Active Topics
-
How many of you still use N900 as main phone? (592)
to Community by bradvesp - 1 day, 2 hrs ago -
Which is the best N95? What software modifications could be made to it? (3)
to General by Kalatti - 1 day, 12 hrs ago -
Installing CSSU Stable in year 2024 (2)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by teroyk - 1 day, 19 hrs ago -
Porting apps to Leste (34)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Arno_11 - 2 days, 5 hrs ago -
[ANNOUNCE] CSSU-thumb thread - stable Thumb2 on N900 (2,266)
to Maemo 5 / Fremantle by pali - 3 days, 21 hrs ago -
Firefox with Leste (7)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 4 days, 1 hr ago - more...
|
2010-03-03
, 13:32
|
|
Posts: 16 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Paris, France
|
#102
|
Originally Posted by Fargus
I don't see much difference between a protocol and a software.
The reason is that they were donated to the rest of the world to use freely. Also SMTP is not software it is a protocol that is implemented in software, so this is not a valid example.
Basically a protocol is just like a software, except that it is written on paper, not on a disk or on RAM.
Atually this is a niave statement. Much in the same way that it was argued that hijaaking someone's open wireless connection was legal, you get charged for theft of electricity! there is always a cost in production of code though not always obvious or significant.
Also, if marginal cost was really relevant in the problem of pricing software, then the price should be more or less proportionnel to the size of the executables and doc files. Or, I believe this is not the case, is it ?
But it's actually not even a matter of marginal cost, since during pirating, the legal owner of the software doesn't pay for the distribution. Let me explain.
Say a pirat legally buys some software. The seller will pay for data transmission and so on, and this marginal cost is supposed to be included in the price. Now the pirat owns the software and decide to share it illegaly with his buddys. He does that using his own bandwith and computing material. So the former owner is absolutely not concerned about this marginal cost anymore.
Not only marginal cost is almost zero for software, but in addition, it's not even entirely paid by the initial software editor.
Last edited by azorni; 2010-03-03 at 13:36.
 |
|
2010-03-03
, 13:40
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#103
|
Originally Posted by azorni
Fro someone voicing such a fervant opinion on a subject I would have expected them to at least understand the basics!
I don't see much difference between a protocol and a software.
Basically a protocol is just like a software, except that it is written on paper, not on a disk or on RAM.
...
A Protocol is an agreed standard for communication it details the interfaces that software can utilise. The software is free to decide how that interaction is accomplished. If you think of the protocol as grammer, then the software is similar to an article or book.
Originally Posted by azorni
The point people are trying to make is that in most countries using someone else's work without paying for it is considered unreasonable. You obviously couldn't give a monkey's about other people's effort and insist on being narrow minded.
...
Marginal cost is indeed not zero but if someone tries to calculate it, he will soon realize that it is fairly small. If I had to try to calculate it, I would have to take into account the price of electronic data storage, the price of bandwith and so on. Surely I will arrive to a very small price per kilobyte. But if you can prove me that it would reach $1/Kb, please do so.
Also, if marginal cost was really relevant in the problem of pricing software, then the price should be more or less proportionnel to the size of the executables and doc files. Or, I believe this is not the case, is it ?
But it's actually not even a matter of marginal cost, since during pirating, the legal owner of the software doesn't pay for the distribution. Let me explain.
Say a pirat legally buys some software. The seller will pay for data transmission and so on, and this marginal cost is supposed to be included in the price. Now the pirat owns the software and decide to share it illegaly with his buddys. He does that using his own bandwith and computing material. So the former owner is absolutely not concerned about this marginal cost anymore.
Not only marginal cost is almost zero for software, but in addition, it's not even entirely paid by the initial software editor.
|
|
2010-03-03
, 13:43
|
|
Posts: 16 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Paris, France
|
#104
|
Originally Posted by Fargus
It's not that different to me.
The car has only one instance though - copying the software and producing another copy is not the same scenario and therefore your analogy fails.
Both sellers want to keep control of what the buyer will do with the product after the sell. This is selling without alienation and is silly according to me.
Now as I was saying, if the seller can find someone to accept this, good for him, but I would never and I would consider that as tying.
|
|
2010-03-03
, 13:51
|
|
Posts: 16 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Paris, France
|
#105
|
Originally Posted by Fargus
That's an interesting point.
You might like to look at the sales contracts with Rolls Royce then - there were stringent conditions. There are also simliar restrictions on a lot of property salesd in the deeds too.
Obviously those firm have a strong commitment to their brand, which is quite an important part of the value of their car.
When the buyer decide to buy a Rolls Royce, he is perfectly aware of that, that's why I understand quite well that he accepts the particular conditions.
So when someone buys a Rolls Royce, he actually buys two things : a car, and the right to drive a car with the Rolls Royce logo on it, with the reputation of this firm and so on.
That's also why debranding exists : a firm with a very strong reputation might sometimes sell products without the logo on it.
According to me, it should always be possible to buy a product without its brand, otherwise once again, it should be considered as tying
|
|
2010-03-03
, 13:54
|
|
Posts: 16 |
Thanked: 1 time |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Paris, France
|
#106
|
Originally Posted by Fargus
So what ? A grammar book is still a book.
Fro someone voicing such a fervant opinion on a subject I would have expected them to at least understand the basics!
A Protocol is an agreed standard for communication it details the interfaces that software can utilise. The software is free to decide how that interaction is accomplished. If you think of the protocol as grammer, then the software is similar to an article or book.
Also, if you're not happy with protocols, please consider libraries. Very few programs are self-executables. Most of them make an extensive use of public libraries, such as standard C libs or arithmetic libs.
These are free software and fortunately, we don't have to pay each time we use them, otherwise a developer would have to constantly reinvent the wheel.
Last edited by azorni; 2010-03-03 at 15:41.
|
|
2010-03-03
, 13:56
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#107
|
[QUOTE=azorni;553907]It's not that different to me.
...QUOTE]
Are you for real? So allowing two people the same use at the same time is the same as a single item? You aren't related to OrangeBox perchance are you?
...QUOTE]
Are you for real? So allowing two people the same use at the same time is the same as a single item? You aren't related to OrangeBox perchance are you?
|
|
2010-03-03
, 13:58
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#108
|
Originally Posted by azorni
Well the point made earlier was that with an EULA or similar then the person in question should be aware of the intent too.
That's an interesting point.
Obviously those firm have a strong commitment to their brand, which is quite an important part of the value of their car.
When the buyer decide to buy a Rolls Royce, he is perfectly aware of that, that's why I understand quite well that he accepts the particular conditions.
So when someone buys a Rolls Royce, he actually buys two things : a car, and the right to drive a car with the Rolls Royce logo on it, with the reputation of this firm and so on.
That's also why debranding exists : a firm with a very strong reputation might sometimes sell products without the logo on it.
According to me, it should always be possible to buy a product without its brand, otherwise once again, it should be considered as tying
Why should it always be possible to buy without a brand? Why should someone have to provide you something they have worked on? Most countries have the right for a vendor to refuse sale and in your case I can see why!
|
|
2010-03-03
, 14:00
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#109
|
Originally Posted by azorni
The grammer is not the book. By creating a book you are documenting the standard. Are you actually this dense or just trolling? I've shown your posts to several French guys here in case it was a language issue and they are of the same opinion.
So what ? A grammar book is still a book.
 |
|
2010-03-03
, 14:09
|
|
Posts: 4,384 |
Thanked: 5,524 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
|
#110
|
@fargus: perhaps it's an age issue.. let it go bro..
__________________
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Follow the MeeGo Coding Competition!
which is why i insist on a signature card