Hello all, although this is my first post in MQ-ville, ive been a user for a year or two and have thoroughly enjoyed the program up until it was broken some time ago
I have purchased MQ Gold and overall I like the program.
I dont believe it lives up to Sprite's advertisements nor is it as functional (based on how I use it) as the original MQ before it was broken. I am not a power user, I'll never use the special hacks Sprite has incorporated, and the /click functionality is nice albeit limited -- at any rate these features arent necessary for what i want to do in EQ.
The reason i purchased MQ Gold was simply because it is THE ONLY ONE that is available. I am not a newb to computers, I am certain if i had the tools and the time i could compile a working version of MQ myself... however, it would take at least $50 to find a suitable compiler. Further im sure id have spent 10-15hrs familiarizing myself with the compiler and debugging. I already work approx 60-70 hrs a week and dont really want to spend the time necessary.
Copywrite issues aside, Sprite has provided an economical solution to regaining functionality of the original MQ code... Heck, even if he stripped the /click and other hacks and offered the plain vanilla version compiled...id still have purchased it for $50... even better marketing idea would be $20-$30 per year for continued updates and support
So is MQ Gold a scam as others suggest? I dont think so... sure the source files are freely available, but the tools and time to compile it are not -- and thats were the real value of the program is... at least to me :)
Has Sprite trespassed re: GPL & copywrite issues... probably but im no expert. Although if i understand it correctly, he could simply compile the vanilla version and sell it without such problems (i think) as the source code is already freely available... i suspect there is a market for such a value-added service... not enough to quit your day job, but prob enough to make it worthwhile.
Lastly, I suspect some of the ill feelings in the community partially relate to the fact that Sprite is catering to the newbs who dont need any computer programming knowledge and thus circumventing the devs desires... My impression is that the devs --right or wrong-- are trying to limit the MQ user community size by offering only source code...
Just a few thoughts... flame away...
Regards and best wishes
Weed
2 cp on MQ Gold from a newb
Moderator: MacroQuest Developers
Most of your post is fairly obvious and somewhat redundant since it's news most of us know.
It's very true that the devs at MacroQuest (and, frankly, most of the MQ community) are putting up limitations by making users compile their own versions. No one apologies for that.
However, the fact that Sprite is releasing compiled versions for newbies is NOT why folks are upset. IN FACT, I could today compile MQ, put it in an installshield for the entire Internet, include the source that I used to compile it, and wouldn't be breaking a single GPL law or ethical rule.
Truthfully, what upsets most MQ users and the people here is that sprite broke a 'trust', if you will. MQ was coded primarily by one man in the beginning, who shared with everyone...then, it was added to and continued by many people ..who gave of their expertise freely. Then, suddenly, someone is making MONEY off of it.
It's the charging for it that has folks upset...it's the fact that someone is making money off of a foundation built by someone else who FORBID the use of that foundation to make money.
Then, to add insult to injury, you were sent here for information on the product.
----------
No, you didn't think things through clearly from the other side. You're happy to have a product and you think that everyone was trying to keep it away from you. Hell, you could have probably posted on this site asking for a compiled version of MQ and someone would have probably given it to you...it's NOT ILLEGAL TO DISTRIBUTE COMPILED VERSIONS OF MACROQUEST as long as you include source (or, if it's CVS source that is freely available).
And, for the record, I don't think that many people (including myself) dislike or hate Sprite. Personally, I'm just disappointed in him more than anything else. I'd like to think we could all control our greed a bit better....
It's very true that the devs at MacroQuest (and, frankly, most of the MQ community) are putting up limitations by making users compile their own versions. No one apologies for that.
However, the fact that Sprite is releasing compiled versions for newbies is NOT why folks are upset. IN FACT, I could today compile MQ, put it in an installshield for the entire Internet, include the source that I used to compile it, and wouldn't be breaking a single GPL law or ethical rule.
Truthfully, what upsets most MQ users and the people here is that sprite broke a 'trust', if you will. MQ was coded primarily by one man in the beginning, who shared with everyone...then, it was added to and continued by many people ..who gave of their expertise freely. Then, suddenly, someone is making MONEY off of it.
