• taladar@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    The rationale is that it’s better for them if they use their software without payment instead of using a software from another vendor without payment.

    More importantly it is better for the company if they use their software without payment instead of developing some sort of competitor (open source or proprietary).

    • infeeeee@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      They are users not developers. An academic or civil engineer who uses a CFD simulator usually has not enough programming knowledge develop such a complex application. The employer has not enough funds to pay for developers (see, they use a pirated software). Paying for developers is still more expensive than buying an already developed product.

      Just look at the state of FOSS CAD software. There are some, but they are very-very limited compared to proprietary alternatives. Most people don’t care, they just want to get the work done. Not everyone is a programmer, even if it looks like that from our lemmy bubble.

      • taladar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        You are thinking too small. Even if only one of a thousand companies in one of dozens of third world nations develops an alternative that is enough.