First of all, I don't use Maemo Mapper, so I'm not going into a debate about the evaluation of the program (I don't use any GPS software; I like simple maps better), but it didn't take me more than a second to distill the OP's real problems from his "hyperbole" (which, if he used MM and got burned by it, is actually rather understandeable). You OTOH chose to focus on how he said it, rather than what he said; this is not very instrumental at getting a dialogue going. It's also a sign of the times, where people are beginning to think there exists such a right as "not to be offended" (especially if they are or claim to be muslim, but I digress). Your Thomas Jefferson would give them a right ding on the ear for that.

Secondly, you're not defending freeware developers, you're stating the fruits of their labour should be treated differently from commercial developers' software. That's condescending at best, and damaging to the freeware movement at worst. You're in fact saying freeware developers should be treated as the equivalent of the mentally handicapped: Their work may suck, but we musn't say anything harsh, lest they be discouraged of continuing to suck. I'm not treating Microsoft nicely for the crap they churn out, nor will I be nice for the legion of freeware media player "developers" that has apparently chosen the Itablet as their home turf, to name my own pet peeve against freeware developers. BOGDAMMIT! GO DO SOMETHING USEFUL, YOU SLACKERS! IN MY DAY, YOU'D ALL BE SENT TO THE GALLEYS!!

Then there's the matter of the actual price being an argument against criticism (apparently only allowed if it's gentle and kind criticism, given in the form of praise), an argument brought up by several others in the thread (I'm shoving my reply in here, because I'm too lazy to say the same thing to the others, but this is obviously not directed at you, as you didn't say in so many words that the (absense of) price determines the level of criticism): If people are going to judge software by what they paid for it, then these people aren't using that software, they're collecting it. You judge software by what it does and how it does it, and if it doesn't meet that criterium, it's bad software, regardless of what it cost you. In fact, bad freeware might turn out to cost more than good commercial software, if only in the amount of time wasted on forums complaining about bad freeware.

Oops! I forgot: "Hitler!" There, now even Godwin's Law is covered.


<gasp!> <gasp!> I'm off now, just resting for a spell...