Will you purchase commercial applications from the Software Center?

[Jr.Muffin]

As many of you already know, the Software Center is planning on selling commercial applications in the mear future. What I'm wondering now is, how many of you are planning, or willing, on purchasing commercial software from the Software Store when they're available?

If I see any interesting software available, I would no doubt purchase it from the Software Center. What I would like to also see as an available option is the option to donate money to the free software as well.

What do you guys think?

[SunnyRabbiera]

I sure will, and donations are good too

[earthpigg]

i already purchase non-free software (video games) for linux, so yes :D

[Irihapeti]

If I saw something that was useful to me, yes. I purchased a Linuxant winmodem driver two years ago because it was the cheapest way for me to get on line and to keep using Ubuntu.

[sledge73]

yes most definatly.

[FuturePilot]

If it was something that would be useful to me, yes I would.

[ZankerH]

Seeing as how the GNU GPL licence permits commercial distribution, I would consider paying for software if it was a promising project released under the GPL, but I would of course take the liberty of taking the code and forking it into a free-as-in-price version (in the unlikely event that someone hasn't done so yet), which you're entitled to under the GPL.

As for non-Free-as-in-freedom software, I already despise it enough so as to avoid using even when it's free of cost, there is absolutely no way you can con me into paying for it.

And let me know when the software centre allows you to install more than one package at a time. Or libraries, for that matter. Until then, it's apt-get and synaptic for me.

[hoppipolla]

If I actually have cash then yeah! Games are the obvious choice for me though, as I don't really have use for any specialist commercials apps atm! :)

[NoaHall]

No, I won't.

[hoppipolla]

No, I won't.

why? ._.

[NoaHall]

why? ._.

Don't need anything. Got my music, got my browser, got my text-editors, got my games, got gnome, got emereld, got AWN. I really can't think of anything I would want to buy. It was the same when I used Windows, there's a load of great free software out there, you just need to know where to look. Although, on Ubuntu, you don't really have to look far... like.. anywhere...

[sliketymo]

Something smells rotten to me.

[Sandlst]

I'm definitly excited about the prospect of being able to buy games! :popcorn:

[Chilli Bob]

Absolutely I would pay. I'd love to see this inspire a commercial, full functioning, proprietory version of a program like PiTiVi. They'd get my money for sure! (It's either that or give my money to Sony Vegas Pro).

Remember: "propietory" != "evil"

(p.s. why isn't my spell checker working?)

[Old Jimma]

Definately... especially if the softare does my federal and state income tax.

Phil Smith
Duluth, GA

[ZankerH]

Remember: "propietory" != "evil"

(p.s. why isn't my spell checker working?)


When in doubt, use google.

Did you mean: proprietary?

In any case, as I've already pointed out, most GNU/Linux users despise proprietary software, so the notion of paying to have it inflicted upon you is frankly ridiculous. As for Free software, a single user can buy it and distribute it at no cost by the definition. So I see the software centre as an absurd endeavour that essentially amounts to a downgraded synaptic package manager and a way to con money out of clueless users.

[gn2]

Probably not.
If I want to buy commercial software I would be more likely to buy it direct from the supplier and cut out the middle man.

[hoppipolla]

Probably not.
If I want to buy commercial software I would be more likely to buy it direct from the supplier and cut out the middle man.

but by buying it through that middle man (Ubuntu/Canonical in this case) you will be giving them money too and it won't be costing you a bean...

[Bezmotivnik]

No, not a prayer, ever.

[gn2]

but by buying it through that middle man (Ubuntu/Canonical in this case) you will be giving them money too and it won't be costing you a bean...

That would depend on the pricing.
If the price was the same, would Canonical
be taking a cut?
If they do then the developer gets less than if I bought it direct.

The way I see it, I don't want retail opportunities built in to my operating system, if I ever use a version of Ubuntu with this software shop chances are I will simply remove it.
If it can't be removed I will consider using another distribution.

[Exodist]

I would purchase games from the software center if they are priced comparable to games at stores in my area "like Best Buy". But if they are over priced, no.

[hellion0]

If I could afford it, I needed it, and no free-as-in-beer option existed, probably.

As it is, I can't, I don't, and they do.

[ctrlmd]

if people start buying com. software more companies will produce more applications for linux

so yes i would.

[Chilli Bob]

most GNU/Linux users despise proprietary software


Do you have hard facts to back that up? Even if it is correct, most computer users are happy to pay for commercial software. I consider myself a computer user who happens to use Linux predominately because I find it a superior OS in most aspects to either Windows or Mac. Where it falls down is in lack of certain software I want to run at home and NEED to run at work, and frankly, I don't see that software appearing without the backing of commercial funding. I can't see MYOB or Quickbooks releasing an open source version of their software anytime soon.

