Which type of software is better?

[Forte Lambardi]

Me and my father had a discussion about free software and commercial software. He claims that that commercial software (you have to pay for) is much better than freeware, and I say otherwise.

 

I would like to hear your opinions. It's not one of those "I am right you're wrong" issues: I want ot know what others think.

 

I personally think that freeware can be just as good as commerical software.

[rridgely]

As far as quality goes commercial software is usually better than their freeware counterparts, but what do you expect when one is backed by hobbyists and the other is backed by a million dollar corporation. But with that said you can function perfectly using mostly free software and I have been doing that for a long time now. (especially if your a student running low on cash. In a business environment you may not want to rely on freeware)

 

I use OpenOffice, the gimp, NVU, and paint.net all the time but I would never say that those are better than MS Office, Photoshop, or Dreamweaver because they aren't but in a home environment the freeware will cover your needs most of the time.(all of the time from what I do and the people I know do).

[Forte Lambardi]

I see your point.

 

So, one has to consider what kind of environment he or she is working with when he or she is trying to figure whether he or she wants to use freeware or commercial software.

 

My dad uses Norton Internet Security, and he kept boasting how it was the best thing he has ever seen. He saw it at his work, and he decided to use it.

 

I try to use it, and it's god-awful for my computer: it hogs resources, it slows down start up, and it slows down overall system performance (at least for me). I switch to freeware and I am running well, if not better, compared to when I had Norton on my computer.

[fireryone]

Your not the only one, you wont find many here singing praises for Norton,

Just stick with the free AV's they are way better than Norton,

If you want to pay for one I recommend using NOD32.

[rridgely]

You didn't say were talking about security software.

If thats the case get AVG Free or Antivir Personal and forget about it. The windows firewall along with those one of those AVs will keep your pc every bit as protected and running much better than a norton infected(thats right infected) computer.

 

Also pick up AVG antispyware and superantispyware which both have free on demand scanners and use them every now and then. Actually just read through the links in my signature.

[Maysky]

I can think of many advantages for freewares over commercial wares besides price.

 

 

- No reservation for features > no "We'll put those new features on the next version and charge the users again for them"

 

- No bad add-ons just for the vendors to claim extra functionality which looks good on the package box, but in reality have little use.

 

- No additional resources required and bugs introduced by those bad add-ons.

 

- Smaller and more efficient

 

- Not pressured to come out before it's ready

 

- No stupid rebate game (US)

 

- Softwares are downloaded and ready for use in minutes (depends on connection speed)

 

 

These are the ones I can think of, feel free to add to it.

 

 

--

[hazelnut]

I have always chosen freeware whenever possible, there are a lot of good free software applications out there, especially in the security area.

 

I used to have avast but it never really agreed with my computer whereas avira (free) does.

 

However if a particular piece of software was something I was really interested in using, and I found after a trial that it caused no system problems, I would consider buying it at a reasonable price.

[Humpty]

As a newcomer you may want to have a look at using my favourite little app which will even survive a "killdisk" attack.

 

Sandboxie - Link

 

Give it a bit of time to get used to and you will reap the benefits.

 

Then you can look at PowerShadow - an unbelievable bit of software.

 

After PowerShadow then have a look at MS Virtual PC.

 

Win98, Ubuntu and two installs of XP pro, one from disc and the other from an ISO as tests are what I have tried this week with all of them working fine.

 

After allocating 512 meg to all virtual machines Win98 kills them all in startup and browsing the net?

 

One thing is that I had to disable my PC tools FW for any of the virtual machines to connect.

[KS-FINN]

I also got about 90% FREEWARE except for a couple commercial. Bitdefender Antivirus v10 is one of the commercial programs. I must have tried at least 8 (Eight) or more FREE antivirus programs but for some reason or the the other they were not compatable with my system or other software so I would have to remove them do to constant problems. I realize Bitdefender is a bit hard on the rescources but I wouldn't go with out once having it. It's the only Antivirus program that I found that causes NO PROBLEMS.!! It's a excellent program once you learn how to configurate it.

[rridgely]

- No reservation for features > no "We'll put those new features on the next version and charge the users again for them"

I don't think its so much reservation of features as much as its that they can do more stuff once they update their program.

