I don’t know why, but I was thinking about the price of different software products last night. I don’t think any of this means anything, but for some reason it won’t go out of my head until I write it down:

• If Microsoft Windows cost any less (free?), would they sell any more copies? (no?)
• If Linux (generic, not talking RHES etc) cost more (something), would they ’sell’ any less? (yes?)
• If Oracle Database cost any more, would they sell any less copies? (no? not by much?)
• If Google (Search) was a subscription service, would most people pay for it? (yes?)
• Does Opera prove that most people won’t pay for a web browser? Or, considering that the web browser is becoming the most important software item on the desktop, would people pay a token sum for an exceptional browser product with hugely improved efficiency/features (firefox isn’t all that)? (yes?)
• Similarly, if IE and Firefox were priced at $10 each, how many of each would sell?
• In the next 10 years, will nearly all software be (cost) ‘free’ (i.e. the marketplace becomes more service-oriented)? Or will the reverse happen and people will pay for search, browsers, etc?
• A Powerbook costs about $1500, and OSX about $130. But the ‘value’ of the $1500 powerbook includes being able to use OSX, not just the price of OSX. So, when OSX inevitably comes to the PC, how much ‘value’ will be lost from a $1500 powerbook? Will it then only be worth $1000 to a typical user?

Like I said, this doesn’t mean a whole lot (except point out that different products have different ‘value propositions’), but I have a niggling feeling that there’s something interesting to be found by following this train of thought.