Slashdot Mirror


Freeware for Windows -- Where Did It Go?

Talahamut asks: "The other day, I was planning on recording a radio show by running my stereo's output into my PC. Oooh, that sucks - WinXP's Sound Recorder limits you to 60 sec. recordings. Oh well, I'll just go online and grab a little WAV recorder. 30 minutes later, I'm frustrated because all I find is crippleware (time-limited, of course...) that records every format under the sun from any sound stream imaginable. What happened to the small home-brewed Windows utilities that used to be so easy to find online years ago? All the freeware sites I checked had nothing but commercial crippleware. Is there no place to find simple programs like that anymore?"

308 comments

  1. download.com? by eviljolly · · Score: 4, Informative

    Try going to www.download.com and searching under programs with freeware licenses.

    1. Re:download.com? by Grab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe he just needs to "try searching". I know assholes post on boards saying "where do I find XYZ?" instead of checking Google first, but it's really come to a pretty sad state when they get an "Ask Slashdot" instead of searching Google!

      Grab.

    2. Re:download.com? by rot26 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Download.com and similar sites used to be good sources of freeware, but since they started charging to list your software, the freeware is gone; at best, the authors will want to recoup their listing fee.

      --



      To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target
    3. Re:download.com? by gi-tux · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Along the same lines is the expense of developing on the Windows Platform. If you use actual legal copies of Microsoft's development tools, the cost is somewhat significant. This makes the bar to being able to afford to develop freeware a little higher.

      Also, more and more companies are making it difficult to develop freeware if you are a corporate developer. Many companies now claim that they own everything that you do even on your own time, or at least have very strict rules about using company assests (their development tools) to do personal work.

      These combined together have hurt "free" software on windows. The financial side keeps young programmers from developing "free" software, as they desparately need to recover their costs. The business side keeps many professional programmers from contributing as they don't want to fight the corporate battles to defend what they are doing. I know several folks in both categories. Most of the young folks are moving to Linux where the tools are much less expensive and the professional guys are finding things to do besides computer work on their own time.

      --
      I have no sig, does anyone have one to spare?
    4. Re:download.com? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I found it pretty funny to see a Google ad when I read his question.

    5. Re:download.com? by armentage · · Score: 5, Interesting

      THe thing about the cost on developing windows is not 100% true. You can download Microsoft's command-line C/C++/C# compilers for free, along with SDK's for developing Internet apps, GUI apps, database apps, and much much more. You have to pay for their IDE, debugger and for a local copy of the manuals, BUT you can do a whole lot for free. Don't forget either that the basic Visual C++/C# package is only $99. There's always GCC/Cygwin. You can install the free MS SDK, and then use any Cygwin development tools you like. Thing is, most windows developers actually LIKE Visual C++. It's really a great environment once you customize it (far less so than you need to customize Emacs).

    6. Re:download.com? by gnu-user · · Score: 1

      I, for one, found the question useful. I normally use nonags, but was glad to see other sites, in particualr pricelesswares.com.

      Asking people can be lazy, but it can also take advantage of all our collective experience.

    7. Re:download.com? by egomaniac · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Download.com and similar sites used to be good sources of freeware, but since they started charging to list your software, the freeware is gone; at best, the authors will want to recoup their listing fee.

      The worst part is that they only charge the little guys. My company (big internet company) released a client-side application last year. Download.com approached us and offered to host it for free. They've served a ton of downloads and we've never paid them a cent. They even featured it for a while -- something we neither asked for nor discussed with them.

      Yet the little guy that gets ten downloads a week actually has to pay for it...

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    8. Re:download.com? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the .NET SDK does contain a perfectly decent graphical debugger.

    9. Re:download.com? by Cynikal · · Score: 5, Funny
      maybe he was using jeeves?

      not everyone has discovered google yet...

      I personally think all search engines should have as the first hit:

      Results:

      1) Seach for this on Google, Dumbass Acuracy - 100%

    10. Re:download.com? by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      Many companies now claim that they own everything that you do even on your own time

      MyCorp has rules like this, but from what I understand, unless your creation is very closely aligned with your workplace functions, what you do on your own time with your own resources would be very difficult for the company to claim if you wanted to challenge it.

      And, most reasonable companies aren't going to go after Joe's MP3 index catalog database management program if he spends his days doing VB to help managers mangle their Excel spreadsheets.

      Some years ago I had dealings with MyCorp's legal department about a technical advance I had made and associated patents, etc. that the company was paying to file. I was curious about the "We own all of you" clause and got the explanation that, practically, the company wasn't interested in "unrelated" work you do on your own time.

      Of course, an unreasonable company and a very lucrative invention might cause a fight, but I have to wonder how well such employment terms would hold up in court.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    11. Re:download.com? by MrResistor · · Score: 4, Informative

      Obviously it's been a while since you've tried to find anything on download.com that was both free AND useful. The combination is pretty much non-existant these days.

      As mentioned by others, most of the freeware developers have moved on to Free platforms, BUT a lot of that stuff has been ported to Windows. TheOpenCD has a good listing of Open Source stuff that's been ported. Check the forums if you don't find exactly what you're looking for, as a lot of apps don't get included on the CD for various reasons (space, duplication of functionality, etc).

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
    12. Re:download.com? by Christopher_G_Lewis · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, there are a couple of free IDE's for the .Net world.

      Microsoft offers a *FREE* ASP.Net development IDE called ASP.NET Matrix available at www.ASP.Net. It's geared towards code writing, so you don't get a great WYSIWYG HTML tool, but you can do some pretty cool stuff with it.

      For a Windows Form IDE, look at SharpDevelop which is currently in Beta release .99b :-). It's open source (GPL) so if it doesn't work, you can fix it. I haven't looked at this one in a little while (beta .95), but it looks like the development team is rolling right along, and in fact, I'll probably download a copy of it today for evaluation. I'm a VS user, but actually write *a lot* of C# test code fragments in TextPad.

      I'm sure there are others, but I've actually used those two IDE's (well, three if you count TextPad :-) and would recommend them.

    13. Re:download.com? by WaterTroll · · Score: 1

      Be careful though. I've encountred a lot of software labeled as freeware on download.com, only to end up being dissapointed with a spyware loaded POS. If you're looking for an image viewer, by chance, Irfanview is arguably one of the best out there. I've been using it for years. It's very stable and quick, and supports a boatload of image formats, as well as video and audio (if you download the plugin package).

    14. Re:download.com? by dublin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      maybe he was using jeeves?

      not everyone has discovered google yet...


      FWIW, I'm still a Google fan, but am finding that Teoma (which uses the same engine as Jeeves, but I like Teoma's presentation better) is delivering results where Google fails.

      Google's great (well as good as Infoseek was in its prime before Disney/ABC/Go bought it and ruined it), but Teoma's methods seem to hold up a bit better and retrn results that are often more useful and relevant than Google's, especially in those cases where Google returns way too much crap. You don't have to switch - use Google for what it's good at, but if you find yourself still looking for the needle after two or three search modifications, then hop over to Teoma and give it a try. I did, at a friend's urging, and have been surprised at how well it works. (I have no connection whatever with Teoma, other than as a user.)

      Google is still my home page, but I am now using Teoma two or three times a day, and am actually thinking about switching, which I couldn't have imagined several months ago...

      Yahoo is getting better, too, and adding more and more useful services all the time. You've just got to love capitalist competition! Thank you, Adam Smith...

      --
      "The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last ./ post
    15. Re:download.com? by bhtooefr · · Score: 2, Informative

      Better yet, since download.com isn't that great for FREEWARE (Free or free), why not SF.net, searching for Windows apps?

    16. Re:download.com? by phaggood · · Score: 0
      but from what I understand, unless your creation is very closely aligned with your workplace functions, what you do on your own time with your own resources would be very difficult for the company to claim if you wanted to challenge it.

      IANAL, but from my understanding (probably from somewhere on groklaw) most courts side with the author unless the company has specified how much of the employee's compensation has been given to him for this agreement. Like those non-compete clauses, you can't just tell an employee they can't go work for the competition for two years, you have to spell out on the contract that there is a 20% premium on your pay that is specifically given to you as compensation for agreeing to the noncompete.

    17. Re:download.com? by Radix37 · · Score: 1
      If you use actual legal copies of Microsoft's development tools, the cost is somewhat significant

      Many universities have deals with microsft that let you get their software either free or really cheap. That's how I got my copy of MSVC++ 6.0 which I used to write a freeware compression program and puzzle game.

      --
      Speed Demos Archive - Lots of speed runs!
    18. Re:download.com? by WTFmonkey · · Score: 1

      That URL doesn't work. What did you mean to type in? I'm curious now.

    19. Re:download.com? by WTFmonkey · · Score: 1

      Nevermind, it was pricelessware.com, no s. Got it. Thanks for the tip.

    20. Re:download.com? by westlake · · Score: 1

      You'll still find tons of great freeware like IrfanView, XNews, etc., on Download.com. Extracting anything useful from Sourceforge can take hours.

    21. Re:download.com? by kundor · · Score: 1

      Google's not the end-all. It's the best at finding the most informative pages on a certain topic, but when you're trying to find a specific page that you've been to before, it's not so good. Searching for words you remember on that page won't work so well since Google mostly indexes by how other pages link to it.

    22. Re:download.com? by dirty · · Score: 1

      http://download.com.com/3000-2168-10267687.html?ta g=lst-0-5

      Took me 2 minutes.

      --

      -matt
    23. Re:download.com? by wdnspoon · · Score: 1

      Developing on the windows platform is easy. Java, with Eclipse as an IDE.

    24. Re:download.com? by JessLeah · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The availability of a free-as-in-beer compiler for Windows doesn't have as much of an impact on Windows programmers as you might think. In the free-software world, the good coders tend to work on the Linux kernel and such things. In the Windows world, the good coders tend to want money for their work. Which means that the people left to develop freeware (i.e. free-as-in-beer, not-usually-free-as-in-speech software) are...

      The not-so-good coders. The coders who would just look at you funny if you suggested that they use a command-line tool.

      Sure, there are exceptions, like the excellent IrfanView and of course the wonderful (and also free-as-in-speech!) utility CDEX, and of course many "cross-platform" projects like Audacity and The GIMP (many of which originated in the Linux/Unix world anyhow)... buuuut... the majority of the freeware coders in the Windows world tend to be those who couldn't easily make a living off of their code.

      You have to remember that the CULTURE in the Windows world is not like that of the Linux world...