 

- No bad add-ons just for the vendors to claim extra functionality which looks good on the package box, but in reality have little use.

Lots of freeware programs have plug ins. Sure they are usually free too but you said things besides price. (and who is to say the commercial plug ins are buggy?)

 

- No additional resources required and bugs introduced by those bad add-ons.

Same as before.

 

- Smaller and more efficient

Nope. Smaller maybe but the gimp isn't more efficient then photoshop for graphic designers.

 

- Not pressured to come out before it's ready

This might be the worst point of all. Freeware is horrible for staying in perpetually endless beta stages.

 

- No stupid rebate game (US)

Eh, your back to price.

 

- Softwares are downloaded and ready for use in minutes (depends on connection speed)

This is a false too.

I can download and use photoshop, norton antivirus or MS office in minutes too the only difference is I have to enter a credit card number.

 

 

 

I'm all for freeware like I said before. But you can't have a closed mind and think just because something is good for you its good for the rest of the world.

I think for students programs like openoffice and the gimp are great. They will get them introduced to the software and get them through school but once you get into the professional side of things everyone is using MS office and Photoshop. If your going to be a web designer then learning to use dreamweaver is pretty much required.

 

You just have to decide what will work for you. I think quality wise freeware has gotten to a point where it can fit a lot of peoples needs(it does mine) but I would never say its better then the commercial products that cost big bucks. I would say always look for a free program to do what you need and then move to the commercial stuff if you can't find anything.

[Maysky]

I disagree. I listed those advantages as general terms, not in absolute terms where you find one exception and it's no longer true. I'm sure you can tell the differences.

 

Closed mind? Perhaps you're reading too much between the lines.

 

 

---

[rridgely]

You said that those were advantages of freeware over commercial software and what I was showing you was that what you said wasn't always true. It may be true for some but not all and if its not you cannot say that its a advantage of freeware over commercial software as a whole. You could point out those things about specific applications though.

 

The reason I even pointed it out was because I have been seeing a lot of of false info all over the net. I see on major tech sites lots of folks saying you should give up windows and use linux and never pay for software and always use blah blah blah. I'm all for using free software when possible but I don't like to spread false claims either.

 

I don't think you can say freeware is better or commercial software is better you have to look at it on a case by case basis. There is some commercial software that is worth the price tag but there is also some that I wouldn't take if you paid me too.

 

Like I said before I'm a huge supporter of using free/open source software.

 

I use openoffice, scribus, gimp, CCleaner, zipgenius, picasa, auslogics disc defrag, firefox, gaim, thunderbird, media player classic, winamp, NVU, all of my security software, ect ect. Just about all of the software on my computers I got free of charge and I recommend these programs all the time but you have to remember that what works for me or you may not be the best to someone else.

 

I'm really only pointing this out because of the subject of the topic(which is better) and I was saying you can't say one is better then the other.

[DennisD]

The windows firewall along with those one of those AVs will keep your pc every bit as protected and running much better than a norton infected(thats right infected) computer.

 

Nice to hear a mention for Windows Firewall, which I've stayed with after trying a few different ones, including another try of PCtools Firewall plus.

 

My pc just seems to run better with windows firewall.

 

Although it's an inbound protection only, it's flagged up a few warnings over the last few days of programs attempting to download something from the web.

 

As I've been trying out some new stuff that downloads extra software, it hasn't failed once in blocking the download until I've given the go-ahead.

 

It also passes every test at places like Gibson Research and Hackerwatch with 100% stealth, and although I've seen various debates about exactly what 100% stealth is, or isn't, it still gives you a feeling of confidence.

 

I run it with Avast Home Edition, and I think I'm fortunate in that I seem to have hit a sweet spot with this particular combination. But of course not all combinations work for everyone.

 

Just thought I'd put my two penneth in for Windows Firewall.

[Andavari]

However if a particular piece of software was something I was really interested in using, and I found after a trial that it caused no system problems, I would consider buying it at a reasonable price.

Same here! Nowadays I would only consider purchasing commercial software if only there was a trial period as you've mentioned to determine if no system problems occur because there's more than enough commercial products that are so horribly coded which cause so much system havoc that they're really not worth installing - let alone purchasing.

