- Freeware

- GlucoMon

- 9500/Itamar

- Two machines become one

- Psion 5mx to Nokia 9500

- Re: Shareware and freeware (was The Digest V1 # 730 13)

Date: 16 Apr 2005 09:14:14 +0700
From: ian chapple <address truncated>
Subject: Freeware

Phil,
>>My point, the first part of which you seem to appreciate, is that the freeware registration requirement is both silly (you didn't say you thought it so but . . . ) *and* wrong. <<

I have already said that I found it a strange requirement, though Rolf did come with a perfectly good reason for doing this. I don't agree with you that it is wrong; if I release a new piece of freeware tomorrow, I am perfectly entitled to operate a registration system if I so choose; you, as a user, have the right to point out that you don't like such a system and have the choice not to continue using my software if you don't like the manner under which it has been made available, but it is not inherently wrong to operate in this way.

>>I think it is legally wrong, I suspect it is morally wrong and I believe it is unfair.<<

I'm sorry, but I still disagree with what you say. There is absolutely no way that it is legally wrong to release freeware requiring registration, and I'm very curious about why you think that it might be; for example, what law is being broken? If it is "legal" to release shareware which requires registration, it cannot be "illegal" to release freeware requiring the same. My above arguments also apply to why I don't believe it to be either morally wrong or unfair.

>>Abandoning the software, free software, *without* freeing it of encumbrances may not make the situation worse for some - but it can not make it any better.<<

That I do agree with. As Chris already said, the best situation when stopping support for a piece of freeware is to make the source code openly available for others to continue developing; however, in my opinion, there is no obligation to do so.

The same applies to Rolf's argument about fixing bugs in freeware; I am happy to fix bugs as and when they are discovered, but I do not believe that there is any legal obligation to do so, and would be very interested to hear of any examples of the law being applied in such a case.

>>Your other point, about the lack of suits, does not mean there is no obligation, merely that there has been a lack of suits.<<

I agree that until there are suits, it is hard to know what the legal opinion of liability/obligation is going to be. For example, it is clear that many freeware authors only have access to a limited range of machines (I have a netBook, 7book and 5mx), so it can be very difficult to assess how well a program will work on a different machine (ie. the Osaris, with its unusual screen size). This makes it very hard to prove liability should a program misbehave when used on a machine that was not available to the author. The same then applies to support; in the aforementioned case, the author would not be obliged to modify his program to work on a particular machine, and could not be prosecuted for not doing so.

>>Legally this area is difficult; copyright applies in theory but hasn't been properly understood in this context yet. Copyright is difficult enough in much older areas.<<

The whole area of software intellectual property (IP) is a difficult area. In the US you can obtain software patents, in Europe you cannot. There are changes on the way, but so far, the EU is not sure how to proceed. When you see the quality of some of the cr*p issued by the US Patent Office, you'd better hope that the EU get it right; bad software patents are definitely not good for innovation!!

Copyright is the preferred form of protection at the moment, but it is very unclear exactly what level of protection this offers, and as I said before, no-one can tell you how much copyrighted code has to be changed before the copyright no longer applies. The problem with copyright is that merely asserting it, using the © symbol, your name and some dates does not necessarily confer copyright protection; if you are challenged about the exact contents of copyrighted material (ie. source code from a piece of software), how can you prove what your source code was, when you actually wrote it, etc.??

Cheers, Ian

Date: 16 Apr 2005 09:42:17 +0700
From: ian chapple <address truncated>
Subject: GlucoMon

For Jack:

I have released a new version of GlucoMon (ver. 1.00r), which does run on a 5mx. I have not tested it myself on a Revo, but I have been assured that it does work ok. I suspect that some of the dialogs may still be too big for the Revo screen; let me know if you find this to be the case.

The new version is available from the FreEPOC website; www.freepoc.org.

Cheers, Ian.

Date: 16 Apr 2005 09:49:00 +0700
From: Steve Litchfield <address truncated>
Subject: 9500/Itamar

>- ABP banking : I am not sure there is already a version on the 9500 but how many lines would I see on the screen ? Would it be feasible to work

Works pretty well on the 9500, though the screen's shallower, of course.

>- Money :  I run the bookkeeping of my photography business on my Mbook. I don't believe there is a replacement for this on the 9500 ?

Would ABP not work for this as well?

>- Route planner :  I use my mBook together with a Garmin GPS when driving to unknown addresses or countries. Is there already software that runs on the 9500 for this, and could I safely balance a 9500 on the dashboard or

TomTom Mobile 5, out next week. 8-)

>- Spreadsheets :  I have several stock spreadsheets on my mBook with almost
100 lines and 30 columns. Would I be able to browse these sheets and

Not as well. The functionality's identical, but again the shallower screen makes a difference. You're going from 480 pixels to 200!!!

>Re.: Data Adaptor? - I can confirm that my SE P910i can work as a modem for
my mBook. I use it regularly with GPRS to check my emails when traveling. I suppose the same is valid for the 9500/9300 but can't be sure.

Yes, the 9500 works as a modem for any other PDA or PC.

..........................
Steve Litchfield, 3-Lib, http://3lib.ukonline.co.uk/
Software and features for Psion/Symbian handhelds and smartphones
Also PocketInfo, useful files - http://3lib.ukonline.co.uk/pocketinfo Journalism: sub-editor and/or senior contributor to:
Palmtop User - http://www.palmtop.co.uk/
PDA Essentials - http://www.paragon.co.uk/mags/pdaessentials.html
PC Basics - http://www.paragon.co.uk/mags/pcbasics.html
Reviews editor, AllAboutSymbian - http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/

Date: 16 Apr 2005 15:25:01 +0700
From: Kevin Thorne <address truncated>
Subject: Two machines become one

Itamar Engelsman wrote:
Subject: two machines

Hello Itamar, I'll try to answer your questions about the 9500 as best I possibly can:

<Answer to: Kevin Thorne
Re.: two machines - Your message made me try to envisage how I would handlechanging from my mBook to a 9500. My main usage of the mBook is:

- emailing :  This I could do as well on the 9500 although typing would besomewhat slower due to the smaller keyboard>

Yes, the smaller keyboard is never going to make it a contender to rival the 5mx but I've found it's actually not too bad with more and more use - perhaps I'm just getting used to it!  Bearing in mind that we are talking about a clamshell PDA as small as a Revo and it's a phone as well, then I don't find it too bad.  The Email app on the 9500 works very well and is very similar to the ER5 one we are used to.

<- ABP banking : I am not sure there is already a version on the 9500 buthow many lines would I see on the screen ? Would it be feasible to workefficiently with it on the 9500 ?  I am not sure>

I may be wrong but I'm sure there was a version of APB Banking available for the 9210 so it may well run on the newer 9500 without problem as quite a lot of my old ER6 software does.  Not sure how many lines you would see as I've not tried ABP.

<- Money :  I run the bookkeeping of my photography business on my Mbook. Idon't believe there is a replacement for this on the 9500 ?>

No, there isn't a version of this for ER6/7.  Interestingly I just tried the latest version of RMR Bank (V2.0) for the 9500.  I've always liked the comprehensive facilities of this program but always found it so darn slow to run....enter a transaction and it could take up to 4 seconds to place it in the account and update the screen.  This new version seems considerably faster (now less than 1 second) - I'm sure it's not just to do with the faster processor of the 9500 as it even used to run too slowly on my S7 when I tried a trial copy.  Now at last it runs fast as it always should have so I shall be registering a copy now - another app taken care of on my Psion replacement!

<- Route planner :  I use my mBook together with a Garmin GPS when drivingto unknown addresses or countries. Is there already software that runs on
the 9500 for this, and could I safely balance a 9500 on the dashboard or isthere a car holder ?>

Again, I know software exists from the 9210 and indeed I saw someone using a plug in GPS module with a 9210 for precisely this.  The module was the size of a pack of cigarettes and very conveniently plugged straight into the serial port of the 9210.  However, even if the software runs on a 9500 this newer machine uses completely different type of connector - a PopPort, so you couldn't just plug this module in anyway.  I'm sure there will be something available soon if there isn't already.  The fact that the 9500's screen is so readable in direct sunlight means it's crying out for this!

