"you can't always get what you want.."

Just a reply to the last sentence (for the rest, no good, no bad, all good): you support development of freeware developments, find developers/people with the same aim, develop some real ideas/ethics by yourself, and in the end don't even feel comfortable with not paying for a MS product, pay for every OS update if you feel like running it. Seems being decent is the real revolution attitude nowadays ...

I'm not a "supporter" of either type of software. If I like a program, I use it. If it's freeware, hey, GREAT. But if it's a commercial product, then I'm willing to pay for it.

I respect both devs equally.

What do I do when I can't afford a program I want? I look for a free alternative.

I use both commercial software and freeware. If I can't pay for let's say PS then I don't use it. Instead I was trying several freeware programs. I can't get used to the Gimp (freeware/open source). Once I found PSP I found it good enough to register it.

I don't think that by definition commercial software is better than freeware. These days we also have commercial freeware like WinAmp. WinAmp is a good product.

There is also some very good non-commercial freeware like the software developed by AnalogX. Another example of good non-commercial freeware is CoolPlayer. That product is now open source.

We all can give examples of freeware that is half finished and will never be completed.

I did release freeware in the past for CP/M and MS-DOS.

Recently I made some plugins for free (WBAmp and DXPlayer) and I am working on some new versions for the latest DX, OB and WB.

Another thing I am doing is a media-player for SD. We don't know much about its future yet, but we will see about that.

What bugs me is that some people think all software should be free. I am working for an independed software house (no, not SD) on a commercial game for several years now. We have a large team of programmers (user interface, AI, games engine, in-house utilities), graphics artists (2D and 3D and desktop publishing), sound technicians, marketeers, project leader, management, etc. Not only the program, but also the packaging, T-shirts, posters, web site and so on need to be done by people. It needs to be distributed, ads are needed and it needs to be sold. That costs money and people are dependent from it. They all love their job. I _know_ I will be mad when our game is on a warez site. In that case they are _stealing_ my daily bread. And oh, I am not rich, don't own a car (don't need one in Amsterdam) and don't want one.

Freeware or payware makes no difference to me. I am one of those nasty warez users so price is no obstacle. Ofcourse, using freeware would be better, but I lack ethics when it comes to software (as does everyone around me). Anyway, I go for the programs that work best for me.

Hehehe, Crea. Those are interesting remarks. The fact that everybody arround you does the same has nothing to do with it. But you know all that of course. It is nice to see someone not defending his own point of view. Yes, it is not ethical. You are right about that. I am glad we closed that discussion.

I definitely need some English lessons. Sorry about all the errors.

Yeah, you misspelled my name too. Interesting thing is that everyone I know (of all ages) and especially the fellow students at school use warez (all of them). Some of them start companies and then they proomptly switch to buying their stuff, because they fear the BSA. So they do not buy it to support the developer or for their own consiousness, but to avoid prosecution.

I greatly support freeware above anything else.
If I need something done and a freeware application does it (commercial or not), that's the one I'll use. Unless it's a Microsoft product, then I already said it before, I use a bunch of MS product but refuse to pay for a single one. Call it my own personal DOJ judgement. I just think Bill Gates making 4 million dollars per day (yes, that is how much is personal fortune increases every day) is totally indecent. But that's another discussion.

So, freeware or payware? I say freeware if possible, otherwise, if I really need it a lot and I'm going to use very regularely then I buy it.

Oh and yes, I did group-buy games twice. That's when 3 people pitch in 20$ to buy a game and then we made 2 extra copies. Sure it's illegal, but I think it could be considered tolerable since none of us would have bought the game alone for 60$. So the developpers did end up with one copy of the software sold instead of none. Anyhow, I only did that twice... It was for Starcraft and Baldurs Gate. Other than that I probably bough around 20 games in total. Some of them on sale for 10$ after the game isn't popular anymore.

personally i like software that does what it is supposed to do well, and that i can understand.

if it costs money, i can afford it, and consider it worth the money i will buy it, although this isnt that common, appart from a good game now and then.

outside of object desktop my favorate programs are powerdesk (registered, since i use it continually) and vim (free, and invaluable).

my *issue* with commercial software is normally one of value for money. i dont have much spare cash, and object to paying for something that isnt worth it.

if it is free / demo and no use, then at least i found out for free.

/me suddenly remembers the rest of the point

if it is software i have paid for then i will report bugs / make suggestions if possible, but with some of these programs i have no idea where or how to do this sensibly. sending off emails into the great unknown seems pointless at times.

/me rather likes the stardock news servers - at least you can tell the comments arrived, even if no one reads them

as for freeware, if i can think of a way to contibute i will. so i spend time trying to debug vim scripts, make helpful suggestions, and share cunning discoveries.

/me considers it ironic that often user to user support is so much better for free ware than for commercial software

I use whatever works. If freeware works as good as non-freeware I'll use that.

All things being equal, I prepare freeware.

But not because I think there's anything better about it, but because I don't pirate software so I would rather use what's free if I can.

I won't claim to never have used warez. I *will* claim that my sytem is currently free of warez and has been for almost a year.

If I like a piece of software, I will use it. If it costs money, I'll pay for it. If it doesn't, great.

For example, I hate Photoshop (never could get the hang of masking). PSP is okay, but I use CorelDraw 8 and MS ImageComposer 1.5 (shipped with Frontpage way back when). Both are old programs, but they serve my purposes.

I will admit to being a little sly, though. If I find a program I *really* like that is way outside my budget, I will still buy it, but at 20-70% discounts from college software stores where I use an old college ID of mine that gets doctored evey year to reflect the current year. That way I'm still supporting the sofware with my money, but doing so within my budget.

MS stuff is an entirely different matter. Working in retail, I get to go to all the roadshows, where I usualy get full-retail versions of the softwares for free. And MS has a great accomodation program for getting their software at *greatly* reduced prices. Sorry, but I *am* a fan of MS software, and every copy I have is fully legit.

one thing i like about paid software is that i have the right to expect support for it. if i haven't paid for something, if it's just offered for free, i really don't have any right to expect the devs to give me any help with it. of course, freeware devs often -do- help people out with things anyway.

i guess mainly i disagree with the idea that there is anything grandly noble about offering freeware. yes, it's very nice of the devs to do that, -very- nice. but after all, we're just talking about computer software here. if they were giving food away, for example, they'd be noble indeed. as it is, those that offer gratis apps, basically sharing the fruits of their hobby, are pretty cool.

one thing i've noticed is that freeware is a lot more common for windows than for mac os. mac users aren't surprised at all to be expected to pay 10 to 20 dollars for some little app. the major exception to this is the stimpsoft stuff, which is some of the most polished and excellent freeware out there.

you shouldnt be embarassed of liking MS software.

to be honest, i am quite impressed with win2k. its just that some of their software seems to very unstable and buggy, eg office.

i have to use it a lot at work, and there are some very good ideas, its just that i wish word wouldnt keep on stopping totaly for several minutes at a time (opening 10 different documents at once seems to be beyond it), and that excel wouldnt keep on resizing my cell comments, so i cannot see half of what they contain.