I am not sure why the audio cd analogy doesn't hold. Quoting the original post:<p>"Software ISN'T a t-shirt. A t-shirt needs cotton. That cotton must be dyed, woven, sewn, printed, packaged, shipped. Software ISN'T a meal. A meal has ingredients, and the more you spend on them, the better, and that goes double for your chef's salary. People understand where their money is going. People are just fine with paying through the nose when they get their money's worth. But no one likes to feel like they have been taken to the cleaners."<p>Looking up on Google, I can get 500 audio cds for around 185$ (<a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&#38;source=hp&#38;q=audio+cd+manufacturing+cost&#38;aq=f&#38;aql=&#38;aqi=&#38;oq=" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&#38;source=hp&#38;q=audio...</a>), per CD cost is 37 cents. Do you think that I should be able to buy the latest album of Backstreet Boys for 37 cents? Where do you account for thousands of dollars spent on recording the album? What about paying the artists? ....you know the 'fixed costs'. We still happily pay 9$ for an audio cd because it gives us pleasure which is worth more than 9$. As he says, 'getting money's worth'.<p>Tell me again, how is software any different? You buy the software ONLY IF you think software gives you more value than it costs you to acquire it.