Ware Types - Question for the group

[Roger Spencelayh]

Like helping to prepare the PL2003 web pages. Thanks again.

Not a problem, I was glad to put back a little of what I've taken out.

help will be needed for PL2004 too - hint, hint

I'm going to have to let you know nearer the time. I have 3 on-going
projects which should be finished around the end of November (as long
as they don't suffer scope creep, which they often do), plus our local
Amateur Dramatics group has a play showing at the end of November (I
run the sound system for them). If you're still short of volunteers at
the beginning of December, let me know.

 

[Roger Spencelayh]

Because people come here for freeware.

Unless they're a freeware collector, I would have thought people come
here for a solution to a problem, and that they would like it to be
free if possible. Some will take the attitude that if it's not free,
they don't want it, whilst others will still need the solution even if
they do have to pay for it.

Talking about payware etc. here
wastes people's time, bandwidth.

How much extra bandwidth is there in "Don't think there's any freeware
- try product XYZ which is SomeOtherWare" over "Don't think there's any
freeware - try looking in alt.comp.SomeOtherWare"?

 

[omega]

Unless they're a freeware collector,

Keep in mind, that's an important group around here. Say you owned
a bar and were contemplating best business plan wrt to your customers.
You'd not go, "unless they're an alcoholic..." In other words, freeware
collectors are an implicit part of the readership here.

.. . .

Posting this not because I want to engage the politics. More just an
opportunistic moment for my comrades-hitting-the-vodkas analogy.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

FYI - Results to Date

So, you're waiting for us to add them up and do the averages?

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Unless they're a freeware collector, I would have thought people come
here for a solution to a problem, and that they would like it to be
free if possible. Some will take the attitude that if it's not free,
they don't want it, whilst others will still need the solution even if
they do have to pay for it.

How much extra bandwidth is there in "Don't think there's any freeware
- try product XYZ which is SomeOtherWare" over "Don't think there's any
freeware - try looking in alt.comp.SomeOtherWare"?

Second one's best, of course.

 

[Vic Dura]

FYI - Results to Date

Susan

Here are the averages of the 29 results. Best viewed with fixed-pitch
font.

Would someone be so good as to check my arithmetic.

-----------

Ad Beta CD Comm Cripp Demo Dona Free Lite
== == == == == == == == ==
2.3 3.5 2.5 1.8 2.2 1.6 4.3 5.0 4.6

-----------


Mal Nag Orph Reg Requ Shar Spy Trial Warez:

== == == == == == == == ==
1.1 2.0 3.1 3.6 3.8 1.4 1.1 1.8 0.9

Note: "--" entries were not counted in average. Averages rounded to
nearest tenth.

-----------

1. off-topic - discuss only when a warning is needed
2. off-topic - brief mention sometimes okay (for comparison etc.)
3. ???-topic - sometimes okay to discuss
4. on-topic - usually okay to discuss
5. on-topic - always okay to discuss

Following is a list of the ware types shown in the Pricelessware
Glossary. If you need to refresh your memory of a ware definition see:

http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/info2003PL.htm#Wares

-----------

Adware:
Betaware:
CDWare:
Commercial Software:
Crippleware:
Demo-ware:
Donationware:
Freeware:
Liteware:
Malware:
Nagware:
Orphanware/Abandonware:
Registerware:
Requestware:
Shareware:
Spyware:
Trialware:
Warez:

 

[Roger Johansson]

Ad Beta CD Comm Cripp Demo Dona Free Lite

2.3 3.5 2.5 1.8 2.2 1.6 4.3 5.0 4.6

Mal Nag Orph Reg Requ Shar Spy Trial Warez:
1.1 2.0 3.1 3.6 3.8 1.4 1.1 1.8 0.9

Conclusion 1:
The readers of the group want to allow a broader variation than
"strictly freeware".

Conclusion 2:
Programs which are highly regarded and recommended have gotten low
numbers because of strict rules.
For example Proxomitron, which strictly seen is abandonware, has got a
3.1 in the Orph column.

Crippleware has got a very low rating of only 2.2
We can think of Forte Free Agent, which earlier was distributed as a
separate program, and would have gotten 5.0 as freeware, now has only
2.2 just because it is distributed in the same file as Agent, I think.

