>That's ludicrous.
>
>I've used plenty of free apps that are just plain junk, full of bugs,
>don't have nearly the features of commercial apps, and are far
>harder to user, have no support, and no documentation.

So have I. I uninstalled them and went forward with my life. Or, I used that base and modified something about it and continued.

>It goes both ways.

Yes, and in both directions the people (who make up the market) sort it out better than any FORCED CONTROL MECHANISM put upon people's shoulders. All forced control does is limit anyone with the ability to have knowledge, or to wield technology properly, to then be able to do anything. It ties their hands.

It's the total excuse of control freaks, Craig. Wake up and stop drinking their kool-aid! It's the exact same type of reasoning they always use to impose control over people ... that "they know better how to guide than individuals do." That may be true on an individual-by-individual basis, that the goals of larger entities know better than a person, or even a small group of people, but it NEVER EVER true on the whole. Only in extreme cases is it true, such as virus research, where there is such a learning curve between no knowledge and sufficient knowledge so as to recognize the dangers, that the forcible control placed atop the people there is required. But even then it's in the ratios, because 99.9% of people would not have the knowledge to know how dangerous something like that is.

In every other case, and especially in the world of software, there are people out there with better solutions, better ideas, different needs than the mass majority of regular users who don't have such needs, and can't wield such abilities (as developers).

Wake up, Craig.

>>That's a weak reason. ARM is already powerful enough for most things.
>Not when you start multi-tasking.

Yes, even then. And if it's not, then you can suspend the app automatically through a task manager utility that is only needed when it is needed, rather than forcibly imposed all the time.

>Said like a true C++ developer. "I need to control everything".

This is pathetic! It's the introduction of some totally unrelated statement to make it seem my position is invalid.

I want the freedom, Craig, freedom to develop. It's not about control. It's about freedom. I am writing Visual __Free__Pro for a reason. I am one person working on one project. Many other people have other projects. The users are going to choose which one they want. It will be mine, or someone else's, or whatever ... but they have the choice to choose.

>Maybe that was true years ago, but here's a good example. With today's
>processors and RAM sizes, why, as a developer, should I care about if
>have to choose an AnsiString or a byte array when working with a string.
>It's called an "optimizing compiler". It should do the work of optimizing,
>not me.

You've introduced arguments that have nothing to do with the argument at hand into the mix. My reasoning has NOTHING to do with anything you've mentioned. The entire disagreement here is one thing: the age old argument that the FLOSS proponents have had against the PROPRIETARY proponents ... it's that freedom matters, and the ability to have that freedom of choice is what's important, even if it doesn't EVER get used ... having the ability to use it is what's important.

It is bad what is happening. So much control. So much domination over users. And using the exact same techniques and ploys.