Buy software, once Say goodbye to subscription fatigue! Discover software you can buy once and own forever–no recurring charges, just tools that work for you, for life.
You must log in or register to comment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_free_and_open-source_software_packages
Buy never software
I use almost exclusively FOSS and I have monthly/annual contributions set up for various projects.
Those are not purchases. You are not “buying” them. They are donations. “Buying” requires payment.
FOSS is notoriously low quality and can disappear at any given time when the developer(s) lose motivation. Don’t get me wrong, I love them too, but I’ll also gladly pay for something more polished and sustainable.
Right, because proprietary software is never abandoned. At least foss leaves you with the source code so you or other folk can carry on the torch in the original dev’s absence.
Proprietary software is also notoriously low-quality and can disappear at any time when the developer loses motivation. Additionally, because the software is closed source, nobody else is able to continue the development of proprietary abandonware. On the other hand, abandoned FOSS projects can be forked and continued, which is something I see often.
Proprietary software is also notoriously low-quality and can disappear at any time
This is just a false equivalency. Do both of those things happen in both cases? Sure. Does it happen WAY more often with FOSS? Also yes. Just go through F-Droid or Flathub and look at the long list of apps that haven’t been updated in years.
Paid software is typically not something someone does in their free time to fill a resume for a real job. It’s something they are able to dedicate real time to because it pays their bills and they have obligations to their paying users. They can also hire other people who also gets their bills paid and have similar obligations.
Neither one is inherently better.
Just go through F-Droid or Flathub and look at the long list of apps that haven’t been updated in years.
“not updated in years” didn’t used to be considered a bad thing. Why is it one now?
If something works well for me as it is and runs locally in a way that doesn’t open itself up to remote exploits, I don’t necessarily need it to keep changing all the time. Even if it would be nice if it had more features, the software works fine for me as it is. I don’t need those updates now or this year.
The only true “need” is that it doesn’t stop working for me when the various platforms or compilers change. I used to use a Python2 program, and I could keep using it for about a decade after its last update, but eventually I did need to move past it because Python3 had long since replaced it and distros stopped shipping Python2. A year or two of no updates it’s nothing.
You can also go on the play store and find a huge list of proprietary apps that haven’t been updated.
You need some actual stats to back up this point. Plenty of proprietary software is unsuccessful because it fails to profit, so its shut down. At least FOSS software will continue as long as someone finds it useful enough to keep it going. Plus the obvious, that if you like a piece of software you can maintain it yourself.
Also saying that FOSS software is “notoriously low quality” is silly. There’s tons of great and important FOSS software and plenty of shit FOSS software, just like proprietary software. Your comments just ignore how much proprietary shovelware exists.
You can also go on the play store and find a huge list of proprietary apps that haven’t been updated.
Once again, false equivalency.
Also saying that FOSS software is “notoriously low quality” is silly.
It’s not silly, it’s plain to see for anyone that has tried to use it. But it is hilarious to see you try to deny it.
Do you think people just enjoy throwing away money to give themselves a worse experience?
Lol that’s not a false equivalency. You don’t get to just decide words mean things they don’t because it sounds nice in your head.
How is that false equivalency? Comparing fdroid to the play store is about as close as you can get.
Like I said, there is bad FOSS software, but that doesnt make it generally false. People pay for software that doesnt have a good free alternative, they pay for support, and often they will pay to use software that has good marketing because they are simply unaware of the alternatives.
I’m not saying all FOSS software is great, but lots of software does have great FOSS options, for example, Firefox, Blender, and Bevy. Obviously there are also examples of proprietary software without a great alternative, like Photoshop. I like FOSS, but I don’t avoid proprietary solutions that do a better job. Believe it or not, I still end up using mostly FOSS software.
You’re not backing your points up with any actual reasoning or examples while also being condescending about it.
How is that false equivalency? Comparing fdroid to the play store is about as close as you can get.
The false equivalency is not that the two aren’t comparable products, the false equivalency is that they have those problems at similar rates, because they don’t.
You’re not backing your points up with any actual reasoning or examples
My reasoning is experience. FOSS has this reputation among most people. Only people who are willfully ignorant can’t see it. I could give you examples all day but it’d just be cherry-picking and I’m sure you would remain unswayed. Feel free to ignore me, I’m just saying what it is.
I am genuinely curious why you think people pay money for worse software though…
I don’t avoid proprietary solutions that do a better job
That was my entire point. The person I was originally replying to seemed to suggest exactly that.
When you look at any app store, you’ll find that the many apps that are infested with ads, spyware, malware, and dark patterns are pretty much always proprietary. Conversely, any FOSS application that tries to introduce such garbage would be forked to remove these offending attributes, which makes FOSS much higher-quality than proprietary software in general.