      While we're on the topic of comparative culture (drifting rapidly off-topic here, but...), please note that in Windows-land, money is a much stronger motivator. Additionally, in Windows-land, conformity is a lot more prevalent. You still see Unix coders who prefer some obscure clone of EMACS or vi, or an even more obscure editor no one's heard of, or one they wrote themselves. Windows people tend to write their papers in MS Word, and only MS Word... because that's what everyone else uses. It is a more conformist culture (this isn't a judgment, it's simply a fact!)

      I am, at this very moment, editing a letter using GNU nano and a CGI I scripted in Perl to format it nicely for printing and/or PDFing. I'm not using MS Office, or even OpenOffice. And there are gajillions of people using "weird" or otherwise obscure solutions like that throughout the Unix world. In Windows-land, a weird approach like that would just get you funny looks. Like I said-- differences in culture...

    25. Re:download.com? by princewally · · Score: 1

      I always look on WebAttack. They have changed their name to Snapfiles, but they have a ton of programs.

      The freeware section is big.

      --

      -
      "Vengeance is fine," sayeth the Lord.
    26. Re:download.com? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You have to pay for their... debugger

      No you don't. Download the free Windows debugging tools and you'll get the GUI WinDbg and the command line cdb debuggers. The kit also allows you to get MS's extensive symbol table.

    27. Re:download.com? by Ayaress · · Score: 1

      It's open source (GPL) so if it doesn't work, you can fix it.

      Am I the only one struck by a bit of irony here? You spend all day looking for a compiler, then you download it, and in order for it to work... you have you recompile it.

    28. Re:download.com? by endx7 · · Score: 1

      Yahoo is getting better, too, and adding more and more useful services all the time. You've just got to love capitalist competition! Thank you, Adam Smith...

      One thing I've disliked about yahoo is there is so much stuff on the main page. Most services may be useful, but it adds too much noise. The fact that google has a more simple main page is one of the reasons I prefer it.

    29. Re:download.com? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So download some cracked commercial stuff off of a P2P network.

    30. Re:download.com? by abandonment · · Score: 1

      it's a very valid question - everything these days is riddled with spyware/adware, and with the shadiness of these companies well known, there is little that makes me want to install most freeware for this reason. download.com is full of software that 'claims' to be free, but you go to their download site & it ends up being a spyware ridden POS instead.

    31. Re:download.com? by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It depends on the state law. That's very clearly defined in California, but in other states it's not so clear-cut.

      In California, so long as you don't use company time, equipment, or premises to create a work, and that work is not substantially relevant to work you do for the company, they have no claims whatsoever on your work, and that right cannot be waived.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    32. Re:download.com? by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      You can download Microsoft's command-line C/C++/C# compilers for free

      Last time I checked, the free compiler does not do optimization, which means there's no benefit over gcc. You're better off going with Dev-C++

      Don't forget either that the basic Visual C++/C# package is only $99.

      and according to Microsoft's web site, that doesn't include an optimizing compiler either. What makes them think that anything that doesn't do optimization can be called "standard"? Who, besides students, would want that? Especially considering that gcc will do that just as well for free...

      It looks like their cheapest optimizing C++ compiler is $1079 (MSRP, of course), so it would actually be cheaper to buy the "standard" version for the IDE and Intel's compiler.

    33. Re:download.com? by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      The coders who would just look at you funny if you suggested that they use a command-line tool.

      You say that, buy I bet you'd look at me funny if I suggested that you write all your code in asm. Sure, you may be able to do it, but why? And then if you don't excersize that particular skill for a while, it takes longer to remember how.

      Windows people tend to write their papers in MS Word, and only MS Word... because that's what everyone else uses. It is a more conformist culture (this isn't a judgment, it's simply a fact!)

      This is not "Windows people." This is "people."

      It's not so much that Windows users are a strange subset of the population as that Unix users are. Most people want to just get their work done, they don't particularly care how. So they just use what everyone else uses, because it obviously works for them and it saves time trying to worry about it.

      I am, at this very moment, editing a letter using GNU nano and a CGI I scripted in Perl to format it nicely for printing and/or PDFing. I'm not using MS Office, or even OpenOffice.

      And I'm using LiteStep (free) on Windows, have a few documents open in SciTE (free), have a HydraIRC (free) client running, and am typing into Mozilla FireFox (free). A while ago I used PuTTY (free) to run a script on my server. I don't know why, I have Perl (free) installed here.

      We're both weird, and we're on different sides of the pool. There's just a lot more "average people" using Windows.

    34. Re:download.com? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Last time I checked, the free compiler does not do optimization, which means there's no benefit over gcc.

      I did a quick check with a sample hello world program. My tests indicate that the free C compiler MS ships is indeed more optimized than MinGW gcc. The time to run the command is faster and exectable filesize is smaller. Here's the results of the test:

      C:\>type hello.c
      #include <stdio.h>

      int main( void )
      {
      printf( "Hello World!\n" );
      return 0;
      }
      The /MD switch is to link with MSVCRT.LIB
      C:\>cl /MD hello.c /FeVisualc++_hello.exe
      Microsoft (R) 32-bit C/C++ Standard Compiler Version 13.10.3077 for 80x86
      Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation 1984-2002. All rights reserved.

      hello.c
      Microsoft (R) Incremental Linker Version 7.10.3077
      Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

      /out:Visualc++_hello.exe
      hello.obj
      gcc compile with strip symbols and O3 optimization.
      C:\>gcc -s -O3 hello.c -o Gcc_hello.exe
      TIMETHIS.EXE is Microsoft's executable timer.
      C:\>"C:\Program Files\Resource Kit\TIMETHIS.EXE" "Visualc++_hello.exe"

      TimeThis : Command Line : Visualc++_hello.exe
      TimeThis : Start Time : Sun Mar 21 03:34:56 2004

      Hello World!

      TimeThis : Command Line : Visualc++_hello.exe
      TimeThis : Start Time : Sun Mar 21 03:34:56 2004
      TimeThis : End Time : Sun Mar 21 03:34:56 2004
      TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:00:00.090

      C:\>"C:\Program Files\Resource Kit\TIMETHIS.EXE" "Gcc_hello.exe"

      TimeThis : Command Line : Gcc_hello.exe
      TimeThis : Start Time : Sun Mar 21 03:35:10 2004

      Hello World!

      TimeThis : Command Line : Gcc_hello.exe
      TimeThis : Start Time : Sun Mar 21 03:35:10 2004
      TimeThis : End Time : Sun Mar 21 03:35:10 2004
      TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:00:00.100
      And now for filesizes
      C:\>for %c in ("Visualc++_hello.exe") do @echo %~c's file size is %~zc bytes.
      Visualc++_hello.exe's file size is 3584 bytes.

      C:\>for %c in ("Gcc_hello.exe") do @echo %~c's file size is %~zc bytes.
      Gcc_hello.exe's file size is 5120 bytes.
    35. Re:download.com? by rabidcow · · Score: 2, Informative

      TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:00:00.090
      TimeThis : Elapsed Time : 00:00:00.100


      The timer ticks every .010 seconds, so you're only seeing a difference of one timer tick. This program isn't taking long enough to meaningfully compare speed optimization anyway. (9 or 10 ticks? Most of that is probably just process start/stop overhead and disk access.)

      Visualc++_hello.exe's file size is 3584 bytes.
      Gcc_hello.exe's file size is 5120 bytes.


      GCC doesn't pack the segments quite as well, you'd need a much larger program to compare actual code size. On very small programs, msvc will always produce smaller files than gcc, but that has very little to do with the actual code.

    36. Re:download.com? by cens0r · · Score: 2, Informative

      Then why don't you try this?

      --
      Jack Valenti and Orrin Hatch will be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.
    37. Re:download.com? by Quattro+Vezina · · Score: 2, Informative

      FWIW, I'm still a Google fan, but am finding that Teoma (which uses the same engine as Jeeves, but I like Teoma's presentation better) is delivering results where Google fails.

      Except that Jeeves/Teoma uses some really nasty crawling tactics. One day, it decided to crawl me and hammered the hell out of my server. 782 hits from it in one day. I'll add that one of the things on my server is a blog using Coranto, with iSay as the comment system. Not only did the crawler hit every single comment page, going back months in my archives, but it hit every single Submit, Login, Logout, and Register link on every single comments pages.

      I ended up firewalling off the IP address of Jeeves/Teoma's crawler (I love iptables). If I didn't cut it off then, it could've made hundreds more hits on my server. I'd imagine many other servers have firewalled them off due to their unethical crawling tactics.

      I run Apache off the same box I'm posting this from--I really don't want to know if I can take the traffic, nor do I want to attract my ISP's attention. The latter problem is probably worse than the former. Google is at least nice about crawling--it'll hit a couple of pages a day, and it seems to avoid links to CGI scripts.

      After this incident, the idea of using Jeeves or Teoma for anything turns my stomach.

      --
      I support the Center for Consumer Freedom
    38. Re:download.com? by endx7 · · Score: 1

      Then why don't you try this?

      Because I never knew it existed. :P

    39. Re:download.com? by itsari · · Score: 2, Informative

      A good site to check out is nonags. It has policy of only carying ad-free, money-free software for those who like to get something for nothing. There is always searching the web. But, I know. That takes effort.

    40. Re:download.com? by Vampyre_Dark · · Score: 1

      bloodshed.net has a free programing IDE called DevC++.. I prefer it to Visual C++ actually, as it does what I need it to do well without a ton of bloat and a 5000 button interface.

    41. Re:download.com? by GMC-jimmy · · Score: 1

      Watch out! Spyware usually comes bundled with freeware.

      I did NOT say freeware usualy brings spyware. I'm only saying that most (if not all) spyware usually rides in on the coat-tails of some freeware product.

      Download/Install with caution. READ THE EULA's !

      Help keep the internet clean.
      This has been a public service announcment.

      --
      __________________________________
      Free your mind - Flush your toilet
    42. Re:download.com? by spacepimp · · Score: 1

      i believe the anger here is entirely unrequited. i have been findnig it increasingly difficult to find freeware and no nag ware as of late, and feel it was a springboard into a quality discussion of coding ethicism. this being said often the quality of these freewares is quite limited. ie gimp is no subsitute for photoshop. (being a cynic im cycincal of your more cynical than i am vantage).

