Create software

>Create software
>Implement licensing structure so nobody can access it until they pay me 3499.99
>The cost of implementing and creating this 3499.99 softwareis less than 1 cent given that we don't even bother putting in a disk in the pretty box anymore
>Somehow this 100,000% markup is not illegal
>Pirates get blamed for pirating my legal thievery in a can
>Could easily sell software for $5 and still be ludicrously rich

Fuck you Microsoft. Fuck you Adobe. Fuck you licensing copyright assholes. You don't stop us. You stop people who pay legally.

Discuss this autism splurge.
>inb4 windows os
I'm on linux. Still doesn't mean t's not fucked up.

Other urls found in this thread:

joelonsoftware.com/2004/12/15/camels-and-rubber-duckies/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

guess how i know you don't make software for a living? fuck off back to /gd/ poorfag

>what is paying the developers who worked on this $3.5K software

wtf are you talking about, Willis?

"b'but but developers h'have to g'get paiiid."
If you sell your software for 5/10/20/40 dollars you will be able to pay developers and then some if you sell a good piece of software.

This is extortion and use of anti-competition to have a fake monopoly.

If someone creates a product they are free to utilize or sell it as they please within the law.

If you don't like it, make your own equally competent alternative and make it open source and free for all.

It's smart marketing. Why would anyone think a $3499.99 product is comparable to a $499 product in quality and service?

/Thread

AND not only do you charge 199.99 for your software that costs nothing to replicate, but you make arbitrary changes to match new licensing policies at the whim of the company and there is NOTHING a law abiding citizen can perform to remedy this.

Yet another instance of "Fuck you Microsoft" and "Fuck you Adobe."

SaaS is the biggest damn scam ever.

If someone creates a product it relies on the existence of copyright laws in order to maintain a monopoly on said product. any attempt at reverse engineering and selling your own software is against the law.

Copyright only ends up making rich richer and poor poorer. Remove the state regulation and see how well your monopoly goes.

You're going to say that the rights of a few outdoes the rights of the many? People are using software to take control of users and extort them for more money. Fuck that.

>Smart marketing
Creation of a monopoly can only exist if there is a government to prop up its existence like with copyright laws.

That companies can only have this business model with the use of copyright. In a natural market you should be able to create similar or exact sofware for cheaper than what you are willing to sell it.

But because you can sell a propriety file type and encrypt it so no fucker can mess with it, then you have a piece of software that blocks out competition and therefore you own a monopoly not by natural markets but by regulation of markets through copyrights.

Who said anything about reverse engineering?
You're not asking Mazda to build a Ferrari. You're asking Mazda to make a car that can compete with the Ferrari at a more competitive price

except if you have a good enough team of programmers you can make powerful software. So you pay these developers a lot of money but as soon as you finish off the software you make crazy money. There is no justification to sell a piece of software for that much other than making people who are already very wealthy into hyper-wealthy people.

So then why don't you make your own software that's just as good as theirs and undercut them?

The justification is there, you're just too poor to see it.

the point I'm making is that software companies are taking advantage of users. I'm all for free markets... but I'm only for free markets free of government intervention like copyrights.

>copyright is abolished
>random guy makes a really useful program and starts to sell it
>megacorp starts selling copies of his program to make money off of someone else's work

Don't like it - don't use it. Simple.

the exact opposite is true now. Mega corporations are locking people out.

People not wanting to pay for a reasonable price for software is exactly the reason why developers are moving towards SAAS.

You're trying to make a point that I've acknowledged multiple times while being too stupid to acknowledge any counter arguments.

Software companies are not taking advantage of users in the slightest. There will always be an alternative, the Linux userbase is continuing to grow as people abandon windows 10. If someone owns a product and wishes to sell it, they have the right to charge what they want.
Adobe and Microsoft are making bank off their products while you're sitting in your mom's basement bitching on an anonymous image board about why they refuse to make their products free for you. Get off your sorry ass and do something about it you bitch.

This. Thank you.

>but I'm only for free markets free of government intervention like copyrights.

Are you seriously suggesting that the best way of fixing this would be to, abolish copyright laws? Are you fucking autistic?


Do you not understand how terrible it would be if small companies couldn't copyright their own products?

Microsoft could literally just take Playstations and start selling them. Vise versa. I don't think you're understanding how fucking stupid you sound.

Price isn't based on what it costs to package the already-built software. It's based on what people are willing to pay.

And in your example, it turns out that there are enough big companies willing to pay $3.5k per license that it justifies charging that much for the software, and they could give a shit about losing you in particular as a potential customer.

Also, making a law on amount of markup would be stupid, there's no way to evaluate the frontloaded cost of actually developing the software.

Anyway, here's a good discussion of software pricing:
joelonsoftware.com/2004/12/15/camels-and-rubber-duckies/
Ideally the company would have a "Home edition" or whatever that only costs $50 or something, but a lot of the time it's just not worth it to the company to have that extra product.

On a related node, there's another article he has on switching to a monthly license model instead of a one-time-purchase model (which Adobe and Microsoft tend to do now), but I can't find it at the moment.

I'll give you the position of someone who sells immaterial goods:

>Be me
>translator
>want to earn 15$/page (meh salary)
>someone comes to me with 20 pages of document
>technical, lot of googling around, lot of consultations
>Would take about 20 hours with proofreading and all
>ask for 300$
>"What the fuck?! I can google translate it for free! You don't even need anything for that, you're just sitting at your computer!"

Fuck people like that. I pay for my Linux software if I come to the conclusion they aren't ripping me off.

Example: A dictionary for Linux. 70$. 130 000 phrases/keys.

A few years ago I wouldn't have bothered, but the functions make my life much easier.

A monopoly on what? All points you named are bullshit!

>Windows: OS
>Adobe: graphical programs

You have other options, nigga! If you don't think the investment is worth the money, don't fucking buy it! Be a smart shopper.

(This is me, btw)
There are two companies I care about. Lingea and TRADOS. One is a dictionary developer, the other a CAT program (basically and IDE for translators). They are fucking pricy, yes, 70$ for a dictionary and about 200$ per year license of TRADOS (dunno if that's true, approx.)

If I didn't want to invest the money, I have other options, namely lokalize and stardict. But stardict is shit compared to Lingea, so much so that I wouldn't use it for casual translation jobs. As for TRADOS, I don't use it because I don't need it, so I didn't buy it. Do they have a monopoly? Fuck no, just a smaller user base.