Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
No good deed goes unpunished
Published on March 15, 2005 By Draginol In Industry

In various software community niches I've been described, over the years, as the software equivalent of Emperor Palpatine from the Star Wars movies. I find outstanding software developers who are happily making freeware programs and lure them to the dark side of the force -- commercial software development. 

And so the belief goes that if only the evil bastards at Stardock weren't plucking these Jedi knights of freeware and corrupting them that there'd be these wonderful freeware programs.  Or put another way, that the programs that we make that have one of these star developers involved would have come out, as if by magic, as freeware if it weren't for our "greed".

The reality, not surprising, is more complicated than that.  The life cycle of a typical freeware developer goes as follows:

  1. They start developing a program because it's something that interests them personally.
  2. They continue developing it because they appreciate the accolades, appreciation, and attention they receive from whatever on-line "community" it is involved in it.
  3. They stop developing it either because they've totally lost interest, have found it extremely "not fun" to keep updating, or because the once supportive "community" has cast them aside for the latest/greatest "freeware" goodie.

As a commercial software developer, I've watched this cycle over and over.  Whenever a "free" program begins development in the market we're in, people will say "Aha! Now finally we'll have a free alternative to program X!"  What they don't know is that we use the same strategy over and over with freeware "competition"-- we wait them out. 

We can always wait out the freeware author because either his program no longer hold his attention in competing with "real life", or it'll become too tedious to keep enhancing it, or (quite commonly) the very people who once went around spamming for them on every forum telling the world that it was the greatest thing have turned around and betrayed them by tossing their support out in favor of some even newer freeware program, even if it's in competition with their freeware program.

I've seen it over and over again.  What often drives talented software developers to come to us in the first place is a feeling of betrayal at the hands of their "supporters". They'll make something for free, put it out there, and for awhile, they'll get support, accolades, and attention.

But much of that early support comes from people who worship freeware as an ideology. They use freeware regardless of whether they could afford commercial software (even when it's better) but because they consider commercial software the bane of the universe that must be fought against. But freeware ideologues are a fickle lot. As soon as the next "hot" thing comes out, off they go.  Some of the very same people who were once spamming forums talking up freeware program X will later go back and spam for freeware program Y and even mention that Y "kicks the crap out of X!"

This is something we've seen since the beginning of our company (ten years ago). But rarely is it made more vivid than a recent episode involving one of our young developers who has spent a sizeable chunk of his young life selflessly making freeware programs to help support a "community".  When we announced ObjectDock 1.11, a FREE program, it was spammed, by people who originated from the same "community" that once claimed undying love and loyalty for this program, in favor of people who want people to try out some other (newer, but far less featured) dock program. 

The reaction of some of our developers to such spamming is "Are you guys high??" because ObjectDock, at this point, isn't just slightly more mature, feature rich, etc. (and did I mention free?).  It's massively more feature rich, uses less memory, faster, more customizable, etc. than anything else available.  That's the benefit of having worked on it for 3 years steadily.  But such is the fickle nature of those with the "freeware ideology" that they'll latch on to the newest thing.  Their loyalty was never to the freeware developer or the freeware program but rather the freeware cause.  Simply put, ObjectDock, while free, got their attention already. Now it was time for them to move to some other thing. 

I've seen it so many times. Developers find it rather cutting when they discover that there's very little loyalty or depth of support for them personally or their programs.  That the "support" freeware developers receive from on-line communities is often (not always) because it is free and new and nothing else.

Because the cycle repeats and is so predictable, commercial developers rarely fear from freeware developers because it's only a matter of time before that freeware program dies out.  The life cycle of the freeware program will play out and the commercial program will be the one that continues to be updated, enhanced, and available while the freeware developer often ends up becoming part of the commercial development team.

