Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Re: Screenshot Captor: A New Definition for Freeware

24 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted

John Jay Smith

unread,
May 15, 2006, 10:28:15 AM5/15/06
to
> I wish someone would make "Freeware" a registered trademark

Read what you wrote... lol, "freeware into a trademark?" Isnt that a little
ironic? LOL!

Although I totally agree with you, and have run into that exact application
also,

the term "freeware" only means you dont have to pay money....
see this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware

There is clearly a need for a new term to distinguish "true" freeware from
the others...
like adware, crippleware, nagware... etc....

Today 15 MAY of 2006, I invented a new term called "sinlessware" to discribe
nonag, no ad, no crippled apps...applications free from all greed and
corruption,
created for the benefit of humanity, and always free.

I dont wish to trademark it, it is free and sinless too.

May googlegroups be my witness :-)

-Ken www.computerboom.com

"Bob Adkins" <bo...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:8u0h62hce1e4d1b0r...@4ax.com...
> rant
>
> I downloaded and installed a "Freeware" program, Screenshot Captor, and
> immediately got a nag screen to register. The nag sent me to:
>
> http://www.donationcoder.com/Keys/
>
> The more I read, the more PO'd I got. If it weren't such a blatant abuse
> of the term "Freeware" it would be funny, actually.
>
> You have to jump through a bunch of hoops to get a "free key", which
> expires. Or you can "Donate" and stop the nags. Now we have an abuse of
> the
> term "Donation".
>
> I wish someone would make "Freeware" a registered trademark that couldn't
> be
> used on time limited software, Nagware, Adware, and Crippleware so little
> jerks couldn't abuse the good name of Freeware.
>
> Everyone should e-mail him and let him know how they feel about it. His
> addy
> is mou...@donationcoder.com
>
> /rant
> --
> Bob


Howard Schwartz

unread,
May 15, 2006, 10:38:08 AM5/15/06
to
Bob Adkins <bo...@charter.net> wrote in
news:8u0h62hce1e4d1b0r...@4ax.com:

> ou have to jump through a bunch of hoops to get a "free key", which
> expires. Or you can "Donate" and stop the nags. Now we have an abuse
> of the term "Donation".

It could be worse. At least they did not try to induce you to fill out a
200 question survey, which they then sell to other companies - like they
do when the pop up screen says, ``Contradulations - you have won a free
laptop (or whatever)''.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 15, 2006, 11:09:37 AM5/15/06
to
Bob Adkins wrote:

> rant
>
> I downloaded and installed a "Freeware" program, Screenshot Captor, and
> immediately got a nag screen to register. The nag sent me to:
>
> http://www.donationcoder.com/Keys/
>
> The more I read, the more PO'd I got. If it weren't such a blatant abuse
> of the term "Freeware" it would be funny, actually.

I agree that calling it "Freeware" is inappropriate. . .

> You have to jump through a bunch of hoops to get a "free key", which


> expires. Or you can "Donate" and stop the nags. Now we have an abuse of the
> term "Donation".

Disagree. You have to return to the site twice (at six month intervals)
to get the Nag permanently removed for *free* or you can remove it
immediately by making a donation.

> I wish someone would make "Freeware" a registered trademark that couldn't be
> used on time limited software, Nagware, Adware, and Crippleware so little
> jerks couldn't abuse the good name of Freeware.
>
> Everyone should e-mail him and let him know how they feel about it. His addy
> is mou...@donationcoder.com
>
> /rant

erm. . . been there, done that, right here. Search the ACF archives
for posts from Mouser.

Mouser is a man with a mission -> finding a way to make the donation
model work. There was quite a long discussion in ACF (that resulted in
some improvements in their donation method). The site does a good job of
alerting people to the need for a key - all the facts are given -
there's no deception going on.

IMO there are many, many "Freeware" sites/authors that deserve to be
reviled but this is *not* one of them. Not my cup of tea but that's a
different story. . .

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

Message has been deleted

Petersen, Vegard Krog

unread,
May 15, 2006, 4:00:17 PM5/15/06
to
on 15.05.2006 16:28 John Jay Smith wrote:
> the term "freeware" only means you dont have to pay money....
> see this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware

That's just the definition of the user(s) who wrote this particulary
entry and not any kind of official definition of the term "freeware"...


regards from

--
Vegard Krog Petersen - Norway

http://vegard2.no -
Solitaire MahJongg guide, Sarah Michelle Gellar Solitaire,
Freeware Logo & symbol, Halma & Chinese Checkers,
Pachisi & Ludo, Freeware Solitaire, My fishy site (fishing
games), a.c.f.g information, Fredrikshald Havfiskeklubb
18+ sites: Firefoxy, Adult Solitaire, Fishy Pictures,
Sexy Chess, Sexy Librarians, Sexy Football
---------------------------------------------------------

John Jay Smith

unread,
May 15, 2006, 4:10:24 PM5/15/06
to
Ok find me better one please that is published and accepted by the majority.


"Petersen, Vegard Krog" <vegard_kro...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e4amg9$rhk$1...@emma.aioe.org...

Vegard Krog Petersen

unread,
May 15, 2006, 4:16:32 PM5/15/06
to
>>> the term "freeware" only means you dont have to pay money....
>>> see this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware
>> That's just the definition of the user(s) who wrote this particulary entry
>> and not any kind of official definition of the term "freeware"...
> Ok find me better one please that is published and accepted by the
> majority.

Majority and majority, well well...
But these on is the most prefered by most of the alt.comp.freeware
participants:

> Freeware: Legally obtainable software that you may use at no cost, monetary or otherwise, for as long as you wish.
http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.php


And please don't top-post!

Kind regards from

Bob Phillips

unread,
May 15, 2006, 4:25:00 PM5/15/06
to
Why shouldn't he top-post? You should not seek to impose your prejudices on
others?

"Vegard Krog Petersen" <vegard_kro...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4468e24d$1...@news.henrynet.se...

Vegard Krog Petersen

unread,
May 15, 2006, 4:49:03 PM5/15/06
to
>> "Vegard Krog Petersen" <vegard_kro...@hotmail.com> wrote in
message
>> And please don't top-post!
> on 15.05.2006 22:25 Bob Phillips wrote:
> Why shouldn't he top-post? You should not seek to impose your prejudices on
> others?

That question could start a a long and flamed thread Bob. :-)

Many people have very strong opinions on what is considered correct
etiquette.

I'll just post the link to the wikipedia discussion of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-posting

And yes: I'm aware of the irony regarding wikipedia in view of my
earlier post in this thread :-)

regards from vegard

John Jay Smith

unread,
May 15, 2006, 4:54:52 PM5/15/06
to
> And yes: I'm aware of the irony regarding wikipedia in view of my earlier
> post in this thread :-)

:-)


"Vegard Krog Petersen" <vegard_kro...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:4468e9ed$1...@news.henrynet.se...

Message has been deleted

Eugene Esterly III

unread,
May 15, 2006, 5:32:39 PM5/15/06
to

Bob Adkins wrote:
> rant
>
> I downloaded and installed a "Freeware" program, Screenshot Captor, and
> immediately got a nag screen to register. The nag sent me to:
>
> http://www.donationcoder.com/Keys/
>
> The more I read, the more PO'd I got. If it weren't such a blatant abuse
> of the term "Freeware" it would be funny, actually.
>
> You have to jump through a bunch of hoops to get a "free key", which
> expires. Or you can "Donate" and stop the nags. Now we have an abuse of the
> term "Donation".
>
> I wish someone would make "Freeware" a registered trademark that couldn't be
> used on time limited software, Nagware, Adware, and Crippleware so little
> jerks couldn't abuse the good name of Freeware.
>
> Everyone should e-mail him and let him know how they feel about it. His addy
> is mou...@donationcoder.com
>
> /rant
> --
> Bob

Bob,

Some freeware does require to get a license key to use the program. For
example, I use the freeware version of Avast & the program runs in
trial mode until you get a free license key. The free license key for
Avast expires once a year & when it expires, you have to get a new key.

Getting a free license key for a freeware prog doesn't bother me
because if it seems like a good program, I'll go thru the hoops of
getting a license key to use the program.

»Q«

unread,
May 15, 2006, 6:24:47 PM5/15/06
to
Vegard Krog Petersen <vegard_kro...@hotmail.com> wrote in
<news:4468e24d$1...@news.henrynet.se>:

>>>> the term "freeware" only means you dont have to pay money....
>>>> see this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware
>>>
>>> That's just the definition of the user(s) who wrote this
>>> particulary entry and not any kind of official definition of the
>>> term "freeware"...
>>
>> Ok find me better one please that is published and accepted by
>> the majority.
>
> Majority and majority, well well...
> But these on is the most prefered by most of the alt.comp.freeware
> participants:
>
>> Freeware: Legally obtainable software that you may use at no
>> cost, monetary or otherwise, for as long as you wish.
> http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.php

JJS couldn't have meant that one, Vegard. He's been in the group for
years. ;)

--
»Q«

Bob Phillips

unread,
May 16, 2006, 5:46:07 AM5/16/06
to
plonk returned

"Duddits" <Dud...@Dreamcatcher.com> wrote in message
news:a8rh62tc2ofe9ogea...@4ax.com...


> On Mon, 15 May 2006 21:25:00 +0100, "Bob Phillips"
> <bob.ph...@notheretiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Why shouldn't he top-post? You should not seek to impose your prejudices
on
> >others?
>

> plonk
>
> Dud :-/
> --
> A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?


