Even another OS ripoff

[Phantasman]

Its a shame to see Open Source products for sale for profit.


http://www.comparesoft.com/products.html

[Master Shake]

I don't get it... Are they selling an open source product?

[Jedeye]

yup... really hate it for the people buy in and have no idea

[Qrk]

Thats even more sickening. At least Linspire didn't change the name.

On second thought. I'll sell you guys a "CompareOS" which is more stable than Windows XP or Vista for the low price of $95, it comes standard with CompareOffice and CompareBrowser, a $200 value. You can even run without installing it on your harddrive!

[briancurtin]

Its a shame to see Open Source products for sale for profit.
would you mind explaining why you think this?

[mstlyevil]

I believe it is in the License that it is perfectly legal for someone to package and sell open source software. Open Source does not mean no monetary cost as many are assuming here. Also the product is supported unlike the free downloads we use. That might actually be important to some people.

[bjweeks]

Do they provide the source?

[Phantasman]

Sure Brian,

The Open Office, The GIMP and a few others being sold here is a community effort by people adding and improving the program. Someone uses the code to take the OS program, and through the GPL they can add and make it better (or worse). A lot of people worked on these programs, and some idiot comes along and packages it and sells it as his (or her) own. The shyster gets his money and the unsuspecting buyer gets a program that he (or she) could have downloaded for free.

[Iandefor]

I believe it is in the License that it is perfectly legal for someone to package and sell open source software. Open Source does not meand no monetary cost as many are assuming here. Alswo the product is supported unlike the free downloads we use. That might actually be important to some people. Exactly. This is why companies like Mandriva, Linspire, or Xandros are allowed to sell their distributions of Linux, even if they're composed entirely of Free Software. But since it's free software, anyone can just make copies of their installation CD's and resell them at a lower price- just look at CheapBytes.

[Phantasman]

Could I copy and sell Linspire?

[missynay]

really....where's all the threads of distro haters because they sell their distros? :rolleyes:
why is this thread here? Think b4 you post! ;)

[mstlyevil]

Could I copy and sell Linspire?

As long as you remove all the nonfree packages and Linspires proprietary stuff then yes you can.

[Phantasman]

Your probably right. I just know if I bought a game for $69 at a gaming store, and found it free online, I would not be to happy. I wonder if the OOo is 2.0 or an older version.

[Phantasman]

As long as you remove all the nonfree packages and Linspires proprietary stuff then yes you can.

My friend did that with FreeSpire (search it here in the forum) and it didn't work out for him.

[xequence]

I believe it is in the License that it is perfectly legal for someone to package and sell open source software. Open Source does not mean no monetary cost as many are assuming here. Also the product is supported unlike the free downloads we use. That might actually be important to some people.


Noone says its not legal. They just say it isnt right :P

[aysiu]

My friend did that with FreeSpire (search it here in the forum) and it didn't work out for him. This is what Linspire has to say about that:
Linspire has no problem with anyone using the open source code from our operating system – in fact we applaud such projects.

The name Freespire, however, did create some confusion in the short time it was used. The name implies a "free" copy of Linspire, which of course it is not. The very things that were taken out of Linspire for Andrew's project are in fact some of the very things that make Linspire, well...Linspire. Read more here (http://info.linspire.com/freespire/index.html).

[briancurtin]

Sure Brian,

The Open Office, The GIMP and a few others being sold here is a community effort by people adding and improving the program. Someone uses the code to take the OS program, and through the GPL they can add and make it better (or worse). A lot of people worked on these programs, and some idiot comes along and packages it and sells it as his (or her) own. The shyster gets his money and the unsuspecting buyer gets a program that he (or she) could have downloaded for free.
i definitely agree with you here. i was thinking you were talking about the sale of any and all open source products being a shame. i agree that taking them and basically calling them your own (from what we can tell), and then selling them is not right. if the base project, as in the GIMP team, wanted to sell GIMP id have nothing against that. surprisingly, there are people out there that think every single thing should be free of cost.

