Yeah, but it was a poster child for nagware. Edit to be fair so did WinRAR, but that sweet sweet compression and multi-volume splitting made it the best tool for those sailing a jolly roger on those slow, stormy seas…
I don’t really have an issue with nagware. You got a powerful, useful piece of software for free. I’m starting to see a lot of comments in this vein on Lemmy. Open Source is fantastic, but it’s also okay to want to get paid for the time and effort put into something.
What I’m talking about is late 90s and early 00s, with WinZip being the prime example but others like ACDSee or even mIRC also coming to mind, where the whole shareware model for the era was companies testing out just how inconvenient they could be and still get the users to buy their apps.
The glorious counterpoint to this was WinAmp, who not only whipped the lama’s ass, but was also free (for non-comercial use) shareware and users paid voluntarily, which I gladly would have if I wasn’t a broke kid at the time.
This era died off completely after that, as the internet became more accessible, open source and libre licenses exploded, and many apps migrated to web browsers.
What is your point? The issue isn’t that I’m seeing it, it’s the level of entitlement people feel they have to free stuff.
I remember using winzip frequently, I don’t remember ever paying for it, ditto mirc. It would have been a damn sight more inconvenient if they’d actually ended the 21 day trial vs clicking a button after 30s, no? Shareware was primarily limited trials - you usually had to pay for the full version.
The name died because we didn’t need to share the disks any more, it grew into modern freemium apps, mtx and ad supported software, I’m not sure I like any of those more.
OS has grown, as has the complexity of free programmes, sure, the number has grown because there are a lot more devs, people have always been willing to give software away - they should be seen as generous, not the base level of expectation.
I still don’t see why any of that should stop people wanting to get paid for the work they’re doing and I do find it somewhat bizarre the level of expectation people have that others give away software then maintain and support it for free.
There was Winzip before.
Yeah, but it was a poster child for nagware. Edit to be fair so did WinRAR, but that sweet sweet compression and multi-volume splitting made it the best tool for those sailing a jolly roger on those slow, stormy seas…
I don’t really have an issue with nagware. You got a powerful, useful piece of software for free. I’m starting to see a lot of comments in this vein on Lemmy. Open Source is fantastic, but it’s also okay to want to get paid for the time and effort put into something.
What you’re seeing on Lemmy is up to you.
What I’m talking about is late 90s and early 00s, with WinZip being the prime example but others like ACDSee or even mIRC also coming to mind, where the whole shareware model for the era was companies testing out just how inconvenient they could be and still get the users to buy their apps.
The glorious counterpoint to this was WinAmp, who not only whipped the lama’s ass, but was also free (for non-comercial use) shareware and users paid voluntarily, which I gladly would have if I wasn’t a broke kid at the time.
This era died off completely after that, as the internet became more accessible, open source and libre licenses exploded, and many apps migrated to web browsers.
What is your point? The issue isn’t that I’m seeing it, it’s the level of entitlement people feel they have to free stuff.
I remember using winzip frequently, I don’t remember ever paying for it, ditto mirc. It would have been a damn sight more inconvenient if they’d actually ended the 21 day trial vs clicking a button after 30s, no? Shareware was primarily limited trials - you usually had to pay for the full version.
The name died because we didn’t need to share the disks any more, it grew into modern freemium apps, mtx and ad supported software, I’m not sure I like any of those more.
OS has grown, as has the complexity of free programmes, sure, the number has grown because there are a lot more devs, people have always been willing to give software away - they should be seen as generous, not the base level of expectation.
I still don’t see why any of that should stop people wanting to get paid for the work they’re doing and I do find it somewhat bizarre the level of expectation people have that others give away software then maintain and support it for free.