Bob Phillips

unread,
May 16, 2006, 6:20:39 AM5/16/06
to
Exactly Vegard, many people have strong OPINIONS. Personally I hate bottom
posting, having to pass through stuff I have already read to get to the new
stuff. Top-posting includes the relevant material, IF anyone should want to
read it.

As long as judicious snipping is applied, top posting is fine IMO. Bottom
posting never is (again IMO).

Best Regards

Bob

PS Sorry about the capitals, I do know my netiquette, but I wanted to
emphasise those points.

"Vegard Krog Petersen" <vegard_kro...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:4468e9ed$1...@news.henrynet.se...

Peter Seiler

unread,
May 16, 2006, 5:29:28 AM5/16/06
to
Vegard Krog Petersen - 15.05.2006 22:16 :

>
> And please don't top-post!
>

and additional: not always fullquote.

--
by(e) PS
spam will be killed

Peter Seiler

unread,
May 16, 2006, 5:32:39 AM5/16/06
to
John Jay Smith - 15.05.2006 22:54 :


>> And yes: I'm aware of the irony regarding wikipedia in view of my earlier
>> post in this thread :-)
>
> :-)

:-) too, but, please think about your fullquotings. THX.

thunder7

unread,
May 16, 2006, 8:15:45 AM5/16/06
to
I too used "Screenshot Captor" recived a nag screen. When I questioned
the author he was rather rude . I also beta test a lot of programs I
told him where there where bugs He told me I was in error. I have
stopped using his programs!.
I however see http://shellcity.net/ is still hailing him as a "FREEWARE
guru." Shell City also needs to be told. They have a lot of excellent
freeware programs there.
In the true defination of freeware.

Message has been deleted

thunder7

unread,
May 16, 2006, 8:17:27 AM5/16/06
to

mouser

unread,
May 16, 2006, 11:14:09 AM5/16/06
to
Gretings,

I am the author of Screenshot Captor, and the person who started the
DonationCoder.com website where it lives.

I've recently written a very long article on our approach; what we are
trying to do with freeware/donationware and why. It touches on some of
these issues (which have come up in another alt.comp.freeware thread):

http://articles.donationcoder.com/One/index.html

I am always willing to discuss these issues and have tried so hard to
be respectfull and helpful in all things related to our site and our
programs; our primary motivation for the entire site is to figure out a
way to keep our software free and accessible while still figuring out a
way to communicate that donations are important to us.

There is one thing I absolutely am really troubled and saddened by
though - it's the comments by thunder that i was somehow rude in some
email or ignored bug reports. If there is one thing I am sure of in
the 15 month history of DonationCoder.com it is that i have not once
been disrespectful or critical to a user or critic of our site. I
personally handle all the emails to the site and I have not once
dismissed a bug report.

In fact, the whole point of our site is try to form a community between
users and coders and engage in a kind of contract where we promise to
work hard to develop and improve software to meet the needs of our
users in return for asking for their financial support and help in
testing software. I hope the people who have know our site feel like
we have done a good job and lived up to our promises in this respect.
I believe they do.

I am available every day, without exception, on our forums, and in our
irc channel. I am always accessible and posts about problems on our
site generally get answered in terms of minutes or hours. We are proud
of being free from the normal forum flame wars and we pride ourselves
on being helpful and courteous.

I am genuinely perplexed by the comment from thunder. Thunder I invite
you to email me (mou...@donationcoder.com) and remind me of our
interactions. I also welcome you post them here if you want to - that
goes for any email or forum or irc chat i have had with anyone in the
history of our site - you are welcome to post any correspondence. If
there is something you felt I did wrong or that I disrespected some
report about bugs I would very much like to hear about it.

I will also say what I've said before - all of our software is meant to
be fully usable for free. We are only trying to encourage donations in
a world where people seem happy to buy commercial software, and happy
to use free software, but almost never donate. If you take the time to
check out our site and decide you are not going to make a donation, you
need only email us and tell us so, and you can skip the normal (what we
think is reasonable) process of waiting for a non-expiring license, and
we will email you one right away.

And I really do ask you to take a look at that article i posted a link
to above; it explains better than I have here what we are trying to do
and why.

-mouser
mou...@donationcoder.com

ps.Thunder7, seriously - do email me and remind me what I said that
upset you - I have no idea what it could be.

Message has been deleted

f0dder

unread,
May 16, 2006, 11:56:41 AM5/16/06
to
Perhaps calling (some of) the DonationCoder applications "freeware" is
wrong - "DonationWare" might be a more appropriate term. It's important to
note, though, that you do NOT have to donate to be able to use the
applications fully, and in that sense they are "freeware".

It's true that you get nag screens until you sign up at the forum and get a
license key. Apart from being a minor annoyance, how bad is this, though?
The donationcoder.com forums are pretty interesting and useful, so it's not
like it's a loss to signup there.

Not all of the software at DC are nag-until-free-registration, by the way.
My own http://fSekrit.donationcoder.com is "true freeware", and so is a
bunch of the other stuff... look around :)


John Jay Smith

unread,
May 16, 2006, 12:44:11 PM5/16/06
to
Hello, mouser.. are you a developer - programmer?
or do you just run the site?

"mouser" <mou...@donationcoder.com> wrote in message
news:1147792449....@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

mouser

unread,
May 16, 2006, 1:07:47 PM5/16/06
to
i am the programmer of screenshot captor and several other of the
programs on the site, as well as the main website admin.
(i spent this past weekend writing a complete up-to-date help file for
screenshot captor; not the funnest work but it's exactly the kind of
work we are committed to doing as part of asking for support from our
users; ps. you'll also find at the end of all of our help files a list
of all related shareware and freeware programs).

John Jay Smith

unread,
May 16, 2006, 1:18:03 PM5/16/06
to
Ok listen... its a good oportunity to tell you this...I was planning on
emailing you
anyway, but this happened and you popped in.

I will be contacting you shortly via email... I have some ideas what will
be beneficial for both of us and in fact everyone else....

I will add to the email "from john jay smith of the freeware newsgroup"

:-)

"mouser" <mou...@donationcoder.com> wrote in message

news:1147799266.9...@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Klaatu

unread,
May 16, 2006, 1:33:51 PM5/16/06
to
On Tue, 16 May 2006 15:56:41 GMT, f0dder posted to alt.comp.freeware:

> Perhaps calling (some of) the DonationCoder applications "freeware" is
> wrong - "DonationWare" might be a more appropriate term. It's
> important to note, though, that you do NOT have to donate to be able
> to use the applications fully, and in that sense they are "freeware".

Even the term "donationware" is not being accurate, since it's not really
a "donation", is it? It's a payment, plain and simple, so "shareware"
would be more accurate. Perhaps "registerware", but certainly not
"freeware".

> It's true that you get nag screens until you sign up at the forum and
> get a license key. Apart from being a minor annoyance, how bad is
> this, though? The donationcoder.com forums are pretty interesting and
> useful, so it's not like it's a loss to signup there.

So wouldn't the term "nagware" be better? All nagware nags you to do
something to get rid of the nag, so at least it fits. The bad part is use
of the term "freeware", when these programs are nothing of the sort.

> Not all of the software at DC are nag-until-free-registration, by the
> way. My own http://fSekrit.donationcoder.com is "true freeware", and
> so is a bunch of the other stuff... look around :)

Why should one need to say "true freeware" when the term "freeware" works
just fine? Since calling (some of) these programs freeware is outright
lying, if one agrees with the commonly accepted definition of the term:
Legally obtainable software that you may use at no cost, monetary *or
otherwise*, for as long as you wish.

--
"It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid,
than to open it and remove all doubt"
- Mark Twain

mouser

unread,
May 16, 2006, 1:56:07 PM5/16/06
to
a lot of these issues also came up and were discussed in this past
alt.comp.freeware thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/browse_frm/thread/7e3e5755136b0a54

mouser

unread,
May 16, 2006, 2:00:45 PM5/16/06
to
no matter what *we* would call it on our site -
people find out about and download our software mainly from software
listing sites - fileforum, tucows, softpedia, snapfiles, etc.
and there is always only: Shareware (with a cost field), and Freeware.

from my experience, nagware refers to software you have to BUY to
remove a nag; that is not appropriate for our software.

registerware would probably be more appropriate, but how many
lay-people really know what that means?

f0dder

unread,
May 16, 2006, 2:30:22 PM5/16/06
to
(Verata nicktoo!, or however it's spelt :)

I see your points... it's a bit hard to classify the software, IMHO. The
programs are fully functional and without time expiration (except for the
"visit forum one more time after 6 months to obtain never-expiring license"
thing), and you can get the nag-removing license for free. So I don't think
shareware is an appropriate term?

I think the most important thing, though, is to say that mouser isn't a
con-man and that donationcoder.com is a great site. (No, I'm not getting
paid for this :-)


thunder7

unread,
May 16, 2006, 3:35:54 PM5/16/06
to
I really have to apologize to mouser. I am sorry!.-7-
i made a mistake. About DonationCoder.
I a wrong!. We all have bad days you are very nice.

And even though I am very poor.
I do want to help programmers build better programs, this is why I beta
test!.
I do not have very much money but I did donate.
I like to help when I can.

