Terragen, listed as freeware but ??,,,

  • Thread starter Thread starter Walt
  • Start date Start date
W

Walt

Hi,
I was searcing for fractal terrain maps, found the Pricelessware list,
saw an entry for _Terragen_ _freeware_, got excited,,, trundled off to the
site but found there this quote :-
"Registered users (..snip...) will be able to render images larger
than 1280 x 960, terrains larger than 513 x 513 and enhanced anti-aliasing
modes"
Somewhat disappointed by the size restrictions (seems to me like the usual
teaser to "comon buy my big brother") I went to the Pricelessware 'ware'
definitions to see what was meant by freeware,,
I see "liteware" and "crippleware" which I think may be a more suitable
description ????

So I came to a.c.freeware to comment, as suggested on the pricelessware
pages, and I see that you are all in the process of nominating for a new
(2004) list.
Would this be a suitable time to reconsider the clasification of Terragen ?

I am not making any judgemnt on the quality of said program as I have not
downloaded it (513x513 is way too small for me), only it's description !
If it had been just 'lite' ie. a few bells and whistles missing, then no
great worries, however it seems to me that a size limit on a fundamental
purpose makes it crippleware ?
Can anyone who has used it tell me if I am mistaken or misrepresenting it ?
 
So I came to a.c.freeware to comment, as suggested on the
pricelessware pages, and I see that you are all in the process of
nominating for a new (2004) list.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but a discussion has also started regarding
lite/crippleware, with
Would this be a suitable time to reconsider the clasification of
Terragen ?

I am not making any judgemnt on the quality of said program as I
have not downloaded it (513x513 is way too small for me), only
it's description ! If it had been just 'lite' ie. a few bells and
whistles missing, then no great worries, however it seems to me
that a size limit on a fundamental purpose makes it crippleware ?
Click to expand...

I'm glad you noted that before DLing it. 513x513 is indeed pretty
small.

I think it would be a good idea for us to go through all
Pricelessware which is liteware and note the limitations compared to
the commercial versions. Since the PL is supposed to give users a
quick reference to the best available in each category, and since
what's only lite to some is crippled to others, I think it would be
great for potential users to have that info available as they pass
through the PL site. I suspect that the limitations of the liteware
apps that make the PL are few in each case (else they would not be
priceless), so it should not take much room to list limitations
along with the description.
Can anyone who has used it tell me if I am mistaken or
misrepresenting it ?
Click to expand...

Not me, but I'm sure somebody here will know.
 
So I came to a.c.freeware to comment, as suggested on the
Not only that, but a discussion has also started regarding
lite/crippleware, with


I'm glad you noted that before DLing it. 513x513 is indeed pretty
small.

I think it would be a good idea for us to go through all
Pricelessware which is liteware and note the limitations compared to
the commercial versions. Since the PL is supposed to give users a
quick reference to the best available in each category, and since
what's only lite to some is crippled to others, I think it would be
great for potential users to have that info available as they pass
through the PL site. I suspect that the limitations of the liteware
apps that make the PL are few in each case (else they would not be
priceless), so it should not take much room to list limitations
along with the description.


Not me, but I'm sure somebody here will know.
Click to expand...

I just rendered a picture at 1024x768 on the latest version (freeware).
Henry
 
It's a great program and the free ver does just what it says it will do.
It will make very nice pictures some of which I use as wallpaper for my
desktop.

If you want "better" then what the freeware has to offer then you pay for
it.

People seem to be getting a little picky about what they get for free.

James A. Smith
http://www.jastek.net
To e-mail keep this line to bypass spam filters.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Greyhawk" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.freeware
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 9:31 PM
Subject: Re: Terragen, listed as freeware but ??,,,
 
It's a great program and the free ver does just what it says it will do.
It will make very nice pictures some of which I use as wallpaper for my
desktop.

If you want "better" then what the freeware has to offer then you pay for
it.

People seem to be getting a little picky about what they get for free.
Click to expand...

