<story><title>On paying for software</title><url>https://seths.blog/2018/06/on-paying-for-software/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>afarrell</author><text>One of the reasons that I switched from Linx to OSX was so that I could pay for more of my software. Why? Because then I more of the software I used could be maintained by someone who had the time to dig into bugs and UI problems and to fix them. But in Linux, couldn&amp;#x27;t I just edit the source myself? Realistically, no. It takes a tremendous amount of effort to source-dive in a totally new project in a language I never use, especially without someone willing to give me a walkthrough of the architecture and fundamental models of the program. It is waaaay more efficient for these to be fixed by an engineer working not in their spare time, but as their full-time job.&lt;p&gt;A developer targeting OSX knows they have an audience of people willing to pay him money so he can spend his whole day doing usability tests and his evening watching a little league game.&lt;p&gt;I do miss strace though.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>kazinator</author><text>This is actually completely backwards in an ironic way. I have found in the past that when I made a program closed source, for sale, all further incentive to do anything to the program became connected to its revenue. Like, &amp;quot;it hasn&amp;#x27;t generated any meaningful revenue, so I cannot justify spending another N hours on it unless those hours lead to sales.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;Most software that you can buy has little or no revenue, which means you will be one of a scarce set of suckers paying for it. That meagre revenue doesn&amp;#x27;t pay for the developer resources to improve the program.&lt;p&gt;Paying for software is like an insurance premium against bugs and issues in that program.&lt;p&gt;Paying for some unpopular software with few users is like buying insurance from an insurance company that insures only a handful of other policy holders.</text></comment>
<story><title>On paying for software</title><url>https://seths.blog/2018/06/on-paying-for-software/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>afarrell</author><text>One of the reasons that I switched from Linx to OSX was so that I could pay for more of my software. Why? Because then I more of the software I used could be maintained by someone who had the time to dig into bugs and UI problems and to fix them. But in Linux, couldn&amp;#x27;t I just edit the source myself? Realistically, no. It takes a tremendous amount of effort to source-dive in a totally new project in a language I never use, especially without someone willing to give me a walkthrough of the architecture and fundamental models of the program. It is waaaay more efficient for these to be fixed by an engineer working not in their spare time, but as their full-time job.&lt;p&gt;A developer targeting OSX knows they have an audience of people willing to pay him money so he can spend his whole day doing usability tests and his evening watching a little league game.&lt;p&gt;I do miss strace though.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>wazoox</author><text>I use Linux and most free software projects allow donations. I even donated to projects I don&amp;#x27;t actually use, like FreeBSD. I donated money to many free software projects, Ardour, Mozilla, LibreOffice, OpenBSD, etc. This is clearly a false dichotomy.</text></comment>