Unlicensed software costs SA R4 billion

Maybe if software retained its value, even after it no longer was the current supported stuff, maybe less people would pirate. You pay for a piece of software, sometimes lots of money, in thousands or tens of thousands, and a few years later, it's obsolete. The magnanimous software company gives you a discount on one version, maybe, and then that's it. It also won't work as the activation server is gone.

Compare to old cars? or old TVs. Or radios. Or books. Or chairs. Or houses. Or clothes. Or calculators. They all work. They can be resold. You bought the latest and greatest DLP projector in 2002 for R20K. Now you get an HD 3D version. The poor student does not need HD, he pays you R2K for the thing and you're both happy. Some value is retained. He wins, you win. Software? Forget it. :)

Oh and the second hand market would be unfair because devs need to live, while the engineers at HP or Infocus, don't. :)
 
It's in the nature of intellectual vs physical goods.

Btw, last I checked no-one was forced to upgrade their software. Those who wish to run last year's version or one from ten years ago are just as free as those who don't.

I've certainly never had the Software Upgrade Police pitch up to check whether I've upgraded or not. Anyone else?
 
Space_Chief said:
Well let's see. Do you think a car which uses aluminum, rare earths, plastic, leather, copper, a lot of manpower and electricity to assemble and so on, which also requires a service plan and has a ton of taxes built in, can be charged much cheaper?

Cost of replicating software: virtually 0. In fact 0, as the pirate does it with his own electricity and time.
Cost of replicating a car: A significant portion of the value of the car. Maybe even more than the R&D and profit.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Software is just a copy
 
Like any commercial matter that doesn't involve State compulsion or State-protected cartels, the price is a matter between the parties.

The alternative - state regulation or imposed pricing - will cause more problems than it solves. On that the record is clear.
 
Arthur said:
It's in the nature of intellectual vs physical goods.
Click to expand...

It's more than nature. Much of it is artificial.

Have you tried reinstalling old software? I did, many times. I get told - this version is not compatible with this version of Windows. Or I get it to install only to not be able to "activate". Or I get loss of functionality, such as Adobe Acrobat Pro 9x won't work with latest Office - i.e. Office can't print to PDF through distiller. Oh MS says there is a fix for that. Upgrade to the latest Adobe Acrobat Pro. R8k gone down the toilet.

Nature... not really. Purposeful or even just very convenient killing off of good investments. Someone paid good money and now it's gone. Certainly unjust.

Btw, last I checked no-one was forced to upgrade their software. Those who wish to run last year's version or one from ten years ago are just as free as those who don't.
Click to expand...

You didn't check long enough.

I've certainly never had the Software Upgrade Police pitch up to check whether I've upgraded or not. Anyone else?
Click to expand...

Again strawmanning and least charitable interpretation. Where did I say the BSA check for updates? The older software no longer works. These packages drive each other. Either your OS is outdated and needs an update or your software. And the one drives the other.

Funny how it's possible to install free and open source VLC on Win98.
 
Last edited:
Arthur said:
Like any commercial matter that doesn't involve State compulsion or State-protected cartels, the price is a matter between the parties.

The alternative - state regulation or imposed pricing - will cause more problems than it solves. On that the record is clear.
Click to expand...

In an ideal system, sure. But sadly with bigger players pricing smaller players out and setting standards, it becomes difficult to do your own thing.
 
Space_Chief said:
Now I do recognise that technology changes but in software it's not that much, and the old software could very well still run on the latest operating systems with some minor function loss
Click to expand...

You've obviously never worked on a team developing and maintaining a large scale software product.
 
icyrus said:
You've obviously never worked on a team developing and maintaining a large scale software product.
Click to expand...

Obviously not and it's not relevant either.

Whenever I see a rubbish response like icyrus', a response which is irrelevant, my eyes glaze over.
 
Space_Chief said:
Obviously not and it's not relevant either.

