🚀 go-pugleaf

"Sundial Services" <info@sundialservices.com> skrev i melding
news:3A0317E5.630C@sundialservices.com...
> ("Hey, this is the internet .. just ask 'em!")
>
> Which do you prefer:
>   (a) A time or feature-limited demo that you can download for free.
>   (b) No demo -- what you get is full-featured -- but it carries a
> 30-day money back guarantee.
>
> I'm finding that when I take the time to download a product, which
might
> be three megabytes or more, I really don't want it to be "half of what
> it could be."  And I really don't want to feel that if the product
just
> does not work out, I can't return it.

Dear Sundial Services.

I acknowledge this. The ideal demo only requires a proper license number
to work without demo "naggings" after having purchased it. OK, at least
if there is substantial time involved in testing it.

One exception, though, with applications that needs a large installation
package - like installing MSAccess runtime libraries, installing BDE,
CrystalReports or similar. Then it may be convenient with a small,
stripped demo version that omits some functionality to keep installation
issues out.

> Now, even software -stores- don't want to take product back, yet
Borland
> offers such a guarantee against Delphi.  And, I mean, if Lands' End
can
> promise "Guaranteed, Period.�" on something like clothes ...

I buy all of my software (OK, 9 out of 10 packages) via Internet. *Very*
convenient to avoid a double money transaction, then. Go for the nag !
If you're still doing the ChimneySweep stuff, put some additional record
in each processed table or so, add passwords to tables, or modify the
data in some harmless but annoying way !

--
Bjoerge Saether
Consultant / Developer
Asker, Norway
bsaether.removethis@online.no (remove the obvious)

(thin smile...)  I shall never permit our product to do anything but its
very best for anyone's table, if it chooses to take-on processing that
table.  Modifying data, adding passwords, or anything of the sort is
completely unconscionable.

Obviously I -am- pondering the strategies for ChimneySweep�, which has
some unusual market characteristics formed by the nature of what it does
and the fact that it is often picked-up like a fire extinguisher .. when
there IS a fire.

But, I am also pondering the feelings that I do have when -I- buy
software, which is that I have usually made up my purchase decision
-before- I download anything.  And if, after having taken it home and
tried it on I decide it simply does not fit ...



>Bj�rge S�ther wrote:
> 
> "Sundial Services" <info@sundialservices.com> skrev i melding
> news:3A0317E5.630C@sundialservices.com...
> > ("Hey, this is the internet .. just ask 'em!")
> >
> > Which do you prefer:
> >   (a) A time or feature-limited demo that you can download for free.
> >   (b) No demo -- what you get is full-featured -- but it carries a
> > 30-day money back guarantee.
> >
> > I'm finding that when I take the time to download a product, which
> might
> > be three megabytes or more, I really don't want it to be "half of what
> > it could be."  And I really don't want to feel that if the product
> just
> > does not work out, I can't return it.
> 
> Dear Sundial Services.
> 
> I acknowledge this. The ideal demo only requires a proper license number
> to work without demo "naggings" after having purchased it. OK, at least
> if there is substantial time involved in testing it.
> 
> One exception, though, with applications that needs a large installation
> package - like installing MSAccess runtime libraries, installing BDE,
> CrystalReports or similar. Then it may be convenient with a small,
> stripped demo version that omits some functionality to keep installation
> issues out.
> 
> > Now, even software -stores- don't want to take product back, yet
> Borland
> > offers such a guarantee against Delphi.  And, I mean, if Lands' End
> can
> > promise "Guaranteed, Period.�" on something like clothes ...
> 
> I buy all of my software (OK, 9 out of 10 packages) via Internet. *Very*
> convenient to avoid a double money transaction, then. Go for the nag !
> If you're still doing the ChimneySweep stuff, put some additional record
> in each processed table or so, add passwords to tables, or modify the
> data in some harmless but annoying way !
> 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sundial Services :: Scottsdale, AZ (USA) :: (480) 946-8259
mailto:info@sundialservices.com  (PGP public key available.)
> Fast(!), automatic table-repair with two clicks of the mouse!
> ChimneySweep(R):  "Click click, it's fixed!" {tm}
> http://www.sundialservices.com/products/chimneysweep

