Ethicalities of abandonware

[aimeeandbeatles]

Please do not post links or anything that will advocate law-breaking, or make this thread closed.

I was thinking about something when going through all these real old floppy disks. A lot of older programs have been abandoned by the developers, or the developers have just disappeared, programs like that are usually classified as abandonware. So what's left of these programs are on old floppy disks, which can degrade pretty easily, as I've learned from getting lots and lots and lots of CRC errors.

Legally, they're still covered by copyright and it's illegal to disterbute them. However, I was starting to think it's less ethical to not try to preserve them than it is to disterbute them. Obviously, if the developer or publisher says to stop, you should stop, as you're going against their wishes, but if they're not doing anything and the program is not being sold in any capacity, who exactly is it hurting?

(The one exception to this, I believe, would be things for which there are newer versions. A lot of the older versions would be used as a replacement for the newer version. I'm not so worried about the losing-sales part as the fact that it would bring up lots of old security vulnerabilities that have been fixed already. Granted, this applies for all older software, but responsible usage probably involves virtual machines and the like. I actually set one up myself.)

 

[Zelig]

I have a hard time really caring, because there aren't really any old programs that I find useful.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Well, I've been having a very hard time finding a flat-file database program like this old (1995?) version of Lotus Approach I found on a CD. I wish I could use it indefinitely, but I'm fairly sure it's 16-bit and if I ever do get around to getting a 64-bit OS, it'd be a pain delegating it to a VM only.

 

[Zelig]

I modify my usage paradigms to work with currently-maintained software, it's really better overall than trying to find old software to match your usage paradigms.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I wish I could actually find currently-maintained programs that fit the needs of the moment. It's kind of a pain.

 

[dutchfire]

There are some games from halfway in the 90s that are really quite good. Actual programs that are still useful are rarer I think.

 

[Zelig]

I wish I could actually find currently-maintained programs that fit the needs of the moment. It's kind of a pain.

I modify my needs to be fit by currently-maintained programs.

There are some games from halfway in the 90s that are really quite good. Actual programs that are still useful are rarer I think.

Yeah, but almost all the good games are available from gog or such.

 

[Maniacal]

If there is absolutely no place to actually buy original copies that aren't second hand already then nobody really cares.

 

[Padma]

I modify my needs to be fit by currently-maintained programs.

Why should I modify my *behavior* just because some idiot developer thinks I should? (And, for the record, I AM one of those "idiot developers". )

My *needs* don't necessarily change. So if I find a tool that does what I need, I keep using it. Fortunately, most of my work is on *nix servers, using the command line, so I can write my own tools easily if I need to.

 

[Zelig]

Because programs aren't designed solely by developers anymore, they're designed by teams of designers and UX experts, and are almost across the board designed for better workflows than what is possible with programs from a decade ago.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

So apparently these designers and UX experts know more about what I need than I do? That's news to me

 

[Iranon]

If modern alternatives exist, the question isn't "is the new stuff better?". The question is "is is so much better it's worth the effort (time and cost) of making the switch?".

Professional UX teams probably know what's good default behaviour, and what options should be easily accessible to provide a good UX for the majority of the target audience.
However, their approach may b problematic:
"Easy to get started", "easy to understand" and "efficient once you know it" tend to be conflicting requirements. Users have come to expect an unhealthy amount of the first.
Results: Many programs that are overkill for casual users but unnecessarily obtuse to those who need to dig deeper.

Also, I prefer relatively primitive functionality and an open-ended approach that makes it easy to incorporate little tweaks and hacks. Many new products are overdesigned for me.
A nice compromise would be to have shiny modern functionality available as bundled scripts in a customisable script-friendly UI... but in general designers and UX experts don't like the idea of mere users ruining their beautiful creations.

*

Regarding games: Much from the mid-nineties and onwards is available legitimately. Earlier things... not so much.

*

Whether one is obliged to obey laws for the sake of obeying the law is a nice topic for a debate, but probably not here.
Something similar goes for whether the wishes of a creator matter, and whether this extends to other right holders.

 

[Zelig]

"Easy to get started", "easy to understand" and "efficient once you know it" tend to be conflicting requirements. Users have come to expect an unhealthy amount of the first.

The last one is pretty much the only one I care about, in all facets of my life. I've honestly considered switching keyboard layouts from Dvorak to QGMLWB.

Also, I'm a pretty heavy power user, and have no need of any old programs, so I mostly feel like people who say they do are inventing reasons for the old programs, and would do just as well with whatever I do and use.

 

[Iranon]

Fair enough, after all the only program anyone needs to use for anything (including gaming) is Emacs