Hi, for what it's worth, it's difficult for me to visualize any payment program to download the Macromedia Flash Player, because the value from quick and widespread feature improvements on the world's computers seems to exceed any practical pricepoint which might be reached. Video is a great example. Maybe others can see things differently, but that's what it looks like from my little corner of the world.

But Macromedia is already "charging consumers", indirectly, in the mobile market -- with manufacturers quickly moving to provide core interface functionality via SWF, there's a competitive disadvantage in offering a SWF-incapable phone. Manufacturers make the purchase agreement here, and consumers then make decisions to purchase these richer devices.

(If you've got a toolbar and are not sure how, then are you using Internet Explorer for Windows? I haven't heard of people being surprised by Firefox offers yet, or other browsers... most of that toolbar action seems to happen for the IE/Win audience.)

two-cents, your-mileage-may-vary etc, jd/mm

Hi,
I agree that there's no way to charge desktop users directly for a Flash Player - but costs aren't necessarily monetary - the cost might be in accepting the installation of bundled software and/or taking the time to remove it.

This kind of cost is often incurred with 'free' software. Real Networks used this technique a lot and just managed to generate a lot bad feeling, and damaged their platform.

Alex.

Understood, the user experience of a download can become a real cost, and so any actual effects do need to be assiduously tracked.

jd/mm