[mstlyevil]

Noone says its not legal. They just say it isnt right :P

Sure it is right. You are not just paying for the software but you are getting free professional support. Also the license clearly states that anyone is allowed to package and sell the software. That makes it right. You do not have to buy it if you disagree.

[Phantasman]

really....where's all the threads of distro haters because they sell their distros? :rolleyes:
why is this thread here? Think b4 you post! ;)

I don't hate anyone. If someone sells their distro, so be it. I have the choice to buy it or not, and that was not my intention with this post. If someone takes the time to improve a distro (Kanotix is a good example ) then they should be paid for their well earned efforts. But if some takes Ubuntu and copies it and just sells it for $59 a clip, it just doesn't seem right.

But hey, no one said life is fair.

[Kvark]

They probably provide support, paperbook manuals and other stuff that is worth the price to some people, just like many distros do, so let them sell it.

But that they pretend that the programs are their own and completely different from the original open source programs they rebranded is plagiarism and almost fraud too. They really should should tell people which programs they are actually selling, who made the programs, and why it is worth it to buy the rebranded stuff from compare instead of downloading the original programs.

[aysiu]

If people are charging, they should be honest about what they're charging for. If it's packaging, they should either say or imply that's it's packaging. If it's support, they should say or imply it's support. They could be charging for convenience, shipping, slight improvements...

They shouldn't make it sound as if that's just how much it normally costs. I understand CNR, sort of. I mean, it doesn't get much easier than Synaptic Package Manager, but CNR is more of a "user-friendly" (or consumer-friendly, at least) interface for searching for and installing software.

Is it worth paying $80 for GIMP when there's no indication that you can get it for free... even for Windows... ? I don't know.

[mstlyevil]

They probably provide support, paperbook manuals and other stuff that is worth the price to some people, just like many distros do, so let them sell it.

But that they pretend that the programs are their own and completely different from the original open source programs they rebranded is plagiarism and almost fraud too. They really should should tell people which programs they are actually selling, who made the programs, and why it is worth it to buy the rebranded stuff from compare instead of downloading the original programs.

That I can agree with.

[Qrk]

Sure it is right. You are not just paying for the software but you are getting free professional support. Also the license clearly states that anyone is allowed to package and sell the software. That makes it right. You do not have to buy it if you disagree.

Then how about this... stupid. Very few people are going to buy CompareWeb just to get professional support (well, very few people will buy it period), the money is mostly coming from consumers that don't realize the software is available for Free elseware.

Its like selling bogus "male enhancement" pills... its legal as long as you market them as "herbal suppliments" but that doesn't change the fact that your basic business model is duping consumers.

[mstlyevil]

Then how about this... stupid. Very few people are going to buy CompareWeb just to get professional support (well, very few people will buy it period), the money is mostly coming from consumers that don't realize the software is available for Free elseware.

Its like selling bogus "male enhancement" pills... its legal as long as you market them as "herbal suppliments" but that doesn't change the fact that your basic business model is duping consumers.

Call me names again and I will report you. I will not answer you if you are going to disrespect me.

[briancurtin]

really....where's all the threads of distro haters because they sell their distros? :rolleyes:
why is this thread here? Think b4 you post! ;)
i dont think 'u' realize what this is though.

[aysiu]

Some interesting clips from their FAQ:
Q: Why do you call yourself CompareSoft?
A: First, we strongly believe that many professional software titles are overpriced and overvalued; 90% of people would be happy with a slightly down-sized (and less expensive) version of their favorite application. As such, we invite you to compare each of our products to their respective competitors. Time after time, when you compare, you'll find the only thing you lose by switching to a CompareSoft product is your sense of sticker shock. Novices and professionals alike will appreciate the clean, simple-yet-powerful design of each of our products; they are a welcome and useful addition to any work flow.

Q: How can you deliver on quality at such low prices?
A: CompareSoft, Inc., is part of a world-wide network of developers and industry experts. We work closely with them on a daily basis, and as a team can support new features, find bugs, and generally develop faster and more efficiently than traditional software publishing houses. All of this is transparent to the you, however - each CompareSoft product is carefully tested for compatibility, integration, and stability before it is released. They must have a different idea from mine about what's "overpriced." I'd probably answer the second question, "Because these programs are free, anyway. Just add in some pretty packaging, manuals, and support."

[xequence]

Sure it is right. You are not just paying for the software but you are getting free professional support. Also the license clearly states that anyone is allowed to package and sell the software. That makes it right. You do not have to buy it if you disagree.

Right and Legal are different things.

It is legal to do that. Me, and many others, dont think it is right. It is making money off things that are free.

Legal is set: It is ether legal or not. Right isnt set, its all opinion.

They are too lazy to make their own office suite and browser so they go and try to sell one freely avalable.

[KiwiNZ]

Please keep to to discussion without the personal stuff huh folks

[Phantasman]

Sorry admin. I don't post here much, but do use Ubuntu. Didn't mean for name calling. Nice debate though, and maybe the other lady was right, I should have thought before posting.

Going back to administrate our own posts (private forum).

**vacating thread**

[Qrk]

Then how about this... stupid.

That was in connection to legal.

It isn't illegal, but stupid.

I was not calling you stupid, just the company, and those who would buy the product.
Sorry for the confusion.

[mstlyevil]

That was in connection to legal.

It isn't illegal, but stupid.

I was not calling you stupid, just the company, and those who would buy the product.
Sorry for the confusion.

It just looked like you were refering to me. Apology accepted.

[mstlyevil]

Then how about this... stupid. Very few people are going to buy CompareWeb just to get professional support (well, very few people will buy it period), the money is mostly coming from consumers that don't realize the software is available for Free elseware.

Its like selling bogus "male enhancement" pills... its legal as long as you market them as "herbal suppliments" but that doesn't change the fact that your basic business model is duping consumers.

If they are playing on peoples ignorance then that is not right. But they may have done some tweaking to it to make it a better product. I just do not want to jump to conclusions and give them the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. Also their support of the product may be superb and many people who depend on their computers for their livelyhood may find that important.

[xhie]

Mac took a solid open source project and made a spectacular product out of it.

Nothing worng with that at all in my book. The bar was just raised enormously when a solid company knowing what they were doing took over.

[Iandefor]

Mac took a solid open source project and made a spectacular product out of it.

Nothing worng with that at all in my book. The bar was just raised enormously when a solid company knowing what they were doing took over. Except that, in all probability, Linspire hasn't made any changes to the software, but they're still charging people for the software. What Apple did and what Linspire is doing are two completely different things. And Apple added a huge amount of their own software to it to build OS X, but Linspire hasn't done anything of the sort.

[TheeMahn2003]

I have already paid for a website to help others with may be off the subject but Ubuntu / Xgl do you think that ubuntu thinks of selling off the same, I won't waste my time otherwise and to be honest they are #1 distro as far as poweruser / user friiendly and caught my attention that way. I do plan on posting code not only to help others but that of programming

[GreyFox503]

Obligatory GNU link:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html


The GNU guys are the ones who wrote the GPL, under which most OSS is licensed. I'm not a lawyer, but I think if they didn't want people selling GPL'ed programs, they could have put it in there.

Instead, they not only allow people to re-sell free software, they encourage it. Check out the link for a detailed explanation.

Just thought I'd throw that in there.

I think it's fine if they want to sell software. If they think they can make money doing people a service, great. If they're just a big rip-off, then hey, no one has to buy from them.

It's true that some people could conceivably buy this software without knowing it's available elsewhere. But what are the chances that this is the first and only website they run into when looking for software products?? Surely OpenOffice would come up sooner than these guys when searching for an office suite, for example.

[mcduck]

"Working from programming hubs such as sourceforge.net, programmers make applications — like word processors and photo editors — that are just as powerful as their commercial counterparts. They often require complicated setup, however, and include little documentation. This is where CompareSoft comes in."

