3 ms·
Shrink wrapped software also often had cheaper upgrade packages, so you didn't always have to pay the full price each year. And before activation and 'licensing
by paulryanrogers 1y ago
Shrink wrapped software also often had cheaper upgrade packages, so you didn't always have to pay the full price each year. And before activation and 'licensing' you could resell it.
As for FOSS going unpaid. SaaS doesn't necessarily lead to FOSS contributors getting paid more than they would if their software was going into shrink wrapped products.
- gruez 1y ago>And before activation and 'licensing' you could resell it. So... nothing from this century? I'm not even sure how software without activation/licensing would work out economically. You'd either need something like a CD/dongle check (which is a hassle/expensive), or accept that one copy is going to be endlessly passed around.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- skydhash 1y agoBought a lot of licenses for software on macOS. Some notable ones are Alfred and Things 3. I have a license for two of the Affinity (Designer and Photos) suite and a not so old version of Parallel. Most people don't really pass the license around. And it's not that much if you're a professional. But most subscriptions prices are egregious.
- paulryanrogers 1y agoGOG sells plenty of software without DRM. DLC is much like the upgrades and expansions of old. SaaS is fine for what it is. It's just not a trade off that suits everyone. And crucially it denies users control over the tools they're paying for.