Share why you buy or not Many Faces of Go
fot...@smart-games.com
so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
Is the price too high? If so, what price would be reasonable?
Is the trial too incomplete? Would it help if it can play a partial
game at a higher level?
Are there missing features?
Is the most important thing its highest level strength, or is there
value in the weaker levels so everyone gets a good even game? Is
there value in the training features (problems, fuseki library, etc)?
Are you running into bugs?
Something else?
SInce version 12 is a download I can easily adjust features or price.
David
Denis Feldmann
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
> so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
>
> Is the price too high? If so, what price would be reasonable?
> Is the trial too incomplete? Would it help if it can play a partial
> game at a higher level?
users , I believe nothing but a complete trial with no restrictions
could satisfy them, and it is not easy to prevent illegal use then :-(
Kirk McElhearn
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
> so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
>
> Is the price too high? If so, what price would be reasonable?
I might pay $50 for it. I'm interesting in the tutorials, problems, and
occasionally playing games when I don't want to bother playing humans.
> Is the trial too incomplete? Would it help if it can play a partial
> game at a higher level?
The trial is too incomplete. I wasn't able to play against any
reasonable level; letting one try the 18K level is pretty useless,
IMHO. I'd like to see more of what the problems are. There were other
parts I tried that told me I couldn't use them (maybe the joseki
dictionary). Wasn't there a full, 30-day demo of the previous version?
> Are there missing features?
Well, there's no Mac version. :-) I have to run it in emulation, which
means I have to boot Windows to do it, and I'm less likely to use it a
lot. How hard is it to port something to Mac these days with Intel
processors?
> Is the most important thing its highest level strength, or is there
> value in the weaker levels so everyone gets a good even game? Is
> there value in the training features (problems, fuseki library, etc)?
I want it to play a good game at a decent strength (I'm 6K KGS, so it
doesn't have to be dan level, though that would be nice). I want other
features that will help me improve my game.
> Are you running into bugs?
> Something else?
>
> SInce version 12 is a download I can easily adjust features or price.
Make it another 5 stones stronge? :-) I don't think you meant _that_
kind of feature. ;-)
Best,
Kirk
--
Read my blog, Kirkville
http://www.mcelhearn.com
Ben Finney
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
> so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
* It's not licensed as free software
<URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software_license>. As a rule
I don't allow programs to run on my computers unless they are free
for modification and redistribution by any party.
* It's targeted at an operating system that I don't use. That could
perhaps be fixed by the community if the community had the source
code licensed free to modify and redistribute.
> Is the price too high? If so, what price would be reasonable?
I think a price of US$ 30 or so would be acceptable, if the work were
licesed as free software.
> SInce version 12 is a download I can easily adjust features or price.
As the copyright holder (I presume?), you are also free to adjust the
license.
--
\ “Courteous and efficient self-service.” —Café sign, southern |
`\ France |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
fot...@smart-games.com
> On 2008-11-09 20:13:33 +0100, fotl...@smart-games.com said:
>
> > I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
> > so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
>
> > Is the price too high? If so, what price would be reasonable?
>
> I might pay $50 for it. I'm interesting in the tutorials, problems, and
> occasionally playing games when I don't want to bother playing humans.
>
> > Is the trial too incomplete? Would it help if it can play a partial
> > game at a higher level?
>
> The trial is too incomplete. I wasn't able to play against any
> reasonable level; letting one try the 18K level is pretty useless,
> IMHO. I'd like to see more of what the problems are. There were other
> parts I tried that told me I couldn't use them (maybe the joseki
> dictionary). Wasn't there a full, 30-day demo of the previous version?
There will be full trial version, but it will have internet checkback
on the license. I don;t know any other way to protect a full trial
from piracy.
>
> > Are there missing features?
>
> Well, there's no Mac version. :-) I have to run it in emulation, which
> means I have to boot Windows to do it, and I'm less likely to use it a
> lot. How hard is it to port something to Mac these days with Intel
> processors?
It runs fine under Wine, so there is no need to purchase or run
Windows, and no need to reboot. I need to make this clearer on the
Web pages. Since Wine works so well, there doesn;t seem to be any
reason to port to Mac.
>
> > Is the most important thing its highest level strength, or is there
> > value in the weaker levels so everyone gets a good even game? Is
> > there value in the training features (problems, fuseki library, etc)?
>
> I want it to play a good game at a decent strength (I'm 6K KGS, so it
> doesn't have to be dan level, though that would be nice). I want other
> features that will help me improve my game.
>
> > Are you running into bugs?
> > Something else?
>
> > SInce version 12 is a download I can easily adjust features or price.
>
> Make it another 5 stones stronge? :-) I don't think you meant _that_
> kind of feature. ;-)
Just wait :) On 9x9 it's already 4 dan amateur, so I don;t think
there are another 5 stones possible.
Thanks,
David
fot...@smart-games.com
wrote:
I appreciate the free software philosophy, but there already is an FSF
go program, so there is really no need for another one. For myself,
if I had decided at the outset to give it away, I would never have
found the motivation to put so much effort into it, so it would not
exist.
David
Kirk McElhearn
>>> Is the trial too incomplete? Would it help if it can play a partial
>>> game at a higher level?
>>
>> The trial is too incomplete. I wasn't able to play against any
>> reasonable level; letting one try the 18K level is pretty useless,
>> IMHO. I'd like to see more of what the problems are. There were other
>> parts I tried that told me I couldn't use them (maybe the joseki
>> dictionary). Wasn't there a full, 30-day demo of the previous version?
>
> There will be full trial version, but it will have internet checkback
> on the license. I don;t know any other way to protect a full trial
> from piracy.
OK.
>
>>
>>> Are there missing features?
>>
>> Well, there's no Mac version. :-) I have to run it in emulation, which
>> means I have to boot Windows to do it, and I'm less likely to use it a
>> lot. How hard is it to port something to Mac these days with Intel
>> processors?
>
> It runs fine under Wine, so there is no need to purchase or run
> Windows, and no need to reboot. I need to make this clearer on the
> Web pages. Since Wine works so well, there doesn;t seem to be any
> reason to port to Mac.
Well, I use VMware Fusion. I don't mean reboot my Mac, but boot up
Windows. As to not porting, I can understand for a program that
interests so few people, but running Windows on a Mac is not the ideal
solution. There will always be problems. (ie Windows-related problems)
>
>>
>>> Is the most important thing its highest level strength, or is there
>>> value in the weaker levels so everyone gets a good even game? Is
>>> there value in the training features (problems, fuseki library, etc)?
