I mean is there one?
The new Vista will be for sale for $199.
An average (whatever that means) American would have to work 10 to 20 hours to be able to buy it.
Meanwhile an average Russian would have to work 10 to 20 DAYS to earn the same amount of money (anything else being equal).
Now, Microsoft conveniently forget about this aspect of life when fighting against global piracy.
I’m not into MS bashing,just using it as an example.
My Question is :
Do I have a point in condoning piracy in Russia (China, India… )
or theft is theft is theft ?
If it has been discussed before please supply me with a relevant link)
Developing software costs a considerable amount of money, and if companies can’t turn a profit on it, they’re not going to do it. You like new features? Buy the current ones.
No; it’s not OK to steal* something you want simply because it costs more than you are able or willing to pay. An unaffordably high price is justification for not buying it, or using something else more affordable (or free), or asking nicely for a discount, but not for just taking it without paying Why would it be?
*(assuming for the sake of this thread that software piracy is in fact a form of theft)
Thou shalt not steal, unless thou be-est poor, in which case thou may get-eth thy blingbling on however thou want. Fucketh the Man, for he holdest thee down
What we need is a system where we send in one tax return to the feds, one to the state, and one to Microsoft. Microsoft could then have some proprietary algorithm that takes lots of factors into account and then set pricing down to the individual or family level. Bill Gates seems to like charity so maybe their could be an extra $10 price break or something if you sponsor a child or rise to the top ranks of a soup kitchen.
The argument that it’s OK to steal something if you can’t afford it may be defensible if you’re stealing a loaf of bread because you are starving and penniless. Nobody “needs” software.
well, they can buy a cheaper car, but where do you buy cheaper OS or a book for that matter ( no ebay or second hand book won’t do if a “free” book through IRC is available, same goes for CD, DVD…
One of the justifications I used to hear for people stealing very expensive software (like computer animation software) is that “when young innovative (but poor) people like me steal/use it, I’m creating a future market for it because one day I’ll be able to afford it on my own, and/or will work for a company who will purchase it for my use.”
To which I say, let the company decide if that’s how it wants to build market share.
Anyway, back to the OP. What makes you think Microsoft “conveniently forgot about this fact” when they set their pricing scale? I bet $10 Bill Gates could find Russia on a map.
a l0t of companies have emerging market prices. for software in a non standard language like russian, it’s easy to have a cheaper russian price for the russian language version. it’s not like there is a big black market for russian language windows in the rest of the world.
india takes it in the shorts because while the gdp is low, you can’t sell english language software at a special india discount because the would be an immediate arbitragenthat will hurt your global pricing.
stealing software is not right. students have access to special programs, student licenses, etc. however this is at the discrection of the seller rather than the student. linux is ‘free’ sorta but there’s also a reason why you don’t see that linux software animation program
Although who’s to say that this isn’t how the company wants to build its market share? Turning more or less a blind eye to hobbyist/enthusiast piracy and being vigilant about corporate licensing?
Over the past 10 years or so, it seems that there’s been an explosion of free licensing for non-commercial or stripped down versions of expensive software such as Solaris, Oracle, Maya, etc. If the company offers that, there’s no reason to not take advantage of it. But if they don’t, I guess I wouldn’t tear my hair out about a hobbyist using software priced for a corporate market if the company doesn’t seem to be worried about it.
If the company does not turn such a blind eye–i.e., if it actually charges for the software, if it actively works to discourage piracy as described in the OP–then obviously that is not its business model.
Granted. But you can’t say this doesn’t happen. Example: in Costco, I see stacks of “Microsoft Office Student and Teacher Edition” – a $150 version of Office that Microsoft says is only for “…qualified educational users or a household member of a qualified educational user.”
It’s piracy for the general public to buy this version of Office. But Costco doesn’t enforce the “educational users only” policy at the checkout stand, and even if they did – it’s sold plenty of places online. I can’t imagine the software has any way to enforce the licensing policy.
You have to admit, it looks very much like offering the “Student and Teacher edition” of Office with a wink and a nod to all home users, students or not, is indeed part of Microsoft’s business model.