Thank for building the programs you do for us, And you also need money
too, I know you also enjoy eating as much as I.
Please forgive me!.
Thunder7

mouser

unread,
May 16, 2006, 3:50:45 PM5/16/06
to
not a problem at all - it was just a misunderstanding; all's well that
ends well :)

for those curious about thunder7's original post, he had emailed me to
tell me about a bug many months ago, and i emailed back and said that i
would try to fix it right away and remarked: "very annoying". thunder7
thought i was saying him emailing me was very annoying, when i was
really commisserating with him about the bug :)

tsa...@gmail.com

unread,
May 16, 2006, 6:56:33 PM5/16/06
to
Quote: the term "freeware" only means you dont have to pay money....

By any standards of logic - well, almost any - the software at
donationcoders fits this definition.
It does NOT say in your definition anything about any steps you need to
undertake to get the software.

An equally illogical approach would be to say its not freeware because
you have to download it or its not freeware because your
wife has been nagging you this last week.

You need to re-read your quoted definition and assimilate what it says.


Mouser's software does NOT require payment ie "you don't have to pay
money" so it fits the definition, but additionally, you can donate
money if you see fit.
There's nothing to debate if you're happy with the wikipedia
definition.

As a final point, anyone who has dealings with Mouser and donationcoder
would be aware that they are on high moral and ethical ground - darn
nice guy as well.
tony saint

jgp...@gmail.com

unread,
May 16, 2006, 8:14:36 PM5/16/06
to
I'm jgpaiva, and I'm a regular at donationcoder.com forums. I also make
my best to help DC become even better than it is right now.
As do all of the members i know at donationcoder. Mouser has been very
well succeeded in building a great community, supported by his
software, his very good administration and moderation of the site and
forums. (and also some luck, in finding a bunch of great forum members
;) )

I can understand people getting mad at having a nag screen in a
software program, after all, most of the people is fooled into thinking
that software authors live out of thin air. I also don't like to have
ads in web pages, popups, nag screens, messages, etc.
What do i do? I try get rid of them. But what i don't agree, is to say
the software authors don't have the right to do that.

Surviving out of donationware isn't easy, just read the article mouser
mentioned, and you'll understand a few important issues that people
often disregard. The truth is: if that nag screen wasn't there, the
donationcoder community would never have been as well succeded, and I
wouldn't have found this great site.

I just think it's important to see both sides of the question in these
matters. I think that if people thought a bit more like that, they'd
even understand that just a nag screen isn't nearly enough for what
mouser's software is worth.

(i don't think there's even anything to debate about the term
"freeware", it's "free" + "software". the english language isn't
ambiguous enough to make that word mean anything else.)

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 16, 2006, 9:09:55 PM5/16/06
to
jgp...@gmail.com wrote:

> (i don't think there's even anything to debate about the term
> "freeware", it's "free" + "software". the english language isn't
> ambiguous enough to make that word mean anything else.)

Your definition means Trialware, Adware, Spyware and Warez are all
"Freeware". Is that your true position on the meaning of the word
"Freeware"?

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 16, 2006, 9:40:28 PM5/16/06
to
It's disheartening to see so many posts saying Freeware is any software
that's free because. . .

For weeks now I've been working on filling in the missing ware
descriptions on the ACF pages (only a few hundred more to go). If anyone
*likes* those detailed ware descriptions please speak up. I need some
encouragement. . .

Dan Goodman

unread,
May 16, 2006, 10:36:31 PM5/16/06
to
Susan Bugher wrote:

> It's disheartening to see so many posts saying Freeware is any
> software that's free because. . .
>
> For weeks now I've been working on filling in the missing ware
> descriptions on the ACF pages (only a few hundred more to go). If

> anyone likes those detailed ware descriptions please speak up. I need


> some encouragement. . .
>
> Susan

I like them!

--

Dan Goodman
All political parties die at last of swallowing their own lies.
John Arbuthnot (1667-1735), Scottish writer, physician.
Journal http://dsgood.livejournal.com
Clutterers Anonymous unofficial community
http://community.livejournal.com/clutterers_anon/
Decluttering http://decluttering.blogspot.com
Predictions and Politics http://dsgood.blogspot.com
Links http://del.icio.us/dsgood

»Q«

unread,
May 16, 2006, 11:44:06 PM5/16/06
to
"mouser" <mou...@donationcoder.com> wrote in
<news:1147802445.1...@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:

> from my experience, nagware refers to software you have to BUY to
> remove a nag; that is not appropriate for our software.

Certainly that's the most common type of nagware, but nagging people to
make a "donation" or to visit your website repeatedly is also nagging.

--
»Q«

zrid...@gmail.com

unread,
May 17, 2006, 1:11:18 AM5/17/06
to
DonationCoder.com makes no claim to freeware, but to Donationware.
Mouser and other forum admins have gone out of their way to keep
DonationCoder.com a respectful place online, which is rare in these
rough-and-tumble days on the internet.

I hope you will give it a second chance. There are a host of other
developers who drop in and give advice, discuss coding issues, and even
ask for specific feedback from DonationCoder.com "members." I'm only a
user, but I don't see anything wrong with developers wanting to get
paid a modest sum for their work through structured donations. The four
distinctions of software I regular frequent are:

- Donationware
- Freeware
- Open Source
- Shareware

- Zaine Ridling
THE GREAT SOFTWARE LIST
http://www.anova.org/software/


________________________________________________

Vegard Krog Petersen

unread,
May 17, 2006, 2:49:46 AM5/17/06
to
on 17.05.2006 00:56 tsa...@gmail.com wrote:
> Quote: the term "freeware" only means you dont have to pay money....
> see this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware

As said before in this thread:
> That's just the definition of the user(s) who wrote this particulary entry and not any kind of official definition of the term "freeware"...

If you want a more widely accepted definition of freeware (at least
prefered by most athe alt.comp.freeware participants:

>> Freeware: Legally obtainable software that you may use at no cost, monetary or otherwise, for as long as you wish.
> http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.php
>

regards from

--
Vegard Krog Petersen - Norway

http://vegard2.no -
Solitaire MahJongg guide, Sarah Michelle Gellar Solitaire,
Freeware Logo & symbol, Halma & Chinese Checkers,
Pachisi & Ludo, Freeware Solitaire, My fishy site (fishing
games), a.c.f.g information, Fredrikshald Havfiskeklubb
18+ sites: Firefoxy, Adult Solitaire, Fishy Pictures,
Sexy Chess, Sexy Librarians, Sexy Football
---------------------------------------------------------

John Fitzsimons

unread,
May 17, 2006, 3:49:00 AM5/17/06
to
On Tue, 16 May 2006 20:30:22 +0200, "f0dder"
<f0dder...@flork.dk.invalid> wrote:

>(Verata nicktoo!, or however it's spelt :)

>I see your points... it's a bit hard to classify the software, IMHO. The
>programs are fully functional and without time expiration (except for the
>"visit forum one more time after 6 months to obtain never-expiring license"

< snip >

Your "without time expiration" comment is like saying "commercial
software is completely free.....once one has paid the vendor the
required amount."

Er, no. If one doesn't go back after 6 months it does expire. So it
isn't "without time expiration". If it was without time expiration one
wouldn't need to go back to their site after 6 months.

tsa...@gmail.com

unread,
May 17, 2006, 4:01:20 AM5/17/06
to
VKP:

"
>> Freeware: Legally obtainable software that you may use at no cost, monetary or otherwise, for as long as you wish.
> http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.php
Legally obtainable : Yes
May use at no cost: yes
As long as you wish: yes
Sure seems to fit the definition to me.
Possible objection : but there is a cost in that you have to register
(cost here = effort plus time plus bandwidth )
If that objection is valid, then there is no such thing as freeware,
unless you could tell me of some software you obtained where you didnt
have to download it, install it do x, y and z to use it. Thus the
definition would be useless.

[rant]This is so pedantic - its freeware unless you want to donate some
money. Whinging about having to make a 6 monthly visit to register as
opposed to simply saying "thanks for the software and empowering me by
giving the choice to me whether to fork out money or not" is the most
disheartening thing I've come across in a long long time.
Maybe Im too old and can remember a time when if you could get
something for free you were actually "GRATEFUL". When people, when
they were given something, said "thank you" as opposed to "why didn't
you give me more?" or "geez, that colour shirt you gave me is crap".
[/rant]

Gary R. Schmidt

unread,
May 17, 2006, 5:58:27 AM5/17/06
to
Susan Bugher wrote:

> It's disheartening to see so many posts saying Freeware is any software
> that's free because. . .
>
> For weeks now I've been working on filling in the missing ware
> descriptions on the ACF pages (only a few hundred more to go). If anyone
> *likes* those detailed ware descriptions please speak up. I need some
> encouragement. . .
>

Encouragement!

Liberal shovelfuls of it!!!!!

Cheers,
Gary B-)

--
______________________________________________________________________________
Armful of chairs: Something some people would not know
whether you were up them with or not
- Barry Humphries

mouser

unread,
May 17, 2006, 6:23:46 AM5/17/06
to
we may be getting rid of the need to return to the site in 6 months..

but let me offer my opinion on nagware and expiration stuff.

if a program pops up nags constantly, let's say once a day or once a
week or more, until you BUY the full version, then to me i wouldn't
call that freeware. the nags are too obnoxious and would interfere
with normal use. to me thats not freeware since the pain of using it
freely is too high.

if a program expires and stops working until you BUY the full version,
that's certainly not freeware.

in our case, the programs will never stop working.

a nag does come up asking you to sign up at our forum for a free
license key. after that the nag will dissapear for 6 months, at which
point it will come up again asking you to visit our site again and get
a renewed key. 6 months after that you can download a never-expiring
(never-again-nagging) license that works on all of our software.

the idea is simply to try to remind people who really use our software
that we are working our hearts out and try to get them to visit our
site and see what we've done in the last 6 months and get them to give
a few seconds of thought to the idea of donating. if they email us and
say they know they are never going to donate then we just send them the
non-expiring key right away.

i do still *personally* consider our approach freeware (and
donationware) because of the minimal nature of the requirements to use
the program. [i also consider "registerware" to be freeware, and would
say that we are registerware also].

having said all that, we are considering removing the need for the 6
month return to the site, in place of a page that asks the person to
read a statement about the site and indicate then and there that they
do not ever want to be bothered by us again. but note this will still
involve and initial nag and need to sign up to get a (non-expiring)
license key. if we didn't do that then people would be downloading our
software from 3rd party sites and never even visit our site a single
time to find out what we are about.

let me also add that we have never, and will never, share any signup
info (email is all we ask for at signup) with anyone.