>>
>> I want it to play a good game at a decent strength (I'm 6K KGS, so it
>> doesn't have to be dan level, though that would be nice). I want other
>> features that will help me improve my game.
>>
>>> Are you running into bugs?
>>> Something else?
>>
>>> SInce version 12 is a download I can easily adjust features or price.
>>
>> Make it another 5 stones stronge? :-) I don't think you meant _that_
>> kind of feature. ;-)
>
> Just wait :) On 9x9 it's already 4 dan amateur, so I don;t think
> there are another 5 stones possible.
So you're not trying to make it stronger on 19x19 games?
Alan Cameron
As a MFoG user since version 10 the thing I miss is the discount for
previous users.
--
Alan Cameron
Kirk McElhearn
> As a MFoG user since version 10 the thing I miss is the discount for
> previous users.
I thought I saw an upgrade price on the web page...
tvirlip
> > Well, there's no Mac version. :-) I have to run it in emulation, which
> > means I have to boot Windows to do it, and I'm less likely to use it a
> > lot. How hard is it to port something to Mac these days with Intel
> > processors?
>
> It runs fine under Wine, so there is no need to purchase or run
> Windows, and no need to reboot. I need to make this clearer on the
> Web pages. Since Wine works so well, there doesn;t seem to be any
> reason to port to Mac.
This attitude is the biggest reason for me not to use it.
Ben Finney
> On Nov 9, 2:45 pm, Ben Finney <bignose+hates-s...@benfinney.id.au>
> wrote:
> > fotl...@smart-games.com writes:
> > > Is the price too high? If so, what price would be reasonable?
> >
> > I think a price of US$ 30 or so would be acceptable, if the work
> > were licesed as free software.
>
> I appreciate the free software philosophy, but there already is an
> FSF go program, so there is really no need for another one.
Not another such program from the FSF, perhaps. Free software, though,
*encourages* competition in a free market, so there's surely room for
competing works from different vendors.
I would be very interested in seeing your program compete for customer
purchases in the level market of free software.
> For myself, if I had decided at the outset to give it away, I would
> never have found the motivation to put so much effort into it, so it
> would not exist.
I don't know anyone suggesting that the product be given away; you
asked for acceptable prices, and I'm certainly not advocating a zero
price.
You did, though, ask for reasons why potential customers aren't buying
your product. The fact that it is not free software is the main reason
why I'm not buying it. I'll happily pay for free software that I
consider worth the price.
--
\ “I bought a self learning record to learn Spanish. I turned it |
`\ on and went to sleep; the record got stuck. The next day I |
_o__) could only stutter in Spanish.” —Steven Wright |
Ben Finney
Chris Welsh
My feeling is that the unique feature of MFOGO is the strong (and
relatively human-like) playing style. Since I am already a little
stronger than the alleged playing strength of version 12, this feature
doesn't hold much attraction to me.
However, I recall as a novice playing some games against MFOGO and
finding it very enjoyable, so I think this is an important feature,
and since its now 2k rather than 7 or 8k, your potential audience is
much bigger, so you should perhaps focus on selling this aspect.
Letting people try out this aspect in its fullness may be helpful (for
example, a trial that lets you play 10 or 20 proper games before that
feature locks out).
Right now I am more interested in a program which manages a pro
database really well, in terms of fuseki/joseki lookups etc. In this
regard I have already purchased Smart Go. While Smart Go isn't
perfect, I don't think MFOGO offers enough in this regard for me to
consider switching (based on the sales pitch on the website). Perhaps
I should download the trial to investigate, but since I gather that
the trial is limited in a various ways, I'm concerned that I'd be
wasting my time (and bandwidth).
Chris
Kirk McElhearn
<bignose+h...@benfinney.id.au> said:
>> I appreciate the free software philosophy, but there already is an
>> FSF go program, so there is really no need for another one.
>
> Not another such program from the FSF, perhaps. Free software, though,
> *encourages* competition in a free market, so there's surely room for
> competing works from different vendors.
>
> I would be very interested in seeing your program compete for customer
> purchases in the level market of free software.
Do you _really_ think he's going to give away his code, after all the
work he put into it, if it's the strongest go program?
Kirk McElhearn
like MFG? Something like CGoban; that'd solve the different problems
relative to platforms...
Joel Olson
"Ben Finney" <bignose+h...@benfinney.id.au> wrote in message
news:878wrre...@benfinney.id.au...
Seems you misunderstand the FSF.
Alan Cameron
> On 2008-11-10 10:52:41 +0100, "Alan Cameron" <alan.c...@iname.com>
> said:
>> As a MFoG user since version 10 the thing I miss is the discount for
>> previous users.
>
> I thought I saw an upgrade price on the web page...
>
> Kirk
Only in US$ nothing about GBP.
--
Alan Cameron
Kirk McElhearn
>>> As a MFoG user since version 10 the thing I miss is the discount for
>>> previous users.
>>
>> I thought I saw an upgrade price on the web page...
>>
>> Kirk
>
> Only in US$ nothing about GBP.
Well, I think you buy through PayPal from the site, so the USD price
will get converted into GBP for you.
fot...@smart-games.com
Please tell me more. I've never use a Mac or Wine myself, but people
who have tell me they like it. Is there an Issue with Wine that I
don't know? Doing a Mac version with the same level of functionality
would require writing perhaps 30,000 new lines of code and would
occupy me full time for about 2 years. During that time I would not
be able to work on making the engine stronger or addign new features.
After this, any new feature would take longer to implement since I
would have to code part of it twice, for two different operating
systems. I would much rather spend my time coding new features and
making the engine stronger than providing something that is already
availebl under Wine.
Thanks for yuor comments,
David
fot...@smart-games.com
> On 2008-11-10 17:09:32 +0100, "Alan Cameron" <alan.came...@iname.com> said:
>
> >>> As a MFoG user since version 10 the thing I miss is the discount for
> >>> previous users.
>
> >> I thought I saw an upgrade price on the web page...
>
> >> Kirk
>
> > Only in US$ nothing about GBP.
>
> Well, I think you buy through PayPal from the site, so the USD price
> will get converted into GBP for you.