    43. Re:download.com? by fredrik70 · · Score: 1

      not only that, the BOrland c++ compiler is free as well on the net, just go to borland and download

      --
      if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
    44. Re:download.com? by armentage · · Score: 1
      Visual C++ .NET Standard 2003
      Manufacturer: Microsoft
      Mfg Part #: 254-00257
      Product Number: 301606

      # Create Highly Tuned .NET-connected Applications and Components
      Use Managed Extensions to C++ and compiler support for optimized Microsoft Intermediate Language (MSIL) code generation. Incorporate Microsoft .NET Framework features including garbage collection, Windows Forms, and threading. Call unmanaged code using high-performance C++ interop technology.

      # Create Highly Tuned Unmanaged Windows-based Applications and Components
      Write and compile unmanaged x86 code. Speed up your application or reduce its size with optimization options for a range of processors, including Whole Program Optimization, and support for Streaming SIMD Extensions (SSE) and Streaming SIMD Extensions 2 (SSE2) instruction sets.
      Microsoft's own marketting blurb for the $109 Visual C++.NET package. Check it out yourself at CompUSA
    45. Re:download.com? by acroyear · · Score: 3, Insightful

      well, a guarenteed download/sale brings in "eyeballs", keeping their advertising rates high. if they can say to the advertisers "look how many people saw our site for ...", they can keep the advertising money flowing to more than cover costs for hosting the popular product.

      the little-guys downloads aren't common enough to warrent raising advertising costs for their specific pages to cover the expense of hosting.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    46. Re:download.com? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      it always amazed me how the top downloads at SF were either MS apps or cross-platform apps.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    47. Re:download.com? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i am looking for windows XP codes were the hell can i find them?

    48. Re:download.com? by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 1

      Googling for Windows freeware and shareware is a hobby of mine because I still believe in supporting indepedent software developers.

      But that being said, the number of quality freeware and shareware for Windows has been shrinking since the Windows 3.1 days. It's especially sad that many of the great applications that were written for DOS and that survived Windows 95, have now evolved into bloated and expensive apps that are too big for their arthopodic exoskeletons.

      What comes to mind immediately is ACDSee, once an incredibly light and fast graphics viewer. Under Windows 3.11 I used to have several instances open at once - which I prefer over thumbnail viewing. Today, ACDSee is an entire graphics suite that includes some graphic editing features. I really loved ACDSee, and everyone in my dorm passed it around on diskette, but the latest incarnation is a big download and a big pain.

      The Web is full of apps like ACDSee. I think what has happened is that the evolution of Windows solved the need for a lot of those older staples of Window freeware/shareware such as the image viewer. Now Windows XP has it built-in and includes a thumbnail based view of pictures.

      Independent developers will either exit the market entirely, or develop their software into more advanced "suites" that offer greater value to the customer... and of course this means a higher price in line with developmental costs.

      If you're a programming hobbyist whose happened to have written some real gems, you may or may not stick it out. Thankfully there are some AnalogX's out there.

    49. Re:download.com? by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 1

      This is likely more off than on -topic, but I'm going through this now. Last night I decided to download that new Microsoft .NET 1.1 SDK, which is available as a free download. It doesn't come with the IDE interface, but my guess is that aside from this and other documentation and value-added software, there's little difference between this offering and the standard VC++ .NET and VB .NET boxed sets.

      I'm not new to C or the WinAPI, but MFC is completely alien to me and this .NET/C# stuff is as well. If I were a starving professional programmer, I might already know this stuff, but as I'm just a hobbyist, I'm completely in the dark on how to write and compile code with this set... which makes the free compiler and SDK or little consequence to me.

      But, yes there is still GCC. I bet if I were to try my hand at UNIX programming, I'd be able to get up and running faster. With .NET and C#, I'd have to invest in a lot of $50-70 books on the subject, and this is before I've actually decided that I like programming in this language.

      I have used Visual C++ 4 and 6, and VC++ is a nice product, but is there a future in this IDE? Won't the move towards .NET force Windows developers to incur some pretty hefty costs? Is VC++ 6.0 and WinAPI programming as I know it, near dead? I ask because I'd like to know. I've read that Microsoft is telling us they'll depreciate PE code, making the coding skills I've been trying to acquire for years a complete waste - providing I stick to the expected upgrade path.

      I guess what I am asking is, will the move to .NET be as major a shift as was the move from 16-bit to 32-bit? Will people be left behind for having not learned .NET, or will they suddenly migrate to Linux, UNIX, and MacOS, where seems apparent that traditional C and C++ skills are still appreciated? When we evaluate the cost of developing for Windows, I think we ought to include the hidden cost of learning a new language than is really isolated to the single platform, and that might only be a fad. We may only be able to go as far as estimating opportunity cost, but it would at least give us something.

    50. Re:download.com? by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
      it always amazed me how the top downloads at SF were either MS apps or cross-platform apps.

      Makes sense to me... Anything that's really good, someone is going to find a way to port it to Windows. It's a little bit harder to pull Windows products to Linux -- especially if they're closed source.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    51. Re:download.com? by armentage · · Score: 1
      I still see a long life for C++ on Windows. The WTL is alive and strong, a great GUI library to work with. C++ is still the fastest language on Windows, no matter what MS marketting says about .NET.

      .NET's C# is more or less a dead ringer for Java. If you know Java, you can pick up C# in a few hours, and being familiar with Win32 is a huge boon. You can call C Library methods directly from C#, and use all COM objects. I'm fairly certain that C++ COM objects will continue strong for years to come.

      I work in the financial industry, where adoption of new technologies is very slow. It took us years to get off of X/Motif and onto MFC, and I don't see us moving to C#/.NET anytime for the forseeable future.

      Interestingly enough, there's a HUGE "OpenSource" MFC programmer's community; way more Open than much of the stuff you see for UNIX (no license at all whatsoever public domain code.) One of the great things about having a single unified platform is that EVERYONE can share code equally. There's no GTK vs QT C++ vs C vs Python schism. Even VB COM objects are usable by all via ActiveX hosting (ugly but not hard to use in C++).

    52. Re:download.com? by VAXGeek · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ever heard of robots.txt?

      Say maybe a Disallow: /archives/ or something similar? If you don't want to be spidered, at least educate yourself about the possibilities.

      --
      this sig limit is too small to put anything good h
    53. Re:download.com? by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      That's odd... Microsoft seems to claim otherwise on their site, unless they're just being very misleading...

      But it looks like those blurbs are from Microsoft's "Features Overview", which is not specific to the Standard version.

    54. Re:download.com? by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 1

      .NET's C# is more or less a dead ringer for Java. If you know Java, you can pick up C# in a few hours

      Maybe what it'll take for me is the actual IDE. At this time I only have a few C# and .NET books on loan and the SDK+compiler set I mentioned earlier. Having spent a few moments examining sample code, C# and VB# look a lot like Java, so I admit it was refreshing, and I am very tempted to drop C and Java altogether in favor of C#. The following articles made some good points:

      A Comparison of Microsoft's C# Programming Language to Sun Microsystems' Java Programming Language By Dare Obasanjo
      and
      A Comparative Overview of C#

      At the moment though I'm still struggling to find a good free alternative to VC++ 6.0 that meets my needs. I had hoped the .NET 1.1 SDK would contain all I would need to write Windows apps using C/C++, but I don't even know how to go about writing a regular C/C++ app using the tools. Where's the C++ compiler???

      GCC and the others may not be an option for me. I want to write Windows and DOS/console apps in straight API. My SO does need to program and wants to be able to write DirectX/DirectShow apps, also using just the API. Everything I have read has indicated that in order to write DirectX/DirectShow apps, I will need to buy VC++, and it looks like I need to buy v6.0 and not this new .NET stuff being sold in stores. From what I've read, the other compiler suites don't come with the SDKs I will need. I know I can download the DirectX 9.0 and the DirectMedia 6.0 SDK, but I don't know how to link them into a new compiler, and supposedly, some of the language in the SDKs are poorly formatted with syntax errors that will kill other compilers.

      Of course, if any of you guys out there know otherwise, I'd love to hear about. My dream is to be able to get the Borland TurboVision IDE from Turbo C++ DOS to run on top of GCC and compiling Windows and DirectShow apps. :)

    55. Re:download.com? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your test is meaningless. Not only have you chosen a program which does nothing, you have only run it once, so you can't even reason about which of the compilers produces a faster "hello world".

    56. Re:download.com? by leifm · · Score: 1

      Ever since download.com started charging people to list their stuff most useful free stuff has disappeared. I used to hit up download.com all the time, now just once in a while for a game demo.

      And I do think there is less freeware on Windows than there used to be, possibly because creative coders have defected to Linux and OS X.

      --

      "Windows Me offers tremendous reliability and stability improvements..." -- Paul Thurott
    57. Re:download.com? by armentage · · Score: 1
      The C++ compiler is "CL.exe". Its an all-in-one C/C++ compiler. C# compiler is "CS.exe".

      My experience with VC.NET has been porting our existing VC6 MFC/C++ code to the .NET's VC7 compiler. Its C++ syntax is much stricter, and it comes with updated versions of the runtime libraries and headers that use stricter C++. From what I can tell, VC7 is 100% backwards compatible with VC6 code, from ActiveX component stubs to MFC to the Platform SDK.

      I haven't used DirectX/Show, but I have read about them and they seem to use straight C and COM APIs. Given what I know about how VC7 (the true name for .NET) I'm going to guess that you should have no problem with it.

      If you have some money to burn... get yourself a copy of the basic VisualC++.NET (the $109) suite and give it a try. At the very least, you'll get a great editor, debug, and tons of online help. If it turns out that it sucks, feel free to come back and flame me!

    58. Re:download.com? by armentage · · Score: 1

      That has to be a bug on their web page. The cell where the check for "Optimizing compiler" would be is not just blank, it looks to be missing all together. The edges around it are the wrong color.

    59. Re:download.com? by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I dunno... That cell is empty (not missing), the other unchecked ones have a single   in them. The question is, what's really supposed to be there?

      I guess I'll report it via their "contact us" link and see what happens. Who knows how quickly they're able to read those reports though...

    60. Re:download.com? by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 1

      If it turns out that it sucks, feel free to come back and flame me! Oh you can count on it!

      So from what you're saying, VC.NET is still a good upgrade path for those of us who won't be doing .NET programming or strictly MFC? That's nice to hear. I can't find any marketing info that doesn't only boost the .NET features.