My experience with "no refund" policy.  Sabine Consulting FTP program,
works nicely, but I goofed and purchased after the limit of 3 image
activations.  Asked for refund, met with stone wall.  Worked thru my
credit union, the recovered money, then I got a letter from them
threatening to file federal charges against me for interstate commerce
fraud.  Had a phone conversation with my CU representative in the room. 
Sabine's husband is, IMHO, arrogant, beligerant, and in no way was he
willing to listen to me.  At one point, he said, "We've got your money
and you're not getting it back --- don't you see that?"  BTW, I needed
it to support a school project for about a few weeks.  Now I use a
freeware version, it's very nice.

I wish there had been a bit more customer consideration.

I guess what I'm getting at is not which is better, but whether there is
any room for exceptions and any consideration of your customers.  I have
done business with quite a few on-line retailsers, SW and HW, and been
VERY happy with all except for this one.  Customer service is what
counts.

Time out is really annoying - you download something and clutter your
system with timed out utilities.

Bizarre behaviour like scrambling data is plain destructive

Money back guarantees are fine, but I would always want to evaluate
the software before paying for it.

Nag screens strike me as a good idea - the software works - you can
use it and basically pay to speed things up.

Tempting greyed out options also strike me as a good idea.

As do reasonable restrictions - say a maximum size of a database.

Personally I reckon that the problem breaks into two parts :-

1) Getting the App in front of a user
2) Getting them to pay you money

Any restrictions that reduce distribution are effectively shooting
oneself in the foot.

Giving everything away is shooting oneself in the wallet.

In my mind, yes, Bj�rge, it IS a bad idea for ChimneySweep� and we will
never do that.  Never in a million years will we do THAT, or anything
remotely like it, with ChimneySweep.  Period.   :-)


>Bj�rge S�ther wrote:
> 
> "Sundial Services" <info@sundialservices.com> skrev i melding
> news:3A037D7E.3132@sundialservices.com...
> > (thin smile...)  I shall never permit our product to do anything but
> its
> > very best for anyone's table, if it chooses to take-on processing that
> > table.  Modifying data, adding passwords, or anything of the sort is
> > completely unconscionable.
> 
> But - is this such a bad idea ? Say a customer with one of my
> Delphi/Paradox applications gets into a typical (but not so frequent)
> Paradox crash. I provided him with a simple tool for rebuilding a new
> database, copying data into the new tables, recreating indices. Still no
> luck. OK, I search for ChimneySweep, download a test version. It says:
> This evaluation version is fully functional, but it modifies random
> data. You may then check out if it actually fixes your database problem
> before purchasing. DO ALLWAYS KEEP A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL DATA !
> Or, you may add a SCRAMBLED table, storing information about what was
> modified for a reversion when proper License ID is entered.
> 
> > Obviously I -am- pondering the strategies for ChimneySweep�, which has
> > some unusual market characteristics formed by the nature of what it
> does
> > and the fact that it is often picked-up like a fire extinguisher ..
> when
> > there IS a fire.
> 
> I believe there are two issues here:
> - Is ChimneySweep the right tool for these problems ?
> - How can I purchase it, not now but NOW ?
> 
> I believe the first problem is the most precious: Do we have a solution
> ? You ususlly may live with waiting for a few hours if you *know* you've
> got the solution.
> 
> > But, I am also pondering the feelings that I do have when -I- buy
> > software, which is that I have usually made up my purchase decision
> > -before- I download anything.  And if, after having taken it home and
> > tried it on I decide it simply does not fit ...
> 
> Will anyone distribute your application when you have a money-back
> clause with your package ?
> 
> Well, this is my opinion, of course, and I'm no average software
> buyer...with me you wouldn't have to protect anything - I allways pay
> (even WinZip !) ...;-)
> --
> Bjoerge Saether
> Consultant / Developer
> Asker, Norway
> bsaether.removethis@online.no (remove the obvious)

