4 ms·

And it's only $20...I can understand why people steal Microsoft Office and the Adobe Suite, but I can't understand the incentive in stealing something like Tran

And it's only $20...I can understand why people steal Microsoft Office and the Adobe Suite, but I can't understand the incentive in stealing something like Transmit or TextMate. It seems that some people can't accept that some software costs money. And while we're on the topic of small Mac software shops, can we safely call ShapeShifter abandonware yet?

tdavis 18y ago
I don't think it has anything to do with accepting software costs money. When I was younger and had basically no money, I would pirate software that I needed to improve a skill or something along those lines. Once I got older and started having disposable income, I started buying software. Hell, I even legitimately own Adobe CS3 Web Premium. Nowadays, if I use a piece of donationware that provided a useful service, I donate. I donate to Open Source projects which have been particularly useful to me. The oddity here is, I'm far from fiscally well-off; I have about $3,500 to my name. So, it seems to me at least, that these things become habit. There were times I used to pirate software (or anything, really) just because I didn't feel like paying for it. Once I became accustomed to paying for software, I kept paying and even started donating. Now, I don't have a single piece of pirated software on my computer. Although, I do have some paid-for software which I no longer use. For instance, I have a license for SteerMouse (http://plentycom.jp/en/steermouse/ http://plentycom.jp/en/steermouse/) which I no longer use, but am also barred from transferring it (I was going to give it away just now) per the license agreement. This is just silly. The less restrictive a piece of licensed software is, the more likely I am to buy it.
- gaius 18y ago
  Companies could definitely be smarter about non-commercial licenses.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]
Tichy 18y ago
Not to defend piracy, but if you shell out 20$ for every small desktop enhancement application, it adds up very quickly.
- tom_rath 18y ago
  How much did the otherwise empty computer and operating system cost? Value doesn't materialize out of good thoughts. Actual work has to go into it.
  - Tichy 18y ago
    I am not saying that it wasn't work to create those programs. But the fact is, there are plenty of free alternatives for most software. That is just the way it is. Putting work into something doesn't make you entitled to get paid. If nobody else feels like buying your stuff, you are out of luck. Personally I am using Linux with 0 commercial software installed. I do pay for the occasional computer game, though. Btw, it is not only "being cheap" that makes me stick to open source software, it has other benefits, too. For example OS software can be bundled with Linux and in many cases be installed via the package manager. Also, I get the "security verification" I don't get for commercial software (I know it is not a guarantee, but it is better than nothing). Also, I know that I will be able to use the software everywhere. I don't have to buy a new copy if I buy a new computer, or find myself at a computer somewhere in the middle of nowhere. Also, put it into perspective: Windows allegedly is more complex than the Space Shuttle, yet sells for 130$ or so (don't know exact prices). In comparison to that, 20$ for a text editor is a lot of money. I know 20$ is not much (like 2 visits to the cinema or 3 coffees at Starbucks), but I think one can't help thinking like that when deciding to shell out money for software.
    - tom_rath 18y ago
      Then why not use the free option rather than pirate? If someone prefers the commercial version, they should be willing to pay for that added value.
      - 18y ago

tdavis 18y ago

I don't think it has anything to do with accepting software costs money. When I was younger and had basically no money, I would pirate software that I needed to improve a skill or something along those lines. Once I got older and started having disposable income, I started buying software. Hell, I even legitimately own Adobe CS3 Web Premium. Nowadays, if I use a piece of donationware that provided a useful service, I donate. I donate to Open Source projects which have been particularly useful to me. The oddity here is, I'm far from fiscally well-off; I have about $3,500 to my name. So, it seems to me at least, that these things become habit. There were times I used to pirate software (or anything, really) just because I didn't feel like paying for it. Once I became accustomed to paying for software, I kept paying and even started donating. Now, I don't have a single piece of pirated software on my computer. Although, I do have some paid-for software which I no longer use. For instance, I have a license for SteerMouse (http://plentycom.jp/en/steermouse/ http://plentycom.jp/en/steermouse/) which I no longer use, but am also barred from transferring it (I was going to give it away just now) per the license agreement. This is just silly. The less restrictive a piece of licensed software is, the more likely I am to buy it.

gaius 18y ago
Companies could definitely be smarter about non-commercial licenses.
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]

Tichy 18y ago

Not to defend piracy, but if you shell out 20$ for every small desktop enhancement application, it adds up very quickly.

tom_rath 18y ago
How much did the otherwise empty computer and operating system cost? Value doesn't materialize out of good thoughts. Actual work has to go into it.
- Tichy 18y ago
  I am not saying that it wasn't work to create those programs. But the fact is, there are plenty of free alternatives for most software. That is just the way it is. Putting work into something doesn't make you entitled to get paid. If nobody else feels like buying your stuff, you are out of luck. Personally I am using Linux with 0 commercial software installed. I do pay for the occasional computer game, though. Btw, it is not only "being cheap" that makes me stick to open source software, it has other benefits, too. For example OS software can be bundled with Linux and in many cases be installed via the package manager. Also, I get the "security verification" I don't get for commercial software (I know it is not a guarantee, but it is better than nothing). Also, I know that I will be able to use the software everywhere. I don't have to buy a new copy if I buy a new computer, or find myself at a computer somewhere in the middle of nowhere. Also, put it into perspective: Windows allegedly is more complex than the Space Shuttle, yet sells for 130$ or so (don't know exact prices). In comparison to that, 20$ for a text editor is a lot of money. I know 20$ is not much (like 2 visits to the cinema or 3 coffees at Starbucks), but I think one can't help thinking like that when deciding to shell out money for software.
  - tom_rath 18y ago
    Then why not use the free option rather than pirate? If someone prefers the commercial version, they should be willing to pay for that added value.
    - 18y ago