>
> Kirk
> --
> Read my blog, Kirkvillehttp://www.mcelhearn.com
Yes, PayPal will convert from dollars to your local currentcy. Since
the dollar is weak now, the price is good in Euros or GBP.
fot...@smart-games.com
I guess I don't understand what you mean by free software. If I give
away the source code what prevents someone from bulding it and giving
it away for free? If I have copy protection, what prevents someone
from changing the code to remove the copy protection, building it and
giving it away for free?
I see the benefit of open source for code that will go to programmers,
but game players have no benefit themselves from having the source
code.
David
David
Kirk McElhearn
> Please tell me more. I've never use a Mac or Wine myself, but people
> who have tell me they like it. Is there an Issue with Wine that I
> don't know? Doing a Mac version with the same level of functionality
> would require writing perhaps 30,000 new lines of code and would
> occupy me full time for about 2 years. During that time I would not
> be able to work on making the engine stronger or addign new features.
> After this, any new feature would take longer to implement since I
> would have to code part of it twice, for two different operating
> systems. I would much rather spend my time coding new features and
> making the engine stronger than providing something that is already
> availebl under Wine.
I'm not sure you'd have to write that much new code; I don't program,
but I'm a Mac journalist, and, aside from the interface work, I
understand that the code would need tweaking, not rewriting. You might
want to consider it, because as Mac market share grows, more and more
home users have Macs. (Ignore the overall PC market share, because that
includes business PCs.)
As for Wine, I don't know myself; I tried it with VMware Fusion (which
runs Windows as if it were running on a Windows box). I did try it with
Crossover, a Mac program that is supposed to be a Wine port, and the
graphics suck: the stones have squares around them. I don't know if
Wine has exactly the same problem, but I would think it does.
In the Middle of the Pack
(I have not downloaded the trial version.)
fot...@smart-games.com wrote:
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
> so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
[snip]
Alan Cameron
David, You have got to be joking current exchange rates make it much more
expensive to buy in GBP.
One quote 1 GBP buys 1.56 USD when a short while ago 1 GBP bought 1.95 USD.
Further the rate is changing so fast these quotes are already out of date.
--
Alan Cameron
Reinhold Burger
On Sun, 9 Nov 2008, fot...@smart-games.com wrote:
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go,
> but not so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
No doubt you felt it was a necessary change, but part of the problem
may be the new licensing feature of version 12. Having to ask for a
new key whenever one changes computers is annoying. You feel that
you don't really own what you've bought.
I would have much preferred the version 11 system, where the buyer
was trusted.
Reinhold
Kirk McElhearn
>> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go,
>> but not so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
>
> No doubt you felt it was a necessary change, but part of the problem
> may be the new licensing feature of version 12. Having to ask for a
> new key whenever one changes computers is annoying. You feel that
> you don't really own what you've bought.
Yes, and I wonder how that will work if you're running Windows in
virtualization. What causes the system to detect a "change" in the
computer?
Batavia
there are several options for porting your code to mac. First of all
you could use a cross platform toolkit (SDL, gtk+, QT,any many more).
of course that's just the graphics toolkit but there are libraries
available for many aspects that you run into. Once you use these
libraries it would take no more work to maintain these features on 3
platforms as it would on just one.
A second option would be using libwine (cross compiling using the wine
libraries). It certainly would require some coding on your part but
probally far less than the 30,000 lines you would need otherwise. Your
program would be using wine when running on other platforms but users
would no longer have to install wine themself (with the problems that
might bring). As long as you are giving willing to provide support the
other platforms, and if they just see 1 executable i doubt they care
what it uses under the hood.
Chris Lawrence
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
> so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
Hi David, thanks for the software and for soliciting feedback. I've
downloaded Go playing software in the past as a curiosity, tinkered
around with them for a bit then eventually uninstalled them. I've never
downloaded MFoG but it would be the same with that.
I no longer enjoy playing against computers. If I lose, I have cannot
discuss what happened and learn. If I win, it's usually obvious that
I'm going to win (and computer starts playing strange moves), so again
nothing to learn. So I don't feel I'm getting anything from the
experience, even if the alternative is not to play a game at all. In
that case I'd rather pick up some life and death or whole board puzzles
and relax with them.
I've played with igowin in the past, sometimes obsessively, but for the
same reason it's lost its appeal. It just increasingly frustrates me,
whether I'm winning or losing.
Perhaps one approach would be to make MFoG more modular (whether
physically or by enablement license). If I was buying it I'd want the
editor and printing, but not the internet client, games, josekis or
problems. Others might want those things. I'd rather pay a bit less
for a cut down version. Perhaps a lite, standard and full version instead.
Regarding the licensing, someone else has said that version 12 requires
you to request a new code if you move computers. If so, I really hate
this kind of scheme - as suggested, it feels like you are only renting
what you've paid for - and this alone would stop me from buying it. At
the same time you need to protect against piracy, so I appreciate the
technical dilemma.
Chris
fot...@smart-games.com
Well, I am a programmer, so please trust me :) If I want the program
to folow all the Mac guidelines I need to rewrite much of the
interface. Most of the time is debuginng and testing, not actual
coding. If I do a simple port so it looks exactly like hte windows
program, it's no different from running it under Wine.
fot...@smart-games.com
I don't like keys either, but there is no choice, given the amount of
piracy of version 11. It works fine under virtualization. You will
require a new code if you reinstall windows or change the processor.
David
fot...@smart-games.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
Your first option is what I was thinking. I have 47K lines of MFC
code, and I expect to touch about 30K lines to port it to a different
library. I want to keep the native Windows look and feel, so I
suspect I would still need two code bases.
Tim Tyler
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
> so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
It was only announced here 8 days ago at the time of your post.
That might be a factor.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ t...@tt1lock.org Remove lock to reply.
-
I did purchase MFG v11 after having for many years
borrowed a pirate copy of MFG v3. I did respect your
wishes to not redistribute MFG v11 but for the good faith
and good will on our part you are "rewarding" us with
this new need for indepedent machine licensing codes.
It's a rare scenario when anybody not in an institutional
learning environment has the opportunity to make such
software widely available to anyone who benefits from it.
And you must think rather too highly of yourself if there's
some imagined demand on the part of Go Beginners and
Newbies to acquire computer programs that defeat them.
It is not easy to find time even to demonstrate the program,
much less encourage them to play it, or stir up any interest.
