Re: Octave fior Android Requires Payment

[Michael Goffioul]

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Mike Miller <address@hidden> wrote:

On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 16:58:08 -0400, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-05-19 at 12:42 -0700, Thomas D. Dean wrote:
>> The Octave app was listed as a free app until I installed it and was
>> surprised by the requirement for payment.
>
> I believe this may be a misunderstanding of the word "free". It
> doesn't mean gratis in this context. It simply means you are free to
> recompile it yourself and not pay, if that's what you want to do.

I think Thomas is referring to the Google Play store entry [1] which
lists the app as "free" (gratis) to install. After installing, it
apparently functions fully for some trial period, after which time I
gather it requests a donation in order to continue functioning. I have
not tried it, but this is the way it seems to be described. Some may
view this as a "bait and switch", since the initial installation
appeared to be "free". I can't say if that's what's going on here, but
this may explain Thomas' reactions he has shared with us.

None of which has anything to do with violating the GPL.

  [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.octave

Personally (and I insist this is only a personal feeling), I *hate* in-app purchases. I would happily purchase a full app upfront, but I've never used in-app purchase and I probably never will; usually I delete such "free" app where you can only progress by using in-app purchases. Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I think paying for the full app upfront is a better business model that pseudo-free apps (at least, more customer-friendly IMO).

Michael.