<- Spreadsheets :  I have several stock spreadsheets on my mBook with almost100 lines and 30 columns. Would I be able to browse these sheets and
properly read and see them ?>

Well, it would involve a lot of scrolling but I've personally found the 9500's superb screen clarity and definition goes some way to addressing the lack of screen space and you can zoom down to a very small font in spreadsheets.

I have to say that with increasing use I am getting to like my 9500 more and more.  Without that stupid limitation on RAM that the older 9210 had, a better screen, wonderful battery life, a better keyboard, faster processor and slightly (although very noticable) smaller profile in my pocket it's a great machine.  To me it's nearly the colour 5mx we never got - not quite though I will quickly add!  I know some people will always want to keep their phone and PDA separate but I am now finding I prefer the all in one box solution.  I carry it in a belt holster and it doesn't feel too big to carry that way.  I do feel that the time is coming to pension off my Psion S7 and move forward and this is why I am trying to get used to just using the 9500 from now on.  I feel now that I am almost there.

Regards
Kevin Thorne

Date: 16 Apr 2005 21:24:24 +0700
From: Lord Kimberley <address truncated>
Subject: Psion 5mx to Nokia 9500

Well I bit the bullet and broughht the 9500 and taking time to get used to it. One lesson I leanrt. Do not forget the security lock code. If you do and lock your phone, you have a charable visit to a Nokia Service Centre. O set a new one, but I then realized the next day I have forgotten it. Many attempts to remember it by selecting Change security code, failing - the phone locks out changes for a while after a number of tries, but providing you wait a bit, that is no problem. In the end I thought of another code and I guessed right so no service centre visit and no cost - just a panic.

OK - now for the hard bit - moving agenda and contacts. Was there a Psion/PC app to allow you to sync agenda with Lotus Notes, because that might be my best route. Normally my diary is my business, but I want all those entries on the 9500, so I need a method.

My Psion address book is a Data app, not Contacts, nowever I suppose I could do the same with that, go via Notes. I can convert the data to Contacts format - I have DataContact, but is there a better way?

Will report the experience here if anyone else is interested. All help welcomed.

--

Yours John.

Tel:       +44 1763 289 732  e-mail:  mailto<address truncated>BR>

Date: 16 Apr 2005 22:35:20 +0700
From: Rolf Brunsting <address truncated>
Subject: Re: Shareware and freeware (was The Digest V1 # 730 13)

Dear Bernhard,

<< There's really no difference between these. The old notion of "shareware" as being different has gone. I am a 1-man software house earning all my living on pretty much one product range >>

Though I tend to agree that some of the differences between shareware and commercial have disappeared the differences haven't disappeared altogether.

<< Do you have a reference for that? >>

Sorry, I can no longer supply you with the relevant EC document names and numbers. I've worked in international standardisation when I worked at instrument manufacturer ENRAF and am co-author of European standard EN13352. I therefore had several of these documents at my office for reference and could access the on-line library of the Dutch standards institute NNI. I had to leave all that behind when I left the company.

Still, that what's supplied needs to be free from defects comes out of the first EC Consumer Protection Directive. That manuals need to be supplied in the language of the EC country in question when requested is referred to in a number of directives including the ATEX Directive for equipment used in explosive atmospheres (reference to the above Consumer Protection directive). The reversal of evidence - customer no longer needs to demonstrate there's a bug in the software - is mentioned in the revision of the Consumer Protection directive of 2000 or 2001.