[ad_267]

Make it a poll!

And yes I would if there was anything I wanted.

[koleoptero]

If they're good then I'd buy them. Supposing that the price is reasonable. (not 100 euros for dvd playback software...)

[corsakh]

Do you have hard facts to back that up? Even if it is correct, most computer users are happy to pay for commercial software. I consider myself a computer user who happens to use Linux predominately because I find it a superior OS in most aspects to either Windows or Mac. Where it falls down is in lack of certain software I want to run at home and NEED to run at work, and frankly, I don't see that software appearing without the backing of commercial funding. I can't see MYOB or Quickbooks releasing an open source version of their software anytime soon.
Yep, I fully agree. The main reasons I look into Linux right now are superior security, usability (workspaces, gnome do, etc), speed and flexibility. It has very little to do with free or open source from my user standpoint (although I accept that all the stuff I mentioned may be hugely due to those two things). And the only thing I am missing to be happy is proprietary software that is available for Windows but not for Linux.

[c2006]

I would if I a) had the means to pay online (I don't currently, no credit card) and b) there was software of interest.

[Starlight]

I probably won't... the only software I buy are games, and the games I buy never seem to have Linux versions anyway. As for everything else, all my needs are perfectly satisfied with free software.

[Hallvor]

No.

[dvlchd3]

As long as the purchase is secure, I would defintely consider purchasing something from the Software Center. However, as pointed out above, besides games, what do we really need that we don't already have?

I also feel if this idea hijakes Ubuntu, I will be extremely disappointed. I don't believe it will without a fight from the community, however, I'm seeing a possible future like the Apple Store and all its B.S.!

[Swagman]

Absolutely.

But only if it's a native port (and not a "cut-down" version either.. ala Nero)

ie: Not running through wine. I'd love to buy ArtRage 2 for Linux

[stinger30au]

if i only have to buy the software *ONCE* and not every time i upgrade and so long as the payed for version is *MILES* better then the free open source version, or there is no free open source alternative, then yes i will pay for something that i find usefull

[Kantis]

Yes I probably will, if something interesting comes up.

I also vote to make this a poll so that I wouldn't have to read through a potentially very long thread just to see if people generally answer yes or no to this very simple question.

[3rdalbum]

Probably not.
If I want to buy commercial software I would be more likely to buy it direct from the supplier and cut out the middle man.

Currently, it's cheaper to buy the Fluendo codecs pack from Canonical, than it is to buy it from Fluendo. So that's not necessarily so.

To answer the question, yes there is software I'd buy:

1. A really good video editor
2. A really good DVD authoring package
3. Big-name PC games with native Linux ports
4. Legal Blu-ray playback support (can we PLEASE get some freakin' legal Blu-ray playback some time soon?!)

[Pasdar]

Sure, if its what im looking for and there is an easy way to transfer the money. But IMO Canonical really needs to up it a notch or ten so Ubuntu becomes much better before they start selling stuff.

[ZankerH]

Currently, it's cheaper to buy the Fluendo codecs pack from Canonical, than it is to buy it from Fluendo. So that's not necessarily so.

To answer the question, yes there is software I'd buy:

1. A really good video editor
2. A really good DVD authoring package
3. Big-name PC games with native Linux ports
4. Legal Blu-ray playback support (can we PLEASE get some freakin' legal Blu-ray playback some time soon?!)

And it's even cheaper to just install the free-as-in-beer restricted-extras package, or, you know, use Free software. Since that's kind of the purpose of GNU/Linux.

[Pasdar]

The purpose of GNU was indeed to provide costless systems to the masses. Though the thing is, all of the best programs are proprietary and are expensive too. IMO they can live happily next to one another.

Not everyone is happy (to be e.g.) playing only shooters [most used genre on Linux it seems (I wonder where that urge to shoot people comes from :p)], and the same game for years, with each new version being the same game, just an added map and some extras....

[superskateman]

I don'y buy paid software much, so I wont be buying anything.
I will stay with my free stuff. :popcorn:

[t0p]

I guess. If I wanted to buy something, and I was running a version of Ubuntu with the Software Centre, and the software was there, I would buy it. But that isn't very likely. I haven't bought software in years. Free Free software has met my every need. (Well, not my every need. But I wouldn't buy a chick off the Software Centre. Not unless it was a very good chick...)

[3rdalbum]

And it's even cheaper to just install the free-as-in-beer restricted-extras package, or, you know, use Free software. Since that's kind of the purpose of GNU/Linux.

The word "restricted" is there for a purpose :-) If you're a computer maker, you can't ship the restricted codecs on your computers if you live in countries with software patents. That's where the Fluendo codecs come into play.