I have said in the past, i do understand that freeware advocates are
very protective of the term, and don't want it to get diluted by
software that isn't really free. it is our intention to keep to what i
feel are the core principles: software that you do not have to pay for,
do not have to do non-trivial steps to obtain, and and which does not
pester you in non-trivial ways.

I realize that requiring the person to sign up at our forum and
download a license key is annoying to users and that most would rather
not do so. please take a look at the article we wrote about this
(http://articles.donationcoder.com/One/index.html) for a long
discussion about why we decided we had to do it.

People can and do occasionally donate 1 cent to us; anything under a
donation of 25 cents is taken completely by paypal so we receive
nothing. nonetheless such donations are accepted as granting full
lifetime membership on our site, with a full non-expiring license key
for all of our programs. The point i'm just trying to emphasize is the
same one at the heart of the article - which is that our aim is simply
to get people to pause and consider whether they want to support our
work, and get them to consider what we are asking for and why. Not to
punish people for not donating. We're also happy to give anyone a full
refund for any donation they ever make.

I wish I had a source of income that would allow me to program and not
have to ask for donations. I am not a big fan of capitalism, and i
find the distribution of income in this world depressing as hell. It
seems like everything is designed to separate the world into super rich
people and those who must struggle every day to get by. My interest is
to find a way to keep our software free for everyone with the smallest
amount of inconvenience that can still get people to spend a few
seconds of their life considering whether we are a worthy cause to
donate to. I wish most things were donation-based (music, software,
etc.) and that people were willing to donate what they could afford and
thought something was worth. It would offer a way for people who make
stuff to get enough money to live on (maybe) and still make the stuff
available to everyone without regard for income.

Whether you like our software and approach or not, or ESPECIALLY if
not, ask yourself how often you use a freeware program and have not
sent an email to the author saying thank you, or donated to the author
when they have a donation button. Lots of authors have freeware and
have a button where you can make a donation to them. Do you? Have you
ever seen freeware get abandoned or never finished, or always lacking a
finished help file? or no support forum? Most freeware authors want
nothing more than to keep programming for the love of it, but then they
get to some point where they have to buy food and pay rent, and unless
they are independently wealthy, they have to make hard decisions about
where to spend their time. I encourage you to donate to authors before
they get to that point. If you have some freeware software you really
like, i encourage you strongly to go visit the authors site and see if
he/she accepts donations, and if so, send them a little. show them
that their work is appreciated and make it possible for them to afford
to keep working on it.

Message has been deleted

Ron May

unread,
May 17, 2006, 7:50:12 AM5/17/06
to
On 15 May 2006 14:32:39 -0700, "Eugene Esterly III"
<gene_...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Some freeware does require to get a license key to use the program. For
>example, I use the freeware version of Avast & the program runs in
>trial mode until you get a free license key. The free license key for
>Avast expires once a year & when it expires, you have to get a new key.
>
>Getting a free license key for a freeware prog doesn't bother me
>because if it seems like a good program, I'll go thru the hoops of
>getting a license key to use the program.

A bit slow on the reply here, but I think you hit the nail squarely on
the head. I, too, use Avast, and don't mind annually renewing the key
because (1) it's a program constantly in use, and (2) the renewal
process doesn't seem to me to be excessively annoying or cumbersome.

"Freeware" registration is one of those gray areas. My personal
tolerance level is determined by a series of factors. Some things I
usually consider are:

* How often will I use the program?
* Are other non-registration freeware equivalents available?
* How intrusive or complicated is the registration process?

Obviously, these are all subjective questions and not everybody will
agree with what's acceptable or not acceptable. In the case at hand,
(DonationCoder) the registration process seems overly irritating and
"preachy," and the offerings, while they appear to be interesting and
useful, just don't seem to be worth the hassle, at least to me. YMMV,
but I see it as a triple-header combination of donationware, nagware
and registerware. I'll pass.

--
Ron M.

Ron May

unread,
May 17, 2006, 8:15:18 AM5/17/06
to
On Tue, 16 May 2006 21:40:28 -0400, Susan Bugher <sebu...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>It's disheartening to see so many posts saying Freeware is any software
>that's free because. . .
>
>For weeks now I've been working on filling in the missing ware
>descriptions on the ACF pages (only a few hundred more to go). If anyone
>*likes* those detailed ware descriptions please speak up. I need some
>encouragement. . .
>
>Susan

Susan, you're absolutely irreplaceable! ALL of your efforts are
GREATLY appreciated.

NOW GET BACK TO WORK!!!

(Just kidding, of course. TONS of thanks for all you do.)

--
Ron M.

app103

unread,
May 17, 2006, 8:32:26 AM5/17/06
to
I have 2 perspectives on donationcoder.com...as both a software user
and as a freeware developer:

I found the website when searching for a utility program. I am one of
those that uses sites like downloads.com and tucows as research and not
for downloading. I always visit the developer's site if possible and
download from there instead. I have my reasons for this, mostly for the
sake of getting the full story on software before I download it.

The site didn't have quite what I needed, but I was intrigued by it and
took a look around, visited the forum, etc. I was quite impressed.

It's a community of developers and users...the perfect combination.
Users can ask for what they want, and if anybody knows freeware that
will do the job, they will be supplied with a link to where you can get
it. If nobody knows of any freeware that will do it, some of the
developers may volunteer to write just what you need. As a user, you
win almost every time.

As a developer of freeware, I win too. I get to see what people want &
need and can add those as features in my software. I can get a lot of
good ideas from the forums. I can also use the forums as an opportunity
to further my programming education. The developers there are from many
backgrounds, countries, and programming languages. All willing to help
each other and the donationcoder.com community. And the software
requests challenge my abilities to solve problems.

There is no issues with big egos and the people there are easy to talk
to and very polite.

When was the last time you were able to just ask a developer for what
you wanted and then they make it for you...without expecting you to
have to pay them if you didn't want to?

And people are generous when they understand that you are trying to
make a living from what you love to do. I never made a dime from
programming till I found that website. And I think I appreciate the
small amount I made from there more because it was not forced upon
anybody to pay for my work, it was because they wanted to. That says a
bit more to me than money made from shareware. Nobody ever clicks the
donation button on my website...and nobody ever clicks the few ads I
have there. The software is all free and I would feel guilty for
charging anybody for it as I don't feel it's worthy of asking for money
for it. But you flatter me when you toss me a dollar or two. I view it
as a compliment...and it encourages me to keep coding and making better
software.

Now if I decided to start coding full-time, I would hope that I could
still pay my bills and put food on my table. If I was giving my
software away for free it wouldn't be likely that would happen unless
someone donated to me. If they didn't, I would be forced to abandon my
projects and go work for someone else on their payware, or make my
projects shareware.

Donationcoder is all about reminding the user not to forget the little
guys that write the software...and reminding the freeware developer who
they write for. There is plenty of donationware out there that is
labeled and assumed as freeware. Most users don't take the time to
notice that software like Spybot Search & Destroy is donationware and
not freeware. Did you donate to further development of Spybot? or did
you assume it was freeware because nothing brought it to your attention
that it wasn't...like a simple nag screen.

What if great projects like Spybot Search & Destroy just disappeared
and you were forced to buy all your stuff? or worse...buy it all from
big companies like Microsoft that don't really care about the end user
and just care about the $?

I think mouser's cause is a noble one and vital to the survival of
quality freeware. So next time you think you are getting something for
nothing, just remember that nothing is really free...someone somewhere
paid for it...even if it was the developer himself that did, with his
many hours of hard work, frustration, etc. If you aren't going to toss
them a little cash, at least say thank you and tell them how much you
enjoy their work. A compliment is a small price to pay but has a big
impact.

Don't forget the little guys...that's all mouser and donationcoder.com
is trying to say...and he says it well.

Daniel Mandic

unread,
May 17, 2006, 8:49:14 AM5/17/06
to
app103 wrote:

> I think mouser's cause is a noble one and vital to the survival of
> quality freeware. So next time you think you are getting something for
> nothing, just remember that nothing is really free...someone somewhere
> paid for it...even if it was the developer himself that did, with his
> many hours of hard work, frustration, etc. If you aren't going to toss
> them a little cash, at least say thank you and tell them how much you
> enjoy their work. A compliment is a small price to pay but has a big
> impact.
>

I think it's a delicate expedition to praise someones work without
having paid for, not leaving untold that you have not paid for.

Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic

Vegard Krog Petersen

unread,
May 17, 2006, 8:58:33 AM5/17/06
to
on 17.05.2006 10:01 tsa...@gmail.com wrote:
> VKP:
> "
>>> Freeware: Legally obtainable software that you may use at no cost, monetary or otherwise, for as long as you wish.
>> http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.php
> Legally obtainable : Yes
> May use at no cost: yes
> As long as you wish: yes
> Sure seems to fit the definition to me.

You forgot the "otherwise" = nags

regards from

BTW: I have nothing against Donationcoders. Think they do a good job.
But I'm becoming a bit "corlissy" about the definition of freeware...

Juzme

unread,
May 17, 2006, 9:34:09 AM5/17/06
to
On Tue, 16 May 2006 21:40:28 -0400, Susan Bugher wrote:


> If anyone ... *likes* those detailed ware descriptions please speak up. I need some
> encouragement. . .

like and encourage. btw, you're amazing.

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:04:09 AM5/17/06
to
mouser wrote:

> i do still *personally* consider our approach freeware (and
> donationware) because of the minimal nature of the requirements to use
> the program. [i also consider "registerware" to be freeware, and would
> say that we are registerware also].

> I have said in the past, i do understand that freeware advocates are


> very protective of the term, and don't want it to get diluted by
> software that isn't really free. it is our intention to keep to what i
> feel are the core principles: software that you do not have to pay for,
> do not have to do non-trivial steps to obtain, and and which does not
> pester you in non-trivial ways.

The definition of Freeware is often discussed in terms of good or bad
(if it's good it's Freeware, if it's bad it's not). IMO the main concern
should be clarity - "free enough for me" is different for everyone. . .

If freeware is used as an umbrella term additional language is needed to
give a full software description (IS Donationware or is NOT
Donationware, IS Registerware or is NOT Registerware, IS Spyware or is
NOT Spyware, is Trialware or is NOT Trialware etc. etc. etc.).

ACF participants prefer the KISS (keep it simple stupid) approach.

"Freeware: Legally obtainable software that you may use at no cost,
monetary or otherwise, for as long as you wish."

If it's Freeware one word tells the *whole* story. By definition
Freeware is NOT Spyware, NOT Adware, NOT Trialware, NOT Donationware,
NOT Registerware etc. etc. etc. etc.

You say your software is Freeware on your web pages. Saying "Freeware"
caused a misunderstanding and that misunderstanding led to the first
post in this thread. IMO if your goal to avoid misunderstandings saying
"Donationware" and "Registerware" or simply "free" would be better.

mouser

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:03:12 AM5/17/06
to
this is an honest real question:
if an author makes a freeware program (by your definition).
and one day in one forum post mentions he will accept donations,
has his software suddenly now become not freeware any longer?

is the very act of accepting a donation (or putting a Donate button on
one's site), enough to disqualify a program from being called freeware?

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:14:49 AM5/17/06
to
Dan Goodman wrote:
> Susan Bugher wrote:

>>For weeks now I've been working on filling in the missing ware
>>descriptions on the ACF pages (only a few hundred more to go). If
>>anyone likes those detailed ware descriptions please speak up. I need
>>some encouragement. . .

> I like them!

Thanks Dan, I needed that. :)

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:15:51 AM5/17/06
to
Ron May wrote:

> Susan, you're absolutely irreplaceable! ALL of your efforts are
> GREATLY appreciated.
>
> NOW GET BACK TO WORK!!!

Yes, massa. ;)

> (Just kidding, of course. TONS of thanks for all you do.)

Susan

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:31:34 AM5/17/06
to
mouser wrote:

According to the ACF Ware Glossary if the author requests donations it's
Donationware (not Freeware).

"Donationware: monetary contribution requested (optional)."

Comment. . . Why the loaded language (disqualify)? Don't most authors
*want* people to know they accept donations? "Donationware" tells them
that they do. "Freeware" (used as an umbrella description) does not.

One goal of ACF's ware definitions is to furnish as much ware
information as possible in the least amount of space. If you want to see
the ACF definitions in action check the ACF web pages:

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/P_BUSINESS-HOME.php
etc.

The ware glossary is here:
http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.php

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:42:31 AM5/17/06
to

I wrestled with that for a while because you can *remove* the nags for
free. . .

Currently the ACF pages show this ware description for Mouser's apps:
"(Donationware) (Registerware: keyed/renewable (key removes nags)) (free)"

mouser

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:45:44 AM5/17/06
to
the glossary is great, and i love the way you have
http://www.pricelesswarehome.org Ware column - very clear and
informative.
i will link to the glossary from our pages.

i wish more people were familiar with the variety of terms; i think a
real problem we have is that most laypeople understand only that
freeware = they dont have to pay, and shareware = they have to buy it.
anything else is a mystery to them, which makes it a bit hard to use
other terms without engaging in an attempt to educate people which
isn't something most people want when they visit a site.

my question was only meant to highlight what i think is the troublesome
aspect of the term donationware. for example, if i take a freeware
program and ask people on my webpage to consider petting their cat
while they download, have i now transformed my software from being
freeware to being petware? my point is only that the operative
significant qualities of the software and what it takes to get it and
use it haven't changed, and that's why i would personallly still call
that freeware.

in other words my definitions are more inline with the wiki page posted
than your glossary, only to the extent that i would consider freeware a
parent classification, and put something like donationware as a
subcategory. that is, something that is donationware would also still
be considered freeware if it meets the freeware requirements. that's
my view - i don't see them as exclusive categories and i don't think
something stops being freeware the moment an author mentions being
willing to accept donations.

other ideas i wouldn't mind having terms for: what about a program that
you *must* pay for, but you can decide on the price. what about a site
that let you pay one amount and get all software the company makes
forever (i've seen this one a few times)? what would we call such
software?

cactus

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:47:55 AM5/17/06
to
Susan Bugher wrote:
> It's disheartening to see so many posts saying Freeware is any software
> that's free because. . .
>
> For weeks now I've been working on filling in the missing ware
> descriptions on the ACF pages (only a few hundred more to go). If anyone
> *likes* those detailed ware descriptions please speak up. I need some
> encouragement. . .
>
> Susan

We appreciate, like and rely on them.

As my (college age) daughter would say, "You go, girl!"

mouser

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:49:14 AM5/17/06
to
another point:
software listing sites only let authors choose from Shareware or
Freeware.
I'm all for petitioning for more choices - if anyone wants to get
something like this started please let me know and dc would be happy to
try to round up some email campaign, etc.

Bob Phillips

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:54:46 AM5/17/06
to
We all like thejm and everything you are doing Susan!

"Susan Bugher" <sebu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4cvcrsF...@individual.net...

mouser

unread,
May 17, 2006, 11:56:59 AM5/17/06
to
susan i think the the ACF approach to listing the various "tags" such
as Donaionware, Registerware,(free),etc is great and very useful.
now if we could only get software listing sites to adopt your system as
well, i think everyone would benefit.

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 17, 2006, 12:13:30 PM5/17/06
to
mouser wrote:

> i will link to the glossary from our pages.

Super. :)

> <snip> if i take a freeware


> program and ask people on my webpage to consider petting their cat
> while they download, have i now transformed my software from being
> freeware to being petware?

<VBG> It becomes "Requestware"

"Requestware: you are asked to do something. Examples: send a postcard
or email to the software author, perform a good deed, make a
contribution to charity"

> other ideas i wouldn't mind having terms for: what about a program that
> you *must* pay for, but you can decide on the price. what about a site
> that let you pay one amount and get all software the company makes
> forever (i've seen this one a few times)? what would we call such
> software?

I'd call it NOT free (off topic in ACF). :)

Tramp

unread,
May 17, 2006, 12:14:12 PM5/17/06
to
In article <1147880744.6...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
mou...@donationcoder.com says...

|other ideas i wouldn't mind having terms for: what about a program that
|you *must* pay for, but you can decide on the price. what about a site
|that let you pay one amount and get all software the company makes
|forever (i've seen this one a few times)? what would we call such
|software?

Dude, don't sweat it. You call your programs whatever you want. You
release them under whatever license you want. Don't worry about what
some of the people here have to say. Some of them have very Puritan
ideas as to what constitutes freeware. alt.comp.freeware is just a very
small corner of the web.

Freeware is a umbrella term that covers many ware types.

Here is just a small sample of websites that define freeware as a
program that doesn't cost money.
<http://www.sharpened.net/glossary/definition.php?freeware>
<http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,289893,sid9
_gci212159,00.html>
http://www.wordreference.com/definition/freeware
http://www.greatnexus.com/glossary/w174.html
http://dict.die.net/freeware/
http://personalweb.about.com/cs/glossary/g/freeware.htm
http://www.atis.org/tg2k/_freeware.html
http://www.bellevuelinux.org/freeware.html
<http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?
book=Dictionary&va=freeware>
http://onlinedictionary.datasegment.com/word/freeware
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/freeware
http://www.learnthat.com/define/view.asp?id=602
http://www.pcwebopaedia.com/TERM/F/freeware.htm
<http://www.computeruser.com/resources/dictionary/definition.html?
lookup=2017>
http://www.computeruser.com/resources/dictionary/definition.html?lookup=
2017>

So don't worry about how others try to your programs. You know what they
are and others know what they are as well.

have a nice day! :-)

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 17, 2006, 12:30:26 PM5/17/06
to
mouser wrote:

> software listing sites only let authors choose from Shareware or
> Freeware.

Some sites do a bit better than that. . . for instance:

http://www.download.com/RoboForm/3000-2092_4-10037672.html

<Q>
License Free to try; $29.95 to buy Buy now...
Limitations Some features disabled after 30 days
</Q>

One work-around for the limited choice problem is to add "ware" notes in
the description field. I've seen that done - can't give you an example
off the top of my head.