You are using false equivalence by incorrectly implying that proprietary software is commercial while FOSS is not. Both FOSS and proprietary software can be sold and commercialized with various monetization strategies. For example, you are currently using Lemmy, a FOSS social network whose development is funded by donations. Nobody here believes that Reddit is better on the basis that it is proprietary adware instead of FOSS.
Free and open source software licenses provide users the right to use, modify, and redistribute the software. Proprietary software does not. That difference makes FOSS inherently better for users than proprietary software.
When you look at any app store, you’ll find that the many apps that are infested with ads, spyware, malware, and dark patterns are pretty much always proprietary
Right, because FOSS software never has any of that…
which makes FOSS much higher-quality than proprietary software in general.
That’s not how that works. There’s plenty of paid software that doesn’t have any of those things.
Both FOSS and proprietary software can be sold and commercialized with various monetization strategies.
You’re just arguing pointless semantics now.
Nobody here believes that Reddit is better on the basis that it is proprietary adware instead of FOSS.
You’re cherry-picking.
That difference makes FOSS inherently better for users than proprietary software.
No. It absolutely does not. Why do I care if you can “use, modify and redistribute” trash software?
FOSS adware and spyware apps are rare because it’s trivial to fork it and remove the undesirable elements. Users have every incentive to use the ad-free and spyware-free forks, which eventually causes the superior user-friendly forks to overtake the originals. However, proprietary adware and spyware apps cannot be forked in the same way, preventing users from stripping out the ads and tracking. The ability to use, modify, and redistribute “trash software” allows anyone to transform FOSS with undesirable elements into excellent software by removing such elements, whereas proprietary “trash software” remains trashy.
deleted by creator
This clearly isn’t true though, otherwise there wouldn’t be so much FOSS software.
Correct. While there are many (good) programs available for no money, that is charity based on desire and passion.
Free in FOSS isn’t about price, it’s about freedom.
deleted by creator
Donate when you can tho
And contribute if you can’t.
For non-programmers: Yes, reporting bugs, writing docs, and answering questions is contributing.
Edit: Fun story, the best contributor I ever had was someone who randomly reproduced reported bugs and filled in the details about how they did it.
Act like a real man. But free and open source software because the devs deserve your money for their free work
The IntelliJ products are not exactly “buy once” - if you want updated versions you need to keep paying periodically.
Not that I think that’s a bad thing necessarily - it doesn’t make sense to expect devs to continue working on something year after year when you’re not paying them for it.
They are “buy once” in that their licenses include perpetual fallback. Whenever you stop paying, you retain your licenses perpetually
Not whenever, you need to be paying for a year and then then the latest version from a year ago is what you get the perpetual license for
if you want updated versions you need to keep paying periodically.
But you can continue using the older version, yes?
Sure, as long as it works. Software has a tendency to stop working on newer OS:es or become subject to security exploits though.
I’m happy to pay for software, but I want more than just permission, I want long term security that my investment in the tool will last.
If IntelliJ would open source their oldest versions, I would make my boss buy me a copy of the newest version every year.
That sounds good on paper, but the chances that someone else will pick up the ball if they abandon it, even if it’s open source, are very slim. If you care about keeping it alive then paying them is a more effective strategy than hoping for random volunteer work by internet strangers.
You, on the other hand, have good chances of being able to learn new tools. So I think the need for this security is exaggerated.
I’m a developer, so my chances are pretty good. But I take your point.
Even if I weren’t, there’s enough software options out there that I don’t have to pick between paying for proprietary software and living with abandonware.
So I think the need for this security is exaggerated.
Of course. I used proprietary software for a long time. Having things I relied on get abandoned got old, but it worked.
I just expect more from most of my software, now.
I use moneydance for finance, it’s $50 for the current version, as of now they give you one free version upgrade, with no requirement to upgrade again if you are satisfied.
It has a learning curve and isn’t the prettiest but I’ve been satisfied with managing my transactions and running reports.
What it lacks though is a decent budget extension.
Until they revoke your lifetime purchase and put the new updates under a sub…
Happened to me with the Android anti-theft app Cerberus, AND with the PlayOn TV recording service.
We should make a shame/do not trust list.
That shit better not happen to Plex, I’ll never buy software again, will pirate the fuck out of it for this reason alone.
That would be punishing yourself compared to switching to Jellyfin, though.
This is the best advice. Heed it!
Using Jellyfin is a punishment in itself.
Hardware accel just seems completely broken, that and downloads to the app.
Shady practices.
They make program/editor pay 99$ to be listed and the link all redirect to a subscribe page sling for an email.
own forever
Ownership implies control - being able to maintain/repair, modify or even resell.
To be in control of software you need access to it’s source code, and have the right to share changes with others.
