Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!tekcrl!tekgvs!toma
From: toma@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Tom Almy)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: Commercial software in comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Message-ID: <4806@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM>
Date: 21 Mar 89 16:57:21 GMT
References: <6236@bsu-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: toma@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Tom Almy)
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.
Lines: 59

In article <6236@bsu-cs.UUCP> dhesi@bsu-cs.UUCP (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
>DEMOs versus FULLY FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMS
>Should both, or none, or one (which?) be posted?

>[...]  It is fully functional, but the license says
>that you may not use it beyond a trial period of 15 days without
>paying.  (But it lets you extend the trial period a reasonable amount
>of time under "extenuating circumstances", leaving those to your
>judgement.)

I would post it (of course by your proposed standards, it could not
be posted).  The user should be able to decide for his/her self whether
to 1) toss it, 2) pay up, 3) use it without paying.
If there actually is a legal obligation to pay, then I would be reluctant
to post since the program is strictly commercial.  I can go to my local
Egghead and get a 14 day trial period on any commercial program, and some
stores around here have rental commercial software for evaluation.

>[...] but the only thing that makes it a demo is that 15 days from the
>date of first use it will stop working (until you make a fresh copy).
>[when you pay]  you will get a secret code that will unlock the
>program so it will always work.  The license does *not* say that
>payment is required; it just says "this is a demo version that can be
>converted to the non-demo version..." and explains how.

I would post this too.  It really is fully functional, and the necessary
re-copying is actually less troublesome than the typical shareware's 
"beg screen".

What I object to (and have seen):
1. Demo disks that do nothing but let you step through a canned demonstration.
2. Programs intentionally crippled by only allowing a small amount of data.
3. "Word Processors" that don't let you save your text.
4. Old versions being distributed with fewer features.
5. A form creation program that comes only with a generic printer driver.
   The real version will use the printers graphic line drawing ability.
6. Documentation so sparse (and missing "help" screens) that one cannot
   deturmine the programs capabilities.

Not only are this programs worthless as is, but they don't let you evaluate
the product so you can decide if you want to pay!  (In fact, now days I use
mostly commercial software, yet 8-9 years ago, with CP/M, most of my
utilities, languages, com software, was public domain.)

I'm sorry, but I feel a FLAME comming on.....

Not to name names, but I received a glossy mailing from a shareware company
whose name reminds one of something found at a supermarket checkout.  They
advertised a number of very interesting products, and gave a BBoard number
to get copies.  Well I called and downloaded most of their offerings, only
to find that they were *all* old versions missing the major advertised
features.  Well I don't use any of *their* products anymore, nor would I
consider buying the *real* versions!

(FLAME off)

Tom Almy
toma@tekgvs.labs.tek.com
Standard Disclaimers Apply