• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Where did the idea that people shouldn't pay for software come from?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I guess my way of thinking would be similar to the IP qualms with music...

Music piracy is way down recently because of online music stores like Itunes, napster, and soon to be windows media player 10 and the walmart online music store.

The OLD problem was music monopolies, price fixing, and slamming CDs with 2 good songs on them down our throats for $22.

Now with Itunes, for 99 cents you can get those songs, legally, and give the RIAA the finger on the rest of that POS CD.

This not only is more fair to the consumer, it makes a hell of a lot more sense.
-------------------

Back on the topic, the "theives" stealing their oh so hard worked on software wouldnt pay $700 in most cases if it couldnt be copied. While i dont steal software, i will never pay $700 for an office application for my home, it makes no sense.

My point is that im not "cheap" im just not stupid, while freeware office apps arent as good as an MS product, they do what i need for home, for free. I dont understand why anyone would feel $700 is an acceptable price for it.
 
For many people, almost all the software that they'll ever need comes bundled with their computer. "Johnny Best Buy" isn't being charged separately for copy of Windows or Money that comes bundled with their new HP or Dell, so he doesn't think twice about the price of it.

Besides, much of the early software was written by hobbyists on UNIX minicomputers and little homebrew systems. I'll bet that many of them never thought of charging for it, since they just did it for fun.
 
Originally posted by: newParadime
The idea isn't that people shoudn't pay for software, but that people shouldn't pay for Crapy ass sfotwarret that is forced down there throats (Windows anyone).

People didn't want to use windows but are forced to and hence don't wantto pay for it. They found a way to get it for free, and then of course they wanted everything for free.
Click to expand...

Bingo.
 
Originally posted by: newParadime
The idea isn't that people shoudn't pay for software, but that people shouldn't pay for Crapy ass sfotwarret that is forced down there throats (Windows anyone).

People didn't want to use windows but are forced to and hence don't wantto pay for it. They found a way to get it for free, and then of course they wanted everything for free.
Click to expand...
:roll:

1. Windows 2000 and XP are both far from 'crappy software'.
2. Who held a gun to your head and demanded you use Windows?
 
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: newParadime
The idea isn't that people shoudn't pay for software, but that people shouldn't pay for Crapy ass sfotwarret that is forced down there throats (Windows anyone).

People didn't want to use windows but are forced to and hence don't wantto pay for it. They found a way to get it for free, and then of course they wanted everything for free.
Click to expand...
:roll:

1. Windows 2000 and XP are both far from 'crappy software'.
2. Who held a gun to your head and demanded you use Windows?
Click to expand...

MS did.

With DirectX.
 
Originally posted by: yllus
Originally posted by: newParadime
The idea isn't that people shoudn't pay for software, but that people shouldn't pay for Crapy ass sfotwarret that is forced down there throats (Windows anyone).

People didn't want to use windows but are forced to and hence don't wantto pay for it. They found a way to get it for free, and then of course they wanted everything for free.
Click to expand...
:roll:

1. Windows 2000 and XP are both far from 'crappy software'.
2. Who held a gun to your head and demanded you use Windows?
Click to expand...

Well, for most people, Dell, HP, Compaq and the like held a gun to their head.
 
Originally posted by: yllus
1. Windows 2000 and XP are both far from 'crappy software'.
Click to expand...

Totally subjective. Pointless to argue about.

2. Who held a gun to your head and demanded you use Windows?
Click to expand...

Going to other operating systems has too many downsides for many people.

I don't know why people try to turn this into some moral argument; it's obvious that we all have different morals, and guilt or condemnation is simply futile when arguing about piracy.
 
Originally posted by: JetBlack69
Well, for most people, Dell, HP, Compaq and the like held a gun to their head.
Click to expand...

How so? No one stops you from using a different OS. If you're talking about windows coming pre-installed, it's not pirated in that case and outside of what's being argued about.
 
Joe Bestbuy doesnt even have a linux option available in the store, if they do have the option, its a demo machine with no software installed and a crappy looking version of red hat on a pos machine.
----------------

*gets back to topic*

If there was DirectX, up to date and stable on linux just like windows, i would not have a windows machine in my house.
 
Originally posted by: JetBlack69
Originally posted by: Deeko
I think its ridiculous. No offense open sourcey's, but that's a ridiculous concept that all software code should be free. Developers spend hundred of hours coding...that software becomes their intellectual property, and they have every right in the world to protect that and charge for its use.
Click to expand...

Open source is free as in freedom, not free as in beer. You can pay for a comercial product, but then get the source code with it. That way, if there is something you don't like about the product, you can change it yourself instead of paying the developer to change it for you.
Click to expand...

Should a famous chef have to publish his recipies/methods in the menu?
Should clorox have to tell you how they make their bleach to get clothes whiter than other brands?

Of course not.
 
Originally posted by: Deeko
Originally posted by: JetBlack69
Originally posted by: Deeko
I think its ridiculous. No offense open sourcey's, but that's a ridiculous concept that all software code should be free. Developers spend hundred of hours coding...that software becomes their intellectual property, and they have every right in the world to protect that and charge for its use.
Click to expand...