It is still the same program, it is still one of the best offline news
readers available, it is still free to use, but now the group calls it
"crippled" and does not want it mentioned other than "brief mention
sometimes okay (for comparison etc.)".

Betaware, not time limited, can be just as good as "strict freeware".
Some of the best programs I use are freeware betas.
There is adware where the usefulness is very high compared to the
negative factor of some small ad in the corner or in the help file.
And there are programs of all categories which are absolutely useless
for some reason.

I just want to show how strange results we get when we use strict
rules instead of some common sense.

Strict rules are for control freaks and preussian officers.

Use your brains instead, and think of usefulness instead of strict
rules.

 

[Aaron]

Conclusion 1:
The readers of the group want to allow a broader variation than
"strictly freeware".

I'm pretty certain other people will come to the opposite conclusion.

Conclusion 2:
Programs which are highly regarded and recommended have gotten low
numbers because of strict rules.
For example Proxomitron, which strictly seen is abandonware, has got a
3.1 in the Orph column.

Crippleware has got a very low rating of only 2.2
We can think of Forte Free Agent, which earlier was distributed as a
separate program, and would have gotten 5.0 as freeware, now has only
2.2 just because it is distributed in the same file as Agent, I think.

The problem I think is what is crippleware is subjective. I suspect
people do not consider software they use as crippleware even if it has
obviously less functions then the full version.

For example is the latest Mailwasher crippleware? If I use it, then I
don't consider it crippleware.

I just want to show how strange results we get when we use strict
rules instead of some common sense.

Yes, it's probably an effect of the way the poll was being held. On paper
it will look like people want only the strictest definitions. Perhaps
when terms like "Ad-ware" , "crippleware"
come to mind, they think of the worse of such class of software, so they
vote it non-freeware. The very same person who votes down ad-aware might
happily allow an exception for Opera, or mailwasher or whatever they like

Strict rules are for control freaks and preussian officers.

A little strong for me, but I agree mostly.

Use your brains instead, and think of usefulness instead of strict
rules.

Aaron (my email is not munged!)

 

[Klaatu]

Please put me down for a "ditto" of Boomer's "vote" below.

I am not using #1 because that "discussion" can go to another group.
IMO

IMO also.

 

[Klaatu]

People come here for solutions to their problems.
They want programs which are as "free" as possible.

If they expect anything other than freeware recommendations here, then
the problem is with their expectations, not the group.

The best solution is an open source public domain freeware program
which is better than all other alternatives, including commercial
software.

If such a solution is not available he wants to hear about the pro's
and con's of other solutions.

If other solutions are freeware, no problem. If not, they are off-topic.

For example: Program A is freeware, program B is better but adware,
and the best program for this task is C, but C is payware.

"Program A is freeware. There are other programs, but they are OT. To
find out about them, ask in the appropriate newsgroup."

Open source public domain freeware should be the ultimate goal here,
but any type of ware can be discussed in pursuit of that goal and to
help people find the best program for their needs.

If the best program for their needs is not freeware, it's off-topic. But
do you think we will find "OT" in the subject lines of these posts? I
doubt it.

Helping people and a friendly atmosphere is more important that
enforcing any kind of strict rules.

Helping people in a friendly atmosphere find freeware is more important
than discussion and recommendation of non-freeware.

[snip]

People who should not post are those who have found a new program
which is less useful than what is already available,

Now who's trying to be a netcop? Pot-kettle-black?

and those who only want to comment on everything that happens,

Like you are doing?

and those who want to control others,

Like you are trying to do here?

and those who use abusive language, threats,
patronizing comments, people with overheated brains who think they
understand what the world is about, etc..

No comment.

 

[Susan Bugher]

Susan Bugher wrote:




So, you're waiting for us to add them up and do the averages?

IMO the range of opinion is more illuminating than a single numeber. See
my answer to Vic.

Susan

 

[Susan Bugher]

On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 03:46:29 -0500, RE: Re: Ware Types - Question for

Here are the averages of the 29 results. Best viewed with fixed-pitch
font.

Would someone be so good as to check my arithmetic.

It's your *assumptions* that needs checking. Averages give numbers that
are too high - as I suspect you know.

The *midpoint* is the mean - half of the people above and half below.
Bell charts to show the *distribution* would be *truly* meaningful.
Anyone?