Suppose I am on a sailboat at sea and must now use
my spare laptop when the first installation goes salt-water
sour? Suppose you or your distribution agent become
unavailable or inaccessible at some future date? I was
ready to put out for an upgrade price but after hearing of
this single-machine licensing news I am dissuaded. So
many projects and life-affirming opportunities exist which
compete quite successfully with the lowest priority of Go !
Consider yourself lucky that supercomputer cores are
not continually online. In the very near future they may be.
Better to sell while you can and stop insulting this community.
- regards
- jb
-----------------------------------------------------------
Interview With a Former Weatherman ( video )
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=5989
-----------------------------------------------------------
ro...@telus.net
> Better to sell while you can and stop insulting this community.
Give it a rest, Jeff. The guy's just trying to make a living from his
work in an environment of rapidly shifting software business models.
If he's made a mistake by restricting the license, he'll pay the
normal entrepreneur's price.
-- Roy L
Ben Finney
> I guess I don't understand what you mean by free software.
By “free software” I mean a work that every recipient is free to
use, inspect, modify, and/or redistribute. Freedoms that we expect for
just about everything else that we buy.
> If I give away the source code
Again, you don't need to give anything away. Charging a fee for the
software doesn't affect the above freedoms.
> what prevents someone from bulding it and giving it away for free?
> If I have copy protection, what prevents someone from changing the
> code to remove the copy protection, building it and giving it away
> for free?
Nothing, that's a big part of the point. This encourages each
potential vendor to provide something that is actually valuable to
*each* customer, rather than depending on artificial post-sale
restrictions.
> I see the benefit of open source for code that will go to
> programmers, but game players have no benefit themselves from having
> the source code.
The fact that recipients who happen to be programmers have these
freedoms benefits *every* recipient.
Just as the freedom of every recipient of a refrigerator to modify it,
redistribute the result, and charge a fee allows a flourishing
post-sale service market by those in a position to exercise those
freedoms, which benefits *every* refrigerator recipient, even though
the vast majority of refrigerator recipients won't exercise those
freedoms personally.
--
\ “If I haven't seen as far as others, it is because giants were |
`\ standing on my shoulders.” —Hal Abelson |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
fot...@smart-games.com
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:11:40 GMT, jazzerci...@hotmail.com (-) wrote:
> > Better to sell while you can and stop insulting this community.
>
> Give it a rest, Jeff. The guy's just trying to make a living from his
> work in an environment of rapidly shifting software business models.
> If he's made a mistake by restricting the license, he'll pay the
> normal entrepreneur's price.
>
> -- Roy L
Thanks Roy. I'm not restrciting the license in any way, The version
11 license allowed you to run the program on two machines. The new
license is the same. All I'm doing is enforcing the existing license
with a key, because I have plenty of evidence that there was massive
piracy of version 11.
As far as the sailboat analogy, I don't see it any different from only
having loaded the software on one laptop and having it die. If you
take two laptops with you and want Many Faces on both, just ask me for
another key. I'm not going to hassle anyone who wants a new key,
since people change computers all the time, and almost everyone is
trustworthy.
i don't understand the logic of someone saying in essence :" I admit
I'm a software pirate, so please don't insult me by assuming I'm going
to pirate your software".
My experience is that go players as a group are very trustworthy. The
number of people who would distribute my code to others for free is
very low. But it does happen. I wish piracy wasn't so common, since
it makes software less convenient for everyone by requiring something
like this license.
Pretty soon there will be a version availble that uses internet check-
in licensing rather than a key per machine. That might be a more
acceptable licensing model.
David
Ben Finney
> i don't understand the logic of someone saying in essence :" I admit
> I'm a software pirate, so please don't insult me by assuming I'm going
> to pirate your software".
Copyright infringement is, in most jurisdictions, against the law; in
some jurisdictions, it is a criminal offense. In *no* jurisdiction is
it the moral equivalent of piracy.
Equating the act of copying a non-rivalrous good — digital
information — with the violent act of attacking ships on the open sea
and depriving their occupants of physical goods, is an insult. It is
an insult both to the victims of piracy, and an insult to those who
engage in the copying of non-rivalrous digital information.
I don't advocate infringing copyright, and would rather see the laws
changed so that what is most natural to do with digital information is
also legal. Even more than that, though, I do not support the moral
equating of violent theft of rivalrous goods with a peaceful act
between consenting adults in isolation from any third party.
I wish you the best in adapting to the world as it is — where the
most natural thing to do with digital information is to redistribute
it in modified or unmodified form, and where any restriction on this
natural act is alien and artificial — and hope you will gain
customers by better understanding and serving them.
--
\ “[On the Internet,] power and control will shift to those who |
`\ are actually contributing something useful rather than just |
_o__) having lunch.” —Douglas Adams |
Ben Finney
-
>> (-) wrote:
>>> Better to sell while you can and stop insulting this community.
> ro...@telus.net wrote:
>> Give it a rest, Jeff. The guy's just trying to make a living from his
>> work in an environment of rapidly shifting software business models.
>> If he's made a mistake by restricting the license, he'll pay the
>> normal entrepreneur's price.
Well, no. David Fotland worked with Hewlitt Packard and
does Many Faces of Go on the side. This observation is not
in any way intended to denigrate the commendable contribution
David Fotland offers. An inherent problem with such license
restrictions concerns that potential animosity generated by the
pirating community who will not hesitate to teach him a lesson.
Did David Fotland detect MY serialized version in public domain?
fot...@smart-games.com wrote:
> Thanks Roy. I'm not restrciting the license in any way,
If what Dave argues is true, and the best option, then support from
Roy is not required. You are now restricting its license: admit it.
> The version 11 license allowed you to run the program on two machines.
False. Installation for v.11 may occur on -multiple- machines.
> The new license is the same. All I'm doing is enforcing the existing
> license with a key, because I have plenty of evidence that there was
> massive piracy of version 11.
We, here, were not contributors to piracy of version 11. I took
your words to heart, concerning redistribution, and did not distribute!
For this you "reward" us with presumption of guilty before innocent.
> As far as the sailboat analogy, I don't see it any different from only
> having loaded the software on one laptop and having it die. If you
> take two laptops with you and want Many Faces on both, just ask me
> for another key. I'm not going to hassle anyone who wants a new key,
> since people change computers all the time, and almost everyone is
> trustworthy.
Having dealt with sailors on those sailboats their solution is not
quite so neat and tidy. There is no cheap internet when at sea.
