Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu From: awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps Subject: Re: All Commercial Software Developers or Companies (pls read) Message-ID: <51087@ut-emx.uucp> Date: 24 Jun 91 03:55:25 GMT References: <25662@unix.SRI.COM> <1991Jun23.011635.19552@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> Sender: news@ut-emx.uucp Reply-To: awessels@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Allen Wessels) Organization: The University of Texas at Austin Lines: 34 In article baumgart@esquire.dpw.com (Steve Baumgarten) writes: >If you want to "use" or "test" nearly anything else in the world, you >must pay for it first. I would like nothing more than to walk down >the road to my friendly Ford and GM dealers and ask that they each >give me a car for free for, say, 6 months, or at least until I decide >which one I prefer. Then I'll be happy to pay for that one, assuming >I still want a car after all. For the last time (I wish), software and cars are NOT NOT NOT analogous. Software manufacturers EXLICITLY state that the software isn't guaranteed to do anything. If you bought a car, you'd have a FAR better chance at recovering damages from a car manufacturer. There are all sorts of laws covering "lemons" in the car industry, but your best shot at a guarantee when you buy software is a 30-day money back guarantee. It is MUCH easier to find a defect in your car (though not certain, of course) in 30 days that in your software. You could counter with the claim that people can vote with their money, but that simply benefits the big companies. The little companies often live or die on the short-term utility of their products. If people didn't "try before they bought" that product, I'm guessing that some of those companies wouldn't make it. If people bought only software that has been around for some time period equal to the optimum "trial period", it is quite likely that only the big companies could last that long. In spite of the fact that I've seen many sales of software packages based on piracy (theft if you prefer), and I've seen many failures of software packages to live up to even their features lists, let alone marketing claims, software IS being stolen by current definitions. In most industries, the manufacturer has the advantage, in the early history of that industry. It may well be that when regulations are improved and enforced on BOTH sides of the license, what is currently termed "theft" will be merely "trial period" use of the software.