Suggestions

[#1]

To stimulate and reward your beta-testers, how about giving those who have contributed something valuable during the beta phase a free developer licence?

Those who get the reward could be peoiple who:

- are the first to report a new bug

- propose a change that is implemented

- anything else Sony considers valuable (a wiki, tutorial)

This will stimulate open beta participation and help improve the quality of PS Suite upon its first release. 

[#2]

Personally I don't see a scheme like this working. Having early access to the SDK for free is enough of an incentive to attract anyone to use the SDK and those who want to contribute to the community and the SDK overall will always do so.

I think rewarding developers simply for suggesting changes and reporting bugs is going to be an easy way to annoy other developers who don't get rewarded with free accounts. It's also simply not in Sony's interests to give away free accounts to the people who are the most active during open beta as those are the people most likely to want (and buy) access when the SDK hits final release.

[#3]

That would only be on a very short term. On the long term, the success of the platform will partly depend on the quality of the platform and the impression it gives once it launches and it is no longer in beta. That is the point at which reviewers, websites and users will get a first impression of the platform. It is much more critical a phase than people (and companies) often realise. You can still do well after that, but not easily. Many developers (and IT professionals) will, and are wise to, wait until the initial kinks are worked out. I would personally normally never jump in early. Not just not during a beta phase, but not the first year, simply because running into bugs and 'children's diseases' as we call them here, is annoying, risky and can take a lot of time.

Other developers are rewarded as well - with a better SDK with nicer features and fewer bugs. I wonder at the type of person who would complain about not getting a free account if it is clear what people did to earn them. This is like being angry because you didn't get money while you sat out in the sun, while someone else did but worked all that same day in his dark, cold basement.

[#4]

Well that sounds awful if you tried to get into the closed beta but weren't able to join due to a country mismatch

[#5]

Having a fee keeps the slush out.

It's free right now so take advantage of it - use it! Make things!

When it goes paid then submit what you have made and if the things are good you will probably make some money and be able to pay the licensing fees. It's worth it, and is not unreasonable to pay.

[#6]

I'm looking forward to seeing how well this works after the beta ends. Will there be enough developers to support it? I don't know.

I personally am not going to bother paying or continue using the SDK after the beta. Paying $99 just to test out my app on the Vita isn't worth it to me. Especially since I would like to give this app out for free.

However it's been a fun excuse to show off the Vita as most people don't seem to know what it is (or how big and pretty the screen is).

[#7]

Why not have a Free License to develop for Free games? Then the playstation store will surely flourish with free apps and mini games here and there so that it COULD compete with apple handheld devices. 

[#8]

Subsoap have a point, but still... will I be able to submit my apps compiled by the beta version of the SDK?

Giving the SDK for free may lower the quality standards but some enlightened indie developer in his garage may create an outstanding app for the platform. Keeping the cost low (but not free) would rise the quality standards but may attract only experienced developers who's willing to invest time and money and may be doing the same for iOS and Android platforms.

If Sony phones and tablets can run apps and games from Google Play, can the installed base of PS Vitas be enough to attract indies to develop games for it?

I'm quite new in the industry and have a lot of doubts about where to put my money and efforts so they don't be wasted in the future.

[#9]

$99 is not going to stop shovelware. It doesn't for the iPhone. And people paid a lot more to make Wii shovelware. So I think there's still going to be "low quality standards".

However, $99 is good for getting rid of the poor or casual programmer. It wouldn't be so bad if the emulator would understand a joystick (*hint hint*). Then I could at least test things out before committing to testing it on the Vita.

I'm still hoping that there won't be a charge for testing on the Vita but it's been so much fun (and I've calmed down) that it won't matter to me. It's given me the drive to go make a game but I'll just have to do it elsewhere. When I'm finished with it, I'll come back and pay the $99 to port it to the Vita.

[#10]

Now that the store is out, this question is less relevent. But I would strongly recommend the SDK to stay free completely, including for testing applications on a device (Vita, Phone, Tablet), and only a fee being required for publishing an App on the Store. I think this is a very developer friendly model, and will get more developers to support the device much faster. 

[#11]

I tend to agree with niwrA's suggestion.  I can't imagine the SDK itself as a large profit centered, but attaching a price tag to it does deter early evaluators.  If the Simulator was more full function ( analog sticks, multitouch, etc ), then a simulator only approach would be more feasible, but as it stands now, a would-be developer is going to run up against the limitations of the simulator extremely fast.

I would suggest taking Microsofts approach, give the tools and full access ot the hardware away, then charge to an annual fee to deploy to the store.