|
|
|
|
|
|
by hellofriends1
1145 days ago
|
|
|
> the choice of emphasizing "FREE" in all caps in this headline. You’re welcome to fork it and try to sell it if you think that’s such a great idea. Anyway are you going to blame the user? I will. It sucks people pay for a $3 coffee or a cigs or chips not software they use for even 10s. Maybe figure out a way to make software physiologically addictive like coffee tobacco and junk food, and you can bypass the two decades of cultural programming of 4b people to value intangibles at 0. |
|
|
Emphasis mine. Are you implying the OP shouldn't raise these ideas? Have you ever had a complaint about a user interface in your car? You are, after all, free to build your own and design it how you like. They saw something they thought could be improved, provided a rational explanation of why they think a change should at least be considered, and did so in a manner that's very respectful of both the software and the people who developed it. So this comment feels more than a little...reductive to me. Moreover, I don't read their commentary as suggesting the software shouldn't be free, merely that its price tag shouldn't be the loudest and most prominent selling point. It's a well-known psychological phenomenon that people want things they think are valuable, so putting a $5 sign on the furniture you're trying to give away makes it more likely to go.