      I haven't used DirectX/Show, but I have read about them and they seem to use straight C and COM APIs. It was during a Google search that I read somewhere that a guy had problems getting the DirectX headers working with either BloodShed or one of the other free compilers. He had said that somewhere within the headers are variables called BOOL... which, being that BOOL is a type, causes problems for every other compiler except VC++ 6.0, which strangely gets around it. I do not know if this is true or not give how zany Microsoft is prone to be with force-crashing competing software, who knows?

    61. Re:download.com? by armentage · · Score: 1
      Yes, BOOL was the original MSVC++ boolean type, before ANSI C++ officially added "BOOL". MSVC++ with MS extensions is notorious for not compiling on other compilers, including other x86 compilers. It's no secret that MS has put many hacks in to C++ for the purposes of easing development on the Win32 platform. Any MS compiler will support these weird symbols.

      VC.NET includes MFC7. It is basically MFC6 updated to support the newer Windows SDK features. MFC6 is almost 7 years old, and was targetted at the IE4 controls. MFC7 supports all the newer features found in the IE6 and COMCTRL6 (Common Controls), as well as GDI+. There are also great new classes, like CDHTMLDialog, which lets you use HTML pages instead of Resource Template to define Dialogs, but then handle their callbacks using C++. The compiler provides better ANSI C++ and better code generation. There's better STL support.

      To sum it up, the C++ parts of VC.NET are not "also ran" additions.

    62. Re:download.com? by mitheral · · Score: 1

      Try XnView as an ACDSee replacement. It's free as in beer and though not a polished inferface it'll open anything including paged tiffs. Much better than the warmed over crap that comes with XP.

    63. Re:download.com? by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the info (and the encouragement). As per tradition, I compiled "Hello World" in both C and C++ using just CL.EXE and the commandline-based distro of VC7 in .NET 1.1 SDK. Aside from the paths not being correctly setup (I think it was my bad), the code compiled clean and fast.

      So the moral of the story is, if you can't afford the full IDE package or you just don't want it, you can still use the commandline tools. I think my next step is to grab TextPad and make it look like Borland.

    64. Re:download.com? by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the suggestion! For some reason when I read the title, John Bradley's XV came to mind. I don't think it gets more unpolished than that interface-wise. Actually, about the only polish I'd like to see on a picture viewer app's interface would be a skinned border that looks like either the white edge borders of a Polaroid snapshot or the borders of a picture frame.

    65. Re:download.com? by chunkwhite86 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft offers a *FREE* ASP.Net development IDE called ASP.NET Matrix available at www.ASP.Net. It's geared towards code writing, so you don't get a great WYSIWYG HTML tool, but you can do some pretty cool stuff with it.

      Riiiight. I could spend months learning this and be able to develop software for exactly ONE platform. great.

      Or I could learn C/C++/Java and be able to develop software for a whole slew of platforms.

      Hmmm. I wonder which one I would choose.

      --
      I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
    66. Re:download.com? by armentage · · Score: 1

      Try Emacs ! Once you get your key bindings right, it's really a fabulous editor. Lisp grows on you FAST.

    67. Re:download.com? by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 1

      Try Emacs !Once you get your key bindings right, it's really a fabulous editor. Lisp grows on you FAST.
      Since you're an Emacs person, Brad Merrill, a Microsoft .NET Evangelist, has some tools for doing C# in Emacs. Also the people at @ic#code have a free as in beer, but still open-source IDE for C# programming. I don't know if I can do straight C/C++ with it. The screenshot has me believing otherwise. It looks like Visual Basic. I'm thinking I'll give that one a try before tackling Emacs.

      While we're on the subject, I've just found that Macromedia's Dreamweaver MX 2004 works as an IDE for C# programming. It does color syntax highlighting, which is an important feature for me, but I haven't found any other standard programming IDE features.

      Finally, not being an Emacs guru, I'm not sure which implementation to get. I can always use Cygwin unless there's a regular Win32 port. However, I also found a Windows version that claims to be smaller and lighter at http://www.notgnu.org/ Any recommendations?

    68. Re:download.com? by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      I found a box for this in a local store which had the same chart printed on it. No optimizing compiler. :P

  2. It is linux's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    All the freelance programers have gone to linux. Maybe if more programmers spent time creating things for windows, they might find that they like it better than linux.

    1. Re:It is linux's fault by walt-sjc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Bwahahahaha! Good one. Here's another. Maybe they will find it more stable and open. Maybe MS programmers will start participating with the community and answering questions on the developers newsgroups. :-)

      But one the serious side, all too many Windows developers get sucked into this idea that they are going to get rich off "shareware." It's just not fun. The developers who are just in it for fun are going to move to a truely open platform where they can share in the work of others in an evironment that fosters those ideals instead of the ideals of greed.

      So anyway, I don't think it's Windows programmers transitioning to Linux, it's just that most Windows programmers are greedy.

      Oh yeah, give this post a half :-)

    2. Re:It is linux's fault by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      Yet I can still find Windows freeware around sometimes. (It's mostly older stuff.)

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    3. Re:It is linux's fault by atomic-penguin · · Score: 1

      1 - I don't believe that Free Software programmer's have all transitioned to Linux.

      2 - I agree that it is harder (than it used to be) to find good free software for Windows.

      However, the free software foundation (gnu.org) has numerous ports of software for the win32 platform. This support 1. My reasoning for 2 is based on personal experience. Example: sox is available for win32 on sox.sf.net...but, I had to know what I was looking for to find it. It's even harder to get something like g++ working on win32 without the aid of cygwin, and it's been my experience that cygwin is mediocre environment at best.

      In this case, looking for a simple sound recorder, sox would do the job.

      --
      /^([Ss]ame [Bb]at (time, |channel.)){2}$/
    4. Re:It is linux's fault by Saiai+Hakutyoutani · · Score: 1

      I don't think so, but I think you're partly right.

      Programmer should try to make their programs at least COMPATIBLE with Windows. That should be a goal.

    5. Re:It is linux's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      you've never done any real programming, have you?

    6. Re:It is linux's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Transition isn't a verb.

    7. Re:It is linux's fault by atomic-penguin · · Score: 1

      s/transitioned/switched to/;

      --
      /^([Ss]ame [Bb]at (time, |channel.)){2}$/
    8. Re:It is linux's fault by exhilaration · · Score: 3, Informative

      PricelessWare is better. Actually, I think that's the best site for Windows freeware on the web - everything is reviewed.

    9. Re:It is linux's fault by EelBait · · Score: 1

      It would be a lot easier if MSFT quit deliberately making Windows so damn incompatible with everything else!

      • Try doing any sockets programming on Windows.
      • Try writing a multi-threaded app on Windows.
      • Try doing any graphics programming on Windows.

      WinSock does not align with BSD sockets. Windows threads do not align with pthreads. DirectX does not align with OpenGL.

      They deliberately isolate themselves onto a little island for no purpose than to hang on to their monopoly. If it weren't for their Windows monopoly, they'd be forced to play nicer with other APIs.

    10. Re:It is linux's fault by Saiai+Hakutyoutani · · Score: 1

      You've never used libraries, have you?

    11. Re:It is linux's fault by larry+bagina · · Score: 1, Informative
      windows has 95% of the desktop market. Maybe *nix is incompatable with everything else?

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    12. Re:It is linux's fault by walt-sjc · · Score: 1

      Um, and you want Linux programmers to support your platform with that attitude?

      "Bend to our will. We are the Borg."

      Please. If you knew any computer history AT ALL, you would know that the Unix API has been around over twice as long as the Windows API. Taking the sockets interface as an example, WHY did MS take a perfectly working interface and fuck it up and make it hard to use? Maybe because their idea of multitasking was so screwed up that they couldn't make it work right??? Who's bright idea was it to associate networking with a Window handle???

      MS has gone out of their way to make writing portable software difficult (hint #2 - java.) Hell, they make ANY programming difficult. This was done on purpose. Those of you that bought into the brain-damaged system are finally finding out that it has drawbacks - and your answer is that the rest of the world needs to change to a proprietary API? Riiight.

    13. Re:It is linux's fault by cperciva · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Try writing a multi-threaded app on Windows.

      The win32 threading API is very nice. Seriously -- I'm a FreeBSD developer, and there isn't much about Windows which I like, but win32 threads are really well thought out and intuitive.

    14. Re:It is linux's fault by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 1

      The parent wasn't complaining about the threads API itself but rather the deliberate incompatibilities. There are lots of reasons to write code that compiles across multiple platforms, and the Windoze APIs make it a lot harder. Yes, maybe the Windows APIs are a little better in some aspects (I don't know if they actually are... I'll take your word for it), but is it really worth breaking compatibility with every other platform out there over?

    15. Re:It is linux's fault by cperciva · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In many cases, I don't think the incompatibilities were deliberate. The great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from... Microsoft had to choose something, and it's not their fault that most people picked a different standard.

      To take the sockets API as an example, the UNIX world had BSD sockets, while the Windows world had Winsock. Microsoft didn't invent Winsock -- it was put together by people who wanted TCP/IP on Windows back when Microsoft didn't provide this. When Microsoft added TCP/IP into Windows, they had a choice: They could use the "standard" BSD sockets, and break all the code people were already running on Windows, or they could build their version of the API people were already using.

      In the case of threads, it's easy to ask why Microsoft doesn't use POSIX threads... except that the POSIX threads standard didn't exist until three years after Windows NT was first released. Oops.

      As for graphics: If compatibility would mean supporting X windows, breaking compatibility is a Good Thing.

    16. Re:It is linux's fault by InfiniteWisdom · · Score: 0, Troll

      Anyone who thinks MS doesn't deliberately make their products incompatible with others needs a serious reality check. For example, every major OS vendor has had their own version of threads for a long time. Every one of them save one have added pthreads wrappers in addition. Guess which one?

      As for graphics: If compatibility would mean supporting X windows, breaking compatibility is a Good Thing.
      I've never heard of this "X windows" thing you talk about, so I'm going to assume you mean X Window. So yeah breaking compatibility is a good thing! How else would they be able to rehash what X has been able to do since the early 1980s like... gasp... the ability to run GUI programs remotely? Hell yeah! That's worth paying for a terminal license for! The ability to login multiple users simultaneously? I'm all choked up with BillG's generosity seeing that he added that major innovation to Windows XP without even requiring multiple licenses to have multiple logins!!!!

    17. Re:It is linux's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And picking on someone for saying "x windows" (which is what everyone says, except for pedantic fucks like yourself) makes you our Slashdot Idiot of the Day! Congratulations!

    18. Re:It is linux's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's even harder to get something like g++ working on win32 without the aid of cygwin

      What's so hard about it? Download MinGW, install, and start compiling.

