dylan@ibmpcug.co.uk (Matthew Farwell) (06/17/91)
In article <NELSON.91Jun16163515@sun.clarkson.edu> nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) writes: >In article <1991Jun15.222200.26041@cbfsb.att.com> mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes: > Very often the authors of shareware are doing it for fun, and they > like to hear comments and suggestions, and like to be helpful. >If they're not in it for the money, why are they asking for money? >Shareware is NO different from commercial, proprietary software -- it >just uses a different marketing scheme. Umm, the difference is that they give you the choice about sending money. Commercial packages don't. Dylan. -- Matthew J Farwell: dylan@ibmpcug.co.uk || ...!uunet!ukc!ibmpcug!dylan But you're wrong Steve. You see, its only solitaire.
chappell@symcom (Glenn Chappell) (06/19/91)
In article <NELSON.91Jun16163515@sun.clarkson.edu> nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) writes: >In article <1991Jun15.222200.26041@cbfsb.att.com> mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes: > > Very often the authors of shareware are doing it for fun, and they > like to hear comments and suggestions, and like to be helpful. > >If they're not in it for the money, why are they asking for money? >Shareware is NO different from commercial, proprietary software -- it >just uses a different marketing scheme. I think they're both right: NELSON appears to be talking about obligations. When you buy something from someone, they have certain legal & moral obligations, regardless of how the product is marketed. However you buy your software, the seller is obligated to let you use it legally and generally to provide some sort of support. In a more vague, ethical sense they are obligated to make sure the product is worth the price. On the other hand, mbb is talking about attitudes. Even the largest corporation can be founded just for the fun of it, but they tend not to be. On the other hand, shareware operations are commonly done for fun. Further, it is true that shareware authors are more likely to enjoy receiving comments and suggestions and helping their customers out. GGC <><
geiser@pictel.uucp (Wayne Geiser) (06/19/91)
In article <NELSON.91Jun16163515@sun.clarkson.edu> nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu (aka NELSON@CLUTX.BITNET) writes: >In article <1991Jun15.222200.26041@cbfsb.att.com> mbb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (martin.brilliant) writes: > > Very often the authors of shareware are doing it for fun, and they > like to hear comments and suggestions, and like to be helpful. > >If they're not in it for the money, why are they asking for money? >Shareware is NO different from commercial, proprietary software -- it >just uses a different marketing scheme. But is there not a difference between asking for money to help defray some of the costs of this "fun" and trying to make a living off of it? Any shareware author who goes into the business expecting to make a "serious" amount of money is bound to be disappointed. Note that the above does NOT disagree with your statement about there being no difference between commercial software and shareware other than the marketing scheme. I simply think that it is a little simplistic to make assumptions about someone's motivation in this case. >--russ <nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu> I'm proud to be a humble Quaker. >I am leaving the employ of Clarkson as of June 30. Hopefully this email >address will remain. If it doesn't, use nelson@gnu.ai.mit.edu. -- Wayne Geiser ****************************************************************** * PictureTel Corporation, One Corporation Way, Peabody, MA 01960 * * (508) 977-9500 x253 (email: uunet!pictel!geiser) * ****************************************************************** "Taxes are what we pay for a civilized society." - Oliver Wendell Holmes.