4 ms·

Because the target audience - developers, system administrator and similarly technically skilled users - by default usually expect software to be free as in bee

Because the target audience - developers, system administrator and similarly technically skilled users - by default usually expect software to be free as in beer. For example, I've talked to quite a few software developers who will gladly admit that IntelliJ IDEA (which comes at merely €499) makes them much more productive but who at the same time keep using Eclipse because it's free. Jenkins is another example. Maintaining a Jenkins install can be a real headache. Its user experience is, let's say, less than stellar. Still, it's widely used because it's "free". It's both ironic and unfortunate that often those people who make a living creating software seem to be the most averse to paying for software.

jolmg 7y ago
> It's both ironic and unfortunate that often those people who make a living creating software seem to be the most averse to paying for software. That's probably true with most if not all professions. I imagine car mechanics are also adverse to sending their car to a mechanic, for example.
- BjoernKW 7y ago
  Yes, but they usually aren't averse to buying proper tools if those help them do their job more efficiently.
  - jolmg 7y ago
    Being able to make or modify the tools is not part of their profession, but it is in our case. Honestly though, I think you're confusing the issue. At least for me and I imagine some others, the problem is not so much with paying but with being able to completely own the tools by having their source. It gives a guarantee that with enough effort we'll always be able to bend the tool to our will. The fact that open source is typically free is just because it's generally hard to prevent skilled computer users from pirating software which source they have complete control over. So, it being free as in beer is just a side effect of the really valuable fact that it's free as in freedom.
    - BjoernKW 7y ago
      Wanting to completely own one's tools is good on principle. However, with tools such as an IDE that remains largely theoretical because very few users will actually change core IDE code. Therefore, for all practical intents and purposes it doesn't really make a difference if you own Eclipse or the IntelliJ IDEA Community Edition or a perpetual licence for the IntelliJ IDEA Ultimate Edition.
Aperocky 7y ago
Intellij IDEA CE can be used commercially. TBF, the paid features are not that exciting.. Most of it belongs to the terminal anyways. The free features cover pretty much all corners (Java).
- BjoernKW 7y ago
  It depends. If you're not just working with pure Java but for example frameworks such as Spring or other languages such as JavaScript, too, you pretty much have to use either the Ultimate Edition or environment-specific editions such as WebStorm. Language and framework support is not what sets IntelliJ IDEA apart but working with frameworks and languages without IDE support can quickly become quite tedious to the point that it offsets the benefits provided by IntelliJ IDEA over other IDEs.

jolmg 7y ago

> It's both ironic and unfortunate that often those people who make a living creating software seem to be the most averse to paying for software. That's probably true with most if not all professions. I imagine car mechanics are also adverse to sending their car to a mechanic, for example.

BjoernKW 7y ago
Yes, but they usually aren't averse to buying proper tools if those help them do their job more efficiently.
- jolmg 7y ago
  Being able to make or modify the tools is not part of their profession, but it is in our case. Honestly though, I think you're confusing the issue. At least for me and I imagine some others, the problem is not so much with paying but with being able to completely own the tools by having their source. It gives a guarantee that with enough effort we'll always be able to bend the tool to our will. The fact that open source is typically free is just because it's generally hard to prevent skilled computer users from pirating software which source they have complete control over. So, it being free as in beer is just a side effect of the really valuable fact that it's free as in freedom.
  - BjoernKW 7y ago
    Wanting to completely own one's tools is good on principle. However, with tools such as an IDE that remains largely theoretical because very few users will actually change core IDE code. Therefore, for all practical intents and purposes it doesn't really make a difference if you own Eclipse or the IntelliJ IDEA Community Edition or a perpetual licence for the IntelliJ IDEA Ultimate Edition.

Aperocky 7y ago

Intellij IDEA CE can be used commercially. TBF, the paid features are not that exciting.. Most of it belongs to the terminal anyways. The free features cover pretty much all corners (Java).

BjoernKW 7y ago
It depends. If you're not just working with pure Java but for example frameworks such as Spring or other languages such as JavaScript, too, you pretty much have to use either the Ultimate Edition or environment-specific editions such as WebStorm. Language and framework support is not what sets IntelliJ IDEA apart but working with frameworks and languages without IDE support can quickly become quite tedious to the point that it offsets the benefits provided by IntelliJ IDEA over other IDEs.