And some people cant seem to resist making barbed comments ?
I was being picky, but not about the program, if you like it and it does
what you want then I am pleased for you. I said that I was making no
comment on the program, only about how it is described in the pricelessware
listing. If you or others like it and describe it here for people to
consider and chose then that is fine by me, however inclusion in a
"Pricelessware" listing is bound to involve some pickyness, will it not ?
What are you saying here, that there is no point in having categories for
liteware, crippleware, spyware etc&etc ?? Is it all a waste of time to
you ?
 
Walt said:
I was being picky, but not about the program, if you like it and it does
what you want then I am pleased for you. I said that I was making no
comment on the program, only about how it is described in the pricelessware
listing. If you or others like it and describe it here for people to
consider and chose then that is fine by me, however inclusion in a
"Pricelessware" listing is bound to involve some pickyness, will it not ?
Click to expand...
What are you saying here, that there is no point in having categories for
liteware, crippleware, spyware etc&etc ?? Is it all a waste of time to
you ?
Click to expand...

You'll notice, in the other thread, that spyware and adware are considered
"always out of bounds" for the PL. You'll see the same statement made on the
PL web site, that no spyware or adware will ever be listed there.

Regarding issues such as intersection of liteware and crippleware groupings,
that is more complex. What should happen at this current time is that folks
vote for those programs that they find so very useful as to be pricelessware.
It follows that what is seen as crippled by the majority would not win a
majority of votes.

Nobody voting should have a real need to be told that a program is lite or
crippled, since, IMO, voters should only consider those programs they already
have knowledge about.

Separately from the voting - hopefully only afterwards - should come the
discussion to deal with the issue you bring forth. Many folks visiting the
Pricelessware site, looking for recommendations, might very well prefer, and
even expect, to have some information about any possibly notable features
lacking in "lite" versions of such programs that make it to the PL.
 
Some comment inline but my main follow-up is at the bottom :

You'll notice, in the other thread, that spyware and adware are considered
"always out of bounds" for the PL. You'll see the same statement made on the
PL web site, that no spyware or adware will ever be listed there.
Click to expand...

Good :)
Regarding issues such as intersection of liteware and crippleware groupings,
that is more complex. What should happen at this current time is that folks
vote for those programs that they find so very useful as to be pricelessware.
It follows that what is seen as crippled by the majority would not win a
majority of votes.
Nobody voting should have a real need to be told that a program is lite or
crippled, since, IMO, voters should only consider those programs they already
have knowledge about.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed.
Separately from the voting - hopefully only afterwards - should come the
discussion to deal with the issue you bring forth. Many folks visiting the
Pricelessware site, looking for recommendations, might very well prefer, and
even expect, to have some information about any possibly notable features
lacking in "lite" versions of such programs that make it to the PL.
Click to expand...

Yep, totally agree with all that you say :) and thanks for the guidance,
I'll watch out for the "afterwards" and re-inject it then then :-)

My main reason for coming here ( which seems to have escaped James) is that
I saw Terragen in 2003list as Freeware. And by the definitions that I
thought I understood from the 'wares' descriptions I thought that it did
not fit. Now software licences keep changing and I knew not if Terragen had
been free and unlimited (< note avoidance of Jamesupsettable other
descriptors ;-) ) previously and had changed in-between-times, and
considering that the maintainers of the PList are doing such a good job,
with plenty to keep them busy, and considering that the web page invited
comment, I thought I'd be helpful and raise a little flag to say "errrm
does Terragen still fit the definitions ? "
You see !! :-)))

As for the actual descriptions/definitions in general and if they should be
applied or not, well that's a whole different ball game and I'll leave
James to go start his own thread about that, or indeed to go off to the
liteware thread,,,, or elsewhere.
 
Many folks visiting the
Pricelessware site, looking for recommendations, might very well prefer, and
even expect, to have some information about any possibly notable features
lacking in "lite" versions of such programs that make it to the PL.
Click to expand...

