I have a strong resistance to pay software, but it’s not so much the fact that you have to pay–I mean I pay for hardware no problem…
The problem with Pay software is the way it tends to work.
I don’t want to pay for the bugs in your code or secondary installs. I’m paying for a working, top of the line piece of software. If the line shifts, I expect the software to shift.
If I paid $60 for a license for MS Word for Windows when it ran on Windows 3.0, I expect my license should still be valid today on whatever OS is still supported. I mean, if I had downloaded (FOR FREE) the first version of Open Office, I would have the latest and greatest today and it would run on any platform OO supported.
I also don’t expect to be bound to a disk. If I need to re-install, I expect that should be possible–I mean it’s a license not a disk you are buying, right? If the disk fails or is stolen or lost, my license should still be valid.
I shouldn’t have to pay more if I use the same software on 45 computers as long as I’m the only user of that software on all 45 computers. I have a license for the software, not the software on the computer with Serial # 309823745908.
When a company starts failing to maintain the license they sent to me, I should be able to do whatever I want with their software–in fact, I think software sources should be kept on file–and as soon as the company fails to fix a serious bug or update their software to the latest platform it should be released.
(This is much of what the patent office was created for–to ensure that good products weren’t lost and were eventually available to all–sure software patents suck right now, but if they were only valid for 2 years and after that they were published as public domain, then I’d be kinda open to the idea…)
There are a HELL of a lot of drawbacks to pay software that don’t exist in free software and not a single advantage to pay (except that in some cases there is no free equivalent.)