> i don't understand the logic of someone saying in essence :" I admit
> I'm a software pirate, so please don't insult me by assuming I'm going
> to pirate your software".
I don't know who said that. Version 3.0 was mailed to me, and
so I evaluated it. I was not any pirate. I wiped off all of the stones
from Version 3.0, even after giving it a 9-stone handicap, so one
problem here concerns misrepresentation that it was a Go Program.
David earned money from it, but Version 3.0 did -NOT- "play Go."
However Version 3.0 was useful for beginners who might become
discouraged by Go Programs that defeat them. The same might be
said of Leela Lite. I also remind you that Version 3.0 was included
in hpux as standard fare, so don't go running to mommy anymore.
Having evaluated version 3.0 was my INCENTIVE to purchase v.11.
> My experience is that go players as a group are very trustworthy.
> The number of people who would distribute my code to others for
> free is very low. But it does happen. I wish piracy wasn't so common,
> since it makes software less convenient for everyone by requiring
> something like this license.
Ironically, the people with whom you are communicating here
are not your pirates. By assuming that they are, however, you
have reduced this Go Community at large to unwitting accomplices
to your unwarranted presumption of guilt. Therein lies your insult.
> Pretty soon there will be a version availble that uses internet check-
> in licensing rather than a key per machine. That might be a more
> acceptable licensing model.
Are you out of your mind? There is no internet checking
like that, from a sailboat, during an ocean crossing. Suppose
no internet is available? Obviously you're not thinking clearly.
- regards
- jb
--------------------------------------------------------
Quartic reciprocity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quartic_reciprocity
--------------------------------------------------------
Kirk McElhearn
>> Better to sell while you can and stop insulting this community.
>
> Give it a rest, Jeff. The guy's just trying to make a living from his
> work in an environment of rapidly shifting software business models.
> If he's made a mistake by restricting the license, he'll pay the
> normal entrepreneur's price.
I think it's a good thing that he's asking the questions he's asked.
He's looking at what users want. You may not be interested in his
product, but others are.
Batavia
of course those in doubt about the strength of the full version could
always download a 'full version demo' from isohunt.com or a place like
that.
In the Middle of the Pack
When I was working as a programmer, most of the software used by my company was "rented" -- The copyright holder retained all rights. For some third-party software, we even had to pay an annual fee. Even when I buy software to run on my (MS DOS, Windows 2K), many of the EULA's make it clear that I don't own the software.
jabriol
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
> so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
>
It is the economy David, You have a good thing going. If It wasn't
because of my own budget constraints and the economy. I would have
purchase it. Right now I try to get stuff for free as we all do.
People are sacrifice their health by eating junk food because it is
cheap.
Now... uh can I get a copy for free? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
fot...@smart-games.com
> >> (-) wrote:
> >>> Better to sell while you can and stop insulting this community.
> > ro...@telus.net wrote:
> >> Give it a rest, Jeff. The guy's just trying to make a living from his
> >> work in an environment of rapidly shifting software business models.
> >> If he's made a mistake by restricting the license, he'll pay the
> >> normal entrepreneur's price.
>
> Well, no. David Fotland worked with Hewlitt Packard and
> does Many Faces of Go on the side. This observation is not
> in any way intended to denigrate the commendable contribution
> David Fotland offers. An inherent problem with such license
> restrictions concerns that potential animosity generated by the
> pirating community who will not hesitate to teach him a lesson.
> Did David Fotland detect MY serialized version in public domain?
>
Hi jb,
I'm sorry I called you a pirate. I was reponding to your use of the
term: "I did purchase MFG v11 after having for many years borrowed a
pirate copy of MFG v3". You used this as a free evaulation.
The v11 license is quite simple and clear. It's printed on the inisde
of your CD case "You are licensed to install this software on up to
two computers in your household only". The version 12 license is the
same.
Version 11 is not serialized so I have no way to know who is violating
the license by providing it free for download. Please believe me when
I say that I know that almost everyone is honest, and is not violating
the license. I do not presume any of you are gulty of this. I'm just
trying to stop the few people who fell they have the right to violate
a license agreement they have freeley entered into. I am in no way
assuming that you are pirates.
Regards,
David
Kirk McElhearn
> Pretty soon there will be a version availble that uses internet check-
> in licensing rather than a key per machine. That might be a more
> acceptable licensing model.
You mean phoning home every time you launch the program? I'm not sure
that's "more acceptable"... Also, as another poster said, what if you
don't have Internet access?
-
fot...@smart-games.com wrote:
> I'm sorry I called you a pirate. I was reponding to your use of
> the term: "I did purchase MFG v11 after having for many years
> borrowed a pirate copy of MFG v3". You used this as a free
> evaulation.
The damn thing showed up in my postal mailbox. The
sender is known but such details won't help this discussion.
> The v11 license is quite simple and clear. It's printed on the
> inisde of your CD case "You are licensed to install this software
> on up to two computers in your household only".
> The version 12 license is the same.
That's nice, but what persuaded most people was your
heartfelt message concerning that time and effort invested.
> Version 11 is not serialized so I have no way to know who is
> violating the license by providing it free for download.
I suppose that you're rather stupid, then, without any
means for prosecution of copyright fraud, and then stupid
for announcing this, and then overreacting with your stupid
solutions for Version 12. No friends for a second opinion?
> Please believe me when I say that I know that almost everyone
> is honest, and is not violating the license. I do not presume any
> of you are gulty of this. I'm just trying to stop the few people who
> fell they have the right to violate a license agreement they have
> freeley entered into. I am in no way assuming that you are pirates.
Pirates do not justify their actions by reference to a "right."
They are in a category similar to illegal immigrants who are
just trying the limits of whatever "the system" allows. Serialized
copy distribution methods would enable copyright enforcement.
In your EULA you could specify the consequences for allowing
breach of security implied by the copyright infringement. Such
serial numbers may be in scattered form, encrypted, and hidden
throughout your code in multiple instances.
Even without legal prosecution it often suffices to identify
the perpetrator of a security breach. Such stories amount to
rather juicy news items when perpetrators are also executives
of major organizations, such as the American Go Association.
Members need to know when those bigshots are misbehaving.
If just a "nobody pirate" then identifying thieves is another plus.
-----------------------------------
"Kirk McElhearn" <kir...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You mean phoning home every time you launch the program?
> I'm not sure that's "more acceptable"... Also, as another poster
> said, what if you don't have Internet access?
