Re: GNAT GPL is not shareware

[Jeffrey Carter <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>]

On 01/05/2015 04:24 AM, Dirk Heinrichs wrote:
> David Botton wrote:
> 
>> It is what it is. A demo of tech...
> 
> No, it's not. It's not a demo, it's a fully featured product. If you don't 
> like the license, don't use it. Use FSF Gnat instead.

In my experience, "shareware" has been used for full-featured software released
at no cost with a request that those who find the S/W useful send some money to
the developer(s). There is also the term "crippleware" for S/W released at no
cost but lacking some feature(s) that can be obtained by paying for the
full-featured version.

GNAT GPL does not match this definition of "shareware".

Some might claim that GNAT GPL does match this definition of "crippleware". As
an example of crippleware, see http://www.wolframalpha.com/. Some offered
features result in an exhortation to "Subscribe to Pro", and this is a
characteristic of most crippleware that is not present in GNAT GPL.

It would be easier to think of GNAT GPL as crippleware if every invocation of
the compiler resulted in an encouragement to buy GNAT Pro that required action
by the user before the compilation proceeded.

The GNAT Pro/GNAT GPL dichotomy seems unique: two products with essentially
identical features, differing only in the run-time license. Perhaps we should
dub GNAT GPL "RTL-ware".

-- 
Jeff Carter
"Blessed is just about anyone with a vested interest in the status quo."
Monty Python's Life of Brian
73