    19. Re:It is linux's fault by EelBait · · Score: 1

      Here's where I disagree: WinSock1 was based on BSD sockets. You can still see the copyright notice giving credit to UC Berkeley. Then they added a bunch of proprietary stuff to start moving away from the BSD API. With WinSock2, if you wanted to keep your app fast, you were required to starting using the WSA_ routines instead of the BSD-like routines.

      This is just their standard operating procedures: Take someone else's standard, start modifying it in proprietary ways with each rev. of the OS. until it's too much of a burden for programmers to support two different APIs. Then the MSFT lackeys can justify using Win32-only APIs by using the same old tired "95%" market saw.

    20. Re:It is linux's fault by Moraelin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, god forbid that anyone might try to come up with a better API.

      Surely something like that would never happen in the Linux world... oh, wait. It does happen. Everyone and their grandma has to come up with their own widgets (QT, GTK, Motif, Mozilla's own crap, etc), their very own font rendering library, their very own sound daemon, their very own graphics library (e.g., I'm sure SDL or SVGALib don't exactly align 1-to-1 with OpenGL either), etc.

      So I hope you'll have some understanding if I find this kind of double standards funny. If it's in Linux it's cool to reinvent your own API for everything, but if it's Microsoft, it's a heinous crime to do the exact same thing. Right. Can I have some of those funny cigarettes too? ;)

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    21. Re:It is linux's fault by pinkUZI · · Score: 1

      Isn't this really a trend of the Internet in general?

      Rembember the free and easy days? Want a new stereo system, search webcrawler, you're bound to find someone giving them away...

      --
      You are receiving this message because your browser supports Slashdot Sigs and you have Slashdot Sigs enabled.
    22. Re:It is linux's fault by RossyB · · Score: 1

      Damn I'm in a picky mood atm.

      SVGALib is a 2D library, so it won't match OpenGL.

      SDL, however -- http://www.libsdl.org/opengl/index.php -- *is* OpenGL when used in 3D.

      And please don't tell me all Win32 apps use the same toolkit. There is the standard toolkit which comes with Windows, the Office 2000 toolkit, the Office XP toolkit, the Macromedia toolkit, and yesterday I installed the Sony NetMD software to be greated by *another* toolkit.

      Win32 UI is as fragmented as Linux, the only difference is that MS can claim a standard exists.

    23. Re:It is linux's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, that would be you

    24. Re:It is linux's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, to rephrase the statement a bit more precisely:

      Greedy programmers will release for Windows.

      There's no chance they'll make money releasing for Linux, given the small penetration, competition from other free-beer apps, and cultural attitude that users should never have to pay. So, if money is a goal, focussing the effort on Windows becomes a derived requirement.

      Of course, even if most greedy programmers are Windows programmers, it does not follow that most Windows programmers are greedy.

    25. Re:It is linux's fault by notamac · · Score: 1

      Actually... ever sat on the DirectX developers list?

      A surprising (well, at least as a Linux guy most of the time - I found it a surprising) number of queries actually do get really real MS developers answering them, and offering useful information.

      And the list is free.

    26. Re:It is linux's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      s/transitioned/switched to/;

      Thanks. When some guy in a suit says "transitioned" to me, I want to punch him.

  3. GNU/* and *BSD by H4x0r+Jim+Duggan · · Score: 3, Informative

    I guess most hobbists have moved to GNU/* and *BSD.

    When making free-as-in-cost, they may as well be doing free-as-in-freedom. And working with other developers that share code is nice.

    1. Re:GNU/* and *BSD by H4x0r+Jim+Duggan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      After a bit more thinking, maybe the demand for freeware has dropped due to fear of viruses and an increase in technophobic users. The latter is inevitable and isn't meant in a bad way. The former is a problem that is solved by source code liberation - when software has assistants or gaurdians rather than owners.

      When I need software? in kinda this order:
      $ grep keyword /var/lib/apt/lists/*
      (that's for Debian, but I'm sure there are similar package lists with descriptions on the other distros)

      If that doesn't work, I try the free software directory, and then freshmeat.

    2. Re:GNU/* and *BSD by revmoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      When I need software? in kinda this order:
      $ grep keyword /var/lib/apt/lists/*


      apt-cache search searchterm

      --
      I would expect such blatant racism on Fark, but on Slashdot? Mods please ban this asshole.
    3. Re:GNU/* and *BSD by cr0z01d · · Score: 1

      Except it's just as easy to get freeware and shareware for the Mac as it was in the Good Old Days of yore, and some of the new stuff is damn spiffy. As a cross-platform developer, I always felt that the Mac was easier and took less resources (e.g. money) to develop for than Windows or Linux.

    4. Re:GNU/* and *BSD by Krunch · · Score: 1

      $ apt-get install debian-goodies dpkg-iasearch

      --
      No GNU has been Hurd during the making of this comment.
  4. Nonags... by sxyzzx · · Score: 5, Informative

    www.nonags.com

    1. Re:Nonags... by kovarg · · Score: 1

      I strongly second that. For your particular situation wouldn't Audacity get the job done?

      --
      blame me!
    2. Re:Nonags... by Da+Fokka · · Score: 5, Informative

      My favourite freeware site is:
      http://www.pricelessware.org/
      Selected by readers from the alt.freeware newsgroup.

  5. Opensource Ate Freeware by ameoba · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A vast majority of the stuff that was once released as freeware is now open source. There are a number of reasons behind this; the ubiquity of the internet and its usefulness in collaboration, the increased availability of high quality development tools and the fact that if you're not making money off some code, you might as well release the source.

    With that in mind, Audacity, while being a bit more full featured than a simple sound recorder, will take care of what you need.

    --
    my sig's at the bottom of the page.
    1. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by enigmatichmachine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      he's pretty much exactly on the nose there... my freeware search engine is sourceforge now. haven't used things like download.com for years. OH, and audacity rocks! its not soundforge, but its essentially windows sound recorder on a lot of steroids.

      --
      -and occasionaly a giant moose.
    2. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by Sepper · · Score: 1

      And it can save to mp3 and ogg too! (with the right libraries)

      --
      I live in Soviet Canuckistan you insensitive clod!
    3. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by FroMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'll put my vote behind audacity also.

      I handle the sound for our church, mainly recording sermons and music, and it certainly handles the job. The setup is simple enough to user right out of the *cough* box *cough* or package. Often I by the end of the service I have about 1.5GB of stuff to go through and clean up and put on a CD which audacity handles pretty well also.

      --
      Norris/Palin 2012
      Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
    4. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by nelsonal · · Score: 1

      Thank you all I was looking to convert some tapes over to CD and ran into the exact same problem. I found some japanese lessons on tape and wanted to listen to them in my car's CD player. I ran into the same problem as the article author and gave up. Thanks for the japanese lessons (my commute just became productive).

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    5. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by jsupreston · · Score: 1

      What kind of setup do you have for this? I do the a/v stuff at my church and have thought about doing this as well.

      --
      "It's a dog eat dog world out there, and I'm wearing Milk-Bone underwear."- Norm (from Cheers)
    6. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, Audacity is good.

      Just in case you're wondering what those guys are talking about, to end users like us opensource is the same as freeware. Technically, it takes away some freedom from you (i.e. freeware has less restrictions), but it's sort of a religious thing, with the "pope" being a guy with long hairs called Richard Stallman. You can see pictures of him by searching on images.google.com.

      Anyways, get Audacity and have fun!

    7. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by FroMan · · Score: 1

      Pretty simple over all.

      From the mixing box I have connected an audio on the monitor channel (since we do not currently use that for the musicians) to the laptop record. I have the alsa drivers setup with the 2.6 kernel and fire up audacity.

      Usually after the service (or before the next week) I will pull the songs out and run the noise removal filter on those (otherwise we get a lot of static sound since our mixer is pretty sad) then export as wavs. Then the sermon itself I usually export as 5 minute wavs from audacity.

      After that, I use arson to burn the CD's off for handing out the next week.

      Most of the folks love it since otherwise I can only make one tape a week and nearly everyone has a CD player somewhere they can use. My next project is to put together a website with mp3's since one of our member's daughter is going on an exchange program next year.

      --
      Norris/Palin 2012
      Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
    8. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by Naffer · · Score: 1

      Yesterday I had some OGG files that I wanted to convert into MP3s to send to an unenlightened friend, and I figured that finding a freeware OGG to WAV decoder program would be a piece of cake. A quick search on google revealed nothing but costly shareware trash. It took me way longer then it shoudl have, and OGG is open source!

    9. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by ameoba · · Score: 3, Informative

      Freeware OGG to WAV decoder?

      I have to assume you're doing this in windows, since under Linux, if you had the ogg libraries you'd already have a decoder and be doing this with a simple shell script.

      So, take just about any decent audio player (such as winamp) that reads Ogg Vorbis and use it to write out WAV files instead of playing to the soundcard (on Winamp it's called the "Nullsoft disk-writer pluging"). Problem solved; you make a playlist, press play & a few seconds later, you're finished.

      --
      my sig's at the bottom of the page.
    10. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by Monkelectric · · Score: 1

      Coolplayer is free and will render an ogg or mp3 to wav (by selecting disk writer for output)... although its a really great lightweight ogg/mp3 player in its own right

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    11. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by yomegaman · · Score: 1

      You want the dbPowerAmp Music Convertor found here.

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    12. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by damiam · · Score: 1

      Winamp will decode oggs and output to a WAV file. So will the standard reference command-line Vorbis utilities.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    13. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by HoneyBunchesOfGoats · · Score: 1

      I use dBpowerAMP to convert between audio formats in Windows. It's got plugins for nearly every format you could want, it integrates very nicely with the Windows Explorer (right-click, pick 'Convert'), and it's completely free :).

    14. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by Naffer · · Score: 1

      dBpowerAMP is what I actually ended up locating and using, though the other suggestions were quite good. I really hadn't thought of just using Winamp.

    15. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by 13Echo · · Score: 1

      Winamp has a WAV out plugin that comes with it.

    16. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by Daniel · · Score: 1

      You probably didn't find a third-party program because OGG *comes* with a decoder that can do this, called ogg123.

      Daniel

      --
      Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
    17. Re:Opensource Ate Freeware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just wish they could drop the "windows sound recorder" bit and keep it plain steroids.

