Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!n8emr!cmhgate!p2.f200.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG!Adam.Frix
From: Adam.Frix@p2.f200.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Adam Frix)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Shareware vs. Commercial
Message-ID: <69944.26EB0E5F@cmhgate.FIDONET.ORG>
Date: 8 Sep 90 04:37:46 GMT
Sender: ufgate@cmhgate.FIDONET.ORG (newsout1.26)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:226/200.2 - Aurora Borealis, Gahanna OH
Lines: 51


Brian Matthews writes:

> In article <68932.26E3FE43@cmhgate.FIDONET.ORG>
> Adam.Frix@p2.f200.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Adam Frix) writes:
> > Are you aware that there is absolutely
> > NO DIFFERENCE between a commercial product and a shareware product
> 
> Shareware:
>     If I don't like software, toss it.  Nothing but a couple of minutes lost.
> 
> Commercial:
>     If I don't like software, I've already paid for it, so I'm screwed.
> 
> Sounds like a big difference to me.


now, look.  I take full responsibility for my posts.  I stand behind what I
say.  And when you quote me, I WISH TO HELL YOU'D GET IT RIGHT.  Quote me IN
CONTEXT, and I'll be happy.  But when you quote me out of context, as you did
in your recent post to me, I get PISSED.

What I said was this:

There is absolutely NO DIFFERENCE between a shareware product and a commercial
one, SAVE THE DISTRIBUTION METHOD.

Of _course_ the distribution method is a difference.  But it's the ONLY DAMN
ONE.  If the distribution method, for some reason, is important to you, then
by all means pay attention to that difference.

But my point was that one is morally obligated to pay for such software, no
matter whether it was distributed commercially or via the shareware method.
 I was responding to someone who said (about StuffIt) that he "wouldn't support
any commercial archiver, but instead choose(s) to support the real thing, shareware."
 The author was making a distinction, one that doesn't exist.  He was saying,
essentially, that if it's not shareware, then it's not any kind of software
he wants to consider.  I take that to mean that he sees shareware as cost-free.
 It's not.  There's no difference between commericalware and shareware in that
respect.

So, next time, quote in context.  (In fact, it looks to me like you purposely
quoted me out of context; for what, I can't imagine).

--Adam--
 

--  
Adam Frix via cmhGate - Net 226 fido<=>uucp gateway Col, OH
UUCP: ...!osu-cis!n8emr!cmhgate!200.2!Adam.Frix
INET: Adam.Frix@p2.f200.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG