, kettch wrote

@Bass: That doesn't excuse it. I'd much rather toss the developer a few bucks for software I like than have to deal with this kind of crap. I'm generally happier with software I have to pay for. Maybe it's because I paid for it, and I'm darn well going to like it. More likely it's because the developer feels the need to make sure that people get their money's worth.

There's stuff like LinqPad, Regex Buddy, and Bins that all have a free version that is excellent. I've bought the full version for all of those partially to get the added features, but also because I like the software enough to support the folks who write it.

I don't think that revenue model is really feasible for stuff like Java (or even Adobe Reader or Flash Player). (Not that I imagine either Oracle or Adobe exactly have cashflow problems, even without bundling.)

EDIT: Although it does p!55 me off. Particularly when you're actually doing them a favour running flash/java/adobe reader since it helps make their ecosystems more dominant encouraging people to buy expensive copies of acrobat or whatever. (It's not like I actually want these programmes on my computer in the first place anyway but more a case of "needs must".) Plus the annoyance issues of them sneaking onto your computer if you forget to notice/uncheck the little box. Plus the security issues of people running unpatched versions of goodness knows what that was only installed as a result of this kind of bundling.