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 17, 2006, 12:45:15 PM5/17/06
to
mouser wrote:

I agree there are major inadequacies in the system most sites use. There
are a *lot* of apps that are free for personal use, $ware for business
use. Freeware OR Shareware just doesn't cut it. . .

Klaatu

unread,
May 17, 2006, 3:43:47 PM5/17/06
to
On Wed, 17 May 2006 15:45:44 GMT, mouser posted to alt.comp.freeware:

> in other words my definitions are more inline with the wiki page posted
> than your glossary, only to the extent that i would consider freeware a
> parent classification, and put something like donationware as a
> subcategory. that is, something that is donationware would also still
> be considered freeware if it meets the freeware requirements. that's
> my view - i don't see them as exclusive categories and i don't think
> something stops being freeware the moment an author mentions being
> willing to accept donations.

The wiki page defines freeware as "copyrighted computer software which is
made available free of charge". Period. Though other things are discussed
on the page, that's essentially their entire definition. With only that
as a parent classification, sub-classifications would include adware,
spyware, and, although not specifically stated on the page, it could be
inferred to include warez. If I make a copy of some commercial software,
say PhotoShop for instance, and install it on my dad's computer, to him
it's freeware, as it fits the definition: a) it's copyrighted (this
didn't change with a copy being made), and b) it was made available free
of charge.

I doubt a majority here would agree with any of these as being on topic,
so wiki's definition would appear to be too broad for on topic
discussions in ACF.

--
Old MacDonald's laptop had an EIA/IO

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 17, 2006, 4:20:22 PM5/17/06
to
Klaatu wrote:

> The wiki page defines freeware as "copyrighted computer software which is
> made available free of charge". Period. Though other things are discussed
> on the page, that's essentially their entire definition. With only that
> as a parent classification, sub-classifications would include adware,
> spyware, and, although not specifically stated on the page, it could be
> inferred to include warez. If I make a copy of some commercial software,
> say PhotoShop for instance, and install it on my dad's computer, to him
> it's freeware, as it fits the definition: a) it's copyrighted (this
> didn't change with a copy being made), and b) it was made available free
> of charge.
>
> I doubt a majority here would agree with any of these as being on topic,
> so wiki's definition would appear to be too broad for on topic
> discussions in ACF.

The definition is both too broad and too narrow. Why "copyrighted"? Some
Freeware is in the public domain. A few examples:

Program: SQLite
Author: D. Richard Hipp
Install: CLI
Ware: (Freeware) (open source: public domain)
http://www.sqlite.org/

Program: Earth Screen Saver
Author: (John Walker)
Ware: (Freeware) (public domain)
http://www.fourmilab.ch/

Program: Christmas clock
Author: (Edward Pizzi)
Install: (n.i.)
Ware: (Freeware) (open source: public domain) LFW (v 2)
http://www.simtel.net/product.php?id=6219

Roger Johansson

unread,
May 17, 2006, 4:29:07 PM5/17/06
to
Petersen, Vegard Krog wrote:

> > the term "freeware" only means you dont have to pay money....
> > see this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware

> That's just the definition of the user(s) who wrote this particulary
> entry and not any kind of official definition of the term "freeware"...

Note that there is no kind of freeware which simply is freeware in the
wikipedia definition.

Let's take an example, Partition Saving is a freeware program most of
us know about. Or the Opera browser.

What type of freeware is it? Is it nagware, loss leader, adware,
donationware, etc..

Look at the types section in the wikipedia article and choose..

It doesn't fit into any of the types.

There is no neutral and good freeware, according to wikipedia.

I have tried to change the article to something more neutral, see the
discussion page, but the open source advocates have stopped every
attempt from me and others to write a better article, because they do
not want freeware to be seen as something positive at all. All freeware
is evil and nasty in their minds, unless it is open source, but then it
is not called freeware.

We who use and like freeware ought to try to make the article better,
but I fear we have no chance against the open source fanatics who have
mangled this article into something totally misleading.


--
Roger J.

HVS

unread,
May 17, 2006, 4:30:36 PM5/17/06
to
On 17 May 2006, Roger Johansson wrote

-snip-



> We who use and like freeware ought to try to make the article
> better, but I fear we have no chance against the open source
> fanatics who have mangled this article into something totally
> misleading.

Which is a rather elegant illustration of why some of us feel that
Wikipedia is a flawed model for a reference work.

--
Cheers,
Harvey

Roger Johansson

unread,
May 17, 2006, 5:33:50 PM5/17/06
to

HVS wrote:

> Which is a rather elegant illustration of why some of us feel that
> Wikipedia is a flawed model for a reference work.

Many pages are totally dominated by strong interest groups which would
use any methods to keep those pages as they want them.

I once tried to add some to a page about "Oral tradition", or something
like that, and suddenly found myself up against a bunch of very angry
jewish traditionalist.
Obviously the expression "oral tradition" is very central in their
belief, and they accept no wider general definition of the expression
which in any way goes against their views.

The remedy for such problems would be better educated and neutral
editors who had overall control over sections of a wiki, but in
wikipedia this does not work, so many pages are under control of
individuals or groups with very firm beliefs.


--
Roger J.

HVS

unread,
May 17, 2006, 5:34:12 PM5/17/06
to
On 17 May 2006, Roger Johansson wrote

>

Which is precisely why the existing editing model is flawed.

--
Cheers,
Harvey

»Q«

unread,
May 17, 2006, 5:56:47 PM5/17/06
to
Tramp <Jg3...@Jg3q2cB.com> wrote in
<news:MPG.1ed515de2...@news.snet.sbcglobal.net>:

> In article
> <1147880744.6...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> mou...@donationcoder.com says...
>
> | other ideas i wouldn't mind having terms for: what about a
> | program that you *must* pay for, but you can decide on the price.
> | what about a site that let you pay one amount and get all
> | software the company makes forever (i've seen this one a few
> | times)? what would we call such software?
>
> Dude, don't sweat it. You call your programs whatever you want.
> You release them under whatever license you want. Don't worry
> about what some of the people here have to say. Some of them have
> very Puritan ideas as to what constitutes freeware.

Dude, I don't think he would have developed as successful a
distribution model if he had dismissed people who disagree with him as
"Puritan". I don't think the model is a freeware one, but I do think
it's good that it's a model which relies on dialog.

--
»Q«

Klaatu

unread,
May 17, 2006, 6:06:37 PM5/17/06
to
On Wed, 17 May 2006 16:14:12 GMT, Tramp posted to alt.comp.freeware:

> So don't worry about how others try to your programs. You know what they
> are and others know what they are as well.

Yep, listen to Tramp if you want to take advise from a spamity spamming
nymb-shifting spammer what spams at midnight.

--
Long live longevity!

tsa...@gmail.com

unread,
May 17, 2006, 6:29:38 PM5/17/06
to
VKP:You forgot the "otherwise" = nags
I'm sorry, but I can't see the word "nags" mentioned at all in YOUR
quoted definition.
I see "cost", but as I tried to point out, that meaning is so nebulous
as to be unusable (eg financial, time, emotional, karmic, energy,
psychological etc etc cost)
In one way or another EVERY piece of software I own comes at a cost to
get and to use. Some "nags" cost me far less than "features" in other
"no-nag" type software.

Ron May

unread,
May 17, 2006, 8:38:22 PM5/17/06
to
On Wed, 17 May 2006 11:42:31 -0400, Susan Bugher <sebu...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Currently the ACF pages show this ware description for Mouser's apps:
>"(Donationware) (Registerware: keyed/renewable (key removes nags)) (free)"

Susan, do you ever have days when you feel like you're a pretzel?
<grin>

--
Ron M.

Helen

unread,
May 17, 2006, 8:45:25 PM5/17/06
to
mouser wrote:
> no matter what *we* would call it on our site -
> people find out about and download our software mainly from software
> listing sites - fileforum, tucows, softpedia, snapfiles, etc.
> and there is always only: Shareware (with a cost field), and Freeware.

>
> from my experience, nagware refers to software you have to BUY to
> remove a nag; that is not appropriate for our software.
>
> registerware would probably be more appropriate, but how many
> lay-people really know what that means?

O.K. This last sentence solved it for me: omit this site! WTH do you
mean by the arrogrant "lay people"?

My ISP isn't free; my internet connection isn't free; my electric bill isn't free;
to call a program "FREEWARE" as a mere lure into a site that is not freeware
says enough for me.

Helen

unread,
May 17, 2006, 8:51:01 PM5/17/06
to
Susan Bugher wrote:
> mouser wrote:
>
>> susan i think the the ACF approach to listing the various "tags" such
>> as Donaionware, Registerware,(free),etc is great and very useful.
>> now if we could only get software listing sites to adopt your system
>> as well, i think everyone would benefit.
>
> I agree there are major inadequacies in the system most sites use.
> There are a *lot* of apps that are free for personal use, $ware for
> business use. Freeware OR Shareware just doesn't cut it. . .
>
> Susan

No definition will cut it as long as the definition continues to change
to include more and more and more and more and more programs
and/or peoples' personal definitions. The continual moving of the
goal posts or adding more aces to the deck changes the entire
rules of the game such that you don't even have the same game
anymore, hence the requirement to change the name of the game.
It's the current state of affairs that whatever is the hot item of the
moment there will be freeloaders jumping on the bandwagon and
using (actually abusing) the term as bait - there are at least a
million and one disguises with the sole goal of separating YOU
from your money and they will use (abuse what was gained respect)
ANY TERM to do it.