  6. Searching found by Foo2rama · · Score: 5, Informative

    I use http://www.versiontracker.com to find all my software... I found these gems all freeware for you. Pocket voice recorder Sound recorder And the total search with "shareware" is Hope this helps

    --


    ---In a time of Chimpanzees I was a Monkey.
    1. Re:Searching found by RevAaron · · Score: 3, Informative

      The first place I usually go is versiontracker, though sometimes they say have the program type- free, commercial, shareware wrong. Another awesome site, but with much more limited use is tinyApps. They keep track of various small, simple and free apps for Windows. Comes in handy a lot. Usually, if I need some app quick, I don't want to deal with a huge bohemoth- just give me something simple.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    2. Re:Searching found by i1984 · · Score: 1

      I know the "Ask Slashdot" question was in regards to Windows, but since VersionTracker came up I thought it might be helpful for Mac users to remember MacUpdate as well. Its pretty similar to version tracker, but the site seems faster, less buggy, less spammy, and is altogether a bit more pleasant to use. When I've gone looking for Mac freeware and shareware it seems easier to find it on MacUpdate.

      NOTE: I'm not affiliated with either site, although I am wearing a VersionTracker t-shirt.

  7. http://www.pricelessware.org/ by pancakeunicorn · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.pricelessware.org/

    1. Re:http://www.pricelessware.org/ by redtail1 · · Score: 1

      Excellent link. Thanks for posting it.

    2. Re:http://www.pricelessware.org/ by phildog · · Score: 5, Informative

      http://www.pricelessware.org/ - I'll 2nd this recommendation

      http://www.tinyapps.org/ - I've had some good luck here too.

      --
      slashsearch.org - slashdot search. powered by google.
  8. It's called TUCOWS by eggstasy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ever heard of TUCOWS? You can search for software there, and order by license.
    AudioGrabber 1.83 is freeware, and is rated 5 stars. I used to use it to rip CDs, but the description claims it can do exactly what you need.

    1. Re:It's called TUCOWS by DeadSea · · Score: 4, Informative
      Some more resoureces:
      1. Open Directory: Freeware - Lists hundreds of sites offering freeware.
      2. Nonags - Better that tucows for Windows stuff because it doesn't list nagware.
    2. Re:It's called TUCOWS by s_mencer · · Score: 1

      exactly... after reading the question, I went straight to TUCOWS and found that program in a matter of about 2 minutes. TUCOWS is an excellent resource. Go there, bookmark it. I use it frequently since I work at a non-profit org. They don't have much money, so I get to use ALOT of free software.

  9. Audacity by Dave114 · · Score: 4, Informative

    It may be a little bit overkill for recording a radio program (although I've used the software for that before), but why not try the (open source) Audacity?

    1. Re:Audacity by mcelb1200 · · Score: 1

      My first thought too. It works like a dream. I've used it for quite a variety of audio processing tasks and my mates at the radio station are constantly amazed at the capacity you can eke from it.

  10. Whats worst..... by vertical_98 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    is that I can d/l a program for *Nix that is free (both beer and speech) and find that the exact same prog is shareware or commerical for Win32. VCDEasy and WinAirSnort come to mind.

    It doesn't kill me to pay for software, but I remember the CD's of free games and tools that anyone running DOS could use.
    Vertical

    --
    72 CD D7 52 D0 7E D8 47 44 91 D5 84 D1 59 F1 A9-This is my 128bit integer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:Whats worst..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can d/l a program for *Nix that is free [..] the exact same prog is shareware or commerical for Win32

      Yeah, Trolltech's Qt comes to mind. It's GPL on all platforms - except Windows. And it's not even L-GPL, so you can't use it for a closed-source release even if you merely link with their libraries.

      I just wish people would STOP GIVING MONEY TO TROLLTECH. I'm amazed that they've burrowed so far into the heart of KDE (and so many Linux distributions).

    2. Re:Whats worst..... by Valdrax · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What possible reason could you have for hating Trolltech over making a commercial version of a product on closed-source Windows that they give away for free to Free Software users? Isn't that just savvy business? Why do you want the core QT developers to go out of business? Someone's got to earn a living somehow keeping the software maintained. Besides, they didn't "burrow so far" into the heart of KDE -- KDE built itself on top of their foundation. They're not invaders; they're the bedrock because they were the best available solution at the time.

      What the grandparent was complaining about was independently developed but equivalent projects are free on Linux and shareware on Windows. It has NOTHING to do with QT.

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    3. Re:Whats worst..... by iantri · · Score: 1
      Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by the VCDEasy comment? You can still download the freeware version, and it's just a front-end to vcdimager/cdrdao which you can get the GPL'd win32 binaries for.

      You don't by chance know of a good VCDEasy like program for Linux do you? I'd rather not have to write the raw XML to use vcdimager :(.

    4. Re:Whats worst..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, Trolltech's Qt comes to mind. It's GPL on all platforms - except Windows. And it's not even L-GPL, so you can't use it for a closed-source release even if you merely link with their libraries.

      You'd realise, if you bothered to google before you post, that the GPL nature of Qt has certain beneficial effects... like, oh, the GPL Windows version becoming possible?

  11. SourceForge by !the!bad!fish! · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Try searching SourceForge.

    --
    Kids today are tyrants. They contradict their parent, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers. - Socrates 400 BC
  12. 2 reasons - Spyware and SourceForge.net by Captain+Kirk · · Score: 5, Insightful



    I'll never forget the mess AOL's icq client and Kazaa's browser stuff made of my PC. For most utilities, sourceforge tends to have it. Better still, software from sourceforge doesn't install a ton of spyware, hijack your web browser or do any of the crap that freeware/shareware people are forced to do to pay for hosting.

    This is one area where open source works. To see the benefit, compare DC++ or eMule with their proprietary equivalents. Better quality because no annoying attempt to install stuff other than what is needed.

    Spyware has killed the freeware/shareware world. The degree to which Miranda and eMule are better than their 'free as in beer' equivalents still amazes me.

  13. Gresham's (ancient, Hindu) Law by senahj · · Score: 1, Funny



    There is no disappearing of the true Dhamma until a fals Dhamma arises in the world.
    When the false Dhamma arises, he makes the true Dhamma to disappear.

    Samyutta-Nikaya II, 224

    --
    Wait a minute. Didn't I say that on the other side of the record? I'd better check ...
    1. Re:Gresham's (ancient, Hindu) Law by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --So are you saying great Dhammage will be wrought??
      :b

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  14. GPL by shfted! · · Score: 1

    And now, my friend, you understand one of the reasons behind the GPL. Once it has been given, it cannot be taken back, and it's your to keep and use forever, without cost.

    Most of those involved in the creation of freeware -- those who see the benefits in cooperation -- have moved their efforts to the open source world, where their value is seen and their work highly respected. You'll find a plenthora of such applications and utilities on the Linux/BSD side of things.

    I don't mean to be a Free software zealot, but in this particular case, Free and Closed software are polar opposites. Welcome to the Light Side, young Skywalker.

    --
    He who laughs last is stuck in a time dilation bubble.
    1. Re:GPL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hippie

    2. Re:GPL by yomegaman · · Score: 1

      What the hell are you talking about? Every other response has given the guy good places to look for free software for Windows. It's still alive and well despite what retarded GNU zealots might think. Stop pushing your agenda and try actually answering a question helpfully for once.

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    3. Re:GPL by shfted! · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I have no "agenda". I simply stated how I see things, and offered a potential explanation for where the freeware went. I assumed that he would know about the obvious places like tucows, download.com, sourceforge, and others, and was still having no luck. I felt that repeating the obvious would have been useless, and tried to offer some insight, but it appears I failed at communicating that. My apologies.

      --
      He who laughs last is stuck in a time dilation bubble.
    4. Re:GPL by Mage+Powers · · Score: 1

      You can take back GPL software in a similar way that the freeware was taken away, you seem to have missed that. The GPL doesn't obligate authors to keep thier software available on the net, they can take down thier site, burn any printouts or cds containing the project and pretend it never happened. Only advantage here is that some Free software zealot named shift! on slashdot could host those projects on his website.

  15. 2 answers in one by samjam · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://freshmeat.net/projects/audacity/

    Freshmeat.net lists MANY software applications as they are released, and as good search capabilities if you login.

    Audacity is one of the best non-complex sound recorders and mixers going, using wxWidgets works and looks right under linux, windows and probably more (you look).

    Sam

    1. Re:2 answers in one by hrbrmstr · · Score: 1

      Beat me to it. Great tool, especially on OS X, but the Windows version is equally as good. It's won awards and is an example of how the open source community side of the *nix world has spearheaded the development of cross-platform/high quality free software.

      For the original question submitter: follow the advice of a couple of the posts and check sourceforge and freshmeat and stay away from download.com, etc. You'll find a great deal of software for all sorts of tasks.

      And, you might want to consider loading cygwin - www.cygwin.com - and take a look at the huge library of stuff that's been ported and packaged for Windows. All free.

      --
      Mind the gap...
    2. Re:2 answers in one by szyzyg · · Score: 1

      The only thing with audacity is that It's so damn slow on OSX - it takes me about 5 minutes to save a 10 minuute mp3 file - regardless of how I configure the LAME setup.

      But..... it is way more versatile than any of the 'professional' audio editors I've tried - most of them won't even import mp3 never mind FLAC or OGG.

      It's still getting there....

  16. That's how it goes by jsse · · Score: 5, Funny

    Years ago my friend who made a freeware called 'GameHack'(sort of, I forgot) was approached by a company for acquiring its source code with good offers. Then the company offers to commercialize his product and pay him royalty after he rejected the first offer. They didn't make the deal in the end.

    I think that's how the things go: you make good freeware and someone will support you to commercialize it if you don't do it yourself. We've seen a couple of such cases in OSS community. Developers are simply human who need to feed their kids and pay their mortage. :)

    P.S. Oh btw, the reason my friend declined their offers is that he lost the source code in a harddrive failure and he's too embarrass to admit it. :)

    1. Re:That's how it goes by eclectro · · Score: 1

      P.S. Oh btw, the reason my friend declined their offers is that he lost the source code in a harddrive failure and he's too embarrass to admit it. :)

      I know that it's too late now, but if the offer was decent enough (too justify the expense) there are a few companies that specialize in data recovery off crashed harddrives.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    2. Re:That's how it goes by at2000 · · Score: 1

      This is the bad with closed-source, free-of-charge or not.

    3. Re:That's how it goes by HeghmoH · · Score: 1

      You don't have to be running an open-source project to keep good backups. My important source code is saved in six different places in three separate physical locations on two continents. It would probably take a nuclear war to get it all.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    4. Re:That's how it goes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your friend is making this shit up. Don't believe everything that people tell you.

