Mint Forum

I think charging customers $19 to upgrade their ‘Mint’ software is an absolute joke, and a disgraceful demand on Shaun Inman’s behalf.

Let’s face it, the $30 upfront payment made it a steep buy. Not unreasonable, but still expensive for something you can get (albeit in a slightly less fashionable and complete package) free.

Now with the latest iteration of his software, Shaun Inman has essentially just redone the visuals. This is in fact the very first feature of ‘Mint 2’ he mentions on his blog (link below). Nevertheless, he has decided that people should have to pay a further $19 to keep up-to-date with these changes. If I need to explain to you why that is so ludicrous, then I guess you’re just a fool.

Trust me, Shaun knows exactly what he’s doing. Kudos to him for being able to accept your money.. But I urge you to stop deluding yourself and see ‘Mint’s latest major upgrade for what it really is. A marketing gimmick.

You are upgrading your image, not your software. If it’s worth $19 to you to feel special, then so be it. But stop trying to delude yourself that this lackluster upgrade is worth the money.

Regards, Luke

Shaun’s blog post: shauninman.com/archive/2007/01/28/two_sday

‘Not unreasonable, but still expensive for something you can get (albeit in a slightly less fashionable and complete package) free’

Use the free one then, you have that choice! Or don’t upgrade, if you don’t think it’s worth it then you can still keep using Mint 1.

And is it just me, or is $19 - in the greater scheme of things - really very cheap. And at 63% of the original cost, is very standard for any software upgrade.

Shaun’s software, his choice! We all need to earn!

I can’t help but agree. For what you actually receive as an end user, paying two thirds the price of the full license to upgrade is taking the piss. And if it’s happened once, it’ll probably happen again. And again. And again. Is this audience really happy with that? If so, style is even more powerful than I thought.

Although new things have been introduced with Mint 2, they are Peppers. Wasn’t the whole point of Peppers to add extra functionality to Mint for free, thus making the package a lot more enticing? After all, you’d be a nutter to run ‘Thin Mint’ when so many free alternatives can meet exactly the same end.

And of course, when you ask for basic things such as multi-user login and historic statistics data to be incorporated, Shaun doesn’t want to know as it’d slow down Mint or there’re ‘no plans’ to add that feature. How about developing it so it doesn’t slow down Mint, or making plans? We are paying a premium for upgrades, after all. It’d be nice if the author even pretended he’s interested in suggestions.

Maybe Shaun’s just become blinded by fame and money and thinks Mint is the equivalent of Windows or something. Either way, the core upgrade from Mint 1 to Mint 2 is overpriced. Take the new Peppers out of the equation and I can’t see how you’d be unable to see that.

I’ll be looking to migrate to other software ASAP, anyway.

Of course, not stripping away your existing loyal audience with excessive upgrade charges while simultaneously failing to attract new customers by either lowering the price or offering substantially more value is another good way to go about success. A new design isn’t going to do much to sway those who were put off by Mint’s price-to-features ratio in the first place.

Mint is obviously aimed at the more casual developer/blogger/etc rather than the high-end statistics market. So why are we being hit with $19 upgrade fees (which came as a surprise to most) and the necessity to buy it for each damn site we run it on? It might be just about possibly to justify $30, $49, $68, on one site, but if you run two or three as a hobby then you’re royally screwed. At least $90 for statistics, then much more if you go for the upgrades too? No.

Perhaps it just stings that little bit more because of the generous open source climate we live in right now, or because I am myself downright stingy, but I’d call it a bad move. And hey, what kind of business venture can improve without criticism of every aspect of how it operates? These things must be discussed, and preferably without blind zealot fandom clouding the waters. It’d be nice to have our points addressed rather being hit with an easy “If you don’t think it’s good value, don’t buy it” statement.