Re: Knock Knock, bad business practice!!
> Its Borland not Darth Vader...
> To clarify, a software company has
> decided to protect its rights (..and the
> wages of its staff and future Linux
> development) by developing a license
> that isnt to everyones tastes. This,
> IMO, is over reaction. Borland are not
> going to suddenly start breaking your
> door down and stealing your top secret
> source code. Yes... they could enter
> your house but then we all know this
> wont happen and its designed to target
> small to medium companies actively
> stealing there software. No, I dont like
> this license nor do I work for Borland
> in any shape or form but I think the
> theory has got blurred with the reality.
> I personally *prefer* that they CAN
> enter my place of work (or house if we
> must all get paranoid) and ask me to
> prove I have paid for there software.
> This is a VAST improvement on having the
> software busy telling them things that I
> have no control over. At least this way
> the end user has absolute control over
> what information is known.
That still doesn't absolve them of the simple fact that they arn't entitled to those rights, even with small-medium sized businesses. Who are they to set parameters like that. People these days think that just because they have "intellectual property", they've suddenly become this "holier than thou" savior to the people.
If they wanna inquire on licensing, they can do it the legal way. Not by obligating us to waive our rights.
As the title says, it's bad business practice.
> The answer seems pretty simple, if you
> feel this license is unfair and
> violation of some right or other then
> dont use the software. I would think
> home users arent particularly a massive
> revenue maker for Borland anyway and...
> money talks.
Absolutley, however Borland's main audience for the past...MANY years HAS been the home developer. It's only been somewhat recently that they've decided to start charging more for their products. At this point, it doesn't seem like the value is there anymore either. They try to pimp out licensing in such a ridiculous manor, that if someone wanted to distribute a piece of software made with their tools, they'd have to shell out yet again.
One price is good enough. You absolutley can not justify their attempts to milk the market. Not with "intellectual property protection", and not with "this is how they make a living".
Yes, money talks, and if people have to spend too much, they're gonna look elsewhere.
If they made their products a "one for all" sort of deal, and made it available at local software stores, for more human prices, more people would buy it...I promise you that.
I was considering buying C++ Builder recently, but after seeing this document, I don't know anymore.
I agree with you on that one. Borland used to have good products, but after becoming Inprise, and whatever other change of face they've had, it's just not the same company anymore.
Now big rooms full of market analysts are turning the crank on a jack-in-the-box with the word "money" painted on it in green.
Boy are they in for a surprise.
Borland charges way too much for their software, and with Linux on a collision course for reality, their sort of products will be just the same as something that "Bob LaBla" made in his basement in Helsinki.