In the long-run, it's about incentives. When a software program becomes "mature", enhancing it becomes quite laborious. There has to be some incentive to keep updating it at that point.  Commercial software provides a pretty straight forward incentive -- financial income.  But glory, accolades, and community support can make a big difference as well.  Luckily for us sith lords, community support is nearly always fickle, ultimately turning that Jedi freeware developer into a Sith commercial developer.


Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Mar 16, 2005
Let's face facts:
*There ARE numerous excellent free/opensource programs: Irfan View, Firefox, Thunderbird, Download Master, Rainlendar, Rainmeter, Kapsules, Foobar, XMPlay and many others.
*There're many abandonware free utilities as well (you know many)
*There're numerous excellent commercial products, like AltDesk, Konfabulator, Photoshop and so on.
*There're lots of crappy and buggy commercial software, which has few free competers (I bet you know many as well)
For the end user commercialware sometimes (only sometimes!) means support, free upgrades, decent documentation... But in many cases he ould get almost the same by using free stuff. Draginol is right, pointing, that commercial developers usually pay more attention to their programs, but I wouldn't be that cricial on free applications.
At least, for me it does not matter much if I make a commercial or free project as soon as I get enough money for my needs (the survival minumum). But the end user (especially in countries, where buying legal software faces certain problems) usually looks at free programs first.
on Mar 16, 2005
As said above, free software is akin to socialism and socialism is evil, ergo freeware is evil. All freeware users should be sent to re-education camps where they can be taught the goodness that is capitalism.

But more seriously, it's a bit like skinning, isn't it? Primarily done to satisfy ones own desires. If it does what you (the dev) wants it to do, it's done. And if you (the dev) run into something that does what you want your app to do, why bother continuing the development? Unless you're really dedicated, that is.
on Mar 16, 2005
The problem isn't the software. It is the neurotic, socially retarded dinks on either side who feel threatened because the world isn't exactly the way they think it should be.


*applauds BakerStreet's wisdom*

Why would you applaud his wisdom when he didn't actually say anything, or even prove his point? There were no examples, no proof, nothing to backup his empty claims. That isn't wisdom, that's spouting off and expecting people to agree simply because it's close to what you happen to believe.

Bakerstreet will "Get wisdom" when he learns that he has to provide PROOF for the things he says and demonstrate with logic why he is right and others are wrong. There are never two different answers to the same question that are 100% right (think math equation, and yes, quadratics can have two values that go in to make the equation equal, but if you plot the graph of the two results, they're still different). And if it isn't 100% right, then it's wrong by definition. Thus, if you want to make a statement you have to do two things: 1. Prove the other wrong, and 2. Demonstrate with a logical argument and physical proof why you are right.

Doing anything else is laziness, not wisdom.
on Mar 16, 2005
John, you and others more than proved his point with your posts. He didn't need to offer evidence, it was alread there.

*applauds John for proving the wisdom of BakerStreet's comment*
on Mar 16, 2005
I don't think some people have actually read what the title of this article is...

Why freeware **nearly always** loses in the long run.
see that 'nearly' in there?

He is commenting on a pattern that he has observed. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule.

I've always thought of OpenSource Software and Freeware as two separate categories, that typically OSS has a group of coders or people that submit patches to the code, while Freeware is, more often than not, a single coder. The advantage of OSS is that someone other than the original coder is able to pick up the code and carry on when the original coder gets board/disenchanted etc. If that happens to Freeware then the program tends to die a slow death.

And why should the Freeware brigade care that some of us are happy to spend money on software anyway? they've still got their Freeware software..
on Mar 16, 2005
I know it's not easy to make the programs, but I've seen some that are 25kbs, and they want $50 for it.


Are you saying the price for the program should be in propotion to the file size? That doesn't make any sence. I'd rather pay for a very tiny program that does it job, than for a large one that can't.
on Mar 16, 2005

2. Your distaste for freeware must be balanced against your personal/economic interest in your own payware.

I use freeware whenever I can. The difference is that I don't make a distinction in what kind of software I use.  If the choice is between a commercial program and a free one and both do the job for me then I'll go with the free one.