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sundial Services :: Scottsdale, AZ (USA) :: (480) 946-8259
mailto:info@sundialservices.com  (PGP public key available.)
> Fast(!), automatic table-repair with two clicks of the mouse!
> ChimneySweep(R):  "Click click, it's fixed!" {tm}
> http://www.sundialservices.com/products/chimneysweep

> Which do you prefer:
>   (a) A time or feature-limited demo that you can download for free.
>   (b) No demo -- what you get is full-featured -- but it carries a
> 30-day money back guarantee.

A demo, hands down. I think most consumers are conditioned to expect
sales departments to be fully staffed and easy to get to; while returns
departments are always understaffed and only available after a long time
on hold. That is, no one thinks of a money-back guarantee as a painless
way to try a product; it's really just a sort of advertising, that we
believe so firmly in our product that we really don't expect to have to
refund your money. (And, of course, if you do ask for a refund, at the
very least you're not earning interest on that money between paying the
bill and being credited; some schlubs will be paying interest on the
charge.)
 
> I'm finding that when I take the time to download a product, which might
> be three megabytes or more, 

Get DSL, then. 3 meg is about 75 seconds at 40 k/sec, if the server can
actually keep up.

> I really don't want it to be "half of what
> it could be."  And I really don't want to feel that if the product just
> does not work out, I can't return it.

Nagware works, for me at least. I buy tools I use regularly, like WinZip
and CuteFTP. Deciding what - if anything - to cripple after 30 days is
an artform, I guess, but it seems the best way to get people to try your
product. Otoh, you mighty actually make more money with a low price and
a money back guarantee: If you price your product below the cost of your
customer's time to squeeze a return out your Customer Service department
....

-- 

http://www.midnightbeach.com    - Me, my work, my writing, and
http://www.midnightbeach.com/hs - my homeschool resource pages

Sundial Services <info@sundialservices.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
3A0317E5.630C@sundialservices.com...
> ("Hey, this is the internet .. just ask 'em!")
>
> Which do you prefer:
>   (a) A time or feature-limited demo that you can download for free.
>   (b) No demo -- what you get is full-featured -- but it carries a
> 30-day money back guarantee.


To be honest, I don't like the money back "guarantee", simply because there
is no guarantee whatsoever I _will_ get my money back. What can  someone in,
say Europe, do to enforce the money back clause on a company in, say the US?
Even if you could, it would probably cost you more then it's worth. Except
for well-known companies or persons (and even then <g> ) I trust _nobody_ on
the internet.

I definitely do like the full-featured-but-time-limited scheme that we see
more and more on the internet these days. I've purchased several apps that
way, because
- You can download immediately,
- You can evaluate immediately,
- There's no money back hassle if you don't like it.

my $0.02...
regards - Dirk

On Fri, 03 Nov 2000 12:54:13 -0700, Sundial Services
<info@sundialservices.com> wrote:
>Which do you prefer:
>  (a) A time or feature-limited demo that you can download for free.
>  (b) No demo -- what you get is full-featured -- but it carries a
>30-day money back guarantee.

I also like the downloadable demo, but with a couple of reservations.
First, think hard about what to limit.  I've seen many where enough
features have been removed to make it impossible to make a reasonable
decision about the product.  Second, please specify somewhere--on the
web site, preferably--*what* the limits of the demo are.  It's bad
enough to find out that the demo is useless; worse to have to download,
install, and start using it to find that out.

You might also make the full product documentation available separately
from the demo.  For some products, like components and libraries, I'd
rather see that first.

-- 
The children were playing 'Other Kind of People', and I asked them what
it meant.  "We play we're the Other Kind of People, and nobody can tell
we're not regular people," they said.  "They can't even guess it."

