RSS Feed

* The Business of Software

I'm interested in any experiences anyone has in choosing between trialware and limited free versions in order to introduce potential customers to their product.  What are the pro's and con's of each.  Anyone deploy both?

As a consumer, I've purchased software from both types of demo versions.  There are disadvantages to each one.

To the time-limited version, it's usually that the trial period is too short.  In some cases, I get busy and don't even get a chance to try out the software, and already my trial is over.  But I have bought some of these.

The problem with limited free versions is twofold: First, you have the danger of customers being happy enough with the free version that they never want the paid version.  (Though that's fine if that's your plan anyway, since some software comes in free basic and deluxe paid versions and it's expected that some users will be happy with the free one.)

The biggest problem I've seen with limited free versions is the ones that have fake menu items, and when you select them, it tells you to buy the deluxe version to enable that item.  It's a pain.

At the very least it should disable the menu item after one sales pitch.  But ideally these menu items should be included but disabled and not selectable, and the help file should explain those features but make it clear that they're in the deluxe version only.

I get extremely annoyed at programs with fake menu items, and I don't think I've purchased the full version of one yet.  However, I have purchased the full version of some feature-limited free versions without such irritations.

Microsoft's Age of Kings is one that comes to mind that had an excellent demo that was actually fun to play on its own, but which also gave a good picture of what the full game would be like.  It withheld enough features to make me want the full version, but it offered enough already, without any "this only works in the full version" crap, to keep me playing it over and over till I was convinced to shell out the $$$.  A great example of how this sort of thing ought to work.

As a consumer, I prefer a limited version if it's _feature_ limiting, not item number limiting.

Sciral Consistency is a great piece of software, and I'd use the limited free version if it allowed you to have more than 4 or 5 items. But I don't use it because having a limited number of items changes the way I think about the software, and I can't really evaluate it with the item number limit pressure.

Treepad Free is also a great piece of software and I use it all the time. It allows me to edit the notes in plaintext. The pay version is actually a different program that allows embedding images, rich text formatting, encryption, and so forth.

I own a pay version of Treepad, but not Sciral Consistency, I didn't continue to use Sciral Consistency after I emailed the author to ask what the limits

of the free version were.

Sorry, my palm keeps hitting the touchpad on this laptop.

I tried to evaluate RealBasic last week.  Their 10 day trial is a joke - it takes me 10 days to find the time to install it, much less code anything meaningful.  I doubt many developers can evaluate a tool in 10 days unless they're using it daily.

I'd chime in for full featured, time limited. We're going with a 14 day trial period, without nag sreens or buy-buy-buy! obnoxiouslness. There's a small countdown in the corner and after the trial everything but making new projects and new tasks still works.

Here's my rationale:
1. We think MasterList Professional delivers value well worth the price ($24.95 USD).
2. Crippled applications (disabled menus or limited records) obscure their value and in effect say don't buy me.
3. Given MLP's problem domain (task/project management) and approach to that problem domain, it will be relatively easy for prospective buyers to decide if MLP is right for them. 2 weeks is long enough to evaluate, short enough so they remember they need to buy.

Bob, I'm curious about "short enough that they remember to buy".

Wouldn't they remember anyway when the time ran out, no matter how long the trial period.

I have no personal experience in this other than as a user, but I would guess the main advantages of a long trial period are
a) theres a better chance the user got to try it
b) if they use it regularly there's a better chance they absolutely need it by now

It's really for reason b) that I've always imagined that, if I were selling shareware, I'd give it a 6mth trial.

I guess the disadvantage is that you lose the impulse-buy sales you would get with the short period. 6 mths is plenty of time to discover you don't really need it at all.

Regarding time versus feature limited, I would imagine that one small advantage of the feature limited trial is that you can actually leave the extra feature code out making it impossible for crackers to patch it.
Of course, this means your users have to do another install  when they buy as opposed to just using a key.

Nonetheless, I'm just guessing. Does anyone know whether this is a real advantage?

But a 6 month trial also is long enough to where they might not need it anymore.  Or they could have rebuilt their system in that time (but those issues were covered in a different thread). 

I have been using about a month for my software and it has been working pretty well.  My sales have gone up noticably.  I was debating on a new version to have it as a number of times used or days used instead to make sure that they get usage out of it.  Either that of making it a 2-3 week trial and if people want an extension there is a place to ask for one.

This is very interesting, as I ponder what to do with my original version of my app when I release the "Pro" version.  The "Pro" edition was always going to have a 14-day trial (14 days of actual usage); and now am thinking to put the original 1.x version as freeware once the Pro is released.

This is good because:

1.) Free stuff is picked up like hot cakes.  Aids marketing and branding.  Aids the hobbyists/academics (for the betterment).
2.) Therefore focuses the more serious users/buyers to the more powerful, feature filled, and more expensive Pro edition.

One slight concern, it might piss off people who bought the original.  So I'm still working on an upgrade path.  Or maybe I could upgrade all those original buyers for free who provide notice. Not sure yet.

If I were to keep the original 1.x edition for sale, it would simply be overshadowed by the Pro TRIAL, and it would seem pointless anyhow.

That's my thought.

Any time there's a time-limit trial, I know I can't use it as-is forever so I have to make a buy decision on it not in 30 days or in 14 days or in 6 months, but RIGHT NOW because I have to decide whether or not I'm going to use this program as if I owned it.

Any PIM (for example) is only as good as the information that's in it, and if I can't adopt it confidently now, I never will because I simply won't fill it up.

Time limit trial != decision in 30 days, Time limit trial == decision now!

The same with a number limited free version. I can't evaluate it completely now, so I need to decide now whether or not I'm going to want to use it to it's full capacity, not when I fill it up.

I don't think very many people get "hooked" on something by casually using a limited demo version.

"I guess the disadvantage is that you lose the impulse-buy sales you would get with the short period."

You don't have to.  I remember that when I downloaded CityDesk once, almost immediately I got an e-mail from Fog Creek offering me 25% off if I bought it in the next 72 hours or something.  You could do something like that and still allow a longer trial period.

avci, MarkTAW,

Trial period should be long enough so they can get comfortable with the app and decide if they want to own it, but short enough so its clear that this is a transaction not two separate things. In other words more like a new car test drive rather than a trial living together.

With the new car test, there's excitement, and fun and a good opportunity to judge whether its right for you.

Moving in together for 6 months can also work out, but can often not!

Since I already live with someone, I want to be in the new car business, so I want to make it as easy as possible for someone to buy my software. So, the trial is the real deal, even if that increases the chances of evil mischief, and I'm offering a 30 day money back no questions asked guarentee.

I think people will get excited about our product, buy it and spread the word. But first they have to get excited.

What's avci?

That sounds like the right length for a trial period, at least for small purchases. Larger purchases are about the relationship.

It wouldn't hurt to have an unconditional money back gaurantee like Fog Creek to make the shelling over money transaction seem less of a commitment.

Worst thing on free trial software is feature limited software, as the feature that attracted me to the program is usually in the not activated section of the program so I can't test it and most the free to try feature can usually be found somewhere else on freeware program.

Or program is full featured but limited in quantity of processing (for example a VCD recorder would limit me to create a 5 minutes VCD !!! who is gonna burn a CD for 5 minutes of video? Not Me).