Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th May 2009 19:06 UTC
Linux We all know them. We all hate them. They are generally overdone, completely biased, or so vague they border on the edge of pointlessness (or toppled over said edge). Yes, I'm talking about those "Is Linux ready for the desktop" articles. Still, this one is different.
Thread beginning with comment 364089
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by pcunite
by BigDaddy on Mon 18th May 2009 19:58 UTC in reply to "Comment by pcunite"
BigDaddy
Member since:
2006-08-10

There is nothing wrong with selling software on Linux. Is this really a hostile point with users?

If your software does something that I couldn't get from a free app, why wouldn't I buy it? (assuming I needed it).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by pcunite
by pcunite on Mon 18th May 2009 20:03 in reply to "RE: Comment by pcunite"
pcunite Member since:
2008-08-26

There is nothing wrong with selling software on Linux. Is this really a hostile point with users? If your software does something that I couldn't get from a free app, why wouldn't I buy it? (assuming I needed it).


The feelings I get from others in the Linux community is that because so much of the base (the kernel, libraries, some GUI kits) are free that any attempt by me to charge for an application (which has fewer man hours than the above list) is somehow morally wrong.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Comment by pcunite
by darknexus on Mon 18th May 2009 21:37 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by pcunite"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

"There is nothing wrong with selling software on Linux. Is this really a hostile point with users? If your software does something that I couldn't get from a free app, why wouldn't I buy it? (assuming I needed it).


The feelings I get from others in the Linux community is that because so much of the base (the kernel, libraries, some GUI kits) are free that any attempt by me to charge for an application (which has fewer man hours than the above list) is somehow morally wrong.
"

I do wonder, though, exactly how much of the community is hostile to paying for software? Yes, there are a lot of vocal zealots who don't think they should ever have to pay for anything, but I wonder how many others are perfectly happy to do so and simply keep silent. You can count me in among that latter group, by the way, I have absolutely no problem paying for an app if it has the functionality I need at a reasonable cost and is better for my purposes than any alternatives.
It seems there are a lot of vocal zealots that give the Linux community as a whole a bad reputation, not unlike some of the more fanatical Mac or Windows fanboys/fangirls. As with all things, the people who are making a fuss are the ones that will be noticed, but their numbers are usually far less than you would think. They're very loud, and the rest of us don't make them see sense for the simple reason that they don't want to.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: Comment by pcunite
by ichi on Mon 18th May 2009 22:12 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by pcunite"
ichi Member since:
2007-03-06

I don't see anyone complaining because of Maya being a commercial application. Or Smoke. Or Houdini. Or Doom3, Quake4, Unreal Tournament, Darwinia, ET:QW and Prey.

What I do see on the other hand is people that wouldn't buy applications like NeroLinux, just because they offer nothing over other apps readily available from the repositories.

The "Linux users don't pay for software" is a lie. Someone who wants to run Maya will be as likely or unlikely to buy or pirate it no matter what OS he runs.
Because you surely didn't meant to say that Windows users buy all their apps, did you? Like, say, Photoshop?.

The issue with Linux users is that we have a lot of software available for free in the repositories. Some of it is great, some is crap and the rest is somewhere in the middle, but if you want us to buy your software you'll have to offer something better than what we already have.

Reply Parent Score: 14

RE[3]: Comment by pcunite
by WereCatf on Mon 18th May 2009 22:25 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by pcunite"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

There are those who refuse to pay for anything, but they exist on ALL OSes and platforms. As others have pointed out, Windows is the platform most used by pirates.

Then there are users who don't like proprietary software. Well, there's nothing you can do about it. But I actually think they are in the minority.

Then there are those who actually support proprietary application developers. Linux lacks f.ex. games, so there's quite a bunch of people who buy proprietary Linux-supported games to show that there is interest for those.

I belong in the group that support proprietary software as long as it offers something that the free ones don't; better/more features, easier use, more stable etc. Pick your choice. But no, of course you won't get your software sold if it doesn't offer enough value for its price. I've noticed that many, if not most, Linux-users are more critical of the applications and features they use and need so you won't get by as easily as you can with Windows-users.

Reply Parent Score: 5

v RE[3]: Comment by pcunite
by DavidSan on Mon 18th May 2009 22:45 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by pcunite"
RE[3]: Comment by pcunite
by wannabe geek on Tue 19th May 2009 00:55 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by pcunite"
wannabe geek Member since:
2006-09-27


The feelings I get from others in the Linux community is that because so much of the base (the kernel, libraries, some GUI kits) are free that any attempt by me to charge for an application (which has fewer man hours than the above list) is somehow morally wrong.


Are you familiar with the "GNU" part in "GNU/Linux" ? That's why so many users (me included) are, let's say, somewhat reluctant to the idea of using proprietary software. It's not just that there happens to be a lot of "free" (of charge) material; the whole point of the GNU project is building a free (as in freedom) operating system.

That said, I don't think programmers are particularly to blame. Nearly all the economic sectors where intellectual production is involved are devastated by the obnoxious "intellectual property" concept and legislation. The biggest problem in IT is software patents, which could eventually bring the industry to a standstill.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by pcunite
by om_rebel on Tue 19th May 2009 17:52 in reply to "RE: Comment by pcunite"
om_rebel Member since:
2009-04-09

There is nothing wrong with selling software on Linux. Is this really a hostile point with users?

If your software does something that I couldn't get from a free app, why wouldn't I buy it? (assuming I needed it).


Exactly. I purchased MoneyDance because I liked it better than any of the alternatives. Those same people who would refuse to purchase software for Linux are probably the same that do no purchase software for Windows either.

Reply Parent Score: 2