~ryanlowe/blog: Would People Pay for AudioMan?

Would People Pay for AudioMan?

Here's a question: do you think people would pay for AudioMan? I don't mean how AudioMan was or is right now, I mean a piece of software that would help you organize your collection, point out missing tags, fix tags with Internet services, manage backup discs, etc.

In other words, most of the features in the Draft Functional Specification. Do you think there's a market for it? You won't hurt my feelings by giving me your opinion -- it will honestly help me.

The price point I have in mind is around $20 US ($25 CAD at the current exchange rate). A new major version of AudioMan with new features would be released approximately on a yearly basis. In between major releases there would be maintenance for the existing major version, which would have bug fixes but not new features.

This question only applies to the AudioMan. Durham would continue to be open source under the EPL. The ID3 library, jid3v2, would be open source as well. I would continue to develop AudioMan with an open process but the AudioMan code itself would be "closed".

Posted at March 14, 2005 at 07:27 AM EST
Last updated March 14, 2005 at 07:27 AM EST

Comments

Yes.

But, I make sure to have a core feature set that is always free (I dislike trials).

» Posted by: aforward at March 14, 2005 04:32 PM

I don't think people would pay for it.

The only differentiators that AudioMan would have is that it:

- manages backups
- brings attention to mistagged files

Most of the other tools like WinAmp, iTunes, Google Desktop search all assume you have good metadata. Fixing metadata is not a big enough market to target but it's good for collection "perfectionists" like myself or people with large collections (also me). I'm really scratching my own itch on this one.

I don't see that as being enough of a market to sustain a commercial product, but it would support an open source one.

» Posted by: Ryan at March 15, 2005 06:59 AM

I use iTunes to fix my tags, and find it pretty easy to use and manage. Since I can drag and drop from explorer and have it convert file types, etc it makes life a lot easier. I just converted 30 albums and updated tags, album covered, etc in around 20 minutes or so... pretty tough to beat that.

The other problem with marketing AudioMan is how does it fit in? People who have a lot of mp3s already are using iTunes, WinAmp, etc to play their files - do you really expect them to use another software to update the files? People are lazy. If I can do everything fairly easily in one software program I will... even if it isn't as intuitive.

The other problem is that iTunes has the resources (read: $$$) to make sure features similar to AudioMan's are easy to use going forward - the more intuitive the more people that use them, the more people with iTunes, the more people with iPod shuffles, the more people that fill them and need to buy full iPods... pretty solid business model they have going.

Just my 2 cents...

» Posted by: Travis at March 15, 2005 11:37 AM

That's very true. But at the same time I need collection management features that iTunes doesn't offer. It would be nice if it did though.

If the introduction of a competitor forced iTunes to add the features I need, then I'm still good either way.

Which is why -- as a commercial product -- AudioMan would fail miserably. It's too niche and you're exactly right: I don't have the resources to compete with Apple.

» Posted by: Ryan at March 15, 2005 11:43 AM

I'd pay for it. But I'm kind of weird that way, and I have large-ish collection, much of which is probably not tagged in a way that makes me happy :).

» Posted by: David at March 17, 2005 10:44 AM

There is free software out there that will fix tags for you. I have a hard time seeing why anybody would pay for software to do it.

» Posted by: Mp3Tagger at March 18, 2005 05:34 AM