“Ownership” can mean a lot of different things and the things you listed are most certainly not a requirement.
So what does “ownership” mean then for software?
“Ownership” can mean a lot of different things
You were arguing that having control over something (as in “being able to maintain/repair, modify or even resell” it) isn’t a requirement for the thing’s ownership?
Then what does “ownership” entail? Being allowed to use the thing but not modify or repair it? I’d argue that this isn’t what “ownership” means.
“Ownership” can mean a lot of different things
the things you listed are most certainly not a requirement.
Then what are? Why wouldn’t the ability to maintain/repair, modify or resell be requirements for ownership?
If “ownership” doesn’t have a unified meaning, then I can interpret “ownership” as the ability to maintain/repair, modify or resell the bought item.
Then what are?
“Ownership” can mean a lot of different things
Why wouldn’t the ability to maintain/repair, modify or resell be requirements for ownership?
Why would they be?
If “ownership” doesn’t have a unified meaning, then I can interpret “ownership” as the ability to maintain/repair, modify or resell the bought item.
You can “interpret” whatever meaning you want, that doesn’t make it accurate.
Fuck paid software, use open source
It’s not even for the cost of it, I simply refuse to trust any software that is not open because I know they’ll try to fuck me over one way or the other
I understand sentiment after seeing how a lot of tech companies are. The other side of it is this: Developers still have bills to pay. FOSS projects are great, especially if they’re done by a small team and have a supportive community, but there are only a limited number of developers who have a combination of knowledge, skill, free time, and financial capability to truly dedicate themselves to FOSS projects.
If I could support myself by coding for FOSS projects, I would probably try (hell I just might not be aware of opportunities for this) but that isn’t the reality in front of me.
It is possible, for example Evan You did it, but he wrote the third maybe nowadays 2nd most popular SPA framework in Vue.js and he is also doing other things with Vite, but at that point he is basically getting paid by companies too to work on that.
Any paid open source software you’d consider to pay?
Jellyfin, for one, comes to mind
Maybe it should be easier for people to donate something to open source software. Maybe on the Linux command line there should be a message from apt that certain projects could use your financial help, of you want to.
I doubt many people would be pissed if projects just ask for a small donation
I would welcome a utility that makes it easy to find donate links for my software packages, based on my Apt, Flatpak, and F-Droid package lists.
The one you like the most and give a donation.
related: [email protected]
Thanks for sharing, I find it hard to discover new “lemmy spaces”??? On here
Sure.
You might want to subscribe to [email protected], and browse here once in a while: https://lemmyverse.net/communities
Subscribed. 🍻
I’ve bought way too much software that suddenly abandons their product to launch a new subscription based version.
I’d rather choose FOSS than anything payed.
I boycott anything that has to be paid or is non-free.
I donate regularly to FOSS projects (that I use).
If you’re into music production, FL Studio has a lifetime license that’s stood the test of time, and has kept up with or exceeded the capabilities of packages like Reason, Ableton, and Logic. It was the first to really embrace an open VST plugin interface, and has so many options that even after 25 years I haven’t yet explored them all. It also comes with a ton of free instruments you can download (basically free DLC).
I picked up a lifetime license for $99 in 2001 when it was Fruity Loops 2.0. Used it for 10 years as it evolved and was amazed that it was keeping up with the big boys. That encouraged me to drop another $80 to upgrade to the producer edition to start making professional level tracks - and I was not disappointed.
The best part? The base license is still just $99. Producer edition is still $179.
EDIT: side note - the demo is actually the full software package, so you can try it out for free. The license just unlocks the capacity to save projects with the plugins that are covered by your licensing.
Bruh I’m still using my fls 11 license from the early '00’s and it still works. Modern hardware has made it work even better really
FL 11 was an amazing piece of software - that’s the version that really kicked it into the big leagues.
You should check out the newest version - the download manager is much better since FL Studio 20, and they’ve got a bunch of new packages and plugins. The Flex plugin is one of the best traditional instrument synths I’ve ever worked with (think it came in on v 17 or 18).
Even the new version has excellent performance on my 10 year old desktop - you’ll love it when you get a chance to upgrade.
Software maintenance does cost a lot, it’s a full time job. Most people don’t pay foss or any at all ( winrar or total commander case ). Most people won’t be able to maintain or adjust foss on their own… Foss doesn’t work forever ( it’s a pain to deeply depend on foss which stops being maintained ). It’s a reality that 1 year fallback license is necessary evil
I prefer the model where you buy updates if you want or need them
Checked Cad > NanoCad > 1 year subscription > fail
I think paid open source like GPL Blender addons from BlenderMarket, Gumroad, etc. is a good option. You pay for it to support the devs while also owning what you bought.
Buy… Software? You what?
Good enough. Now tell me where it is made and you can call it perfect.