"What CompareSoft Gives Back
CompareSoft brings the power of these esoteric "open" applications to the average user — we vet the projects for bugs, donate any code or documentation we develop for the project, and help fund projects as appropriate (e.g. help pay for websites, code distribution, etc.). In fact, CompareSoft donates a portion of every sale to the Open Source community. Before, these open source projects were limited to computer science students and other industry professionals; they are now available to everyone."

If these are true, fair enough I think. They have the right to do this, anyway. And some people _are_ just that stupid that they won't trust software if they don't pay for it. But I also think that using real names of softs would be nice.

By the way, there are some manuals available on the website. They could actually be helpful, at least "CompareOffice manual" helped me to turn off autoformatting of URL:s in OpenOffice :D

http://www.comparesoft.com/downloads.html

[commodore]

If I'd develop a program I'd write it in the license that people who want to sell it MUST tell the buyer that my soft is actually free of charge and you can get it at this and that website.

[egon spengler]

Noone says its not legal. They just say it isnt right :P

So the staunch advocate of piracy thinks that it is ok to contravene the license of developers who want to sell their software but somehow it's wrong to sell software that the license permits to be sold?

[Sirin]

This is damn crazy. This is OpenOffice.org, GIMP, and Nvu, at a high price!

Save 100% off OpenOffice.org (which they call "CompareOffice") (http://www.openoffice.org/)

Save 100% off GIMP (which they call "ComparePhoto") (http://www.gimp.org/)

Save 100% off Nvu (which they call "CompareWeb") (http://www.nvu.com/)

You Save: $199.95 USD

Someone should sue their asses. Microsoft may be rippers, but THESE "CompareSoft" GUYS are overdoing it. :???:

[DrFunkenstein]

This is damn crazy. This is OpenOffice.org, GIMP, and Nvu, at a high price!

Save 100% off OpenOffice.org (which they call "CompareOffice") (http://www.openoffice.org/)

Save 100% off GIMP (which they call "ComparePhoto") (http://www.gimp.org/)

Save 100% off Nvu (which they call "CompareWeb") (http://www.nvu.com/)

You Save: $199.95 USD

Someone should sue their asses. Microsoft may be rippers, but THESE "CompareSoft" GUYS are overdoing it. :???:

Again, it's totally and absolutely legal what they are doing and if it leads to this software being available in "normal" shops, that's a good thing.
And on top of this, in case you didn't notice, Linspire payed for the developement of NVU and the very same guy who runs linspire also runs comparesoft.

[KingBahamut]

Its a shame to see Open Source products for sale for profit.


http://www.comparesoft.com/products.html

Sad, very sad.

[Master Shake]

Can this thread be merged with the "Bad Move for Linspire" thread, as its reall the same thing?

[awakatanka]

"Working from programming hubs such as sourceforge.net, programmers make applications — like word processors and photo editors — that are just as powerful as their commercial counterparts. They often require complicated setup, however, and include little documentation. This is where CompareSoft comes in."

"What CompareSoft Gives Back
CompareSoft brings the power of these esoteric "open" applications to the average user — we vet the projects for bugs, donate any code or documentation we develop for the project, and help fund projects as appropriate (e.g. help pay for websites, code distribution, etc.). In fact, CompareSoft donates a portion of every sale to the Open Source community. Before, these open source projects were limited to computer science students and other industry professionals; they are now available to everyone."

If these are true, fair enough I think. They have the right to do this, anyway. And some people _are_ just that stupid that they won't trust software if they don't pay for it. But I also think that using real names of softs would be nice.

By the way, there are some manuals available on the website. They could actually be helpful, at least "CompareOffice manual" helped me to turn off autoformatting of URL:s in OpenOffice :D

http://www.comparesoft.com/downloads.html

Didn't cedega said something in the same way? And they never have give back anything till now?

If they change the name ok but there needs to be a reference to the orginal product name if they don't change anything, but thats only what i think.

Well atleast GPL gives me the right to make a copy of it and give it away for free.