Having some experience in business, I also think that “cost-less = cheap” for many people. I have witnessed sales going up after increasing prices. People providing adult education will tell you the same : the same training program, when given “for free” (that is, paid by public subventions) or paid in full by a company or the trainees themselves, always gets a worse feedback when people don’t directly pay for it or are made aware of its full price.
The thing is, an intimidating and expensive software (Dassault Catia comes to mind) is an advanced work tool, while an intimidating and free software is an over-engineered piece of junk for amateur nerds. So if the perceived value is low, as a prejudice, then the whole UX might be just confirmation bias.
Not sure it that applies. Nobody uses OpenOffice as a hobby, it’s really not the same purpose as dt. I would rather look at Blender, for example.
Yeah, I totally agree with that. But to be a good designer, I need to understand who I am designing for, and what their problems are, while also avoiding the survivor bias (only considering the people still using it and not the one who gave it up).
Now we are talking, thanks for the tips.
To be completely honest, I don’t want to enlarge dt’s user base. Actually, more users only means more trouble. Opening dt to Windows was, if you ask me, a mistake that has been long delayed (the reason being we are really under-staffed on the Win front, no developer in his right mind wants to touch that OS, so the bugs trackers are filled with Win-centric peculiar issues).
darktable is not meant for anyone, and that’s fine. I just want to be sure that we are not driving users away for wrong reasons (that would be any reason not related to image processing, like lack of computer skills).
So who could manage expectations?