Freeware Shopping Cart software needed

  • Thread starter Thread starter DJboutit
  • Start date Start date
PuppyKatt said:
To me, the "big deal" is that if I want to save my settings, I have
to pay you for permission/the right to do so.
Click to expand...

But as a "casual" user, you wouldn't have such a need. If you want
to save your settings, then you're obviously a "regular" user since
you intend to use the app often, and thus privy to paying the rego.

Don't misunderstand this: I'm talking about saving app settings, not
saving any work you have created. It's not like you create a doc or
something and then can't save it without paying. Nothing like that
at all! As I said, both paid and unpaid users get EXACTLY the same
functionality -- except the paid ones can start the app with things
like the last opened folder remembered, and a list of MRU docs, etc.
No big deal? That's all I'm trying to do.
 
Mouse scribebat:
But as a "casual" user, you wouldn't have such a need.
Click to expand...

Who decides what I, as user, need? *I*, the user, do. Not you.

Your program is intentionally "crippled" to make it uncomfortable to use
for certain users without payment. Thus, it fully qualifies as crippleware
as defined from the /user/ site in acf.

This does not mean that this program will not be recommended for certain
uses, but it does not qualifiy as fully fledged freeware due to its
restrictions; I would rather call it shareware according to your
description: You might share it, you might use it, but when you use it
regularly you shall pay for it. That is not evil, but neither freeware.
 
Matt said:
On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 22:55:56 -0500, Susan Bugher


Actually, you'd have to call this "webware" as it's a service, rather
than anything you can actually run.
Click to expand...

Agree, it's been revised to Webware - along with a few others. . .

Susan
 
Onno said:
Mouse scribebat:

Who decides what I, as user, need? *I*, the user, do. Not you.
Click to expand...

That's right -- so if you didn't want to pay, you wouldn't have to.

Look, I'm not trying to do anything evil here, I'm just trying to find
the balance between free and paid. I've seen a lot of recommendations
here for "Lite" apps versus "Paid" apps -- and to me, what I want to do
is even better than that because it's not really "Lite" at all. Let's
take a folder-locking app as an example: many recommendations abound
here for "Lite" versions which allow only 4 (for example) folders to
be locked. People here in alt.comp.freeware have no problem with this.
I've seen it with my own eyes. Now let's say my app was a folder lock,
it would allow ANY number of folders to be locked, just like the "Paid"
version. Complete, full functionality. The only "catch" (for want of
a better word) is that when adding new folders, the folder browser
would start at "My Computer" instead of the last selected folder,
because no user prefs are saved. How is that a bad thing? If you
honestly think that makes an app not freeware, then that's insane.
 
Mouse scribebat:
That's right -- so if you didn't want to pay, you wouldn't have to.
Click to expand...

Well, I was not about the paying: I wanted to point out that we, as users,
decide whether your program is freeware, crippleware or whatsoever. And
that will be decided upon usage, by the people who actually used it. The
only way to make sure it is called "freeware" beforehand is to make it
completely free, without ads, nags or limitations.

You can release it the way you want, but then you have to risk it being
defined "crippleware", "shareware" or whatsoever. Of course, if it is as
useful and unobtrusive as you pretend, then it won't be called crippleware.
It might even be called freeware if the limitations are small enough -- but
you simply won't get a guarantee for that in advance.

Do not convince us that your limitations are unobtrusive, show us!
 
Look, I'm not trying to do anything evil here, I'm just trying to find
the balance between free and paid.
Click to expand...

So what's wrong with the concept of one fully functional program free
for personal use and pay for commercial use?
 
Mouse wrote:
... said:
Would this then be acceptable to publish here when released?
Click to expand...

Fwiw:

1) survey the acf faq (http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html)
2) decide for yourself

Trying to get acf consensus on your "casual-ware" beforehand is akin to
herding the proverbial cats. Not only is it futile, it only delays the
publication of your proggy.

One last thing: remember, it's always easier to apologize than to ask
for permission.

regards,
-Sparky
 
"Mouse" <Not Specified> wrote in
That's right -- so if you didn't want to pay, you wouldn't have
to.

Look, I'm not trying to do anything evil here,
Click to expand...

IMO, you are overly defensive about this. No one said you are doing
anything evil or even bad or even unpleasant.
I'm just trying to find the balance between free and paid. I've
seen a lot of recommendations here for "Lite" apps versus "Paid"
apps -- and to me, what I want to do is even better than that
because it's not really "Lite" at all.
Click to expand...

I use nnCron lite and would recommend it here to anyone who needs a
scheduler. I don't see "freeware" and "crippleware" as disjoint.
I've got no problem calling nnCron lite crippled freeware or free
crippleware, and no problem recommending it here. It's a great app,
and it's free. It's also slightly crippled.

ISTM that what is bugging you is that some people (e.g., me) will
call your program crippleware if you reduce its funtionality. I'm
afraid you are just going have to live with that.

When I recommend nnCron lite, I don't see a need to point out that
it's crippled, as I reckon the term "lite" lets anyone know that its
funtionality is reduced. If its authors released the free version as
"nnCron, free for casual use" then I would need to explicitly point
out that the functionality is reduced. Probably I'd use the phrase I
used above, "slightly crippled".

[snip hypothetical example]
If you honestly think that makes an app not freeware, then that's
insane.
Click to expand...

I hope I've clarified at least my position.

But there are people who consider any crippling of an app to rule
out calling it freeware, and they are not insane. Calling their
position insane is unlikely to decrease your chances reading the
word "crippleware" in threads about your app.
 
Back
Top