In the past, I’ve repeatedly made arguments contradicting the widespread assumption that digital music distribution is supposedly slated to become a costless consumer luxury. A good number of bloggers have championed the line of free-to-download, free-to-listen.
Now I will attempt to argue in opposition to the belief that cloud-based software is destined to eventually bear no financial tariffs for end users.
It is strange how, when digital music is the concern of a large segment of the online punditocracy, the concept of free (both as in speech and as in beer) isn’t something the largest of mainstream media outlets openly pontificate. Reporters do address the issues of peer-to-peer transfers and the grim status of the music industry at large. But the columnists generally don’t take a stand on either side of the line separating Free vs. Not Free. Yet those apparently representing the perspectives of big publishers appear to have no qualms exploring the idea of free (as in beer) software, as The New York Times’s Matt Richtel exemplifies in a article published earlier today.
So is there a double standard at work?
I for one see absolutely no reason to think the software industry - particularly its growing sector of Web-based offerings - is bound for a fate of out-and-out costlessness. I simply cannot envision developers big or small delivering feature-rich productivity applications - whether they be of the MS Office stripe or likened to Adobe’s Creative Suite - without requesting some measure of financial recompense from users. Software, like any other intangible but valuable invention, is something that really cannot be sustained solely on the basis of advertising - a model which more and more critics and soothsayers have been thoroughly bullish about as of late.
Sure, advertising will play a part in software development and support. It already does to some degree. But one would be naive to think that the any and all eventual cloud-based versions of programs that currently bear price tags tallying anywhere from the dozens to the hundreds are one day going to be driven exclusively via advertising revenue.
There are plenty of examples of businesses established entirely out in the cloud that have managed to grow and remain on stable, paying subscriberships. 37signals is one. It is independent. It is an exclusively Rails-based developer group. And it keeps on keeping on. Another business, as the abovementioned New York Times article describes, Zimbra, a company purchased by Yahoo! in 2007, is producer of cost-based tools. It has managed to amass a small but sizable body of paying users. Google also targets it’s own application suite at small- and medium-sized businesses. An annual fee is levied by the Mountain View-based company. (To promote its products, Google has begun offering universities and non-profits free services.)
Of course, this isn’t to say that advertising has no legitimate place in the software industry of today and tomorrow. There will certainly always exist a significant subset of the Web-based software market that positions some assortment(s) of utilities to be free of cost. Whether for marketing purposes or for beta tests or for trial programs, prospective users will regularly be sought without being forced to contend with the ol’ enter-your-credit-card-information-here page.