I was using the Fluendo codecs as an example to say that it's not necessarily cheaper to buy from the maker.

[The Funkbomb]

It depends on a few things.

Do I need it? If not, then no.

The second thing is, is it the best? For example, if adobe ported CS4 over to linux, I'd highly consider buying it because it has a quite a few features that are just better than the GIMP. If the for-sale programs only have a couple of extra options that I don't see myself using, I'd stick with the free of cost versions.

Stability and how it plays with my system is something else I would consider. Kdenlive is a great program but it crashes frequently on my computer. If I'm going to plop down some coinage, I'd have to see that it was fixed.

The last thing is if I'd be able to use a trial version. I very rarely buy software sight unseen in Windows and I don't see that changing in Linux. I usually have a trial version or a beta floating around. If I like what I see in the trial version and say, "I can dig this", then I'd be more likely to pay for a full version.

[samh785]

if i only have to buy the software *ONCE* and not every time i upgrade
This is exactly my concern. What about when we do a clean install? I doubt we'd be able to continue to use the proprietary programs that we paid for...

However I would gladly use the donate feature to give money to projects that I supported. :)

[kellemes]

For me, one of the major reasons for not using Windows is the fact it's not free, and this includes a lot of software made for it.
Having to pay for software I used to get for free isn't acceptable and surely will give Ubuntu a lot of enemies. I'll be one of them.
It smells like Ubuntu is going for the cash just like Microsoft.

[mivo]

I bought a number of commercial Linux games. Whether I'll buy anything from the software center will depend on a number of factors:

- Offered payment methods.
- Conditions of use, i.e. limited installs, etc.
- Is the software tied to Ubuntu? If so, I'll pass.
- Can the software be re-downloaded?
- Is support included?
- The price.

[Tibuda]

For me, one of the major reasons for not using Windows is the fact it's not free, and this includes a lot of software made for it.
Having to pay for software I used to get for free isn't acceptable and surely will give Ubuntu a lot of enemies. I'll be one of them.
It smells like Ubuntu is going for the cash just like Microsoft.

Man, Windows can run free software too. Indeed, most software you run in Linux you can run in Windows too. GIMP, Firefox, Thunderbird...

And Linux* also can run paid software too. There are only few available, but it has to change to increase the support by ISVs and the userbase. If you only use free software, you'll still be able to only use them. Nothing will change for you!

*see I say Linux, not only Ubuntu.

[Xbehave]

Having to pay for software I used to get for free isn't acceptable
Erm they are going to be offering software that wasn't available at all (at least without tracking down the developers website), it's not like they will start charging for firefox :lolflag:.

While I appreciate what Canonical are trying I'm a big fan of OSS, so I personally probably won't use it. It's not that i have a problem with paying it's just that there is little overlap between paid for software and OSS.

I would buy game-data to be used with an OSS engine, e.g pay for doom (instead of using freedoom because it's easier to install) or better yet a more modern shooter, hell if i get hooked on wesnoth again i would probably pay for a closed map pack or two. But given that i rarely game on my laptop I'm unlikely to buy a full game.

I think the point about developers getting more if you go straight to them is valid, but canonical is doing something to earn their cut (making the program visible & easy to install), that along with it being optional (this isn't an iAppstore where you can't offer software without going through Canonical) means developers will make a choice over weather Canonical's service is worth the price, if they decide it is then I'm cool with it (assuming their cut is smallish <30%)

[kevin2849]

I use linux/ubuntu for two reasons: transparency and choice. Those were the reasons I migrated away from windows and are of more concern to me than price. I currently pay for software that I am required to use for my schooling and would do so for linux if it was something I needed. If this is at the expense of transparency and choice, why choose linux over windows or osx? So, a cautious yes.

[Regenweald]

For me, one of the major reasons for not using Windows is the fact it's not free, and this includes a lot of software made for it.
Having to pay for software I used to get for free isn't acceptable and surely will give Ubuntu a lot of enemies. I'll be one of them.
It smells like Ubuntu is going for the cash just like Microsoft.

And how much money do you donate to the salaries of Canonical's 100+ employees good sir ? Or should they pay their bills with that warm feeling inside that they get from providing you with an OS.

It's really easy to be a free software evangelist when you go to your job all day, pay your bills, then come home, log on to a forum and have a glorious opinion. But when your job ISproviding free software, all of a sudden, idiots around the world want you to work for free.

When you install K3b, do you then go to the store and demand free dvd's ? I mean, where are all the free hardware evangelists? SO you download a free tool and PURCHASE another tool to enhance your use of that tool. What is so wrong about downloading a free operating system then purchasing a software tool that will further enhance you computing experience ?

I know I'm wrong though, FOSS hackers run on sunshine and rainbows...