I understand that both you and Chris Handley such EC regulations to be ridiculous. Note that the majority of the EC directives are the result of the harmonisation of existing rules and regulations in the EC countries. They're not completely new. Most of what you'll find in the Consumer Protection Directive was already mentioned in British consumer protection legislation. Nor is it true that an EC directive is always more demanding. Harmonisation means negotiation means compromise. Some EC countries had to say goodbye to their very strict regulations because the other EC countries didn't apply similar restrictions. It was mandatory, for example, to supply a French as well as a Dutch/Flemish manual with your product when you supplied the product to Belgium. That's been replaced by the supply of a manual in the language of the EC country when requested. Directives tend not to give that impression when you read them as as their scope tends to be quite wide. I almost got a heart attack when I read the Construction Product Directive. However, when I looked at the product ENRAF supplied and what's in the Directive it was a case of .. doesn't apply ... doesn't apply ... doesn't apply ... etc. Most of what was left was already taken care of as these items had been part of previous regulations. There were only two or three new requirements which were relative minor.

When you read the Directives, and can read through the sometimes tortuous legaleese, you'll find that they mention the minimum requirements based on what's reasonable to expect from what's supplied.

<< I *am* obligated to fix bugs as the customer has paid a 3-figure sum for the software >>

That's no longer true, I'm afraid, a freeware authors are also obliged to fix bugs. That the supplied software needs to free from defects simply asks the author to take due care when developing it. And that
the author has tried and tested the functions contained in the application before its given out for general release. The author isn't required to demonstrate this in the form of test protocols, test logs and test reports. Nor is the author required to give a cast iron guarantee that everything works. However, the author is required to
take corrective actions when it proves that one of the functions has a defect. The "free from defects" means that the author remains responsible for the software after the general release.

Most software authors, including freeware authors, won't have any problems with this. The application is their baby, so to speak, and
they feel the responsibility as parent. The purpose of the "free from defects" clause is therefore twofold:
1) It's a basic quality check : Do you have what it takes to release software to the general public?
2) It's a stick that can be used against unscrupulous "Not my problem, Buddy" software developers.

<< I do supply some software on a "this is what you get" basis ... >>

You're free to do that as long as the "this is what you get" refers to the looks, operation, etc. The application doesn't have to be stunning to look at. It doesn't have very slick to operate. Nor does it have to be optimised for maximum performance. It can be a simple, rough edged, tool you've developed for personal use. And when there's a bug in it
you may cut your own fingers, so to speak. Release the tool to the general public because it may be useful to other people, however, and you become responsible for bug fixing as it's other people's fingers that may be cut.

<< Most "commercial" software has some sort of evaluation copy these days, and anyone limiting how his software is purchased is restricting sales >>

I very much doubt whether "most" of the commercial software you find boxed on retailers shelves do have evaluation copies.

<< If you are correct in that then this is an impossible requirement >>

The Dutch proverb of "The soup isn't eaten as hot as it's served" also applies here. That the burden is now on the software author to demonstrate there's no bug rather than the user to demonstrate there is one was introduced to counterbalance the difference in (technical) knowledge between software user and software supplier. Let's be honest, the average user isn't a software developer nor a technician or engineer. He or she doesn't always know whether what (s)he sees is a
bug or not. And when it's reported as a bug (s)he doesn't always know how to report it. The unfortunate result is that many a bug report
isn't taken seriously by technical support staff. Or that the software supplier quickly points to the operating system supplier who points to the (video or other) driver supplier who points to the software supplier. What the directive does is to place a stronger emphasis on
the responsibility of the software supplier.

<< 1. To fix it, a bug must be reproducible >>

And when you can't reproduce the bug, whatever you do, you report this to the user. The bug report can then be classified as something to
watch out for when the user doesn't have additional information you can use. Could be that the bug suddenly pops up when you're working on the application. You can also apply a cut-off period of (say) one year
after which the bug report is taken off the list.

<< 2. Very frequently the bugs "found" in my software are most often attributable to provable bugs in printer, video or scanner drivers, and just sometimes the OS. Where would this requirement leave me then? >>

When you've checked that your side of the interactions with the operating system and/or drivers is correct you've done 90% of the job. You can then ask the operating system and driver suppliers whether
there are any known issues concerning the functions you use (you're filing your own bug report). When there's such an issue with the video driver you can report to the user (s)he has to upgrade the driver to version x.y. And to ask the user to confirm that the bug has gone after the new driver is installed. You can add that the issue will be considered solved when you still haven't heard from the user after (say) two months.