 

I'm one of those folks that still prefer the commercial Microsoft Office over the currently available free/open source office alternatives. After trying OpenOffice and not liking it, it has further concreted that preference of me liking MS Office.

[Forte Lambardi]

I read all the replies, and you guys all make good points. It's actually help me to expand my thinking on the advantages of freeware and commercial software.

[lotse]

Same here! Nowadays I would only consider purchasing commercial software if only there was a trial period as you've mentioned to determine if no system problems occur because there's more than enough commercial products that are so horribly coded which cause so much system havoc that they're really not worth installing - let alone purchasing.

 

On that point it pays to remember to ALWAYS create a restore point BEFORE installing any new software - a feature I've noticed that happens automatically with some software

 

Unfortunately its a steep learning curve when it comes to buying software, as I have found out to my cost, both in monetary terms and in the time and effort involved in restoring your HD and trying to recover lost data.

 

For the record, the best piece of commercial software I have bought is Diskeeper - it does an amazing job keeping my disk defragmented.

 

The best freeware is a tough choice. If it was security related its probably AVG, but for entertainment the GOM movie player is THE best multimedia player I have come across - combined with the real alternative and the QT alternative, it will play every movie type I have heard of, together with a range of options and settings that puts most commercial players to shame. I'm beginning to sound like an advertisement so I won't post the link, but a quick Google search will give you the home page.

[DennisD]

The GOM player looks to be an effective player of just about anything, but I'm a bit concerned about the DRM question raised on the GOM player forum, which took 2 months to elicit an answer.

 

Found here:

 

> 4. DIGITAL RIGHTS MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ("DRMs"). This software includes a DRM("Digital Rights Management") technology. DRMs are designed to manage and enforce intellectual property rights in digital content purchased over the Internet. Gomplayer digital rights management is a proven platform to protect and securely deliver content for playback on a computer, portable device, or network device. You may not take any action to circumvent or defeat the security or content usage rules provided or enforced by either the DRM or the Software. DRMs may be able to revoke your ability to use applicable content. Gomplayer is not responsible for the operation of third party DRM in any way, including revocation of your content. Gomplayer is not responsible for any communications to or from any third party DRM provider, or for the collection or use of information by third party DRMs. You consent to the communications enabled and/or performed by the DRM, including automatic updating of the DRM without further notice. You agree to indemnify and hold harmless Gomplayer for any claim relating to your use of a third party DRM.

 

The sentence I've underlined really is heavy handed.

 

Maybe I'm over reacting, but I don't think this is something I want to voluntarily put on my system.

[rridgely]

I tried gom player but I didn't see a need for it. It looks nice but it doesn't play quicktime files so I still had to use media player classic. Since MPC plays everything I didn't see any reason to keep them both.

[Andavari]

The GOM player looks to be an effective player of just about anything, but I'm a bit concerned about the DRM question raised on the GOM player forum, which took 2 months to elicit an answer.

 

Found here:

The sentence I've underlined really is heavy handed.

 

Maybe I'm over reacting, but I don't think this is something I want to voluntarily put on my system.

I dunno if you're overreacting, however I had suspicions about it and completely removed it. Perhaps we're the old paranoid guys on the forums!

[lotse]

Thanks for the feedback.

 

How would the DRM be updated? Would that be through GOM player of some thirdparty application? I have always blocked GOM player from accessing the web anyway, although I admit the sentence doesn't sound good. Infact I always block all media players from accessing the web

 

A couple of points regarding rridgely's comments.

 

Firstly, Gom player does play QT/Mov files if you install the QT alternative. Secondly MPC isn't fully compatible with vista, I kept getting "screen resolution" error messages. The screen/movie display quality seemed to be worse as a result. I also never remember MPC ever being able to play QT/MOV files, I always used to use the VLC player to play that format.

 

If there are any Vista users who can reccomend a suitable player, I quite willing to give other players a try...

[rridgely]

With the klite mega pack MPC will play every format I have ever run into. I installed gom player with it installed and it didn't play .h264(quicktime).

[wgan]

I dont care which type the software is, I only care what the quality the software brings, like CCleaner, you dont need to pay a dime for it, but it's quite good, isn't? just ask yourself does that piece of ware make you happy, then you will get the answer, good luck:)