Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Well all this talk of warez and such fails to recognize a simple idea: economics and how that applies to the software industry. Lets first look at physical products that you go and buy, like cars. What kind of car do you think is a better car a top of the line Mercedes or a Honda Civic? I'm willing to bet most people would think the Mercedes a better car. Why? Because it cost more. It's a pretty simple idea. If something costs more it is generally seen as being "better". Apply this idea to software. I'll use Adobe for example. They have various versions of Photoshop available. They range in price from, I think, $40 for a consumer level version to about $800 for a professional version. Now the two versions are different, but the Pro version is not going to be 2000% better than the consumer level version as the price difference would indicate. Now, lets look at manufacturing costs. A software company has to manufacture a CD, a manual, and a display box. Go look at how much it costs to get some CD's printed. This "manufacturing" can't cost more than about $3 a unit to produce. A fraction of what it would cost to actually manufacture an actual hardware product. But, you could argue about R&D costs. Well, any hardware manufacturer is probably going to have to pay as much, if not more, than any software manufacturer. With software you've got programmers, more programmers and management. With hardware, you've got design team engineers, manufacturing engineers, production workers, etc. and management. So, your R&D can't cost very much when all your company does is programming. So, then there is support. I think this is what you are paying for when you buy software. If you want support, you buy the software. If you don't need support and can live with your conscience, then you can use the cranked versions. Which is why people get mad when someone asks them some simple question answered in the manual. They would be giving you free support for something they paid their own good money for. To me it is hard to argue that software is worth what it costs. Companies like the above mentioned Adobe sell bundled software packages for up to half of what it costs for the individual pieces of software. They can't be losing any kind of money for this, so why don't they just sell all of there software for half the cost? >Let me tell all of you something: *People* create software. *People* who >have kids, and mortgages, and bills to pay. Good people. *People* you'd >like >if you ever met them. *People* like you. They may love what they do, as >Tim >noted in another email, but is this a reason to pay them any less? I don't >think so. If they love what they do, so much the better, because they'll >likely create better products. If anything, we should be paying them more! >But, my gosh, let's not penalize them just because they do their job well! >Can you see that this is, effectively, what you're doing? I challenge you >to >take a moment and think about this now. Higher prices don't create better products. Just ask Microsoft. Competition creates better products, which usually creates lower prices. >Gregor argues that he's a "bedroom musician" and so his theft doesn't hurt >anybody. But if no one paid then there wouldn't be any software right? So >somebody has to pay. > Well, no. There is plenty of freeware and shareware software out there. It costs absolutely nothing to use. So, even if no one paid there would still be software. Ever heard of Linux? >Software piracy is such a big problem that software prices have to be >higher >to compensate for the lost revenues resulting from piracy. In this sense, >Gregor, you and the others are not only stealing from the software >companies, you are *also* stealing from those of us who pay money for the >software, because we're paying more than we would otherwise have to. >You're >stealing from your fellow musicians. Did that ever occur to you? I don't >know about the rest of you, but I don't like being put in this position. He is *not* stealing from you. If anything *you* are stealing from *you*. Even if people were not "stealing" software like you say, the software companies would still charge as much as they could. The software companies operate under the principles of supply and demand. The software companies will charge whatever the market will allow. So, as long as you still pay those high prices, you are only stealing from yourself by not holding software companies accountable for charging such high prices for software in the first place. >To those of you who use pirated "warez" on a regular basis, I say this to >you: I question your ethics. What you are doing is wrong and, if you carry >it through to it's logical conclusion, it inevitably leads to a double >standard too - another ethical issue. Who wants to be mired in all this >crap? Let me give you an extreme example: let's imagine for a moment that >Gregor writes a song and it becomes a #1 hit worldwide. However, Gregor >doesn't make one red cent off of his incredibly good fortune because >everyone pirates his song and no one pays for it. Can anyone honestly say >to >me that Gregor is going to happy with this? Is it going to be okay because >individuals did the theft and not some deep-pocket corporation? Of course >not! Gregor's going to be screaming bloody blue murder for his money! He >will definitely want to be paid, won't he? And wouldn't you? And yet... >how >is this different from the software piracy issue? The only thing that's >different is that little Gregor is now losing some money. You know, in >this >situation, the tune he will sing will be different from that espoused in >the >email below. Your logic about any hit song if very flawed. He could not have a hit song without a contract to some big corporation. He could never make much money off of that song due to the way the recording industry and copyright laws work right now and so you are right back to the fact that if anyone *stole* his song (a highly arguable statement) it would only be hurting the big corporation that he has that contract with and he would never feel much of a pinch unless he already was a huge, overbloated act, like Metallica and U2. >Remember also that software developers expect to be paid for their work, >just like *we* do. And it's fair to exchange something of value with each >other right? You do it every time you drop into a McDonalds, buy a car or >go >see a movie. So why shouldn't the developers be paid? I say to you all: >what's wrong with caring about these people too? Are we all so concerned >with ourselves and our needs that we simply can't do the right thing? >Taking >anything without paying for it is stealing, plain and simple... and >that's a >fact! And these people are paid. It's called a salary. And, well, you don't exchange something of value, you exchange money. You can't trade a year's worth of mowing someone's lawn for a piece of software. So, what if you really don't have the money? Do you used a cracked copy and rationalize it, or do you use something else that costs next to nothing and probably does the same? >* Stealing is an ethical and a legal issue... and stealing is wrong. But so is speeding, running red lights, not wearing your seat belt, carrying concealed weapons, viewing pornographic material if you are under eighteen years of age, drinking if you are under twenty-one, etc. Does that stop anyone? >* When you *use* software that you have have not paid for, you are >stealing. Well, I could argue "use" easily, so instead, I'll argue "paid for". Do you 'pay' for using the library? Did the Pilgrims 'pay' for the land they took? Do logging companies 'pay' for the trees they cut down in National Parks? Do you 'pay' for the oxygen your car burns? Do oil companies 'pay' for the damage their spilled tankers create? Do you 'pay' for using your friends swimming pool? Do you 'pay' for listening to the radio? Do I need to go on? I'm not saying anything either way about using or not using cranked software. It is a murky area when talking about right and wrong. I just hate when people give out condemning, all mighty judgements about something that is, now, as trivial as warez. It sounds an awful lot like the fire and brimstone preachers of the Puritans talking about going to hell and putting the "fear of God" in you. Ben Porter. What are you N2? Choose from 150 free e-mail addresses. http://www.n2mail.com