Why do we ask for donations so often? Because it’s important! As KDE becomes more successful and an increasing number of people use our software, our costs grow as well: Web and server hostin…
Unfortunately, there has always been the issue that a not-insignificant percentage of users of FOSS software believe the FREE part means “free as in beer” and take umbrage when asked to contribute.
I’ve long been a proponent (and I know I’m in a minority) that has advocated for a shift in the marketing of FOSS applications from “donation based” to “value based”. Meaning that the expectation is that if you enjoy the software, you pay an amount that you believe is commensurate to your use. This is voluntarily of course…if you can’t pay, than please use it and enjoy it. But those who can pay, should pay…at least a little bit, to offset the costs for those who can’t.
It’s more or less that the wording of FOSS apps needs to change so that you are expected to contribute if you can.
Just my opinion. Like I said, I know I’m in the minority. Just not a fan of the percentage of users that has always existed that (falsely) think that asking for money for your project is somehow anathema to the Open Source ideal and whine whenever they’re asked to contribute.
The full saying is “Free as in Speech, not Free as in Beer”
Basically the “Free” in free means that it’s free to do with as you please, modify, etc… But not free as in “here’s a free product…like getting a free beer”
That’s also confusing and it is not the full saying. The full saying is “free as in free speech, not free beer”.
From the FSF website:
Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. Think of “free” as in “free speech”, not as in “free beer”. Free software is a matter of the users’ freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software.
Maybe donate 50 cents for every hour you used the software and it was useful to you.
That would be 1000 €$ per year if you work with Linux full time.
Let’s see some commercial software:
Microsoft Office 365 is 70 $€ per year. Adobe Suite around 700 $€ per year. IntelliJ IDEA about 170 $€ per year. Affinity Suite is 170 $€ once. Reaper is 60 €$ for a discounted license. Full featured media player like Elmedia costs 20 $€. BBEdit costs 60.
The FOSS windows and Mac FTP client Cyberduck asks for a minimum 10 €$ donation. It won’t prompt you for a donation if you bought a license. The Duck applications are all pretty nice.
While I absolutely agree with what you are trying to say and donate to kde myself already. The issue with a lot of comments like yours is that the examples you use are almost always commercial software that already only see’s limited use. I get value out of non commerical use applications such as dolphin, kate, konsole, and kdeconnect. Finding examples of popular paid versions of those applications would go a long way in my opinion because it would be something that more people can relate to.
The problem I see with the examples you are giving are the same problems I see when someone uses those examples as reasons why they can’t switch to linux in the first place. And that is the fact that while those programs are popular. They aren’t used by the vast majority of people who don’t have a work related need to use them. Half the people that claim it as an excuse probably don’t actually use those programs as well.
Your examples such as Cyberduc, Elmedia, and BBBedit are your stronger examples. Again just my opinion.
I like that terminology. I use some very high quality, high visibility FOSS software and sometimes feel bad that I more frequently donate to smaller projects that bring me value by filling a specific want or need that no one else is working on.
Unfortunately, there has always been the issue that a not-insignificant percentage of users of FOSS software believe the FREE part means “free as in beer” and take umbrage when asked to contribute.
I’ve long been a proponent (and I know I’m in a minority) that has advocated for a shift in the marketing of FOSS applications from “donation based” to “value based”. Meaning that the expectation is that if you enjoy the software, you pay an amount that you believe is commensurate to your use. This is voluntarily of course…if you can’t pay, than please use it and enjoy it. But those who can pay, should pay…at least a little bit, to offset the costs for those who can’t.
It’s more or less that the wording of FOSS apps needs to change so that you are expected to contribute if you can.
Just my opinion. Like I said, I know I’m in the minority. Just not a fan of the percentage of users that has always existed that (falsely) think that asking for money for your project is somehow anathema to the Open Source ideal and whine whenever they’re asked to contribute.
Also what the hell is up with everyone saying “free as beer”?
Beer isn’t free!
The full saying is “Free as in Speech, not Free as in Beer”
Basically the “Free” in free means that it’s free to do with as you please, modify, etc… But not free as in “here’s a free product…like getting a free beer”
That’s also confusing and it is not the full saying. The full saying is “free as in free speech, not free beer”.
From the FSF website:
I have over €1500 donated to opensource projects.
I have only once bought a commercial software license worth €7/lifetime.
Maybe donate 50 cents for every hour you used the software and it was useful to you.
That would be 1000 €$ per year if you work with Linux full time.
Let’s see some commercial software:
Microsoft Office 365 is 70 $€ per year. Adobe Suite around 700 $€ per year. IntelliJ IDEA about 170 $€ per year. Affinity Suite is 170 $€ once. Reaper is 60 €$ for a discounted license. Full featured media player like Elmedia costs 20 $€. BBEdit costs 60.
The FOSS windows and Mac FTP client Cyberduck asks for a minimum 10 €$ donation. It won’t prompt you for a donation if you bought a license. The Duck applications are all pretty nice.
While I absolutely agree with what you are trying to say and donate to kde myself already. The issue with a lot of comments like yours is that the examples you use are almost always commercial software that already only see’s limited use. I get value out of non commerical use applications such as dolphin, kate, konsole, and kdeconnect. Finding examples of popular paid versions of those applications would go a long way in my opinion because it would be something that more people can relate to.
The problem I see with the examples you are giving are the same problems I see when someone uses those examples as reasons why they can’t switch to linux in the first place. And that is the fact that while those programs are popular. They aren’t used by the vast majority of people who don’t have a work related need to use them. Half the people that claim it as an excuse probably don’t actually use those programs as well.
Your examples such as Cyberduc, Elmedia, and BBBedit are your stronger examples. Again just my opinion.
They make more apps than just Cyberduck?
Mountain Duck and Cryptomator
I like that terminology. I use some very high quality, high visibility FOSS software and sometimes feel bad that I more frequently donate to smaller projects that bring me value by filling a specific want or need that no one else is working on.