Being locked in with proprietary software

I've written before about problems with proprietary software, and how some software vendors are locking in customers and using their leverage to cause painful headaches. Just today I was dealing with changing an IP address on a Windows server and therefore needed to get a new license file for a software package that runs on that server. The server is obviously actively being used, so the IP address will be changed probably soon on a weekend. I contacted the vendor to get a new license file, and they first said they needed a bunch of information from the server AFTER the new IP address is assigned. I responded and explained that I cannot change the IP first, then wait for hours/days to get a new license file as this would cause downtime for the users. So, they responded and said that they could generate a new license file ahead of time, but they need to know the exact time that we will be changing the IP address of the server. Seriously? What else could they need, our network infrastructure design, too?

My point is, vendors that write proprietary software and license it with a tight grip, cause a lot of headaches and wasted time for their customers. They can get away with things like locking in their customers, making it extremely difficult for the customer to shop around for cheaper and more flexible alternatives. They also can require extensive registration and activation techniques, collecting further information from you that is stored on their systems and potentially can be viewed by who knows.

This is why I greatly prefer open source software. It is completely free as in freedom, and we can use it anonymously and that's just OK with everybody. I don't like giving away lots of details to vendors about any of my hardware/software. Many times, they don't need to know anything more than the simple fact that you've paid them money, and you own their product. Unfortunately with the nature of proprietary software, piracy and other activities are common so they need to license and take control of the software. Thankfully, open source software is completely free of piracy. All of the activation, registration, and information collecting steps are simply not needed, period. To me, I overwhelmingly prefer this as it means I don't have to worry about it and I can just use the software and move on with things.

Talkback

"and you own their product." The fact that you paid for the product actually doesn't mean you own it, because they still tell you how you can use it, and restrict your use, of said product. You are really renting the product and paying them for its use. And, if the product is flawed, and you have to re-install it every six months, you have to negotiate a new registration of the product, lest it will stop working in 30 days. And, in some cases, you are forced to pay for a product if it is pre-installed on a new unit, even if you aren't going to use the product. This is called a monopoly, as they are the only ones who have the manufacturer tied up, in an agreement, to install said product on this device. This is inherently wrong, and should be illegal, but when you have the best lawyers, judges, and politicians that money can buy, then nobody gives a flip.
ator1940 17 June, 2010 14:46 Reply

@ator1940, excellent points made. That is actually a great way to think of it, as if you are renting rather than buying.

I wrote that yesterday in frustration of seeing a company use their leverage and cause much grief and aggravation. It took about 8 emails back and forth to come across the terms to allow the server IP address to be changed without causing downtime for the users.

It's very surprising that businesses still choose to use proprietary products that cause this grief and aggravation, when often times there are open source alternatives out there that avoid all of the problems mentioned. I think a lot of them are just used to it, and just don't know better. Personally, if I find an open source program that isn't quite up to par with a proprietary one, I am more than satisfied with using the open source alternative anyway, especially when taking into account the extra time and money that could be wasted with the proprietary one.
apexwm 17 June, 2010 17:46 Reply