Shareware…? - jscotta44_1

I don't understand the difference between "Commercial" and "Shareware" software. Is the difference who makes it, the feature set, the pricing level, or some other criteria?

Price alone cannot be the differentiating factor. Otherwise, perhaps "Shareware" should be called "Cheapware" and Commercial "ExpensiveWare" - seems more accurate.

If it means being able to try it before you buy it, then there is little difference between the two. Maybe feature set? I don't think there is any real distinguishing difference between the two there.

So, in my opinion, a rose by any other name is still a rose. And software that you pay for by any name is software that you pay for. The question is whether or not the value proposition justifies the expense.

Reply to This

Monday, September 25 2006 @ 10:34 AM PDT

Shareware…? - Daniel Staal

The original distinction was that 'shareware' was software you were encouraged to share with your friends, but that if you wanted to use for any length of time you were required to pay for it. This versus commercial software that required you to purchase it before you used it.

The distinction has mostly been lost with the spread of downloadable software on the Internet, and trial/demo periods on many pieces of commercial software. Still, to me, 'shareware' is software that I can use for a limited time with full (or very near) functionality, where commercial software I have to pay first. I don't know how this programmer is using it, but cost has never been a distinct part of the definition. Most shareware is cheap, but that was to encourage payment more than anything else.

Reply to This

Wednesday, October 11 2006 @ 05:43 PM PDT