A. Pagaltzis wrote: > * Sean O'Rourke <[email protected]> [2007-08-16 23:00]: >> Here's an analogy. Say you want people to wear seatbelts. You >> might: >> >> (1) Install a buzzer that go off for 10 seconds after a car >> starts unless the driver's seatbelt is fastened; or >> (2) Install a buzzer that never shuts off while the buckle >> is undone; or >> (3) Disable the ignition while the driver's seatbelt is >> unfastened. >> >> IMAO (2) is no more effective than (1), but far more annoying, >> and therefore hateful. > > That's true, but what you are saying is is that #2 makes people > not put on their seatbelts out of spite. How is that supposed to > make sense? > > If it was that hateful, why didn't you stop using it? And if you > didn't stop using it despite getting pissed off, why didn't you > just buy it to spare yourself the bile? > > Maybe the incessant nagging reduces the number of people who are > willing to pay. That might be a valid point. But if it's pissing > off freeloaders at the same time, well then I can't quite fault > the author for putting in a nag screen.
In real life, #2 caused people to just disable the buzzer. I guess that would be analogous to pirating the software. Pissing off potential customers is never a good way to sell your product.