And if they've got "Internet access" then why not play on one or
more of those Go Servers? Even if you can't snuggle up to your
favorite `bot' there are "real people out there" who play better.
The entire point of Go Software was to play without any Internet,
and to load it onto a machine which has no Internet Connection.
- regards
- jb
--------------------------------------------------------------
CA Dirty Air Kills More Than Car Crashes
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081113/D94E0KJG0.html
--------------------------------------------------------------
Gohst
don't think most people here are actually customers, or even potential
customers. Then add in the futility of trying to explain why you want to
charge money for your hard work to a bunch of people who expect that
"software should be set free". Free software is a fad. Not in the sense
that it will one day disappear.... there will always be talented people
who want to work on public-domain programs. It's a fad in the sense that
large (and small) organizations think that they're going to make money
on it while giving it away. Sun Microsystems changed their stock market
symbol to Java, and paid US$ 1 billion for mySQL, which is freeware (but
also has a version that they charge for). Sun, in the current poor
economic climate, is currently shrinking into insignificance. Why?
Because they're trying to change their business model in mid-stream, but
they haven't yet figured out how to make a living out of giving software
away.... it doesn't seem to inspire folks to buy their expensive
hardware.
The point being that, despite those who feel religious on the topic,
"free software" is an oxymoron.
I understand the problems that you are going through. Many attempts to
prevent piracy make the legitimate purchasers feel inconvenienced, or
worse. I don't have a better answer than the one you are trying. This is
also part of a changing business model... the change to electronic
distribution. I won't bore you all with my thoughts here, but will just
point out that many "intellectual property" companies, including the
entire music and movie industries, are wrestling with this one. Lots of
"creative destruction" here.... and it puts lots of people out of work.
What you're trying to do is to surf on top of the rampant changes in the
Internet age. I wish you well.
Good luck with your venture. I think sales will probably pick up in a
short while (few months, maybe) when people aren't feeling so stressed
financially.
Don't sweat what people in here say too much. I'm sure you're aware that
the Usenet is for arguing, just for the sake of arguing, many times.
-- Gohst
Daniel T.
> ... I have plenty of evidence that there was massive piracy of
> version 11...
>
> ... almost everyone is trustworthy.
>
> ... My experience is that go players as a group are very
> trustworthy...
>
> ... The number of people who would distribute my code to others for
> free is very low...
>
> ... I wish piracy wasn't so common ...
I'm not really part of this discussion, I don't have a machine that can
run the game no matter how I might acquire it.
I have to say though that your comments above are quite confusing. Are
most go players trustworthy and the number of free distributions very
low, or was there massive piracy of version 11 and piracy is common? You
might want to get your story straight.
More importantly, out of the people who did use a pirated copy of the
game (whether once, or dozens of times,) how many would have purchased
it if they couldn't get a copy for free? I may be very wrong (and I
guess there is no way to tell,) but I suspect that your "enforced"
licensing technique will cause sales to fall rather than raise.
Frank McIngvale
> I see that there aremanytrial downloads ofManyFacesofGo, but not
>
> Is the price too high? If so, what price would be reasonable?
Yes. At $30 it would be a sure sell for me, but even $40-$50 would be
more palatable. $90 is just really hard to justify.
> Are there missing features?
I can't find a way to ...
* Tell the computer not to resign games.
* Play with human untimed and computer timed
* Not clear how to use Byo-yomi timing
> Is the most important thing its highest level strength, or is there
> value in the weaker levels so everyone gets a good even game?
I really like having the weaker levels -- this is the main reason I'm
considering Many Faces. I've been playing vs. GnuGo with handicap (for
me), but I feel like I'm missing out on playing non-handicap games. I
like having the option to use a weaker level with no handicap.
> Is there value in the training features (problems, fuseki library, etc)?
For me, buying Many Faces would be just to get a strong go playing
program. I rely on other tools for joseki, IGS, database, etc.
> Are you running into bugs?
The "Go problems" portion has some problems I think. It will say
"wrong move" but I don't see a way to retry. Also I've given the
correct answer several times and it said "wrong move". Not sure what's
wrong. (Example: lvl0.prb Problem 45, it only tells me "correct" when
I play at C3, but pressing F10 shows the correct answer is C4, and
clicking the icon to show alternate variations shows many corner moves
as correct solutions.)
frank
> Something else?
>
> SInce version12is a download I can easily adjust features or price.
>
> David
Ian Osgood
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
>
> Is the price too high? If so, what price would be reasonable?
> game at a higher level?
> Are there missing features?
> Is the most important thing its highest level strength, or is there
> there value in the training features (problems, fuseki library, etc)?
>
> SInce version 12 is a download I can easily adjust features or price.
>
> David
Caveat: I have not downloaded version 12 yet, since I have no
expectation that it would work on my Mac.
I think $100 is a reasonable price for a world champion program. This
is in line with the top strength chess programs.
Playing at full strength is a requirement. It could be limited either
by board size, number of moves at full strength, percent of processor
used, or trial length (30-day, for example). One possibility: only
play at full strength for a single move, so the program strength could
be evaluated on particular test positions loaded from an SGF file.
As a Mac user, I would be satisfied with several options, in this
order:
1. A native application, such as iGo Sensei.
2. A GTP application which works as well under Sente Goban as GNU Go.
3. A Windows application which has been *tested* to work under Wine
(MacPorts has version 1.0 now). You may need to redistribute more
files (such as MFCxx.DLL) in order for this to work.
Ian Osgood
former COSMOS customer
current iGo Sensei customer and Sente Goban user
Kirk McElhearn
> 2. A GTP application which works as well under Sente Goban as GNU Go.
Yes, this would be good for the game engine, but to be fair the program
offers other features that can be useful.
Kirk (a Mac user too)
In the Middle of the Pack
> I love Many Faces of Go. Don't get me wrong here, it's a great
> program. But to answer your question:
>
> Usually, when you buy version 1, you can upgrade to version 2 for
> free. I know you've put a lot of work into it but others, who allow
> free upgrades, have too. This is after all just an upgrade - it's not
> a new program. It's the same graphics as before and basically the same
> thing as before (except it's stronger, plus some fluff).
Generally, that has not been my experience with proprietary software, unless the software was cost free in the first place. Usually, I am offered a discount for an upgrade, I usually have to pay something to be able to use the new features that the new version offers. For a game program, a significant increase in playing strength might or might not be worth the price of an upgrade.
