Commercial Software. Evil?
 

One of the feelings you get reading threads here about other devices, is that software that isn't open source (and I guess all other commercial items) are evil and not to be welcomed to the NiTs.

Whereas it is interesting have a large open source model on the nokias, and I guess inevitable with the linux roots, it seems a very odd monoculture, and not very helpfull for any platform to have so little commercial support.

For a geek, obviously this is a good thing, but not so helpful for people who just want to do what they want to do, and want the nokia to help them. The people who don't know it is linux, more likely don't care what it is, or in some cases, the people who buy it despite it being linux.

Given the choice between spending £10 on a piece of software that works well and does what I want or spending an evening trying to get some other piece of software to work, I would be happy to spend the money - my time is worth more than that.

Also there is some software that just doesn't seem to happen. GIven that the platform has now been around for quite a long time, the lack of PIM facilities and other software that is in abundance on other platforms is quite disturbing. Lets face it, writing software like that is rather dull compared to games and media players and maemo is harder than a lot of platforms to write for, so why bother if you dont get to do fun stuff.
But it is what a lot of people want.

I am not saying that open source is bad, just that I don't think that commercial software is bad either, and I think it is desirable to have both for the long term health of any platform.

I guess I wouldn't see commercial software is bad. It pays for my food, my house and my toys!

Re: Commercial Software. Evil?
 

I want a completely open source OS (including everything Nokia keep closed source)

and yes I would buy commercial software if it's not buggy and if I need it.

Re: Commercial Software. Evil?
 

I have paid thousands of dollars for commercial software, but it makes me nervous to have my computer controlled by forces that are hidden to me and to practically everyone. For example, to have to agree not to try to examine the software that is on my computer -- isn't that like getting a car and having to agree not to open the hood? The reason I didn't move on to Vista was basically because I felt that the progressive commercialization of my computing life had gone far enough.

I saw in the paper that some of the girls removed from the ultra-fundamentalist Mormon community didn't know their ages or how to spell their own names. Doesn't that remind you of some computer users? I'd rather be in a community where things are more complicated, but freer.

Re: Commercial Software. Evil?
 

I've asked several commercial software developers to port their offerings to the Itablet scene; none have responded favourably.

Let me rephrase that: Most haven't bothered to respond at all and those that did, said they weren't gonna.

I don't agree that all commercial developers are evil, but at their mercy we'll always be...

Re: Commercial Software. Evil?
 

It is to agree not to, but again, for most people (including in this case me), I really don't care what is under there. I actually know what is under there, and I am glad that now I earn a bit more I don't have to deal with it any more!

In the same token, while something is working, why does it matter what is under the hood of a computer or a car, as long as it lets you do what you want to do?

looks around this vista clad screen. Well.. microsoft gave it to me for free so it seemed rude not to use it!
Actually I am a mac user, I am just (taking a break from) working at the moment!

no, it reminds me of religion. It mostly reminds me of what happens when you give people power over you and trust them with blind faith.

Freer as in not paying for things, or having more choice? I would certainly prefer the latter, although I am not convinced that a pure open source world gives me that.

Re: Commercial Software. Evil?
 

I must admit to not being entirely suprised. Do you think it is a lack of knowledge of the platform, a lack of interest in it or the belief that there is no return to be made?

I must admit if you want palm or pocketPC software there are hundreds of places you can get them. IT software, very few.

Re: Commercial Software. Evil?
 

Guess you don't buy much commercial software, then.

I've nothing against commercial stuff, but am not persuaded that much commercial development/porting to the tablets is likely.

Then there's commercial sorta-open stuff where you get the source if you license the software to use; that approach, alas, is largely limited to expensive research stuff, not games and office apps.

Re: Commercial Software. Evil?
 

Well, take the example of Softmaker, for instance. They make Textmaker and Planmaker, two excellent closed-source, cross-platform programs. Versions for Wince were available as well as for the Zaurus platform (admittedly they stopped working for the Z after it was abandoned by Sharp). I find it hard to imagine they'd have a hard time porting their stuff to the Itablet, especially as their software is as UI-agnostic as possible.

Edit: I tried -- foolishly -- to type a message on my Itablet again. And as usual, it got completely mangled. This is really getting beyond bad; no more Nokia tablets for me, ever again...

Re: Commercial Software. Evil?
 

Nobody has brought it up here, but part of the reason might just be that proprietary software developers distrust platforms that are openly touted as being open. Thus Linux in general, and Maemo in particular.

The FLOSS community is a broad tent, politically speaking, and sometimes the outspoken fringe scares away proprietary developers, by making them feel that 1) they are not welcome, and 2) making the market for commercial software on Linux appears even smaller than it actually is

Notice that the commercial software available on Maemo are the ones that are free-beer on other platforms anyway: Skype, Rhapsody, etc. The ones that make money from some added-value service (since the Rhapsody client only plays streaming media, in this case the value is actually 0 unless you pay up!) are more likely to get ported.

(recalling how when Red Hat's Matthew Szulik came to campus, a student in the audience grilled him on how Red Hat is sponging off the community. Yikes!)

Re: Commercial Software. Evil?
 

I was wondering this too. I hope the success of Skype and Canola will show people that developing commercial apps for an open platform doesn't mean giving away the crown jewels. I too would pay for an excellent PIM, and I'm a "free where possible, pay only if necessary" kinda guy.

The open source-only crowd are driving away customers and money from the platform. I would like to develop small cheap shareware apps for maemo myself, but I don't think it would fly, with that crowd around.