I personally get a complete ROI on my lifetime license of WNS Links every few hours. So if it is especially time intensive to concentrate on these issues then I'm sure that I (and possibly some others) would be more than happy to compensate you for your time.
In order to assure your continue development and support:,
I as an actual customer of WSN Links, would be glad to pay (and no use the perpetual upgrade license) for buying the 3.20 version as it includes lots of improvements over the previous ver.
I'm shure other users would think the same way.
If the problem is that we have bought a per-life licence for WSN Links,
Firstly I believe that violates the spirit of the license, but from a more selfish perspective I believe I'd be torpedoing my own reputation if I did that.
For example, have a look at the top review at http://php.resourceindex.com/detail/01645.html : "But as the author offers free perpetual updates, how much we can trust he doesn't decide to rebrand it and make us pay again for it?"
I get that kind of bad review just from somebody's paranoia about the chance that I'd do such a thing. Imagine what'd happen to my hotscripts rating if I actually did it. And my hotscripts rating is, without a doubt, largely responsible for my income. Creating unhappy customers -- even if it's a minority of them -- would kill future business.
I do recognize the need for a non-perpetual system, which is why the yearly license was introduced. As the price goes up (which it will), perhaps more people will find theirselves buying the yearly license instead of the perpetual one. However, according to survey responses so far a lot of people would simply refuse to buy a yearly license -- it's perpetual or nothing for them.
My prefered way to increase income, of course, would be to have one of the other WSN scripts start achieving some sucess somewhat on par with WSN Links. That just hasn't been happening.
0/5
1
2
3
4
5
This thread is closed, so you cannot post a reply.
Comments on Paying for 3.20
Forum Regular
Usergroup: Customer
Joined: Aug 09, 2004
Location: Chile
Total Topics: 172
Total Comments: 462
Paul,
Reading inquiries of users like the ones stated at:
https://www.webmastersite.net/forums/detail/5081
specially mrowton comment:
And considering some of your comments stated at
https://www.webmastersite.net/forums/detail/5217
In order to assure your continue development and support:,
I as an actual customer of WSN Links, would be glad to pay (and no use the perpetual upgrade license) for buying the 3.20 version as it includes lots of improvements over the previous ver.
I'm shure other users would think the same way.
If the problem is that we have bought a per-life licence for WSN Links,
I suggest to re-named 3,20 to WSN Links - Pro.
Kind Regards,
Dan.
developer
Usergroup: Administrator
Joined: Dec 20, 2001
Location: Diamond Springs, California
Total Topics: 61
Total Comments: 7868
Firstly I believe that violates the spirit of the license, but from a more selfish perspective I believe I'd be torpedoing my own reputation if I did that.
For example, have a look at the top review at http://php.resourceindex.com/detail/01645.html :
"But as the author offers free perpetual updates, how much we can trust he doesn't decide to rebrand it and make us pay again for it?"
I get that kind of bad review just from somebody's paranoia about the chance that I'd do such a thing. Imagine what'd happen to my hotscripts rating if I actually did it. And my hotscripts rating is, without a doubt, largely responsible for my income. Creating unhappy customers -- even if it's a minority of them -- would kill future business.
I do recognize the need for a non-perpetual system, which is why the yearly license was introduced. As the price goes up (which it will), perhaps more people will find theirselves buying the yearly license instead of the perpetual one. However, according to survey responses so far a lot of people would simply refuse to buy a yearly license -- it's perpetual or nothing for them.
My prefered way to increase income, of course, would be to have one of the other WSN scripts start achieving some sucess somewhat on par with WSN Links. That just hasn't been happening.