>
> For example, I didn't have to pay $50 to download service pack 1, 2 or
> 3 to Windows XP. Upgrading Internet Explorer to 7.0 was also free (but
> who the hell would want it? :-)) even though it was mainly intended
> for Vista.
I don't think that is a fair comparison. Service packs and updates are generally regarded as fixes for shortcomings, bugs, or other problems. Did Microsoft offer a free upgrade from Windows 2000 to XP, from XP to Vista, from 95 to 98, without charge?
>
> That, plus the $90 (!) to buy the complete program, just seems greedy.
>
> People are going to pirate it anyway. Then everyone will have it for
> free.
Not so. Some people will pirate it, but not everyone. Many people recognize piracy is theft. Many people will recognize that many other people have to deal with financial factors in creating and improving various products. The potential to derive income may be a motivating factor.
Do you recommend software developers look for other jobs because people are going to pirate their software anyway, and everyone will have a copy for free? If so, do you recommend software development cease?
Imagine you are a software developer, you loved go, and you have the ability to create great go software. You might like to offer the go software for no cost, or at least lifetime upgrades from previous editions for no cost. But, you have bills to pay. You have a choice of where to spend your time. Do you spend it on something than has the potential to pay the rent, or something that will certainly not contribute to paying the rent?
I say "potential to pay the rent", because there is the chance that the product will not sell. Such are the risks.
> No matter what protection you put on a program - any program -
> somebody will figure out a way to pirate it.
You put jewels in a safe -- any safe -- somebody will figure out a way to steal them.
> So I think the problem
> here is that people figure, rather than paying $90 (for, say, version
> 8) and then upgrading the program to version 9, 10, 11 and 12 ($50 * 4
> upgrades = $200, and $90 + $200 = rougly $300, which is more than
> you'd have to pay for 9.2mm tsuki shell and slate stones), they'll
> just wait until someone does.
>
You are comparing go software to a physical go set? That doesn't seem to be a good comparison.
> I think you'd sell a lot more copies of it if you 1) dropped the price
> a bit and 2) allowed free upgrades like everyone else.
Again, not everyone offeres free upgrades.
> This, of
> course, wouldn't net as much income per copy as before, but on the
> other hand you would sell more copies so I think it would even out in
> the end.
>
[snip]
In the Middle of the Pack
>> I don't think that is a fair comparison. Service packs and updates are
>> generally regarded as fixes for shortcomings, bugs, or other problems.
>> Did Microsoft offer a free upgrade from Windows 2000 to XP, from XP to
>> Vista, from 95 to 98, without charge?
>
> I consider Windows Vista to be a completely new program, I think most
> people do. And I think my comparison was fair; we can call Windows XP
> as it was originally released "XP version 1". Windows XP with SP1
> could be called "XP version 2" and so on. You do get new programs when
> you download the service packs, for example the windows firewall (even
> though it fixes bugs aswell; as did the new versions of MFGO if I
> remember correctly).
You were maintaining that "everyone else" offers "free upgrades." I disagree that they do.
Regardless of what wording you use, what wording does Microsoft use when offering a lower price for a version that can replace a user's installation of XP?
Whether a Windows O/S, a game, or any other software, if a purchaser accepts the "upgrade" pricing offer for proprietary software, and installs the new version, do the EULAs leave him/her free to allow someone else to give the installation media of the old version to someone else to install and use?
>
>> Not so. Some people will pirate it, but not everyone.
>
> Yes, you are right, of course. I meant eventually someone will crack
> it and make it available for everyone.
>
>
>
>> Do you recommend software developers look for other jobs because people
>> are going to pirate their software anyway, and everyone will have a copy
>> for free? If so, do you recommend software development cease?
>
> You sound like I was advocating piracy - I wasn't. I explained why
> some people prefer to pirate it rather than buying it (or just don't
> use it at all), that's all.
>
I did think you were trying to excuse or justify piracy.
>
>
>> You put jewels in a safe -- any safe -- somebody will figure out a way to
>> steal them.
>
> Not the same thing. You can't just make a copy of the jewels.
>
The point of my analogy was that the ability of certain people to find ways around means of protection or security doesn't justify that people should try to use those ways, or that should eschew such protection. The fact that software is easily duplicated while jewels can't be duplicated or are difficult to copy doesn't change that. I thought you were trying to excuse software piracy.
>
>
>> You are comparing go software to a physical go set? That doesn't seem to
>> be a good comparison.
>
> I disagree. Both go software and a physical go set falls under the
> category "go as a hobby".
Categories can be broadened until any two things can be classified together. Beginners and a few others might be trying to choose one or (exclusive) the other as alternatives. But, since the circumstances under which one would use go software or a physical set are so different, for most go players with a computer. the alternatives would have software choices independent of go set choices. You considered not the original purchase price of go software, but accumulated cost of the original purchase and upgrades. The software choice has to include "no upgrade", so, I think you presented a false choice. Also, a series of upgrades can extend over years. This seems to support the idea that it isn't a suitable comparison. How many people considering purchasing software think that they are committing themselves to a series of possibly costly upgrades?
In the Middle of the Pack
>> I don't think that is a fair comparison. Service packs and updates are
>> generally regarded as fixes for shortcomings, bugs, or other problems.
>> Did Microsoft offer a free upgrade from Windows 2000 to XP, from XP to
>> Vista, from 95 to 98, without charge?
>
> I consider Windows Vista to be a completely new program, I think most
> people do. And I think my comparison was fair; we can call Windows XP
> as it was originally released "XP version 1". Windows XP with SP1
> could be called "XP version 2" and so on. You do get new programs when
> you download the service packs, for example the windows firewall (even
> though it fixes bugs aswell; as did the new versions of MFGO if I
> remember correctly).
You were maintaining that "everyone else" offers "free upgrades." I disagree that they do.
Regardless of what wording you use, what wording does Microsoft use when offering a lower price for a version that can replace a user's installation of XP?
Whether a Windows O/S, a game, or any other software, if a purchaser accepts the "upgrade" pricing offer for proprietary software, and installs the new version, do the EULAs leave him/her free to allow someone else to give the installation media of the old version to someone else to install and use?
>
>> Not so. Some people will pirate it, but not everyone.
>
> Yes, you are right, of course. I meant eventually someone will crack
> it and make it available for everyone.
>
>
>
>> Do you recommend software developers look for other jobs because people
>> are going to pirate their software anyway, and everyone will have a copy
>> for free? If so, do you recommend software development cease?
