Posted by: StanleyTweedle
« on: July 08, 2011, 14:31:02 »I realize the project has come a long way since I first discovered it, and likely much more so altogether, and this progress represents a lot of man-hours in development.
I disagree with the developer's decision to limit full functionality to only those users who purchase a license. At this stage in development, I am not convinced-- and therein lies the problem. I don't even have the opportunity to experiment with the /cloud/ features, the graphical spectrum comparison, etc.
It's disappointing, and frustrating.
Don't get me wrong: I support capitalism, and commercial software-- I can't tell you how irritated I am by the /digital pan-handlers/ who beg for donations-- but I believe we have a grey-area here. I believe it's right that we, the Users, respect the author's decision to put a price tag on Similarity. I can think of several commercial software products, however, which are released as "beta" versions, which incrementally upgrade through "release candidates", and so on, until the a final edition is determined, polished through a successive series of incremental updates based on user feedback, and bug reporting, etc.. The process is fair, and engaging. Near the /end/, as feedback and bug-reporting wanes to a minimum, and the "release candidate" editions expire, the Users know precisely what to expect, should they decide to purchase the software. Oftentimes, developers who employ this beta-testing model will further encourage quality, substantive feedback, by /awarding/ a license for the release edition to the "top 3", or 5 or so Users who were most active in providing meaningful feedback during the testing process. As a result, as I stated earlier, it is an engaging activity, as well as viable for both the User and the Developer.
I do purchase commercial software, but I don't have the luxury to purchase every software I find considerable. In the case of Similarity, it's most reasonable for me to bow out, and watch from the sidelines, developing what opinion I am able from the limited functionality, contrasted against mere speculation of how I might fair with a licensed version. Meanwhile, I have little incentive to commit to purchasing a license.
Notwithstanding, even in its limited, non-licensed-User mode, Similarity facilitates some skimming of the fat from my collection. I suspect this shall be the extent of my experience with it, and therein lies the crux of my disappointment.
[1]
reference to the English seasonal classic "Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer"
I disagree with the developer's decision to limit full functionality to only those users who purchase a license. At this stage in development, I am not convinced-- and therein lies the problem. I don't even have the opportunity to experiment with the /cloud/ features, the graphical spectrum comparison, etc.
It's disappointing, and frustrating.
Don't get me wrong: I support capitalism, and commercial software-- I can't tell you how irritated I am by the /digital pan-handlers/ who beg for donations-- but I believe we have a grey-area here. I believe it's right that we, the Users, respect the author's decision to put a price tag on Similarity. I can think of several commercial software products, however, which are released as "beta" versions, which incrementally upgrade through "release candidates", and so on, until the a final edition is determined, polished through a successive series of incremental updates based on user feedback, and bug reporting, etc.. The process is fair, and engaging. Near the /end/, as feedback and bug-reporting wanes to a minimum, and the "release candidate" editions expire, the Users know precisely what to expect, should they decide to purchase the software. Oftentimes, developers who employ this beta-testing model will further encourage quality, substantive feedback, by /awarding/ a license for the release edition to the "top 3", or 5 or so Users who were most active in providing meaningful feedback during the testing process. As a result, as I stated earlier, it is an engaging activity, as well as viable for both the User and the Developer.
I do purchase commercial software, but I don't have the luxury to purchase every software I find considerable. In the case of Similarity, it's most reasonable for me to bow out, and watch from the sidelines, developing what opinion I am able from the limited functionality, contrasted against mere speculation of how I might fair with a licensed version. Meanwhile, I have little incentive to commit to purchasing a license.
Notwithstanding, even in its limited, non-licensed-User mode, Similarity facilitates some skimming of the fat from my collection. I suspect this shall be the extent of my experience with it, and therein lies the crux of my disappointment.
[1]
reference to the English seasonal classic "Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer"