At 10:07 PM 3/12/98 -0500, you wrote:
>Earl Truss wrote:
>>
>> Yes, a lot of people think $30 is too much to pay, but there must be enough
>> who think it is OK else they would not get enough people to buy the Beta
>> version to make it worthwhile.  That is, they don't need to give it away to
>> testers because enough will pay to do it.
>
>Years ago, the developers paid US to beta test (a free final version)
>Now we have let them turn the table around the other way.
>
>It's sad to say, but we stand in line to give them our hard earned
>money so we can do THEIR work for them.
>
>I think that the average American consumer has been so overwhelmed
>with advertising, that his/her brain is numb.  I still find it amazing
>
I'm not so sure that it is advertising that has done this to us.  I agree
with you in that it mystifies me that people will pay to do beta testing
rather than agree to do it for pay or for a free final version when the
product is released.  (I remember those days too.)  My major point in the
above was simply to point out the fact that companies no longer give away
betas because they've discovered that people will pay to get them.  It does
no good to say "they oughta give them away because *I* wouldn't pay for
it".  One must realize the economics of the situation and I don't think the
original poster was looking at it with this in mind.