Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 140 posts

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#121

Post by hulitu »

Tostino wrote: post #28
Spare_account wrote: post #19

I have installation media for MS Office 2010 in my desk drawer. If I lose the disc, I wouldn't expect Microsoft to replace it for me. I'm afraid I don't really understand what the author is angry about here.

When the purchase medium is a download link the expectation is that the link keeps working if the company is in business. Give a good reason it shouldn't. Edit: also, list your startups. I like to avoid doing business with people who think this way.

> When the purchase medium is a download link the expectation is that the link keeps working if the company is in business.

Famous last words.

There is a reason Internet Archive is so popular.

A lot of SW was hosted on ftp sites, which became "unsecure".

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#122

Post by izacus »

throwaway1389z wrote: post #31
izacus wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why... not? You paid for that software.

You paid for a copy, you got your copy. The business is not responsible forever furnishing you a new copy.

Why not? They sold you a license, they said so themselves. Why are you defending them here?

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#123

Post by izacus »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #34
izacus wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why... not? You paid for that software.

Because what you paid for is the software on physical media. Why would any publisher just hand out things for free that they otherwise charge for because you claim you lost the item. Back in the days of physical software, it used to be common to buy and sell used software. The difference between "I lost it, send me a new one" and "I sold it, send me a new one" is a simple lie, that more people than you think would be…

I'm pretty sure the business was very clear that I'm only buying the license though. So why are you talking about physical media?

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#124

Post by AshamedCaptain »

crtasm wrote: post #87
AshamedCaptain wrote: post #40

Now go complain to Adobe, where they just shut down their activation servers and leave you with 1k$ of "perpetual" unactivable & unusable software, no matter how much care you took keeping the installer media.

I remember downloading the offline installers for CS2 they released after turning off its activation servers. I take it that wasn't repeated for the later versions https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/adobe-releases-creative-...

Nope: https://community.adobe.com/t5/download-install-discussions/...

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#125

Post by hulitu »

WhoCaresAboutIt wrote: post #58

The license policy sounds annoying, but the bigger question (to me) is: why are we still talking about FTP in 2025? If you need file transfer, use SFTP/SSH, rsync, rclone, etc. And if you want a GUI, WinSCP has been doing this for free for ages.

> why are we still talking about FTP in 2025?

Why not ? It is a file tranfer protocol.

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#126

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

WhoCaresAboutIt wrote: post #58

The license policy sounds annoying, but the bigger question (to me) is: why are we still talking about FTP in 2025? If you need file transfer, use SFTP/SSH, rsync, rclone, etc. And if you want a GUI, WinSCP has been doing this for free for ages.

It does support sFTP etc. so is similar to WinSCP, but I think it's an easier GUI for non-technical windows users to get to grips with. However, if they're going to be asshats about licensing, then WinSCP is a clear winner.

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#127

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

hluska wrote: post #16

I guess we’ve reached a point where instead of taking personal responsibility for our backups, we just try to turn the internet into our personal army against products.

It's a lot more efficient to have a central repository for versions of a particular bit of software rather than expect every user to keep a backup of all the versions. It's just a general waste of resources.

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#128

Post by Daviey »

Brian_K_White wrote: post #63
cowsandmilk wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Obviously, a VM wouldn't be a suitable environment for FileZilla. Why not? VMs can be given access to the host file systems.

Do you sell vms or something? It's absurd to even consider running an entire os in a vm just to use the calculator or the notepad.

QubesOS would like a word with you. https://www.qubes-os.org/

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#129

Post by jpambrun »

unsnap_biceps wrote: post #70
jeroenhd wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Hosting licensed copies of software is the norm. Steam does it, Google does it, Apple does it, EA and Ubisoft do it, and all of them host much larger software (including free updates) than FileZilla. Maybe hosting 5GiB image downloads on a dedicated web portal the same way Microsoft does is a bit much to ask, but this is nothing. We're talking 50 megabytes of storage here, per version. They can save thems…

> Hosting licensed copies of software is the norm. Steam does it, Google does it, Apple does it, EA and Ubisoft do it Correct me if I'm wrong, but they do not store previous versions for you to choose, only the current version.

This is irrelevant since your steam game license applies to all subsequent versions. The argument is it's immoral sell version specific licenses with no way to get to said specific version.

Re: FileZilla Pro "Perpetual License" – A Warning to All Users

#130

Post by dghlsakjg »

izacus wrote: post #123
dghlsakjg wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because what you paid for is the software on physical media. Why would any publisher just hand out things for free that they otherwise charge for because you claim you lost the item. Back in the days of physical software, it used to be common to buy and sell used software. The difference between "I lost it, send me a new one" and "I sold it, send me a new one" is a simple lie, that more people than you think would be…

I'm pretty sure the business was very clear that I'm only buying the license though. So why are you talking about physical media?

The comment that started the thread was : I have installation media for MS Office 2010 in my desk drawer. If I lose the disc, I wouldn't expect Microsoft to replace it for me.

We are talking about physical media to compare and contrast the differing expectations around responsibility for backing up a digital download (what the linked complaint was about), and physical install media (what this thread is about).

> I'm pretty sure the business was very clear that I'm only buying the license though.

Microsoft in 2010 was very clear that your were buying physical install media for Office 2010 along with your license. They did this by making the physical install media part of the license purchase transaction.

Post reply on HN