Whenever I see a rubbish response like icyrus', a response which is irrelevant, my eyes glaze over.
Click to expand...

So despite your ignorance you wish people to take your opinion seriously? At least try put a modicum of thought into your arguments.
 
icyrus said:
So despite your ignorance you wish people to take your opinion seriously? At least try put a modicum of thought into your arguments.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should apply the same advice to your own pearls of wisdom?

You must be some sort of super coder, someone who knows every single situation in a "team development" on a "large scale product" in every relevant package and you have some super knowledge which extrapolates it to every situation. Never mind that even if it was true in your particular case, it would still not necessarily be an excuse.

But yeah typical IT excuse, "You're too ignorant. Just take our word for it."
 
Next up, our difficulties are your problem. Nice passing the buck there. So who pays the devs' salaries again? Oh these ignorant fools. "How dare they complain. They're just dumb idiots."
 
Space_Chief said:
Maybe you should apply the same advice to your own pearls of wisdom?

You must be some sort of super coder, someone who knows every single situation in a "team development" on a "large scale product" in every relevant package and you have some super knowledge which extrapolates it to every situation. Never mind that even if it was true in your particular case, it would still not necessarily be an excuse.

But yeah typical IT excuse, "You're too ignorant. Just take our word for it."
Click to expand...

It is not complicated, you just haven't considered it. Every platform that a piece of software has to support is an extra burden in development, maintenance and support. When the cost vs reward of supporting that platform drops below a certain threshold the platform is dropped. There is no grand conspiracy, merely economics.
 
icyrus said:
It is not complicated, you just haven't considered it. Every platform that a piece of software has to support is an extra burden in development, maintenance and support. When the cost vs reward of supporting that platform drops below a certain threshold the platform is dropped. There is no grand conspiracy, merely economics.
Click to expand...

Except old software often still works. But when your OS or program says "This version does not work with this OS" and terminates, you're out of luck. Meanwhile you don't need the new features.

And who is to say when enough support is enough. And who audits this? No-one. One just has to believe the company which has absolutely no interest in pushing an upgrade. After all if old software worked, how would they keep paying their bills.

It's just take our word, it's too difficult and costly to help people keep their investments. Because only the dev's time and money is important. For the rest of the world, money grows on trees and people just don't know how to spend it.

Now some of these may be relevant problems. But that also changes the landscape for users. And users pay. And hence some people pirate because they don't see the worth of the value of their good money going into something only to be brushed off with a "it's not in our financial interest to support this anymore".

And thanks for your "you haven't considered it". You must be a clairvoyant. I've never considered the costs of maintanance and cross-compatibility with older and newer products and standards.
 
jetlee said:
... Quite honestly, I think piracy probably helps guys like MS stay dominant ...
Click to expand...

Agree completely. Companies like MS, Adobe and Autodesk give students their software for free to tie them in to the ecosystem and prevent them from investigating alternatives. Same reason they turn a blind eye to individuals and small companies who use unlicensed software. They also rely on the hundreds of thousands of developers on unlicensed software in places like India and China to innovate and make more applications available that work with their software or OS only. Then they set their dogs on the corporates and governments to reap the harvest.

I guess all is fair in a free market, but it does leave a very sour taste in my mouth. Probably the reason why the last time I bought any software was a XP CD in April 2007. Completely FOSS for personal use since 2009.
 
I really don't mind paying for licensed software especially the operating system. I bought an original Windows 7 Home Edition and still use it to this day. My experience is that pirated operating systems are not reliable.
 
I say if you can afford it, pay for it :) If you cant.... use it, until it uplifts you so you can afford to pay for it :D

Personally I would prefer you use the opensource alternative, but the software companies themselves would prefer you pirated their product rather than use the open source alternative. So give them what they want :)
 
ghoti said:
Personally I would prefer you use the opensource alternative, but the software companies themselves would prefer you pirated their product rather than use the open source alternative. So give them what they want :)
Click to expand...

As I said, yes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X