Software companies are throwing a collective tantrum about unauthorized downloading and use of their products. They accuse downloaders of violating copyrights and stealing their work. Due to the systematic bias in favor of corporations of North American law, the opposite case is rarely made. Namely, software companies are robbing their customers blind. Here are six good reasons not to buy software, ever.
1. No Guarantees
Suppose you buy some new software, and it won’t install (Oblivion), does not work properly (SPSS), does not perform as advertised (MacSpeech Dictate), crashes constantly (Windows), suddenly corrupts its own files (Outlook) or breaks your other software (Symantec Security). Try bringing it back to the store for a refund. “Sorry Sir, we can’t issue a refund if the software’s been opened.” Giving you a replacement disc doesn’t work if it’s the software that’s broken.
2. Time Limits to Support
Where does Microsoft get off not supporting an operating system after a certain arbitrary date? They sure as hell don’t tell you this when you buy it in the first place. I’m not saying they should have to support old products forever – just that they should have to tell you how long the product will be supported when you buy it. And what if the upgrade is not technically superior to the previous version?
3. It just doesn’t work and they charge you to fix it.
Most modern software is absolute garbage. It simply does not do what it’s supposed to do. Software is full of bugs, features that are bugs in disguise, unnecessary complexity, poorly thought-out interactive mechanisms and crucial but missing functionality. Software companies fix the bare minimum, and then expect you to pay for the next version, which fixes SOME of the problems that never should have been there in the first place.
4. Nothing is Secure
Operating systems are to safes as leaky rafts are to nuclear submarines. All modern operating systems, for example, are so littered with holes that angsty teenagers can write viruses that end up costing software users millions of dollars. Most computer security is based on passwords, even though we know damn well that passwords don’t work.
Conclusion
Suppose we have a software company, say Ubersoft that makes some software, say “Doorways,” which I pay good money for. It turns out that Doorways doesn’t work very well, so I waste days of my life screwing around with it, trying to get it to work. Suppose they stop supporting it after a year, because they want me to upgrade. Suppose the “upgrade” barely even fixes half of the debilitating problems that made the original such a headache. Then suppose the system spontaneously corrupts all my family pictures and the videos of my kids, backups and all, and then, due to a well-known but unfixed security hole, someone is able to hack in, steal my identity, and subsequently make off with my life savings. If I sue the software company, I’ll get nothing.
Now suppose that instead of software, it was a new oven that had spontaneously caught fire, due to a known but unfixed electrical issue, and burned my house flat, wiping me out financially and destroying the same family heirlooms. The guys who made the oven would be on the hook for serious damages.
So why the hell aren’t the software companies responsible for the damage inflicted by their products?
Fuck ‘em. Power to the Pirate Bay.
| Comments | Published in | PREV | NEXT |
|---|---|---|---|
| 9 |
consumerism list piracy software law |
No mention of DRM? That alone makes the case for piracy.
And what if the upgrade is not technically superior to the previous version?
I wonder which example you could possibly have in mind here.
It would be great if legal provisions regarding software had two parts: one designed to protect intellectual property rights, and one to protect user rights. Unfortunately, this won’t happen quickly in a world where international companies market their software in many different countries with many different laws, so we’re stuck with the Pirate Bay et al.
Or, wherever possible (because if my oven’s going to set fire to my apartment, it’s only a small consolation that the oven was downloaded for free, to sabotage your metaphor): use open source software and pray that the people working on it will be users who will 1) understand what the potential problems with the software are and 2) have their own – and other users’ – best interests at heart when fixing those problems.
And now I could start on some problems with open source software (the potential for copyright problems, unfortunate interactions with legal software, the not-uncommon belief that user friendliness is for the weak), or an entirely separate rant on people/institutions/websites that require that you have a particular brand of software to perform a particular function; but I think that’s quite enough sleep-deprived commentary for now.
It’s funny, the first thing I do with any new system is strip down all the bundled software they try to give me.