>
> You sound like I was advocating piracy - I wasn't. I explained why
> some people prefer to pirate it rather than buying it (or just don't
> use it at all), that's all.
>
Yes -- I did think you were trying to excuse or justify piracy.
>
>
>> You put jewels in a safe -- any safe -- somebody will figure out a way to
>> steal them.
>
> Not the same thing. You can't just make a copy of the jewels.
>
The point of my analogy was that the ability of certain people to find ways around means of protection or security doesn't justify that people should try to use those ways, or that should eschew such protection. The fact that software is easily duplicated while jewels can't be duplicated or are difficult to copy doesn't change that. I thought you were trying to excuse software piracy.
>
>
>> You are comparing go software to a physical go set? That doesn't seem to
>> be a good comparison.
>
In the Middle of the Pack
>> You were maintaining that "everyone else" offers "free upgrades." I
>> disagree that they do.
>
> Yeah, but *most people* do.
I disagree that even most people (who offer upgrades) offer them as free upgrades. Unless the original software was free. We both use definitions and examples to suit our positions. You have a broad definition of what constitutes an upgrade; I have a narrow one.
Your definition allows software patches and updates to be called free upgrades. I use the wording of the vendor's offer and pricing policy.
>
>> Categories can be broadened until any two things can be classified
>> together. Beginners and a few others might be trying to choose one or
>> (exclusive) the other as alternatives. But, since the circumstances
>> under which one would use go software or a physical set are so
>> different, for most go players with a computer. the alternatives would
>> have software choices independent of go set choices. You considered not
>> the original purchase price of go software, but accumulated cost of the
>> original purchase and upgrades. The software choice has to include "no
>> upgrade", so, I think you presented a false choice. Also, a series of
>> upgrades can extend over years. This seems to support the idea that it
>> isn't a suitable comparison. How many people considering purchasing
>> software think that they are committing themselves to a series of
>> possibly costly upgrades?
>
> I think only David Fotland would use that as an argument to defend his
> over-priced product (which also would explain why you suddenly popped
> up here only to write 3 posts with that e-mail address, defending the
> price of MFGO),
I am not David Fotland. Use the Google groups archive to see that I have other posts in the last 10 years. A few of them are in rec.games.go, a few in rec.running and some other groups. (There is a gap of several years when I had an ISP that didn't provide USENET access.)
I posted here because I thought you were trying to defend, excuse, or justify software piracy. I live in a country with a capitalist economic system, and I have strong views against software piracy.
Although I like the open source and free (unrestricted) software movement, as well as the idea of free (cost) software, I defend the right of David Fotland, myself, and others to take the proprietary / cost approach. I recognize that David Fotland and developers of other products take a risk, in that a product they bring to market might not sell well enough for them to recover their costs.
> but anyway:
>
> Shell and slate stones last for, what, 20 years? 30? 50? For that
> price you get to use and upgrade MFGO for maybe 3 years or however
> long it took to release those four upgrades.
>
> Even the initial price is nuts. No other computer game costs that much
> (yeah, maybe you can find one to prove me wrong, but most games don't,
> plus you get to upgrade them for free; and you can't compare Half-life
> 1 to Half-life 2 or whatever since the latter is a completely new
> game, totally reworked with everything new).
I'm not familiar with the Half-life games.
If MFoGO seems overpriced, it may because of simple economics. With a large potential market, the developer can price lower and hope to make a profit because he/she expects that the fixed costs of development can be recovered by being spread out among a greater number of units sold. With software aimed at a smaller market, the potential for fewer unit sales means the development costs are divided among fewer potential purchasers. Isn't this the case with go? David Fotland knows the market is small and he is taking a chance that the demand for quality go software is relatively inelastic.
If you think go software is overpriced, try pricing software for even smaller markets. Some businesses pay hundreds of dollars for a good software package. For something like 3rd party security software on a mid-range or mainframe computer, the price may be thousands of dollars. In some cases, comes with a license that requires renewal for a fee every year. I'm not trying to compare, per-se. game software to business software. The point I'm trying to make is that the size of the market has an effect on the price.
> For $90 you can get some
> pretty nice go equipment instead, so why waste it on a computer
> program that's rivaled by free alternatives such as GnuGo, MoGo,
> GoGrinder and others? You don't even NEED to pirate it in order to
> play go on your computer. Even $90 is like a shin-kaya board with
> yunzis.
I'm sure the creators and distributors of go software are aware that these programs compete with them and make their markets smaller, or make demand for their specific products more elastic.. They hope that their software will offer enough additional features, or a better playing engine to keep people interested.
>
> It's not a false choise at all. If John Doe has $300 to spend on his
> hobby, will he put it on an extremely over-priced computer program +
> upgrading it a few times, or some really nice go equipment? For most
> people it's a no-brainer (and that's why it doesn't sell, to answer
> the original question). You don't need to broaden the categories in
> this case.
I read your remarks as presenting a choice of spending the money on a go set or (exclusive or) the software and subsequent upgrades. It seemed to me that you think an initial purchase of the software would require subsequent upgrades. You ignore the possibility of purchasing the software and not upgrading it. John Doe could spend $100 of that $300 on software then not upgrade it. That is why I called it a false choice. If "false choice" is too strong, how about a "choice with too few alternatives?"
And, I also still think the circumstances in which one would use go software vs. a go board are different enough so it will rarely be a choice of one or the other.
Can a physical go set teach joseki? Can it review games? Can it present problems? If you get a physical go board, would you buy books to add these capabilities? If someone got a go set and books, would he/she be interested in buying more books later on?
(Now there is an example that makes a better "one or the other but not both" example: Does John Doe spend his money on new books or a software upgrade?)
How many go players that have a computer and software do you think have a physical board? At the time they purchased either one, how often was it a choice of one or the other?
jlw...@gmail.com
> I see that there are many trial downloads of Many Faces of Go, but not
> so many purchases. I'd like to know why.
>
> Is the price too high? If so, what price would be reasonable?
> Is the trial too incomplete? Would it help if it can play a partial
> game at a higher level?
> Are there missing features?
> Is the most important thing its highest level strength, or is there
> value in the weaker levels so everyone gets a good even game? Is
> there value in the training features (problems, fuseki library, etc)?
> Are you running into bugs?
> Something else?
>
> SInce version 12 is a download I can easily adjust features or price.
>
> David