<< I simply cannot demonstrate that there isn't a bug if the customer refuses to upgrade >>

When the user files a bug report (s)he is obliged to cooperate with the software supplier. In other words, when it's important to know what happens when the user performs steps A, B and C in succession the user needs to perform these steps and report back to you. When you need to know the name and version of the printer driver the user has to supply them. When the user doesn't want to cooperate you send him/her a notice in which you mention (once more) the information you need. To which you add that the bug report will be taken off the list when you haven't received the information after two months.

I trust that my responses to your points 1) and 2) indicate that the new directive doesn't change anything for a responsible software supplier who takes the job seriously. You're certainly not asked to do the impossible.

<< Nor most shareware or even commercial software >>

Well ... the minimum requirements regarding product documentation are so minimal that I, personally, wouldn't call a user manual a manual
when it covers these minimum requirements only. Not only as a customer but also as a writer of manuals.

<< How many languages are there in the EU? There are at least 3 in the UK for a start >>

When you see "EC languages" mentioned in EC directives and similar documents it refers to the official languages as used in the EC countries. For the UK this means English. For the Netherlands it's Dutch, Spanish for Spain and both French and Flemish/Dutch for Belgium. You're, of course, free to supply manuals in such non-official
languages as Welsh, Scots Gaelic, Irish Gaelic, Manx, Frisian, Drenths, Basque, Catalan, Breton or Letzebourgs as an additional service.

<< If you are correct then it sounds like another completely ridiculous EU regulation which is ill-thought-out and impossible to implement or enforce, and which would deprive English-speaking customers across the world of most software. Am I supposed to test my users as to their ability to speak and read English? Am I to refuse to supply to non-English countries, or non-English speakers within the UK? What? >>

Which is complete nonsense as you're going way over the top.

1) EC directives don't apply "across the world".

2) You're free to supply English software with English documentation to English speakers wherever they happen to live.

3) The directive doesn't make it mandatory to supply a German manual when you get an order for your software from Germany. However, in case the customer in question can't come to grips with the English manual and, as a result, the software (s)he has the right to request for a German manual. When you're unable to comply the customer is free to
send the software and documentation back to you and request the reimbursement of what (s)he paid for it as well the shipping costs.
It's when you refuse to do so that you're in breach of the directive.

4) Given the fact that people have the right to request a manual in Spanish when you're selling to Spain it's best to know your target audience. Supply software to the proverbial 'man in the street' in Berlin, Amsterdam or Paris and you're bound to get requests for German, Dutch and French manuals. When the target audience is large enough you can work with a French agent or representative who translates the application and documentation for you and performs technical support in French on your behalf.

5) When you sell to the UK your customer has the right to request an English manuel as English is the UK's official language. As you already provide one ... what's the problem?

6) A Danish person living in the UK can ask for a Danish manual as an additional service but doesn't have the right to ask for one as English is the UK's official language. Could be that a UK citizen who
originally came from one of the former British colonies would like to have a manual in (say) Hindi or Urdu. They don't count as far as the EC directives are concerned as Hindi and Urdu aren't EC languages. You're, of course, free to supply a Hindi version of your software when there's a sufficiently large market for one in the UK. One which can become a springboard for selling to India.

<< And bear in mind also that Windows doesn't even have a UK English version. There is nowhere you can change "favorite" to "favourite" or "color" to "colour" >>

Let's be honest, the difference between favorite and favourite is a difference in writing rather than a difference in language. We're not dealing with such differences as Kachel (hearth or heater) in Dutch being Ofen in German while Kachel (tile) in German is Tegel in Dutch (and when I'd pronounce the Tegel the German way, Germans would think I'm referring to the old Berlin airport). What's more, a surprisingly large number of words and phrases that are in common use in the UK originate from the US. A linguist who looked into this matter found
that there are vastly more American loan words used in Britain than British loan words used in America. I'm not going to stop you from having a linguistic fight with Microsoft but don't expect the EC to
step in.

---
Kind Regards,
Rolf Brunsting - Beilen - Netherlands