Ooops, I let my last post escape too early ! I meant to also comment on
your lines above.
Yes, I think that that is a very good idea and such information would be
very helpful. I expect that we have all downloaded software that once
installed springs a surprise upon us without having been mentioned on
the "glossy home page"
Indeed I think Terragen itself 'buries' its limitation on the registration
page, oh dear, what have I said, I expect I've upset James again now !
 
Walt said:
Ooops, I let my last post escape too early ! I meant to also comment on
your lines above.
Yes, I think that that is a very good idea and such information would be
very helpful. I expect that we have all downloaded software that once
installed springs a surprise upon us without having been mentioned on
the "glossy home page"
Indeed I think Terragen itself 'buries' its limitation on the registration page
Click to expand...

Yes, definitely, experience has taught us to be very wary of the Undisclosed
and Hidden, on the glossy home pages of software.

The Pricelessware site has a most excellent webmaster, who also pays strong
attention to consensus reached here. After the PL2004 is concluded, I think
it would make for a very useful talk, about what kind of extra information
for programs should arguably accompany their descriptions on the P site.
oh dear, what have I said, I expect I've upset James again now !
Click to expand...

This James, just a bug on the windshield, a flick on the highway. ;)
 
Walt said:
I was being picky, but not about the program, if you like it and it does
what you want then I am pleased for you. I said that I was making no
comment on the program, only about how it is described in the pricelessware
listing. If you or others like it and describe it here for people to
consider and chose then that is fine by me, however inclusion in a
"Pricelessware" listing is bound to involve some pickyness, will it not ?
What are you saying here, that there is no point in having categories for
liteware, crippleware, spyware etc&etc ?? Is it all a waste of time to
you ?
Click to expand...

Hi Walt,

ACF folks *are* picky about Pricelessware. We label PL programs *the
best of the best*. *Issues* with a program are of interest to the group
as a whole.

Last year some of the *pickyness* issues *weren't* discussed. That
omission led to long rancerous threads later. IMO the sooner the issues
are on the table the better. Thank you for bringing this one up for
discussion.

FYI - this year there will be three Pricelessware ballots, one to vote
*for* a program and two to determine the *suitability* of a program for
the Pricelessware list. There will be one ballot for acceptable, one for
unacceptable - for the programs identified as having issues.

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
 
Susan Bugher <[email protected]>:

[Inserted from further back in the thread].
Walt wrote in said:
Last year some of the *pickyness* issues *weren't* discussed. That
omission led to long rancerous threads later. IMO the sooner the issues
are on the table the better. Thank you for bringing this one up for
discussion.

FYI - this year there will be three Pricelessware ballots, one to vote
*for* a program and two to determine the *suitability* of a program for
the Pricelessware list. There will be one ballot for acceptable, one for
unacceptable - for the programs identified as having issues.
Click to expand...

Susan, clarification requested.

Limitations in a program's functionality, such as in the case of what's
being reported about Terragen, would you be saying that can be cause for
sending a program to the acceptable-unacceptable ballot?
 
omega said:
Susan Bugher <[email protected]>:

[Inserted from further back in the thread].
Last year some of the *pickyness* issues *weren't* discussed. That
omission led to long rancerous threads later. IMO the sooner the issues
are on the table the better. Thank you for bringing this one up for
discussion.

FYI - this year there will be three Pricelessware ballots, one to vote
*for* a program and two to determine the *suitability* of a program for
the Pricelessware list. There will be one ballot for acceptable, one for
unacceptable - for the programs identified as having issues.
Click to expand...


Susan, clarification requested.

Limitations in a program's functionality, such as in the case of what's
being reported about Terragen, would you be saying that can be cause for
sending a program to the acceptable-unacceptable ballot?
Click to expand...

Yes. There are a lot of programs on the Nominations List. The
acceptable-unacceptable list *highlights* the programs people *might*
object to as being unsuitable. Crippleware, Registerware, Warez,
Trialware, Spyware, Betaware - any issue of that type.

