Is there any point in registering my Apple/Word software? Is registering just about giving big companies your details so that they can go ahead and spam you? What are the advantages?
Well, in theory, registering means that you will get notified of any software bug fixes or minor updates. But, if you visit versiontracker.com or macupdate.com this is really not an issue.
Y'know, I have yet to receive any information from any software company that I wouldn't have already come across that justified registration. And I do it a lot for corporate purposes.
Perhaps time to time you might be sent deals. For example, slightly off topic, but if when you register a new Mac (hardware) and agree to have Apple send you info at a later date you'll get a free MacWorld subscription.
It is unethical to charge for software. And I don't think there is any free software which requires registration. So, I say neigh.
"Writing non-free software is not an ethically legitimate activity, so if people who do this run into trouble, that's good! All businesses based on non-free software ought to fail, and the sooner the better."
Contrary to what all the FSF nitwits say, software is not something that longs to be free. It takes considerable time, money, and skill to make it. It is not simple. Software is very much in the same category as medicine in that when compared to distribution, the upfront R&D costs are by far and away the majority of the development cost. Some people continue to fail to grasp that some things are very difficult and expensive to make, but near free to distribute. (software is kind of like music and movies in this sense, although the up front development cost for music isn't nearly as high).
Why is it unethical to charge for software thuh Freak?
my apologies. i didn't mean `charge for software'. i meant `promote non-free software'. non-free software puts boundaries, it builds walls. you are permitted some rights to use that piece of software, but I am not (as I've not acquired a license for those rights). it is wrong to separate people into these groups. All people should be granted opportunity to access and contribute to software. Closed programs, like MS' Word, do not allow this opportunity. You are not free to share the program with your neighbors, nor are you free to edit and aide in the development of the program. I am a competant programmer, and there are many closed programs that I feel that, given access, I could improve. But the developers have restricted me that right.
as for Yevgeny's post, s/he made the same mistake many people make about free software. The very mistake I made when I tried to phrase "charge for software." Free software doesn't mean price. It means freedom. Obviously, programmers will have to be paid in some respect. But, I'm not the best person to explain all this. If you are genuinely interested, read some of the fsf's philosophy writings.
and, back to the topic, free software programs (or those which i've encountered) don't tend to ask users to register.
Comments
Y'know, I have yet to receive any information from any software company that I wouldn't have already come across that justified registration. And I do it a lot for corporate purposes.
"Writing non-free software is not an ethically legitimate activity, so if people who do this run into trouble, that's good! All businesses based on non-free software ought to fail, and the sooner the better."
-- Richard Stallman
Originally posted by Yevgeny
Contrary to what all the FSF nitwits say, software is not something that longs to be free. It takes considerable time, money, and skill to make it. It is not simple. Software is very much in the same category as medicine in that when compared to distribution, the upfront R&D costs are by far and away the majority of the development cost. Some people continue to fail to grasp that some things are very difficult and expensive to make, but near free to distribute. (software is kind of like music and movies in this sense, although the up front development cost for music isn't nearly as high).
(From here.)
Why is it unethical to charge for software thuh Freak?
Originally posted by SonOfSylvanus
(From here.)
Why is it unethical to charge for software thuh Freak?
my apologies. i didn't mean `charge for software'. i meant `promote non-free software'. non-free software puts boundaries, it builds walls. you are permitted some rights to use that piece of software, but I am not (as I've not acquired a license for those rights). it is wrong to separate people into these groups. All people should be granted opportunity to access and contribute to software. Closed programs, like MS' Word, do not allow this opportunity. You are not free to share the program with your neighbors, nor are you free to edit and aide in the development of the program. I am a competant programmer, and there are many closed programs that I feel that, given access, I could improve. But the developers have restricted me that right.
as for Yevgeny's post, s/he made the same mistake many people make about free software. The very mistake I made when I tried to phrase "charge for software." Free software doesn't mean price. It means freedom. Obviously, programmers will have to be paid in some respect. But, I'm not the best person to explain all this. If you are genuinely interested, read some of the fsf's philosophy writings.
and, back to the topic, free software programs (or those which i've encountered) don't tend to ask users to register.