However, I don't go with a freeware one that saddles me with a lot of missing features simply to make some sort of "political" statement.

on Mar 16, 2005

poor draginol. if freeware is so apt to die then why do you cry about it so much? let me tell you why its because everything stardock makes has at least as good freeware equivelents. yoour stuff is the least impressive stuff ive seen out.

all of the best software i use happens to be freeware and so far none of it seems to be dying so your theory is moronic. lets look at stardock products

windowblinds -> tons of free shells that do the job great
objectdock -> 3-4 free ones and most are less buggy than od
multiplicity -> synergy and porgon, both work great and been around for years
desktopx -> kapsules, dotwidget and a couple others work great (but I did hear you bought out kapsules to kill the freeware competition)
cursorxp -> theres 30 of these out there

And so the reason I wrote this on JU was so that anonymous people could respond. And the reason I did that is that I knew some zealot would come on to demonstrate my point for me.

WindowBlinds - free shells have nothing to do with WindowBlinds.

ObjectDock - there is yZ dock which has far fewer features and has not been updated in years. There's also Mobydock which also hasn't been updated in a very long time. And there's RKLauncher which is just getting started and has nowhere near the features of ObjectDock.  And ObjectDock IS freeware.

Multiplicity - anyone comparing it to Synergy has either never used Multiplicity or is a freeware idealogue.  There's open source Linux email clients too (text based at that). Perhaps we should dump MS Outlook and switch to that too.

DesktopX - The programs you mention don't have nearly the content or feature set of DesktopX. And we didn't buy Kapsules. But you again demonstrate my point with your ignorant "tried to kill freeware". We don't have to kill freeware because freeware usually kills itself or its community shows no consistent appreciation for the work of freeware developers.

CursorXP - there are no alternatives to it free or otehrwise beyond what's built into Windows.

But thanks for making my point "Byro".  Freeware ideologues don't care about about the relative merits of programs. To them, "free software" is an ideology.  And hence it's people like Byro who inevitably drive freeware developers to become commercial developers by their fickle allegience. They make no distinction between say "Dot Widget" and "Kapsules".   Or better yet, CursorXP - which IS FREEWARE - has no distinction in his mind than some mouse cursor changing program that uses regular Windows mouse cursors.

For me, I've seen people like Byro for years so it doesn't bug me at all. But for many freeware developers who mistakenly think that people like Byro appreciate the work they've freely given, it comes as a shock that to them, it's has nothing to do with appreciation for a specific developer or specific program but rather merely a tool to combat the "Evils" of commercial software.

on Mar 16, 2005
"Bakerstreet will "Get wisdom" when he learns that he has to provide PROOF for the things he says and demonstrate with logic why he is right and others are wrong. There are never two different answers to the same question that are 100% right (think math equation, and yes, quadratics can have two values that go in to make the equation equal, but if you plot the graph of the two results, they're still different). And if it isn't 100% right, then it's wrong by definition. Thus, if you want to make a statement you have to do two things: 1. Prove the other wrong, and 2. Demonstrate with a logical argument and physical proof why you are right."

Why don't I have to post exhaustive proof, John? Because others enevitably throw a hissy fit like that and prove me right, maybe? Maybe because your neurotic posts here are examples enough?

John Galt will "get wisdom" when he gets the serious psychological help he needs so desperately. Please John, take the first step. We're rooting for you...

on Mar 16, 2005

Indeed.  People who don't really follow this stuff closely are usually just shocked to find out that there are people who will throw their effort behind any kind of cause - real or imagined.

It usually goes like this:

"Let me get this straight, there are people, real people, who put time and energy into trying to promote computer programs that are free not because of their relative merits but simply because it's free in a quasi-never ending battle to fight the evils of non-free software?"

"Yep."

"No really, people do this?"

"Yes."

"Don't they have a Star Trek convention or something they should attend?"

