So whats the difference bewteen liteware & shareware ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter status
  • Start date Start date
S

status

both are crippleware aren't they ? either way you look at it, goes
against the so called "pure" definition of freeware as defined in the
acf faq doesn't it?
 
On 3 Dec 2003 12:40:42 -0800, (e-mail address removed) ([email protected])
wrote...
| both are crippleware aren't they ? either way you look at it, goes
| against the so called "pure" definition of freeware as defined in the
| acf faq doesn't it?

Seems to me that the difference would be that the license for freeware
does not require any payment for continued use, whether or not you'd
classify it as "liteware." On the other hand, a license for shareware
does require payment if you intend to continue to use it.

Some "liteware" versions are shareware or payware (e.g., Photoshop and
the "lite" Photoshop LE), and some "lite" editions of payware are
available as freeware (e.g., Outlook and Outlook Express). Hey, so
long as it works, isn't spyware or adware, is free, and has a feature
I find useful, I'm not going to quibble.

I've seen a lot of software developed first as free versions, and only
later did the authors put out a pay-for "enhancedware" version with
more features. I appreciate the ones who continue to maintain the free
versions.

On the other hand, my understanding of the term crippleware is to
refer to software in which you have to pay to "unlock" extra features.
I suppose that if you had a download bloated with a lot of ghosted,
menu items and tools which you were expected to "unlock" then you
would have a case. Most "lite" versions I have used wouldn't fit that
description (they are usually separate, smaller programs). Just my
view, based on the points I've seen made here in previous discussions.





- return address is altered slightly to reduce spam.
 
And said:
both are crippleware aren't they ? either way you look at
it, goes against the so called "pure" definition of
freeware as defined in the acf faq doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Not quite: "crippleware" lacks key features that make the
program usable at all. For example, a word processor that
won't allow you to save files you've created or edited is
obviously crippled. One that lacks macros and a spellcheck
but otherwise works is "lite", but you can still create, edit
and save documents; it is NOT crippled.

As for shareware; it's not freeware because it's not,
technically, "free". The shareware license is very clear that
it's only free during a defined testing period, and after that
period you are expected to purchase a license to continue
using the product. Some shareware programs lapse into
crippleware after the trial period, others may simply trust
you to pay. But in the case of the latter case, it's not
technically "free".

--
:-) Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/xjahn/Main.html

After a number of decimal places, nobody gives a damn.
 
Trying to get a word in edge-wise "(e-mail address removed)" wrote in
both are crippleware aren't they ? either way you look at it, goes
against the so called "pure" definition of freeware as defined in the
acf faq doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Crippleware is also a program that says "some" features are disabled
after say, 30 days. But perhaps rendering what you wanted it for
worthless.
 
Christopher Jahn said:
Not quite: "crippleware" lacks key features that make the
program usable at all. For example, a word processor that
won't allow you to save files you've created or edited is
obviously crippled. One that lacks macros and a spellcheck
but otherwise works is "lite", but you can still create, edit
and save documents; it is NOT crippled.

As for shareware; it's not freeware because it's not,
technically, "free". The shareware license is very clear that
it's only free during a defined testing period, and after that
period you are expected to purchase a license to continue
using the product. Some shareware programs lapse into
crippleware after the trial period, others may simply trust
you to pay. But in the case of the latter case, it's not
technically "free".
Click to expand...



According to the acf FAQ:

"4) WHAT IS COMPUTER FREEWARE ?

legally obtainable computer programs/utilities that anyone with an
internet connection can obtain free of (additional to internet) cost
and does not have any "limitations" as to it's use, e.g. only being
able to be used for a certain time period and/or only having some
features able to be used. "

If we were to go by this exclusive definition, then liteware is the
same as shareware is the same as crippleware (note last few words that
say "only having some features able to be used"). That would make
Adaware and a few other programs off topic for this group.

But this is where the definition gets muddy. Notice that it is also
basically saying it is freeware ONLY if you download it from the
internet and not by any other means or media. Am I the only one that
sees something wrong with that exclusionary defintion?
 
On 04 Dec 2003, (e-mail address removed) wrote
According to the acf FAQ:

"4) WHAT IS COMPUTER FREEWARE ?

legally obtainable computer programs/utilities that anyone with an
internet connection can obtain free of (additional to internet)
cost and does not have any "limitations" as to it's use, e.g. only
being able to be used for a certain time period and/or only having
some features able to be used. "

If we were to go by this exclusive definition, then liteware is
the same as shareware is the same as crippleware (note last few
words that say "only having some features able to be used"). That
would make Adaware and a few other programs off topic for this
group.

But this is where the definition gets muddy. Notice that it is
also basically saying it is freeware ONLY if you download it from
the internet and not by any other means or media.
Click to expand...

But that's not what that says at all.

