Late last week, I read an article so dumb, I couldn't believe it. I recovered, and wrote up part of a response for this very weblog, but I couldn't bear to finish it. Now, however, I see that both Macuser and The Macalope fought through the stupidity and have weighed in. Both links are certainly worth reading, so check them out.

The basic ideas of the initial article are that iPhone software will cost money, and that paying money for software is A Bad Thing. In author Anita Hamilton's world, ads are the new money. Why sell software for money, when you can annoy your users by having them view or click ads? Then, eventually, you can collect some money from those ad companies. Or perhaps a middleman who runs an ad network. The key here, I think, is to put as many people between you and the customer as possible, because a straight money for goods transaction is just not hip anymore.

There's so much wrong with this article that it's difficult to reply at all. There's its Windows-centric presumption that no one pays for software. There's the idea that exchanging money for software is "anything but a bargain". Perhaps best (or worst?) of all, there's the author's seeming belief that Apple rules by fiat, and can force all developers to release their software for free. Ultimately, I gave up on the whole thing, as it was just too much. However, I do urge you to check out the replies from Macuser and Macalope.

Remember, even virtual goods like software have value, and you get what you pay for. There will certainly be some great ad-supported software, and even great free software. In order for developers to provide quality software, however, we generally need to earn money off of it. Having your customers pay directly for your software is still a very viable way of doing just that.