Helen

unread,
May 17, 2006, 8:57:24 PM5/17/06
to
Klaatu wrote:
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 15:45:44 GMT, mouser posted to alt.comp.freeware:
>
>> in other words my definitions are more inline with the wiki page
>> posted than your glossary, only to the extent that i would consider
>> freeware a parent classification, and put something like
>> donationware as a subcategory. that is, something that is
>> donationware would also still be considered freeware if it meets the
>> freeware requirements. that's my view - i don't see them as
>> exclusive categories and i don't think something stops being
>> freeware the moment an author mentions being willing to accept
>> donations.
>
> The wiki page defines ...

Wiki can be change very easily. It is not a very reliable source for
anything but a starting point. Why not use one of the age old dictionaries
that have an element of respectablity? Wiki recently went through a
big rigamarow about inaccurate information about a person. Apparently
there was some concern about damage to the reputation as a result of
of the inaccurate information that was 'spread around the world' so to
speak. They are mere mortals and make errors too, but not a site
(at the present anyway) worth much of anything except as a starting
place for a subject one is truly and wholly ignorant of.

Helen

unread,
May 17, 2006, 9:03:07 PM5/17/06
to
Susan Bugher wrote:
> Dan Goodman wrote:

>> Susan Bugher wrote:
>
>>> For weeks now I've been working on filling in the missing ware
>>> descriptions on the ACF pages (only a few hundred more to go). If
>>> anyone likes those detailed ware descriptions please speak up. I

>>> need some encouragement. . .
>
>> I like them!
>
> Thanks Dan, I needed that. :)
>
> Susan

I like them too, Susan. And FWIW, I appreciate your time, energy and
talent in addition to the informative posts on this ng. When I view headers
I skip most, but read yours because: 1) time is precious, 2) the world and
this ng is too often full of nothing but junk, and last but not least, 3) your
post are worth reading (e.g, they contain information that is helpful whether
one disagrees or not, and it is usually on-topic information rather than the
blather that occurs from time to time among or between a couple or so...
just an ingredient of a ng, I suppose. Anyway, keep up the good work
and know that you are appreciated. Enclosed is a HUGE HUG and a
never-ending THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

Helen


Message has been deleted

mouser

unread,
May 18, 2006, 1:17:47 AM5/18/06
to
i certainly meant no disrespect by using the term "lay people", i just
meant people who aren't experts in the field of software terminology.
people who aren't familiar with all of the different terms in susan's
glossary, and who don't follow the debates about the definitition of
freeware.

mouser

unread,
May 18, 2006, 1:32:57 AM5/18/06
to
i agree there will always be people in marketing that try to take a hot
term and distort it and abuse it and use it as bait and hype. and i
also support the idea of trying to nail down the meaning of the
different terms. language also has a habit of evolving and changing as
people use it - and we don't always get to tell people what a word
means - sometimes word meanings shift over time and a fight ensues
between those who want to preserve the meaning and those who advocate
accepting the changes.. it can be a fascinating process sometimes.

i think it's important to recognize, as this thread as demonstrated -
there is no single universally accepted definition of freeware. most of
us would agree with the core principles of it refering to software that
can be used fully without paying anything, but after that it gets a
little more murky. i've stated my personal belief that
donationware/registerware (assuming users emails are not being
misused!) still should qualify as being freeware. to me they still
embody the spirit and intent of freeware. i would personally not call
adware or programs that have nag screens that can only be removed with
a payment freeware, though some might disagree.

John Fitzsimons

unread,
May 18, 2006, 5:06:46 AM5/18/06
to
On 17 May 2006 03:23:46 -0700, "mouser" <mou...@donationcoder.com>
wrote:

< snip >

>in our case, the programs will never stop working.

That isn't true. If people don't re-register in six months the
programs stop working.

< snip >

>the idea is simply to try to remind people who really use our software
>that we are working our hearts out and try to get them to visit our
>site and see what we've done in the last 6 months and get them to give
>a few seconds of thought to the idea of donating. if they email us and
>say they know they are never going to donate then we just send them the
>non-expiring key right away.

There are other ways to achieve your goals. Occasional nag screens, a
mailing list reminder, new version releases of programs etc.

< snip >

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.vicnet.net.au/~johnf/welcome.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/

John Fitzsimons

unread,
May 18, 2006, 5:06:46 AM5/18/06
to
On 17 May 2006 01:01:20 -0700, tsa...@gmail.com wrote:

< snip >

>Whinging about having to make a 6 monthly visit to register as
>opposed to simply saying "thanks for the software and empowering me by
>giving the choice to me whether to fork out money or not" is the most
>disheartening thing I've come across in a long long time.

< snip >

Then you dishearten easily. Something that only works for six months
if not re-registered isn't freeware. You can call it registerware,
demoware or whatever. But it isn't freeware. Annoyanceware may be
closer to the mark.

There is no guarantee that the site in question will even be in
existence in six months. Why install programs that may cease to
work ? Pretty silly idea IMO.

Added to that there is nothing stopping that site changing it's mind
and saying immediately "Registration now cost $xxx. We have had
freeware authors do that sort of thing in the past.

You can do whatever you like. Some of us however don't want a re-run
of these types of situations.

f0dder

unread,
May 18, 2006, 7:46:17 AM5/18/06
to
John Fitzsimons wrote:

>> in our case, the programs will never stop working.
>
> That isn't true. If people don't re-register in six months the
> programs stop working.

It won't stop working - it will just display the at-startup nag again.

>> the idea is simply to try to remind people who really use our
>> software that we are working our hearts out and try to get them to
>> visit our site and see what we've done in the last 6 months and get
>> them to give a few seconds of thought to the idea of donating. if
>> they email us and say they know they are never going to donate then
>> we just send them the non-expiring key right away.
>
> There are other ways to achieve your goals. Occasional nag screens, a
> mailing list reminder, new version releases of programs etc.

"Occasional nag screens"... that's what [some of] the DC programs do. One
nag at program startup. The "license" keys are just to make this nag go
away, not to make the programs functional.


f0dder

unread,
May 18, 2006, 7:54:17 AM5/18/06
to
John Fitzsimons wrote:

> Then you dishearten easily. Something that only works for six months
> if not re-registered isn't freeware. You can call it registerware,
> demoware or whatever. But it isn't freeware. Annoyanceware may be
> closer to the mark.
>
> There is no guarantee that the site in question will even be in
> existence in six months. Why install programs that may cease to
> work ? Pretty silly idea IMO.
>
> Added to that there is nothing stopping that site changing it's mind
> and saying immediately "Registration now cost $xxx. We have had
> freeware authors do that sort of thing in the past.
>
> You can do whatever you like. Some of us however don't want a re-run
> of these types of situations.

You're a bit wrong on how the things currently work. Here's a few quotes
from Mouser:

http://www.donationcoder.com/Forums/bb/index.php?topic=631.0
"first of all, the programs will not ever stop working - so you'll never be
in a situation where a program you use suddenly stops working."

"but i am happy to state clearly that should the site ever dissapear, all
member keyfiles may be shared freely. ie if site dies, anyone may put their
legal licenses up on the web for everyone to use. the keyfiles are not
going to be tied to machine hardware or anything, so that is not going to be
an issue."


http://www.donationcoder.com/Forums/bb/index.php?topic=875.0
"I have also said this in a couple of places, including the key file page:
If you know you are not going to donate, send me an email i will make you a
non-expiring license key."

"thanks uwe and rrtwister -
i think needing to get a new key every month would be excessive - as it is,
every 6 months might be already too annoying."


Susan Bugher

unread,
May 18, 2006, 11:59:16 AM5/18/06
to
Susan Bugher wrote:
> mouser wrote:

>> software listing sites only let authors choose from Shareware or
>> Freeware.

> One work-around for the limited choice problem is to add "ware" notes in

> the description field. I've seen that done - can't give you an example
> off the top of my head.

found one:

http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/file_description/0,fid,23030,00.asp

<q>
Note: Although this version is free, the vendor cheerfully discloses
that it's nagware. A nagless professional version of this program
exists; that one lets you customize your lists to fit your preferences.
</q>

:)

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 18, 2006, 1:04:21 PM5/18/06
to
Roger Johansson wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware

> There is no neutral and good freeware, according to wikipedia.

> We who use and like freeware ought to try to make the article better,


> but I fear we have no chance against the open source fanatics who have
> mangled this article into something totally misleading.

It might be worth trying an appeal to some of the linked web sites such as:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html#freeware

Maybe send them something along these lines. . .

-----------

Some "free software"/ open source advocates are actively promoting
erroneous defintions of Freeware. Please help us conteract the spread of
the kind of FUD found on this web page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware

You maintain that: "Free software is a matter of freedom, not price."

Participants in the alt.comp.freeware newsgroup maintain that Freeware
is a matter of the cost you pay (monetary and non-monetary) to use the
software. Our definition of Freeware is: "Freeware: Legally obtainable
software that you may use at no cost, monetary or otherwise, for as long
as you wish."

Freeware may or may not be open source - the terms are not mutually
exclusive. The terms "free software" and Freeware are about two
different things, Both may (or may not) apply to a given software program.

Please use ACF's ware definition of Freeware on your web pages and/or
link to ACF's ware glossary which defines "wares" in terms of monetary
and non-monetary costs.