FWIW - the following carryover nominations *might* have issues -
depending on the *version*. I remember you said you favored an older
unlimited beta version of Popcorn - someone else wanted the newer
Liteware version - some people regard the Liteware version as
crippleware . . .

IMO the nominated *version* should be known *before* the vote . . .

Mailwasher
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/PL2004INTERNET.htm#M105

PopCorn
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/PL2004INTERNET.htm#P127

AI RoboForm
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/PL2004DESKTOP.htm#A116

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
 
Susan Bugher said:
Yes. There are a lot of programs on the Nominations List. The
acceptable-unacceptable list *highlights* the programs people *might*
object to as being unsuitable. Crippleware, Registerware, Warez,
Trialware, Spyware, Betaware - any issue of that type.
Click to expand...

<example.example.example>

Fooke's Notetab Lite has only a single-level undo. Given what we expect
from our great wealth of free text editors these days, I consider that
limitation so disabling as to be a cripple factor.

Continue example w assumption that this amounted to a Big Concern for
me. My needed action would be to post about it in the thread "Subject:
[PL] 2004 Removals" ? From there, it will then be added to the list for
voting acceptable and unacceptable ?

</example.example.example>
 
Susan Bugher said:
FWIW - the following carryover nominations *might* have issues -
depending on the *version*. I remember you said you favored an older
unlimited beta version of Popcorn - someone else wanted the newer
Liteware version - some people regard the Liteware version as
crippleware . . .
Click to expand...

The Popcorn thread did sort of look left hanging. Yet my interpration
from the various posts was that the last public release of the
unrestricted version (1.48?) made the best common meeting grounding.

(The sole advocate for the current limited version, he'd also mentioned
the last unrestricted version as being good for nomination. Also, re
the "warez" suggestion about the later beta release, I didn't have an
opinion, and no one else I saw followed up.)
 
omega said:
Susan Bugher said:
Yes. There are a lot of programs on the Nominations List. The
acceptable-unacceptable list *highlights* the programs people *might*
object to as being unsuitable. Crippleware, Registerware, Warez,
Trialware, Spyware, Betaware - any issue of that type.
Click to expand...


<example.example.example>

Fooke's Notetab Lite has only a single-level undo. Given what we expect
from our great wealth of free text editors these days, I consider that
limitation so disabling as to be a cripple factor.

Continue example w assumption that this amounted to a Big Concern for
me. My needed action would be to post about it in the thread "Subject:
[PL] 2004 Removals" ? From there, it will then be added to the list for
voting acceptable and unacceptable ?

</example.example.example>
Click to expand...

Hi Karen,

Very reassuring to know that you won't let me get away fuzzy thinking.
I'll try to do better this time. ;)

hmm . . . thinking hard . . . point one . . .

The acceptable/ unacceptable lists are primarily for good programs that
have bad habits or undesirable associates.

Easy calls:

Spyware is prohibited on the PL. The Google Toolbar was discussed
several times in the last year. Some people believed it was Spyware -
some didn't. (That may be a dead issue - I'm *not* trying to revive it -
just using it as an example.)

Trialware is *not* prohibited. Some people say Trialware should be
*totally* prohibited, some people say it should not. Some people says
40tude Dialog is Trialware, some people say it's not.

The type of objections noted above are grounds for placing a program on
the acceptable/ unacceptable list - where it will be judged for
suitability for the Pricelessware List by the group as a whole.

A tougher one:

The Liteware vs. Crippleware issue.

Placing programs on the acceptable/ unacceptable lists is an *option* -
it's not required.

IMO a program that is useless to *most* people is not likely to be
nominated for Pricelessware. If the program description is modified to
clearly spell out the program's limitations - that may satisfy the major
concerns. If not, it probably should be placed on the acceptable/
unacceptable lists.

After we have gone through the process once we may want to make some
adjustments. IMO this time it's better to have too many programs on the
acceptable/unacceptable ballots than too few.

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
 
Back
Top