It's the charging for it that has folks upset...it's the fact that someone is making money off of a foundation built by someone else who FORBID the use of that foundation to make money.
Then, to add insult to injury, you were sent here for information on the product.
----------
No, you didn't think things through clearly from the other side. You're happy to have a product and you think that everyone was trying to keep it away from you. Hell, you could have probably posted on this site asking for a compiled version of MQ and someone would have probably given it to you...it's NOT ILLEGAL TO DISTRIBUTE COMPILED VERSIONS OF MACROQUEST as long as you include source (or, if it's CVS source that is freely available).
And, for the record, I don't think that many people (including myself) dislike or hate Sprite. Personally, I'm just disappointed in him more than anything else. I'd like to think we could all control our greed a bit better....
Thank you Amadeus, your reply was insightful and well thought out. By no means did i intend to be obvious and redundant, my apologies to the community for taking up bandwidth
I am certainly not an apologist for Sprite, nor his modifications to MQ... but merely offered an opinion that he did add value to the software if only by offering a compiled version.
As far as the TRUST held by plazmic to the MQ user community, you are in a far better position to judge that than i. Although, i still believe a "compiling service fee" is not outside that TRUST.
Lastly, although I respect your opinion, based on how a couple of other requests for compiled versions were handled by both devs and peers... I strongly doubt a newb such as i would have gained trust enough to receive a compiled copy. I dont think anyone was witholding anything from me, the info is freely available and i am capable, but nonetheless ur suggestion that someone would have been gracious enough is not supported by the responses seen on the boards.
Again thank you for ur response, and mods if this post is not contributing to the community pls feel free to delete thread as soon as is convenient.
Regards,
Weed
I am certainly not an apologist for Sprite, nor his modifications to MQ... but merely offered an opinion that he did add value to the software if only by offering a compiled version.
As far as the TRUST held by plazmic to the MQ user community, you are in a far better position to judge that than i. Although, i still believe a "compiling service fee" is not outside that TRUST.
Lastly, although I respect your opinion, based on how a couple of other requests for compiled versions were handled by both devs and peers... I strongly doubt a newb such as i would have gained trust enough to receive a compiled copy. I dont think anyone was witholding anything from me, the info is freely available and i am capable, but nonetheless ur suggestion that someone would have been gracious enough is not supported by the responses seen on the boards.
Again thank you for ur response, and mods if this post is not contributing to the community pls feel free to delete thread as soon as is convenient.
Regards,
Weed
Money
I have no problem with people making money off of open source software. In fact I would say it is good when people are able to do this since it shows that open source software is a viable soultion for a buisness model. I do however have a problem with people who try to make a quick buck through unethical and ileagle means. If he had made the source available to those users he distributed the software to he would have been fine.
The reason the GPL requires you to provide access to the source is that by doing so the changes you make can be brought back into the community you based your software on. If you want to sell compiling fees for open source software, fine. If you want to sell support for open source software, no problem. If you want to package it with an easy to use installer program, this also is fine. In all of these cases you are selling your time. Some people may get upset but they have the ability to offer a similar service if they wish or release the same product for free.
What is not fine is taking an open source project, adding a little functionality, and trying to close the source on your modified version.
Another thing, generaly people have the tact to find out what the community/core developers think before starting a venture such as this. Granted you are not bound legaly by their opinion however it is the decent thing to do.
Thanks
The reason the GPL requires you to provide access to the source is that by doing so the changes you make can be brought back into the community you based your software on. If you want to sell compiling fees for open source software, fine. If you want to sell support for open source software, no problem. If you want to package it with an easy to use installer program, this also is fine. In all of these cases you are selling your time. Some people may get upset but they have the ability to offer a similar service if they wish or release the same product for free.
What is not fine is taking an open source project, adding a little functionality, and trying to close the source on your modified version.
Another thing, generaly people have the tact to find out what the community/core developers think before starting a venture such as this. Granted you are not bound legaly by their opinion however it is the decent thing to do.
Thanks
