Linked by David Adams on Tue 13th Dec 2011 03:12 UTC
Editorial I was reading today about how Linux Mint developers altered the Banshee music player source code to redirect affiliate revenue from Amazon music orders to them instead of Banshee. They've reportedly made less than $4, which has caused a kerfluffle among those paying attention to that corner of the world. But it raises a larger point that has been swirling around for a couple of decades: an OS vendor has a lot of power to influence, and even monetize their user base. Where should they draw the line?
Thread beginning with comment 500079
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Wed 14th Dec 2011 07:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
Member since:

The trouble is, the extra exposure isn't really worth anything if everybody gets it. Since you have to jump through hoops to get your software into the store, as more people rely on the store, you become unwilling participants.

A fine example is the app BBEdit by Bare Bones Software. To get the latest version of BBedit in the Apple store, they had to remove certain features that simply cannot be implemented within Apple's sandboxing APIs that were added to MacOS X a few versions back. Now, they must sell an inferior product to satisfy Apple's requirements, while maintaining a separate, feature complete version for people who buy directly.

It's easy to look at the success of smaller indy developers, and point to app stores as a major component of that success, but being featured on a good indy review site could be just as effective, nearly as accessible, and without having to compromise on features or your ability to provide full and proper support for your customers.

Reply Parent Score: 2