I hope more people will respond to the poll. For now - here again are
the results to date - with the mid-point denoted by a blank line above
and below for ease of reference. Look at the numbers in the Warez column
to see why I thing averages are a bad idea.

Susan

-------

Ad Beta CD Comm Cripp Demo Dona Free Lite
0 2 0 0 0 0 3 5 3
1 2 0 0 0 0 3 5 3
1 3 1 1 1 1 4 5 4
1 3 1 1 1 1 4 5 4
1 3 1 1 1 1 4 5 4
1 3 2 1 1 1 4 5 4
1 3 2 2 1 1 4 5 4
1 3 2 2 1 1 4 5 4
2 3 2 2 1 1 4 5 4
2 4 2 2 1 1 4 5 4
2 4 2 2 1 1 4 5 4
2 4 2 2 2 1 4 5 5
2 4 2 2 2 1 4 5 5
2 4 2 2 2 1 4 5 5

2 4 2 2 2 1 4 5 5

2 4 3 2 2 2 4 5 5
3 4 3 2 3 2 4 5 5
3 4 3 2 3 2 4 5 5
3 4 3 2 3 2 4 5 5
3 4 3 2 3 2 5 5 5
3 4 3 2 3 2 5 5 5
3 5 3 2 3 2 5 5 5
3 5 3 2 3 2 5 5 5
3 5 3 2 3 2 5 5 5
3 5 4 2 4 2 5 5 5
3 5 4 2 4 3 5 5 5
4 5 4 2 4 3 5 5 5
4 5 5 2 4 3 5 5 5
5 5 5 3 5 4 5 5 5

-----------


Mal Nag Orph Reg Requ Shar Spy Trial Warez:
0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 0
1 1 1 2 3 1 1 1 0
1 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 0
1 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 0
1 1 2 3 3 1 1 1 1
1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1
1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1
1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 1
1 1 3 3 4 1 1 1 1
1 2 3 3 4 1 1 1 1
1 2 3 4 4 1 1 1 1
1 2 3 4 4 1 1 1 1

1 2 3 4 4 1 1 1 1

1 2 3 4 4 2 1 2 1
1 2 3 4 4 2 1 2 1
1 2 3 4 4 2 1 2 1
1 2 4 4 4 2 1 2 1
1 3 4 4 4 2 1 2 1
1 3 4 4 5 2 1 2 1
1 3 4 4 5 2 1 2 1
1 3 4 4 5 2 1 3 1
1 3 4 5 5 2 1 3 1
1 3 5 5 5 2 1 3 1
1 3 5 5 5 2 1 3 1
3 4 5 5 5 2 2 3 1
4 4 5 5 -- 2 3 4 1
-- 5 5 5 -- 3 3 5 5

 

[Blinky the Shark]

The problem I think is what is crippleware is subjective. I suspect
people do not consider software they use as crippleware even if it has
obviously less functions then the full version.

For example is the latest Mailwasher crippleware? If I use it, then I
don't consider it crippleware.

I think the best example of bizarre interpretations of the line between
crippled and not-crippled is JF's obsession with the online news reader
Xnews. In this example, he considers it crippled because it's not an
offline news reader. That's like calling a program with the specific
stated purpose of finding square roots crippled because it doesn't find
cube roots. It's pure fetishism. Especially when there's no other
version of the program for it to be crippled *from*. But the main issue
is still a full program of stated type X (online news client).

On the other hand, there are programs like the Free Agent you noted
that have, if I've observed correctly, sizeable contingents on *both*
sides of the question. There are a couple more programs that seem to
fall into that category, but I'm damned if I can think of which ones I'm
referring to. I remember thinking "here we go again" <g>, when those
discussions start, but I can't come up with names off the top of my head.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

If they expect anything other than freeware recommendations here, then
the problem is with their expectations, not the group.

The best example of that is the sizeable number that ask for web-based
solutions. That's not ANY kind of "ware", client side.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Vic Dura wrote:

It's your *assumptions* that needs checking. Averages give numbers that
are too high - as I suspect you know.

Averages give averages. There's nothing high or low about an average --
it's simply an average. It's not the *same*...

The *midpoint* is the mean - half of the people above and half below.
Bell charts to show the *distribution* would be *truly* meaningful.
Anyone?