"Oh, it's worse than that, with Enterprise canceled, they'll have even more time to go out and post how the latest half-assed primitive freeware program is 'better' than some nominally priced commercial program."

"Oye!"

It has no affect on us. It's just when the freeware idealogues start switching to the latest/greatest fad freeware program (even if it's not as good as OTHER freeware programs) that's when they push those developers into becoming commercial developers.

Look at what Byro wrote - of the 5 Stardock programs he ripped on, TWO of them are freeware and another two might as well be freeware in that they either give away nearly the whole store or they work forever in their "free" incarnations.  And even though he doesn't know what he's talking about (comparing WindowBlinds to a shell for instance), he emphatically claims how "buggy" ObjectDock is or claims there's various alternatives to CursorXP (I'd really like to know what they are) or confuses DesktopX with Kapsules.  My favorite is the Synergy vs. Multiplicity.  Like the guy who can afford two computers is going to be willing to mess around with some feature-poor cryptic program rather than pay $40 to have it all just work with lots and lots of options.  But that's the mentality.

on Mar 16, 2005
"It's just when the freeware idealogues start switching to the latest/greatest fad freeware program (even if it's not as good as OTHER freeware programs) that's when they push those developers into becoming commercial developers."
To be fair, they have their irrational twins in the payware camps, as evidenced by John Galt's "Freeware is evil socialism" perspective above. Without folks like him, and of course the real offensive, snatch-and-patent-and-litigate Sith Lords of commerce there wouldn't be that much for freeware idealogues to talk about. At least not much for those in the middle to give ear to, validating their crusade.
on Mar 16, 2005

Bakerstreet - that is true but the point of the article isn't to say that freeware communities are bad guys or any worse than any other group of zealots.  The point is to illustrate the EFFECTS.

Let me give you a common scenario (this is a fictional example):

Joe Developer gets interested in making a really cool calculator program. He's interested in making such a calculator but decides one day to put out his first "Beta" version onto a site he frequents called "NeatGadgets.com".  Within a few weeks, a forum is made for him on NeatGadgets.com and a bunch of "regulars" start praising him.

Pretty soon every time he releases a new version of his calculator, some of the people from his "community" go out and start posting and about it elsewhere. They evangalize it.  They tell Joe how great he is and how much better his program is than commercial calculators are.

Over time, Joe gets busier and busier with other things but keeps at it because he feels responsible to his "customers" (the community). He doesn't want to let them down. So many weekends are spent putting in request X and Y that came in from his "customers". At this point, his calculator is pretty damn impressive. It's very feature rich, very solid.

Then one day, he logs on, and a new guy, Bill Developer, has released his first build of his free calculator. It's rough and doesn't do anything that Joe's calculator already do and do better. But suddenly, many, even most of Joe's "community" flocks over there, some of them saying how much better it is than Joe's calculator. And in fact, suddenly, when Joe makes a new release, no one even comments on the new release or reposts about it on other news sites. In fact, some of them will come on and say "Joe's Calculator is crap, you should try Bill's calculator!"

Now Joe feels hurt and betrayed. He thought of these people as his friends, his supporters. But they weren't really supporting him or his program. They were simply supporting the CONCEPT of free software and for them, the goal is to have LOTS of free software in quantity.

Joe then calls up Commercial Calculator Corp. and starts talking to them.  Pretty soon, a new calculator is being made that's even better because he's being paid to do it and he already liked doing this stuff anyway. And the free calculator disappears or lags and those same people who had previously betrayed him are calling him greedy or worse.

I've seen that scenario play out so many times over the years that it's amazing how predictable it is.

In the commercial world, what do I care if some guy like Byron is running around pissing about some half-baked freeware program.  If someone likes my work, they hopefully purchase it. If they later decide something is better, that's fine, they can go use that.  

