Re: Protecting Software w/ Software License Keys...
Re: Protecting Software w/ Software License Keys...
- Subject: Re: Protecting Software w/ Software License Keys...
- From: Jeff LaMarche <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 11:38:59 -0700
On Sunday, June 16, 2002, at 01:10 AM, Jeffrey T. Hazelwood wrote:
>
If I we're the developer of another webserver, OS, compiler, Java App Server,
>
Window Server,
>
graphics program or news reader, I wouldn't like any of these because they
>
would be cutting
>
into my profits and making my job of making money twice as hard.
Oh, you mean, like, competition? Yet, somehow, there are dozens of web server
and web application servers that are surviving and, in may cases, making quite
a bit of money. Funny how that happens. But even though the overall quality
of web server software is better for the existence of Apache, it's still bad
because it's free, right?
>
> Collusion is no better than anti-competitive behavior. Telling me that open-sourcing
>
> my code is a bad idea unless it's poorly written is inane.
>
>
Maybe I stated my point wrong, but freeware and OpenSource are two entirely
>
different things.
>
I've been paid to work on code that was released as opensource.
Perhaps. Your comments were in response to my original statement concerning
the fact that I give away anything I write for the Mac as open source. Open
source is usually free. You can make money selling it, support it, etc., but
by its nature it's free. Same is true for my stuff. You want to take something
I've released, make a minor change and market it and resell it? Go right ahead.
>
>
No, in the point that I made, you would lose your job because they would
>
hire someone else for free and wouldn't need you anymore. Just like if I
>
have
>
Apache, I don't need to buy anyone else's webserver. Just like when Internet
>
Explorer came out, there was no point in me paying $49.95 for the Netscape
>
browser that they were charging.
Different situation, as I said - Microsoft intentionally leveraged it's market
power and money to destroy competition. That's bad. Providing a free alternative
with no ulterior motive is not the same thing. It may not make you happy as
someone who wants to exploit the same marketspace. Sure, you'll have to work
harder to survive. That's business. Every business has challenges, this is
one of the challenges of making software. You don't have to like it, but it'
s a fact of life; get over it.
>
This is fine and dandy, for me the consumer, but not very good if I was trying
>
to make a competing product.
This is why software companies do market research before entering a market
space. You don't see many competitors to Photoshop because it would be difficult
to create a comparable program, never mind a better one, and be able to charge
considerably less. Those that are not willing to pay Photoshop's price tag
can use Photoshop Elements or the Gimp. Oh, well. That's life in the business
of software.
>
One more point about "free" is all of the internet startups that were free.
>
You remember
>
the ones that wanted to figure out how to make money in the future that are
>
now bankrupt
>
and have hosed the entire technology sector? Free does not a business make.
Nope, it doesn't. I'm not trying to make money off my Mac programming - it'
s my hobby. I write and debug Enterprise software for a living, which means
I don't touch a Mac while at work =)
>
The whole point of this original thread was about software protecting and
>
licensing.
>
If you want to do freeware, then there's no point in worrying about that,
>
is there?
I'm not worrying about it, I'm debunking your ridiculous statements to the
list about it being "wrong" or "bad" for someone (like me) to release Freeware.
- Jeff
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.