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.php

------------

Klaatu

unread,
May 18, 2006, 2:05:06 PM5/18/06
to
On Thu, 18 May 2006 00:57:24 GMT, Helen posted to alt.comp.freeware:

> Klaatu wrote:
>>
>> The wiki page defines ...
>
> Wiki can be change very easily. It is not a very reliable source for
> anything but a starting point. Why not use one of the age old
> dictionaries that have an element of respectablity? Wiki recently
> went through a big rigamarow about inaccurate information about a
> person. Apparently there was some concern about damage to the
> reputation as a result of of the inaccurate information that was
> 'spread around the world' so to speak. They are mere mortals and
> make errors too, but not a site (at the present anyway) worth much of
> anything except as a starting place for a subject one is truly and
> wholly ignorant of.

While I agree with you for the most part, it was not I who brought up wiki
to begin with. And if you think it's easy to change what's on that page
describing freeware, just try it. You'll have a bunch of OSS zealots
changing it back so fast you're head will spin.

--
"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the ... public."
--someone who presumably made a lot of money that way

Roger Johansson

unread,
May 18, 2006, 3:29:39 PM5/18/06
to

Susan Bugher wrote:

> Some "free software"/ open source advocates are actively promoting
> erroneous defintions of Freeware. Please help us conteract the spread of
> the kind of FUD found on this web page.

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware

What surprises me most is how they seem so totally unaware of the real
world.

Most people are still using some version of windows, and they often use
freeware like the Opera browser. That is the real world.

I think software is first divided into the main categories freeware and
payware, that is what most people think about software, you either get
it for free or you have to pay for it.

Then there are further subdivisions of these main categories.
Freeware is divided into proprietary and open source, with further
subcategories and distinctions of each of these categories.

The term "shareware" is antiquated and should not be used at all, but
OSS advocates often use it to confuse the issue and to confuse the
terms freeware and shareware with each other.

Today we call shareware and all other commercial software "payware",
which is a better and more generally accepted term. "Commercial
software" is an alternative to "payware", but too long and less
popular. "Shareware" was a way to distribute payware before internet
became generally available and simplified distribution.


--
Roger J.

»Q«

unread,
May 18, 2006, 1:39:15 PM5/18/06
to
"f0dder" <f0dder...@flork.dk.invalid> wrote in
<news:446c6070$0$60780$157c...@dreader1.cybercity.dk>:

> http://www.donationcoder.com/Forums/bb/index.php?topic=875.0
> "I have also said this in a couple of places, including the key
> file page: If you know you are not going to donate, send me an
> email i will make you a non-expiring license key."

Where is the key file page?

--
»Q«

Vegard Krog Petersen

unread,
May 18, 2006, 4:50:58 PM5/18/06
to
on 18.05.2006 21:29 Roger Johansson wrote:

> The term "shareware" is antiquated and should not be used at all, but
> OSS advocates often use it to confuse the issue and to confuse the
> terms freeware and shareware with each other.
>
> Today we call shareware and all other commercial software "payware",
> which is a better and more generally accepted term. "Commercial
> software" is an alternative to "payware", but too long and less
> popular. "Shareware" was a way to distribute payware before internet
> became generally available and simplified distribution.

The term 'shareware' are alive and kicking. I think the 'Association of
Shareware Professionals' would disagree very much that the term
'shareware' is dead... :-)

http://www.asp-shareware.org/

A try to use 'trialware' failed badly. > http://www.trialware.org/

regards from


--
Vegard Krog Petersen - Norway

http://vegard2.no -
Solitaire MahJongg guide, Sarah Michelle Gellar Solitaire,
Freeware Logo & symbol, Halma & Chinese Checkers,
Pachisi & Ludo, Freeware Solitaire, My fishy site (fishing
games), a.c.f.g information, Fredrikshald Havfiskeklubb
18+ sites: Firefoxy, Adult Solitaire, Fishy Pictures,
Sexy Chess, Sexy Librarians, Sexy Football
---------------------------------------------------------

Susan Bugher

unread,
May 18, 2006, 6:02:33 PM5/18/06
to
Vegard Krog Petersen wrote:

> The term 'shareware' are alive and kicking. I think the 'Association of
> Shareware Professionals' would disagree very much that the term
> 'shareware' is dead... :-)
>
> http://www.asp-shareware.org/

Agree. :)

re Freeware and the definition thereof. . .

After a little Googling it appears that most definitions of Freeware are
either lame or *very* lame (Wikipedia). . .

I just made a few changes in the ACF/PL web pages that should result in
a higher placement on the search engines when people search for
"freeware glossary" or "freeware definition".

Additional links to the pricelesswarehome.org web site and the ware
glossary web page would also help - if you haven't linked please
consider doing so.

FWIW. . .

freeware glossary - the number one spot is currently held by:
http://www.sharpened.net/glossary/definition.php?freeware

"Like shareware, freeware is software you can download, pass around, and
distribute without any initial payment. However, the great part about
freeware is that you never have to pay for it. No 30 day limit, no demo
versions, no disabled features -- it's totally free. Things like minor
program updates and small games are commonly distributed as freeware.
Though freeware does not cost anything, it is still copyrighted, so
other people can't market the software as their own."

freeware glossary - the number one spot is currently held by:
<http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&defl=en&q=define:Freeware&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title>

The above is a links page - "Definitions of Freeware on the Web"

the first link's definition:
"Freeware
Software that is available free of charge for personal use."

thunder7

unread,
May 19, 2006, 12:13:07 AM5/19/06
to
Speaking of "Freeware" found this page while surfing.
http://www.gnu.org/

thunder7

unread,
May 19, 2006, 5:10:13 AM5/19/06
to
Almost 12 years ago I had a old 486 PC with 8mb of ram and no Programs.
A friend told me of freeware. I have been hooked ever since.

(Long story shortend.)
I have a very painfull lower back all lot of the pain killers just do
not work on me, I spend 95% of my time awake and surfing.
I exist on a goverment program called Disability Income because I can
not walk very far. And the searing pain makes it tough to do a lot of
things.

Except laying down, sitting if I do not move around a lot.Are about all
i can do without to much pain.

I do not have a lot of money, If I pay rent buy food I am doing well.
When I have a chance which is not offten, I support a few sites
artwanted.com, artuproar.com, and now donationcoder.com.
Im not a rich man by far,...

But these people code these programs for use and that takes them away
from the spouse, children. And many other thing they could be doing.
Too code programs for us they think we will like.
They have bills just like you and I.

I usually can not afford more $ 5.00
But it is worth it becaue I helping them make that program the best it
can be.

Just think how Photoshop would be if they asked you for a donation,
rather than selling you the program.
$10.00 free updates the program is your's.

hmmm,makes one think hmmm,...
How many more would have Photoshop than they have righ now.

Anyway just a though

Eugene Esterly III

unread,
May 19, 2006, 5:37:34 AM5/19/06
to

I agree about Wikipedia. It is a good site but because it is open to
everyone, anyone can change the articles. In fact, Wikipedia had to
lock the article on Jack Thompson (the lawyer who is after violent
videogames) & I'm guessing it's because he complained.

Joerg Toellner

unread,
May 19, 2006, 5:48:41 AM5/19/06
to
Hi thunder7,

i do not know to whom you've talked/written. But it can't surely NOT have
been mouser.

mouser is one of the most kind, polite and helpful person on the internet. I
am sure and know it from my own experience, that he takes EVERY mail and
notice (in IRC as well as in forum or PM) very serious and handle it asap
and with patient until the problem is solved (if it can).

To all:
For the term Freeware. Maybe you can talk about what Freeware is or how it
is defined. But its tedious IMHO. For me as a user of a program it makes no
difference. If a useful and good program cost me nothing more than going 2
times in a whole year for 2 minutes to a website and then have the program
forever and i have to pay nothing else it's freeware in MY personal opinion.

DC never uses your registration data for earning money or sell it to others.
I am a member for about 1 year now and i never received sth. else at the
DC-Newsletter twice a month - which i really like to recieve and that i can
quit if i want.

If you are not glad with the "hoops of DonationCoder" maybe their programs
are not for you or you can live with the nagscreen (what is so horrible to
do one click more? It costs you nothing also! - TskTsk!). Go and look
somewhere else if you find an alternative with less "hoops" and same
quality. If you find one - Lucky guy! But please don't blame s.o. that is so
kind to invest time (and money of his own) to endow you a useful program for
nothing than for 4 minutes of your precious time in one year.

And i advice you: Go to DC-Website and try it out. You'll see, you don't
have to go through hoops for the keys, but you get a lot of tipps,
discounts, good discussions, help and many many more for (again) nothing.

I am not endoresed somehow with the DC-Website. I am only a regular member
of the community. I write this post not because i was said so by somehow and
i get nothing as a reward for writing this. It's my real and true opinion.

Just my 2ct.
JoTo

"thunder7" <thun...@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1147781745.1...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>I too used "Screenshot Captor" recived a nag screen. When I questioned
> the author he was rather rude . I also beta test a lot of programs I
> told him where there where bugs He told me I was in error. I have
> stopped using his programs!.
> I however see http://shellcity.net/ is still hailing him as a "FREEWARE
> guru." Shell City also needs to be told. They have a lot of excellent
> freeware programs there.
> In the true defination of freeware.
>


f0dder

unread,
May 19, 2006, 6:15:45 AM5/19/06
to

Go to http://donationcoder.com , click "software", scroll down and click
"License key download page". You'll end up at http://donationcoder.com/Keys/
.


It is loading more messages.
0 new messages