In the commercial world, there's a certain..fairness. While I hope that our customers will be loyal to us, I don't expect it. If another product comes out and they switch to that, I am not going to have my feelings hurt in the same way that I would if I were devoting countless hours of my free time to them.  

What happens is that many freeware developers start to mistake their supporters as customers. And the "currency" their customers pay them in is through their support, appreciation, and accolates.  So when, inevitably, some/most/all those supporters instantly flock to the latest/greatest  freeware gadget, the developer feels hurt and betrayed. He can't get that free time back. He has nothing at all to show for his lost weekends and nights.  The commercial developer, by contrast, might still feel a bit of a sting but at least they were able to earn a living or at the very least be able to have bought a new computer or paid for a trip to Disney World or whatever. 

The OS/2 market was full of similar zealots. They would lobby for a product to be made for OS/2 and then not buy it when it came out. They didn't really want the product to use, they just wanted to add another notch to the OS/2 software catalog.  The freeware idealogues are much the same way. They don't really care about the actual program or the developers. They just want to (as some people in related threads) to list off a bunch of quality freeware programs that exist. 

on Mar 16, 2005

My point was people like J.G here see freeware fold for the reasons you describe and try to interpret it as some affirmation of their philosophical beliefs. In actuality, as many small payware developers have probably folded for the same reasons. It isn't the ethos, or the "moral stance", it is just a personality flaw some people have on either side.

As a game developer, you've seen it, no doubt. The "We're cool, you suck" crew spend all their time on messageboards crapping on competing games, flaming people who complain, but when something new and flashy comes along, they are generally the first to jump ship and then revisit the board to let everyone know what the new "cool" game is.

In my years observing Sony Online Entertainment's dealings with their "fans", it plays out almost the same. When Dark Age of Camelot came out the same class of Everquest players decided that it was far more "in tune" with MMORPG players and Sony was just in it for the cash. They fled. A new class of apologists replaced them, and then bailed when Final Fantasy XI came out. It just happened again when WoW came out.

Not to say that your hypothetical situation isn't how things happen. I'm just saying that you could make the same metaphor work with Comic Books, Games, Religion, or anything else wherein people get a woody having sectarian battles and yet have no real moral commitment to the actual topic.

on Mar 16, 2005
Anti-freeware or commercialization idealogs and over-zealous freeware advocates are merely two sides of the same coin. Does it really matter whether you are for or against freeware or for or against commercial software? Really who cares, except those who are already so absorbed in thier own pesonal idealism that they can not see the proverbial forest of the binary jungle for the individual 1 0 1 0 trees? Let's face it ther are several realities here to examine:

1. Freeware will always be around because there will always be a new crop of developers who are willing do develop for the sake of it, and people who are willing to develop because of their desire to contribute.

2. Commercialization is a natural progression of a pursuit of any reasonably developed passion. If you build something long enough, eventually it will grow to a point of needing additional support.

3. Freeware is not bad, nor is commercial software bad. The only distinction between the two aside from the obvious financial distinction, is how it is used and percieved by the people who benefit from it's usefulness. Software doesn't kill people, people with software kill people.

Seriously, software of any kind is defined by it's usefulness, and a niche is created around any line of software that is useful, user friendly, and productive. Regardless of whether it is free, share, ad, or buyware, if you are a member of a niche built around any piece of software, you achieve the greatest benefit by being a contributor. Buy, the software, read the ads, send bug reports, or debug and aid in development, it is all a part of contributing. Isn't that why a large majority of us, especially the folks who respond to these forums, are here? To be inspired, to create, and to contribute? Think about it. Everyone who believes their cause is just has someone in opposition to their position. That is what makes some people freedom fighters and some people terrorists, it is all a matter of perspective. Anyway, remember...

inspiro, creo, affero

Peace
on Mar 17, 2005
People don't walk into stores expecting to get stufffor free, butthey expect evertything for free online. it,s like communism or something. Communism fails becuase there is no incentive, the private sector can do much better than the government
3 Pages1 2 3