal album in '88, maybe they would have continued doing metal instead of boring mainstream hardrock with a few pseudo-metal riffs.

Seriously, I agree. Who cares for awards? I don't even know the people on those juries!

Fairies wear boots and you gotta believe me!