A lot companies see end user customer support as a necessary evil. Outside of the occasional warm fuzzy they might give out (hopefully making a repeat customer), they(support techs) do very little in the way of generating revenue. Proprietary software is usually sold by large corporations, or small companies aspiring to be bought by a large corporation. Small companies generally lack the resources to adequately support their products, especially when they become popular very quickly. Large companies draw a large portion of their revenue from other corporate clients. One corporate client can represent millions of dollars, one Joe plumber(standing alone), is a drop in the bucket. That’s why if a corporate client has a problem in the middle of the night, someone will get their ass out of bed (if necessary) to fix the problem. If I call with a problem (especially after business hrs) my call is routed to Sri Lanka and the operator is doing tech support on line 1, and selling SHAMWOWs on line 2.
Guarantees are a pain in the ass even when offered, intentionally I suppose. It usually ends up being a pissing contest. It’s like all consumers are automatically assumed to be the guy who spilled coffee on his install disk and dried it in the microwave.
Security is going to be an issue anytime your PC is connected to the real world. Security can/is done on different layers (OSI) and can/does include more than just password protection. The problem is the average user has neither the skills, and/or the resources to accomplish it. No matter how good your security is, someone is trying to break it. Some conspiracy folks have theorized this may be some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy. The software companies create the virus and then sell you a solution.
I’m amazed at the development of open source. There’s very little from a personal PC perspective that can’t be done using an open source application. I think it’s great. It’s interesting that despite all of the great free browsers out there, IE still has over 70% of the market share. Why?
Is it the best? If your answer is yes, please explain.
Is IE the best? Yes.
The best at spreading viruses and malware, creating revenues for software companies.
Rick – IE most certainly is not the best (H – when SARS first hit, there was a joke going around that the good news was that unlike most viruses it didn’t spread via IE), but there are a few places where an alternative won’t do.
Microsoft Windows Update, for one, requires that users have IE. So do a number of other sites I’ve come across, including at least one country’s main research and student funding agency’s website (not to name names…). I think this is at best absurdly negligent, and possibly illegal, and either way shocking, but that might go some way towards explaining why so many people might run IE. That, and force of habit among people who’ve grown used to IE and don’t care enough about their browser’s features to switch.
@M
Well there is an addon that will run the IE engine inside Firefox. Also a user agent switcher will make the Microsoft site think you’re using IE and everything will work normally.
Illegal? This is MS we’re talking about. They don’t have to compete!
@M – “IE most certainly is not the best”
Yeah, not in any measurable technical specs. (that I know of). As you mentioned, I think a lot of it is browser apathy among the average PC user. With the exception of Linux, the corporate world really hasn’t fully embraced open source, so IE is pretty much standard there.
As an ex-web developer, my experience is that most people who code and design for the web hate IE as much as everyone posting here. From our perspective, IE is a pain in the ass because it plays by its own rules; it doesn’t follow web standards, even though Microsoft has been involved in the drafting of the W3C drafts and specifications for years now. So the folks creating web sites have to make dozens of pieces of special IE-only code/markup just so their site will function in that broken, sad failure of a browser. Unfortunately there are some people who simply code for IE because it’s the dominant browser, but I suppose every profession has its idiots.
@H, I don’t think the DRM on software would be so bad if the other problems were fixed. DRM on music and movies, however, totally justifies pirating them.
@M, I think you’re correct on all points. Unfortunately, open source software and protecting user rights run contrary to the corporatist agenda of our politicians
@Rick, the trick with security isn’t making it impossible to break, it’s making it more trouble than it’s worth. I think the popularity of IE comes down to its bundling with Windows. Human decision making is strongly influenced by default options.
@M, I think I might know that funding agency, and it works with Camino
@Dan, I’ve heard the same thing about coding for IE. Perhaps one solution is for developers to stop supporting deviations from the standards. I’m not sure how to implement that, though.