> Which do you prefer:
>   (a) A time or feature-limited demo that you can download for free.
>   (b) No demo -- what you get is full-featured -- but it carries a
> 30-day money back guarantee.

We believe that customer service is #1.

We ask the customer to try the demo to verify
the product works for them before purchasing.

The demo is full featured.

We have a 15 day return policy, but would gladly
refund under any reasonable circumstance.

We want our customers to be happy, and we
often go the extra mile to make sure that they are.

We have never been asked to refund (so far,
knock on wood).

www.code4sale.com

Joe
--
Joe Hecht Associates

Sundial Services <info@sundialservices.com> wrote in message
news:3A0317E5.630C@sundialservices.com...
> ("Hey, this is the internet .. just ask 'em!")
>
> Which do you prefer:
>   (a) A time or feature-limited demo that you can download for free.
>   (b) No demo -- what you get is full-featured -- but it carries a
> 30-day money back guarantee.
>

I like to see a fully working product limited only by a nag screen. Though,
I guess, it will depend to a large extent upon your target market.

Dave

"Sundial Services" <info@sundialservices.com> skrev i melding
news:3A037D7E.3132@sundialservices.com...
> (thin smile...)  I shall never permit our product to do anything but
its
> very best for anyone's table, if it chooses to take-on processing that
> table.  Modifying data, adding passwords, or anything of the sort is
> completely unconscionable.

But - is this such a bad idea ? Say a customer with one of my
Delphi/Paradox applications gets into a typical (but not so frequent)
Paradox crash. I provided him with a simple tool for rebuilding a new
database, copying data into the new tables, recreating indices. Still no
luck. OK, I search for ChimneySweep, download a test version. It says:
This evaluation version is fully functional, but it modifies random
data. You may then check out if it actually fixes your database problem
before purchasing. DO ALLWAYS KEEP A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL DATA !
Or, you may add a SCRAMBLED table, storing information about what was
modified for a reversion when proper License ID is entered.

> Obviously I -am- pondering the strategies for ChimneySweep�, which has
> some unusual market characteristics formed by the nature of what it
does
> and the fact that it is often picked-up like a fire extinguisher ..
when
> there IS a fire.

I believe there are two issues here:
- Is ChimneySweep the right tool for these problems ?
- How can I purchase it, not now but NOW ?

I believe the first problem is the most precious: Do we have a solution
? You ususlly may live with waiting for a few hours if you *know* you've
got the solution.

> But, I am also pondering the feelings that I do have when -I- buy
> software, which is that I have usually made up my purchase decision
> -before- I download anything.  And if, after having taken it home and
> tried it on I decide it simply does not fit ...

Will anyone distribute your application when you have a money-back
clause with your package ?

Well, this is my opinion, of course, and I'm no average software
buyer...with me you wouldn't have to protect anything - I allways pay
(even WinZip !) ...;-)
--
Bjoerge Saether
Consultant / Developer
Asker, Norway
bsaether.removethis@online.no (remove the obvious)

"Sundial Services" <info@sundialservices.com> skrev i melding
news:3A043032.7E26@sundialservices.com...
[about modifying data...]
> In my mind, yes, Bj�rge, it IS a bad idea for ChimneySweep� and we
will
> never do that.  Never in a million years will we do THAT, or anything
> remotely like it, with ChimneySweep.  Period.   :-)

I believe you'll have to get paid *before* the user pesses the button
that fixes his problem. After it's a 10% chance he will. Of course it's
a different story with software companies that bundle your tool with
their applications....

Good luck, no matter what you do ! I may need your tool one day...;-)

--
Bjoerge Saether
Consultant / Developer
Asker, Norway
bsaether.removethis@online.no (remove the obvious)

Oh, you probably do [need it] now, Bj�rge!  :-)

Seriously, I think the jury is telling me pretty clearly that they want
demos, in the form of "nagware."  Currently we have "10 tables for 10
days" function-limited demos (because, practically, time-limits of any
sort are easily bypassed by themselves).  