Open source is free as in freedom, not free as in beer. You can pay for a comercial product, but then get the source code with it. That way, if there is something you don't like about the product, you can change it yourself instead of paying the developer to change it for you.
Click to expand...

Should a famous chef have to publish his recipies/methods in the menu?
Should clorox have to tell you how they make their bleach to get clothes whiter than other brands?

Of course not.
Click to expand...

Should clorox sell their bleach for $1500 a bottle? Then try to come up with reasons why the vast majority of people dont want to pay for it?
 
Originally posted by: Deeko
Should a famous chef have to publish his recipies/methods in the menu?
Should clorox have to tell you how they make their bleach to get clothes whiter than other brands?

Of course not.
Click to expand...

No offense, but those are pretty bad analogies. I can think of innumerable ways that software differs from food or bleach.

But analogies are hard to do well 😉
 
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Joe Bestbuy doesnt even have a linux option available in the store, if they do have the option, its a demo machine with no software installed and a crappy looking version of red hat on a pos machine.
Click to expand...

Yeah but ignorance is quite different from someone holding a gun to your head, which was what the original comparison was. Just because I'm apathetic and ignorant about something doesn't mean that someone else is forcing me to make bad choices.
 
No sh!t they are different, but its the same concept. They spent their time making it, its their intellectual property, so maybe they overcharge, so don't buy it, that's why its a free market. Stop buying it and they'll lower the price. I see absolutely no reason why software manufacturers should release their source code.
 
Originally posted by: Deeko
No sh!t they are different, but its the same concept.
Click to expand...

I think you missed what I was saying. Of course they're different; that's what an analogy is. I meant that the concept was not the same.

They spent their time making it, its their intellectual property, so maybe they overcharge, so don't buy it, that's why its a free market. Stop buying it and they'll lower the price. I see absolutely no reason why software manufacturers should release their source code.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I don't buy closed source software. But I don't think you're going to convince others to do the same. Like I mentioned previously, arguing about morals is pretty much a waste of time; no one is going to change their views simply because you imply that your value system is the correct one.
 
Software titles are generally easy to pirate. People perceive their single act of pirating as harmless- nobody dies and nobody loses any physical property. The issue is that many people have developed these perceptions. Combined with pricing that arguably most home users find excessive, and you've got a consumer who can also rationalize "nobody is losing out on a sale since I couldn't afford it anyway."

Then there's the "stick it to the man" attitude:
If you dropped $700 for Office, all you've got to show for it is a nice little box, a manual, a few pieces of paper, a CD, and a sticker with numbers on it. All you probably wanted was that CD and the sticker. You know that CDRs are as cheap as $0.10/disc, and that stickers are probably just as cheap. Microsoft being a software giant and wealthy company is common knowledge. Why then, you think, would it price a single piece of software more than an entire Dell computer? "Because it can and people will buy it anyway." Then you get angry. "F this. I'll get it for free, keep my $700, and Microsoft can suck me until it prices more reasonably."
 
Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
Originally posted by: JetBlack69
Well, for most people, Dell, HP, Compaq and the like held a gun to their head.
Click to expand...

How so? No one stops you from using a different OS. If you're talking about windows coming pre-installed, it's not pirated in that case and outside of what's being argued about.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that the consumer doesn't know about the different OSes. I guess the pre-installed is outside the argument, that's the closest thing I can think of about the "gun to your head" argument.

EDIT: Yeah, ignorance is not the same as "gun to your head." 🙂
 
Originally posted by: Deeko
Should a famous chef have to publish his recipies/methods in the menu?
Should clorox have to tell you how they make their bleach to get clothes whiter than other brands?

Of course not.
Click to expand...

You only use/eat a meal once. How many times do you use your software? There might be something you don't like about it. Wouldn't you like to get under the hood anc change it?

BBWF is right. Piracy and OSS are two different topics.
 
Originally posted by: newParadime
The idea isn't that people shoudn't pay for software, but that people shouldn't pay for Crapy ass sfotwarret that is forced down there throats (Windows anyone).

People didn't want to use windows but are forced to and hence don't wantto pay for it. They found a way to get it for free, and then of course they wanted everything for free.
Click to expand...

And those people believe in crap open source software.
 
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Joe Bestbuy doesnt even have a linux option available in the store, if they do have the option, its a demo machine with no software installed and a crappy looking version of red hat on a pos machine.
----------------

*gets back to topic*

If there was DirectX, up to date and stable on linux just like windows, i would not have a windows machine in my house.
Click to expand...

Yes and I'm sure a nice command line interface, with the knowledge on how to compile an os and mount a cdrom is a requirement on operating the computer would be a VERY ATTRACTIVE feature of the system. :roll:

If you linux fannies want companies to start offering linux, try building a linux that your average joe best buy would like to use, and not a crap one like lindows...
 
If Office were $200 I bet everyone and their mother would buy it.

Also, there is the perception (sometimes right and sometimes wrong) that you spend $700 for software and then within a year or two it will be useless. (Think when apple switched from 0068 to PowerPC, or when Windows went from DOS to Windows, etc.)

This fear is made worse by the fact that many people do not have time to follow software/hardware daily and keep up with the news. The fear that their $$ will go out the window. Also, it is made worse by the fact that computer hardware is so cheap -- so why pay so much for software??

.. just my 2c
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top