[Chrisn02]

Will you purchase commercial applications from the Software Center?
Yes I would. As long as it good quality, reasonably priced, suited my needs, easily reinstallable on upgrade/os reinstall, easily moved to another distribution (if necessary) and the open source alternatives still available. Also easily filtered out for those who don't want commercial applications.


Remember: "propitiatory" != "evil"
+1

[Paqman]

Can't say I really pay for much Linux software, but if I did Software Centre is as good a place as any (assuming the price is right, of course).

[samh785]

For me, one of the major reasons for not using Windows is the fact it's not free, and this includes a lot of software made for it.
Having to pay for software I used to get for free isn't acceptable and surely will give Ubuntu a lot of enemies. I'll be one of them.
It smells like Ubuntu is going for the cash just like Microsoft.
They aren't going to make you pay for software that is free now. They will add the option to donate money to these projects and possible includes some proprietary software. No one is going to force you to pay for FOSS software except for the project heads, and even then is supremely easy to obtain the software elsewhere.

[3rdalbum]

This is exactly my concern. What about when we do a clean install? I doubt we'd be able to continue to use the proprietary programs that we paid for...

Oh, Canonical will probably link it in with Ubuntu One or Launchpad, so their own servers keep track of what you've already bought, and let you download it again for free.

I think we've got to remember that the existence of the Software Center won't make high-quality commercial software 'magically' appear. The first developers to join on will probably be extremely indie with almost no idea of how to work on a Linux system (i.e. you'll probably find that the programs will chmod large tracts of your system or run setuid root to get around the Unix security system... or use obsolete APIs like the original V4L).

[samh785]

you'll probably find that the programs will chmod large tracts of your system or run setuid root to get around the Unix security system... or use obsolete APIs like the original V4L).
lmao

[Swagman]

I guess. If I wanted to buy something, and I was running a version of Ubuntu with the Software Centre, and the software was there, I would buy it. But that isn't very likely. I haven't bought software in years. Free Free software has met my every need. (Well, not my every need. But I wouldn't buy a chick off the Software Centre. Not unless it was a very good chick...)


You mean.. Like having a Mute button hard wired in ?

Or perhaps a sudo mode ?

[betrunkenaffe]

yes

[sanderella]

Maybe, depends what they are. I would love an app to run my CAD knitting program.

[Jr.Muffin]

I believe that if you support Ubuntu, and the people who create incredible free software (like GIMP), the least you could do is dish out a couple of dollars to donate to them.

Ubuntu will always be free (at least I hope), and the software available will too, but a major issue is that even though the people who create the software make it free, they have bills to pay just like the rest of us.

If you like the software try and give something back. Nothing is actually free.

-- Poll:
I would like to create a poll, but unfortunately I am not given the choice anymore in this thread. If an admin sees this could you please create a poll with these three options:

Will you purchase commercial applications from the Software Center?
1. I will most definitely will.
2. If there's software I'm interested in.
3. If the commercial software is better then the free software.
4. I don't have the money to spend on software, but once I do I will.
5. I don't plan on buying commercial software, but will donate to free software.
6. I don't plan on buying or donating to any software.

[aysiu]

I'll just weigh out my options and pick the best option.

If I can get X software for free and it works well, I'll get X.

If I can get X software for free but Y software works significantly better and doesn't cost that much, I may pay for Y.

If I can get X software for free and Y software works only a little better and costs a lot, I will stick with X.

It all depends on the situation.

[Warpnow]

If it meets these requirements:

Reasonably priced (I will not pay more than $20 for a suite, or $10 for a simple application).
Doss not have a free alternative.
I have the money to spend (So most likely no at this point in my life.
I don't have to pay for upgrades for at least a decent time.

[LowSky]

What the heck will be offered? And what will be the terms tot he downloaded material?

Once I know that then maybe just maybe I will buy stuff.

[Xbehave]

you'll probably find that the programs will chmod large tracts of your system or run setuid root to get around the Unix security system... or use obsolete APIs like the original V4L).lmao
3rdalbum is probably referring to CNR (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNR_%28software%29) and has a point, commercial ports of desktop software may ignore Linux conventions or get them hideously wrong, so I would not dismiss his post so readily. For example look at the mess that is itunes on windows (it needs a network deamon to start running at boot time)

That said, I welcome attempts to get commercial software to Linux, I just don't think it will be very good software(games are a possible exception)

[lightningfox]

Maybe.

[samirbasha]

And how much money do you donate to the salaries of Canonical's 100+ employees good sir ? Or should they pay their bills with that warm feeling inside that they get from providing you with an OS....

wow didn't know that they where suffering, it makes me feel bad now...........
All these years of hard working for warm feelings only.............:(
And how some stupid users can say that they didn't like the idea....shame on you guys...