It doesn't even imply that that "freeware as defined for this group"
cannot be obtained by other means -- only that it must, in *addition*
to those other means, *also* be obtainable from the Internet.
 
both are crippleware aren't they ? either way you look at it, goes
against the so called "pure" definition of freeware as defined in the
acf faq doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Many participants here do not accept the "pure" freeware definition.
IMO the "pure" definition is unrealistically restrictive.
 
Vic said:
Many participants here do not accept the "pure" freeware definition.
Click to expand...

How quickly we forget that which we do not care to remember . . .

Just a bit over a month ago you proposed a *new* definition of freeware.
Your proposal was quite thoroughly rejected . . .

From: Vic Dura ([email protected])
Subject: New FREEWARE definition proposal
Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware
Date: 2003-10-23 06:25:39 PST

Susan
--
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org
PL2003: http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/about2003PL.htm
PL2004 Review: http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php
alt.comp.freeware FAQ (short) - maintained by John F.
http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
 
Harvey Van Sickle said:
But that's not what that says at all.

It doesn't even imply that that "freeware as defined for this group"
cannot be obtained by other means -- only that it must, in *addition*
to those other means, *also* be obtainable from the Internet.

--
Cheers,
Harvey

For e-mail, change harvey to whhvs.
Click to expand...


But it does *not* state "in addition to" but "with an internet connection
can obtain free"
 
John Fitzsimons said:
On 4 Dec 2003 10:05:29 -0800, (e-mail address removed) ([email protected])
wrote:



< snip >

Liteware is meant to be free and shareware isn't.


Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.aspects.org.au/index.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/
Click to expand...


From the FAQ:
<SNIP>
Programs that cost money, or are time limited, are commonly called
"shareware" or "demos". Those that are free, and that have some functions
that cannot be used, are commonly called "crippleware" or "liteware".
<SNIP>

So Liteware is the same as Crippleware is the same as Shareware, is it not?
I'm only going by the FAQ here.
 
Vic Dura said:
Many participants here do not accept the "pure" freeware definition.
IMO the "pure" definition is unrealistically restrictive.
Click to expand...


But I point to another passage that states freeware is only freeware if it
is obtainable thru the net:

<SNIP>
Freeware can of course be obtained from "other sources" than the internet
but as the majority of the A.C.F. readers often cannot access them, such
discussion/sources, are generally avoided/discouraged.
<SNIP>
 
Vic Dura said:
Many participants here do not accept the "pure" freeware definition.
IMO the "pure" definition is unrealistically restrictive.
Click to expand...


But I point to another passage that states freeware is only freeware if it
is obtainable thru the net:

<SNIP>
Freeware can of course be obtained from "other sources" than the internet
but as the majority of the A.C.F. readers often cannot access them, such
discussion/sources, are generally avoided/discouraged.
<SNIP>
 
And said:
But I point to another passage that states freeware is only
freeware if it is obtainable thru the net:

<SNIP>
Freeware can of course be obtained from "other sources"
than the internet but as the majority of the A.C.F. readers
often cannot access them, such discussion/sources, are
generally avoided/discouraged.
<SNIP>
Click to expand...

AS much as you'd like your mere insistence to change the
meaning, this sentence does NOT say what you claim it does.



--
:-) Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/xjahn/Main.html

Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.
 
And said:
From the FAQ:
<SNIP>
Programs that cost money, or are time limited, are commonly
called "shareware" or "demos". Those that are free, and
that have some functions that cannot be used, are commonly
called "crippleware" or "liteware".
<SNIP>

So Liteware is the same as Crippleware is the same as
Shareware, is it not? I'm only going by the FAQ here.
Click to expand...

You are an annoying little troll, and I'm done with you.

PLONK

--
:-) Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/xjahn/Main.html

Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.
 
rtdos said:
control what you
write.


But I point to another passage that states freeware is only freeware if it
is obtainable thru the net:

<SNIP>
Freeware can of course be obtained from "other sources" than the internet
but as the majority of the A.C.F. readers often cannot access them, such
discussion/sources, are generally avoided/discouraged.
<SNIP>
Click to expand...

Congratulations! You win!
 
No. I too think it's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

But not for the same reasons rtdos does, right? He claimed that the
"exclusionary defintion" makes crippleware, liteware, and shareware all
the same thing, which it does not do. He also claimed that it makes
nothing freeware unless it's unavailable except as a download, which it
also does not do. These misunderstandings in his reading of it are the
basis on which he said something is wrong.

--
»Q« It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you
mean it is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers.
It isn't her's. It isn't our's either. It's ours, and
likewise yours and theirs.
-- Oxford University Press, Edpress News
 
So, what's your point?
Click to expand...

The point is that in your crusade against faqs you are
misrepresenting what they say and then attacking them on that basis.
Either you really don't understand what's written in them (which
seems unlikely) or you are trolling by deliberately misrepresenting
them.

--
»Q« It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you
mean it is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers.
It isn't her's. It isn't our's either. It's ours, and
likewise yours and theirs.
-- Oxford University Press, Edpress News
 
Back
Top