With "over 2,000 licensees at over 200 companies in over 20 countries,"
this product being our primary means of making a living(!)  -- naturally
we want to do what customers want.  And it has been enormously
interesting, just in the past few days, to ... "ask."  

If ever there was a succint expression of "what is the power of the
World Wide(!) Web" ... this is it.  Thanks!

-Mike


Bj�rge S�ther wrote:
> 
> "Sundial Services" <info@sundialservices.com> skrev i melding
> news:3A043032.7E26@sundialservices.com...
> [about modifying data...]
> > In my mind, yes, Bj�rge, it IS a bad idea for ChimneySweep� and we
> will
> > never do that.  Never in a million years will we do THAT, or anything
> > remotely like it, with ChimneySweep.  Period.   :-)
> 
> I believe you'll have to get paid *before* the user pesses the button
> that fixes his problem. After it's a 10% chance he will. Of course it's
> a different story with software companies that bundle your tool with
> their applications....
> 
> Good luck, no matter what you do ! I may need your tool one day...;-)
> 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sundial Services :: Scottsdale, AZ (USA) :: (480) 946-8259
mailto:info@sundialservices.com  (PGP public key available.)
> Fast(!), automatic table-repair with two clicks of the mouse!
> ChimneySweep(R):  "Click click, it's fixed!" {tm}
> http://www.sundialservices.com/products/chimneysweep

I prefer to have a complete download of my program that has some limitations
and a nag screen based on the user providing a their user code.  My program,
being a pedigree program, has the option of downloading various demo
databases and adding, but not deleting, additional dogs.  The number of dog
that can be added is limited by the various maximum database size without
having the key.  These are hard coded values that can not be exceeded so
they don't exist in the registry or other user changeable locations.

For the user code I use a unique key for each user based on their system ID
(drive C: id in decimal).  When they install the program they can read this
value for their system.  When I get the money and the number, I send them
their user code.  Since the program must be installed and working before
they know what their system id is, I do not ever have an issue with somebody
wanting their money back because they say they can't install the program.  I
will honor reasonable requests to provide a new user code based on them
upgrading their system.  This is subject to fraud but in very limited
numbers.  New system again this week, uh Fred?  That is your 43rd new system
this year. Well here is your new code - I think not!

Since their code is based on their system ID, sharing it with others does
not work.

Do you think this is a good idea?

...Jim

Sundial Services wrote:

> ("Hey, this is the internet .. just ask 'em!")
>
> Which do you prefer:
>   (a) A time or feature-limited demo that you can download for free.
>   (b) No demo -- what you get is full-featured -- but it carries a
> 30-day money back guarantee.
>
> I'm finding that when I take the time to download a product, which might
> be three megabytes or more, I really don't want it to be "half of what
> it could be."  And I really don't want to feel that if the product just
> does not work out, I can't return it.
>
> Now, even software -stores- don't want to take product back, yet Borland
> offers such a guarantee against Delphi.  And, I mean, if Lands' End can
> promise "Guaranteed, Period.�" on something like clothes ...
>
> What are the pros and cons of this argument in your opinion?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sundial Services :: Scottsdale, AZ (USA) :: (480) 946-8259
> mailto:info@sundialservices.com  (PGP public key available.)
> > Fast(!), automatic table-repair with two clicks of the mouse!
> > ChimneySweep(R):  "Click click, it's fixed!" {tm}
> > http://www.sundialservices.com/products/chimneysweep

Jim Andrews wrote:
> Since their code is based on their system ID, sharing it with others does
> not work.
> 
> Do you think this is a good idea?


I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that what we are doing now is the
overall best thing to do.

We do not attempt to use machine-specific identifiers because, in our
own internal experience with various systems, ordinary changes to our
computers' software configuration often "tripped" the machine-specific
code.  And I would prefer to keep things as simple as possible for the
purchasers.

Your mileage may vary.