....as a mean. Similarly, a cat and a dog aren't the same, but that
doesn't mean a cat is a misrepresented dog. An inch and a foot aren't
the same, but that doesn't mean an inch is a misrepresented foot.

They're simply different measurements.

 

[Vic Dura]

It's your *assumptions* that needs checking. Averages give numbers that
are too high - as I suspect you know.

I don't recall making or stating any assumptions. I just calculated
the numeric averages leaving out the "--" entries.

I agree however that it would be nice to see someone calculate the
median and standard deviation. I am to lazy to do so myself :-(
although I'm not certain about their statistal validity with this kind
of data.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

People come here for solutions to their problems.
They want programs which are as "free" as possible.

< snip >

Try reading the newsgroup name. It isn't :

alt.comp.free.as.possible

or

alt.comp.help.even.if.off.topic

Idiots who cannot understand the idea of being "on topic" in a
newsgroup just waste everyone's time.

I suggest you setup one/both of the above newsgroups if you haven't
come here to read about/suggest/discuss freeware.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

Unless they're a freeware collector, I would have thought people come
here for a solution to a problem,

Nope. Try reading the name of the newsgroup. Newsgroups have different
names for a reason.

How much extra bandwidth is there in "Don't think there's any freeware
- try product XYZ which is SomeOtherWare" over "Don't think there's any
freeware - try looking in alt.comp.SomeOtherWare"?

People posting "off topic" posts in newsgroups can increase the
bandwidth considerably. One newsgroup might not matter but many people
read more than one newsgroup. Some people pay for every MB of
downloaded data they get. Including newsgroup data.

Regards, John.

--
****************************************************
,-._|\ (A.C.F FAQ) http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
/ Oz \ John Fitzsimons - Melbourne, Australia.
\_,--.x/ http://www.aspects.org.au/index.htm
v http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/

 

[John Fitzsimons]

Aaron wrote:

I think the best example of bizarre interpretations of the line between
crippled and not-crippled is JF's obsession with the online news reader
Xnews.

< snip >

A much more bizarre interpretation is where people want a newsreader
and you suggest one that only natively does online nerwsreading. Kind
of like suggesting a car with only two wheels. Despite your obvious
"denial mode" many people in the world want/use offline newsreaders.

Your fanatical enthusiasm about XNews does not help such people.

Regards, John.

 

[Roger Johansson]

It's your *assumptions* that needs checking. Averages give numbers that
are too high - as I suspect you know.

The *midpoint* is the mean - half of the people above and half below.
Bell charts to show the *distribution* would be *truly* meaningful.
Anyone?

Both average and median are meaningful numbers, and in this material
they are generally close to each other.

One could argue that average gives a more fair result because it
really averages all the votes.
One could argue that median gives a more fair result because it gives
the majority more power over the minority, I think.

I hope more people will respond to the poll. For now - here again are
the results to date - with the mid-point denoted by a blank line above
and below for ease of reference. Look at the numbers in the Warez column
to see why I thing averages are a bad idea.

I have compared Vics average numbers with your midpoint numbers:

type average midpoint (average higher than midpoint? Y or N)

Adware: 2.3 2 Y
Betaware: 3.5 4 N
CDWare: 2.5 2 Y
Commercial Software: 1.8 2 N
Crippleware: 2.2 2 Y
Demo-ware: 1.6 1 Y
Donationware: 4.3 4 N
Freeware: 5.0 5 Even
Liteware: 4.6 5 N
Malware: 1.1 1 Y
Nagware: 2.0 2 Even
Orphanware/Abandonware: 3.1 3 Y
Registerware: 3.6 4 N
Requestware: 3.8 4 N
Shareware: 1.4 1 Y
Spyware: 1.1 1 Y
Trialware: 1.8 1 Y
Warez: 0.9 1 N

9 Yes 7 No 2 Even

The result is that averages gave higher number 9 times, midpoint gave
higher numbers 7 times, and the results were identical twice.

Hardly a convincing result to back your idea that averages generally
give too high numbers. In such a small material 9 to 7 can be seen as
a 50/50 result. In an increasingly larger material the numbers would
probably get closer and closer to 50/50

What about the warez column?
0.9 to 1.0, Vics average is _lower_ than your median.