  17. How about using Audacity by EvilNutSack · · Score: 0, Redundant

    here I am! ? Works for me...

    --
    --
  18. Use cdex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    U can find it on http://theopencd.sunsite.dk/

  19. Re:Switch to Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bahahaha! Cygwin nullifies any benefit of using Linux. Most of those apps can compile on Windows. Don't forget, XFree86 has been running quite nicely through Cygwin for awhile now.

  20. Was there really lots of freeware? by GeckoUK · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I remember there being lots of shareware that relied on your good will to send money to the creators.

    Perhaps the attitude of the article author that this was all "freeware" is why it has slowly changed to cripple-ware :)

    1. Re:Was there really lots of freeware? by eclectro · · Score: 3, Interesting

      shareware that relied on your good will to send money to the creators.

      The problem is there wasn't enough good will to buy groceries with. That's why I have seen most shareware titles either become demos or crippleware.

      It's funny also how all the "free downloads" really aren't.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    2. Re:Was there really lots of freeware? by Rallion · · Score: 1

      Make the software good enough, though, and you might get enough good will. I'm curious to know how much money people send Patrick Kolla, creator of Spybot. Enough for him to keep using the 'donation' model, apparently.

    3. Re:Was there really lots of freeware? by HeghmoH · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is a fascinating article about the effectiveness of crippling shareware versus relying on goodwill at http://www.scrawlsoft.com/products/common/hardnose .html.

      The short summary: He did a study using a Windows shareware program. Upon installation, it randomly chose whether to be crippleware or simply remind the user to pay when starting and quitting the program, with a 50% chance of each. It did this in such a way that reinstalling wouldn't randomly choose again, so most people didn't even realize there were two "versions". The crippled version sold over five times as many copies.

      Granted, this is a single example and may not be representative of all situations, but it's the best study I'm aware of so far. It puts the "people who will buy it will pay for it anyway, don't piss people off by crippling the product" position in serious doubt, at least in my mind.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    4. Re:Was there really lots of freeware? by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      The problem is there wasn't enough good will to buy groceries with.

      I think part of that is where the target market for the shareware is.

      Someone writing a little DOS-based game and asking for $20 probably won't get it too often -- most people will play the game a few times, then move on to the next shiny thing.

      I wrote a DOS-based program that maintained a database of fax numbers and contacts, and printed fax cover sheets. It was $20 shareware. Not crippleware -- there was no "registered version". It told you once the first time you ran the program that you should send $20 if you liked it, and you never saw that message again.

      The program was being used in a lot of lawyer's offices. I know because I got a lot of $20 cheques from lawyers.

      I think business-related applications are (or were) more likely to get money in the door because people use those applications every day to accomplish something of value to them. Unlike a game.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    5. Re:Was there really lots of freeware? by teeters · · Score: 1

      In the early 90's, we at work downloaded Scorched Earth from the local BBS and played it during breaks. We had so much fun playing it, we decided that every time we played a game, we would drop a quarter into a box next to the monitor. When the box filled up to the $10.00 (or whatever) the author requested for contributions, we gladly sent him the cash. Fond memories.

  21. What about... by josefcub · · Score: 1

    What about using the old, 16-bit Windows software, even under Windows XP? You can go to places like Simtel and browse their old archives... I used to search there all the time, years ago, and they may still have freeware titles from the era stashed in their archive.

    --
    Bleakness... Desolation... Plastic Forks...
    1. Re:What about... by eclectro · · Score: 1

      Not really. 16 bit windows was nothing more than DOS with lipstick, with a lot of programs using DOS interrupts.

      Another real problem to a lot of this old software is that it was written with 386 clock speeds in mind. So that is around 25 MHz. Most new machines run at 2500MHz, a 100 fold increase that will break many programs.

      You can use a DOS simulator and load Windows 3.1 onto it (maybe - there is a real issue of compatibility here, most of the free stuff isn't 100% and there is bound to be bugs). You can also use a slow-down program for the CPU.

      If and when you get all this to work, you are sure to have a very clunky computing experience at hand.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  22. Re:Switch to Linux by eclectro · · Score: 4, Funny

    So become part of the growing Linux community, install linux today, because this is where the cool windows programmers have gone!

    This commercial in a thread is brought to you by Anonymous Coward productions, located in Sausalito California copyright 2004 All rights reserved.

    We now return you to your regular slashdot reading.

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  23. It's not limited to 60 seconds by lightspawn · · Score: 4, Informative

    It just looks that way because of a bad, bad, bad UI.

    Record 60 seconds of silence. Now save them as a file, and import it into the current sample. Voila! a 2-minute sample, which you can record over. Repeat as necessary.

    1. Re:It's not limited to 60 seconds by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      I'd forgotten about that. I was using Windows 95 and finally had the HD space along with a decent sound card to mess with Sound Recorder. I made a five minute long file of silence and saved it as 8-bit, 11KHz. When I wanted to record something longer than one minute I imported the file, improved the quality settings, and recorded over.

    2. Re:It's not limited to 60 seconds by blueday4 · · Score: 1

      Or you can simply load any large WAV file, clear, then have the time length of that file to record with.

    3. Re:It's not limited to 60 seconds by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      a 2-minute sample, which you can record over.

      That sounds like a work-around or a "hack" rather than an actual feature.

      "Hey, you can beat the built-in protection by doing X Y Z."

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    4. Re:It's not limited to 60 seconds by Daniel · · Score: 1
      Record 60 seconds of silence.

      ...but don't let John Cage's estate hear you doing it!

      Daniel

      --
      Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
    5. Re:It's not limited to 60 seconds by toddestan · · Score: 1

      ...but don't let John Cage's estate hear you doing it!

      But what's there to hear???

    6. Re:It's not limited to 60 seconds by DrEasy · · Score: 1

      My guess is John Cage must have recorded silence in one of his albums and sold it as such. The grandparent may be joking that by recording silence you are infringing on his copyright.

      Cage was an avant-garde musician who claimed more or less that any noise could be music as long as you listened to it in that way. I once went to a concert that was playing a composition of his, where the partition/instructions told the musicians to swap instruments in the middle of the piece and so on. It was crazy.

      John Cale of the Velvet Underground was heavily influenced by his work. Maybe the similarity in names was the reason? ;-)

      --
      "In our tactical decisions, we are operating contrary to our strategic interest."
    7. Re:It's not limited to 60 seconds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You may not have heard about it in the US, but a UK recording artist released a silent track and made a joking reference to John Cage, and got sued: BBC report

    8. Re:It's not limited to 60 seconds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And people brag about great Microsoft product managment and user focus.

      Priceless

  24. this is /..... by andrewleung · · Score: 2, Informative

    who here hasn't written something like this 3x already?! :-)

    Petzold's book is a good starting point...

  25. Hey, do you feel the need to write your own? by gnovos · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Are you feeling up to writing the utility you need? No? Hmmmm, maybe that's where all the freeware went?

    --
    "Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
  26. Another anti-windows troll posing as an article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    This one is classified as: "Error between keyboard and chair". It's resolved by yelling: "Learn to use the internet, dumbass".

    See the selection of freeware audiorecorders on Snapfiles.

    Lack of Windows freeware, my ass.

  27. or perhaps by nsebban · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    or perhaps you should search better : http://www.totalrecorder.com/

    --
    ____
    nico
    Nico-Live
    1. Re:or perhaps by erebus24 · · Score: 4, Informative
      or perhaps you should search better :
      Total Recorder Standard Edition costs just $11.95 (USD). Most other recording packages cost more and deliver less. Additionally, all new program updates are available to purchasers at no cost!
  28. Re:Switch to Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cygwin nullifies any benefit of using Linux;

    (aside from the superior kernel and other general linux goodness that is)

  29. In the words of Linus... by hummassa · · Score: 1

    Real men don't keep backups, they upload to the ftp server and the rest of the world copies it.

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
  30. You probably want... by Fweeky · · Score: 2, Informative

    foobar2000 and foo_record. Can play and record pretty much every audio format imaginable (although you probably want to find the 0.7 diskwriters until they're all ported to the new 0.8 API.. ask me if you need a hand, but you should be able to find stuff on the very useful forum) in 64 bit float precision. It can apply software DSP's, perform tagging operations at a level which puts the likes of Tag & Rename to shame, and is more configurable than any other audio player out there (because it's more than just an audio player ;)

    Most of the components are BSD licensed too. And don't let the default look put you off; it's skinnable and you can go a *long* way with nice formatting strings.

    I could go on, but I should really stop gushing. I've successfully converted quite a few peeps by doing this though, so there must be some truth in it :)

  31. buy out by jeisc · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ms bought them all out or hired the developper/s

    if you can't beat'em, buy'em!

    --
    This is a test!
  32. This is what you want by ptaff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    GnuWin is a nice burnable collection of free software for Windows.

    I personally always include a "GPL" when I search for Windows software; helps filter out the cripppleware.

  33. Google "freeware"... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Informative
    and you get:

    http://www.freewarehome.com/
    http://www.nonags.com
    http://www.tucows.com

    and then:

    http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
    http://www.dago.pmp.com.pl/messer/

    /. is not a hand filtered Google. Well, actually, in this case it is, but you see my point... MoJo

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  34. My solution by Vilim · · Score: 1

    I experianced the same thing a while ago. Since at this time I was in high school and could not afford to buy every piece of shareware that I need, my only option was to look for cracks/warez. I finally got sick of the moral/legal/painintheass aspects of this method and switched to Linux.

    Now every computer I own runs Debian (I switched my server from Gentoo yesterday), my software is 100% legal and it cost me $0. I believe I have given back to the open source community in the form of the amount of bug reports/patches that I have submitted to various projects.

    Although switching to a free (not RMSs' fucked up definition, I mean Linux, BSD, or any OS where the majority of programs are no charge) OS was the right choice for me, for you that may be different. I am not one of the pimply faced Linux zealots who believes that Linux is the best OS on the face of the planet etc.

    If you can't switch to an OS where the majority of programs are free, I can only suggest paying for a program when you are sure that you will use it more than once, and that it is decent. Otherwise get some good cracks sites and try to remain calm when the 24329th patch you download fails just like the other ones.

    --
    History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it - Sir Winston Churchill
    1. Re:My solution by nuggetman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Joe Average is not going to change his entire operating system to record a radio broadcast... get real.

      --
      ...and that's all there is to it.
    2. Re:My solution by marcilr · · Score: 1

      I've switched out my entire operating system for a lot less...For example I hate Microsoft Outlook. It ate several computers before driving me to alternatives, i.e. Linux. It was a rough transition but I'm happy and a sane now. I no longer rant and curse at my computers...

      --
      Azurite is fine covellite is mine.
  35. AnalogX by Reddog0176 · · Score: 4, Informative

    AnalogX.com has some pretty good software. http://www.analogx.com/contents/download.htm

    1. Re:AnalogX by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      Yes, but unfortunately they don't have an audio recording program.

  36. What's wrong with cracks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.cracks.am Works almost every time.

  37. Funny you should post this .. by stevey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As a reminder of how to develop under MFC a couple of days ago I wrote a toy program for monitoring machines.

    Kinda like Nagios does (formerly netsaint) but in a single application instead of a webbased system.

    I sent a copy to a colleague who appreciated it, and one of his first comments was sell it for 29$!

    I am a Debian guy, I write free software for Linux/Unix and I could do for Windows - but to be honest I have no qualms about charging for Windows.

    Why? None of the software I've produced has been by any means essential, its just handy stuff for the sysadmin type who has to look after a lot of Windows desktops.

    If people use it fine, if they sent me money fine, if not I really don't mind.

    Under Linux or Unix I'd honestly not consider it. I might get paid to update some software, or write something specifically for you (that happens every few months, usually for peanuts; but sometimes for suprisingly large amounts of cast) - but I'll not write something random then expect people to pay for it. It's a completely different market and mindset.

    People under Windows may hate it, but they have been conditioned to expect to pay for software which is any good. Winamp is even going back to a premium paid product, after previously being shareware then going free!

    1. Re:Funny you should post this .. by yomegaman · · Score: 0

      Why do you GNU zealots feel compelled to lie to push your agenda? Winamp is still free, only the "Pro" version with CD burning costs money. It's sad that the truth matters so little to you folks.

      --
      ...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
    2. Re:Funny you should post this .. by stevey · · Score: 1

      I did not lie, previously WinAmp was shareware, then it became free.

      Now there is a premium product which you must pay for.

      I don't have a problem with that at all .. I'm merely showing one example of a popular piece of software which used to be free becoming a paid product - sure it's still free, but the super-sexy-version is now paid only.

      Kinda highlighting the original point of the "article".

      .. shall I suggest that anti-GNU people are zealous now? *shrugs*

    3. Re:Funny you should post this .. by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      You mislead, though.

      You said "Winamp is going back to being a paid-for product" which implies that the free version of Winamp is being discontinued, when a more accurate way of saying it would have been "Winamp is once again adding a paid premium version to its product line".

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
  38. webattack by kayen_telva · · Score: 0, Redundant

    now known as snapfiles.com

  39. You dont google well do you by LesFerg · · Score: 2, Informative

    Having just experienced the same need, I googled for "windows open source wav record" and instantly had pages of free and/or open source offerings for windows.

    The top of the list was http://www.vorbis.com/software.psp, which pointed me towards Audacity, which I had already used under Debian (its nice to see open source projects going cross-platform).

    This was less than 5 minutes. Google gives you exactly what you ask for, after all....

    --
    If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
  40. something similar has happened with drivers by geoswan · · Score: 1
    A similar phenomenon has happened with drivers. It used to be much easier to track down drivers for discontinued hardware. Now a web-search will turn up deceptive sites that try to sell you access to drivers.

    In this case I think we have to put some of the blame on the search engines. They accept kickbacks from sites to be listed earlier in the list of results.

    Perhaps not being able to find freeware is a similar phenonmenon.

    What we need is an altruistic, non-commercial search engine -- with powerful features and a wide pipe. We need a search engine that is on our side, not on the side of those who are trying to sell us things.

  41. use apt-cache instead by vlm · · Score: 0, Redundant

    If you have debian installed, use "apt-cache search keyword" instead.

    "apt-cache stats" and "apt-cache show packagename" are also entertaining... try "man apt-cache" first.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  42. it's generational by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'm not convinced that it's as simple as "all the former Windows free(beer)ware developers are now doing Free(speech)ware for Linux." I just don't see a lot of that transition happening. I think it's more of a generational thing.

    The folks who wrote DOS and Windows freeware in the 80's and 90's have just gotten tired of it. It was fun, but the community of techie early adopters has been inundated with everybody and his mother-in-law, and it's just not the same anymore. If they're still doing it, they've decided to make a job of it: hence crippleware requiring payment. Some have moved on to Linux and such, but the rest are just middle-aged parents who don't have time or enthusiasm for it anymore.

    Meanwhile, the new generation of techie types (who could have been early adopters of PCs, but now it's too late for that) have either gone directly into open-source, or they've grown up in that "mature market" of Windows, where it seems that most of the neat toys and applets they'd want are already bundled with the OS, and the bubbling stewpot of innovation has cooled to a simmer.

    Another related factor is that the nature of the computer you take out of the box has changed dramatically over that timeframe. If you bought a computer 25 years ago, it was expected that you would do some programming with it. Turn on that Apple II or C64 or that IBM PC without an OS installed, and you're in a BASIC interpretter. The more recent computer purchaser is never really given that nudge.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  43. What sad. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    To write such rubish just to be proven wrong by several other posts almost immediately.

    Unadulterated anty OSS zealotry at its worst.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  44. SourceForge by vaskin · · Score: 1

    Do a sourceforge search and look for high activity rates, you can qualify search to Win32 apps rather easily. Its not "freeware" but Open Source, which is where all the freeware coders went.

    --
    --- cut here ---
  45. Free Alternatives by apirkle · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you're using Windows, you should probably be using all of these programs (if you need them). Most of them are pretty stable and mature.

    Audacity - Sound editing (so this post is on-topic!)

    Mozilla FireFox - Web browsing.

    The Gimp - graphics/photo editing

    Sodipodi - Vector graphics (SVG) editing. It's no Illustrator, but the basics are there, and they're pretty nice.

    OpenOffice - Not quite ready to replace Word/Excel/PPT, but it's great if you (or your employer/university) haven't already shelled out for Office.

    FileZilla - FTP client

    Gaim - AOL Instant Messenger client

    PuTTY - ssh client

    There's a bit more elaboration and links on my blog.

    1. Re:Free Alternatives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      FileZilla - FTP client

      Real men send USER, PASS, TYPE I, PORT, RETR with netcat to get FTP files.

    2. Re:Free Alternatives by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      Audacity - Sound editing (so this post is on-topic!)
      Absolutely great product, use it all the time. If the submitter had found this product we wouldn't be having this conversation.
  46. One possible reason... by Andy+Smith · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was in a similar situation myself recently. I wanted a program to rip the audio from a stand-up DVD so I could listen to it on the PC without needing to play the DVD.

    After a looong search I eventually found one free program that could do the job. Downloaded it, installed it, started ripping. Five minutes later it stopped. Time-limited, you see. But good news! Apparently there was a commercial version which could record for longer than five minutes! So after being tricked like that, obviously I rushed to order the commercial version... NOT.

    Obviously that was a dirty bait-and-switch trick but I can think of one legitimate reason why more ethical coders may be moving away from free releases...

    A few years ago I wrote a video capture program. It was for my own personal use because I wasn't happy with any of the commercial options available. I decided to release the software for free, and included in the zip file a brief text file explaining how to use it and stating the one very limited, specific job that it was designed to perform.

    The software was listed on one download site and the reviewers there ripped it to shreds.

    Why?

    Because they claimed that a certain feature didn't work.

    Never mind the fact that the info file made no mention of that feature. Never mind the fact that the feature was way outside the scope of this particular program. These reviewers wanted a free video capture program with a certain feature, so when a free video capture program came out *without* that feature, they reviewed the program as defective.

    Would I release a program for free in future?

    Very unlikely.

    If someone considers buying a program then they'll probably read the instructions to make sure it can do what they want. If they go ahead and buy it then they'll almost certainly have read the instructions. But if it's free, as with most free stuff online, people have unrealistic expectations and they react nastily when those expectations aren't met.

  47. www.sysinternals.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They make great tools available . source code too.

  48. Sound Recorder with Scheduling - MP3 by todsandberg · · Score: 1

    Sound Recorder with Scheduling -> MP3/Wav.
    Just set up the schedule, leave the radio on and your radio show will be recorded.
    It's sort of a VCR for your soundcard.
    It records to Wav or MP3.
    Good for recording radio shows.

    Description:
    http://www.dago.pmp.com.pl/messer/index-old.html

    Download:
    http://www.dago.pmp.com.pl/messer/

    Tod

  49. For something really nice simple and free.... by zhiwenchong · · Score: 2, Informative

    Try this
    Stepvoice recorder
    http://www.stepvoice.com

    It records almost any sound source directly into MP3. You can also define quality of the recording.

    Best of all, it's only 230k!

    1. Re:For something really nice simple and free.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best of all, it's only 230k!

      $230k? he was looking for something that was free

  50. Excellent Freeware Site by todsandberg · · Score: 5, Informative

    Excellent Freeware Site
    http://www.snapfiles.com/freeeware/ (used to be webattack.com)
    I used to be addicted to freeware and this was one of my favorite places to get a fix.
    All the software is well categorized.
    I can often find what I'm looking for here.

    http://www.nonags.com is good too.

    Tod

    1. Re:Excellent Freeware Site by toddlg · · Score: 1

      Bump!
      Snapfiles (aka Webattack) is the only site you'll need I'm guessing...

    2. Re:Excellent Freeware Site by mandalayx · · Score: 1

      link in parent shows "file not found"

      try this link

    3. Re:Excellent Freeware Site by mandalayx · · Score: 1

      link in parent shows "file not found"

      try this link

  51. Audacity by Space · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you are still looking for an audio recording app check out the windows port of Audacity. It has reat sound quality, mp3 and ogg output, Multi track, 32-bit floating point sound files, etc.

    --
    I Don't Work Here
  52. Note to mikeash RE: Creatures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, you might want to do a mozilla / firebird / firefox / whatever-it-is-called-today on your "Creatures" software. There's been a commercial artificial life program by this name for years now. "Norns"?

  53. Try this one by mrdogi · · Score: 3, Informative

    ScanRec is one I've found rather useful. It isn't an end-all/be-all recorder, but it does have a rather useful feature. It was created with a VOX control originally to be used for recording ham sessions. So, it would not record constantly, but only when anybody brodcast. It will create a log file detailing what times it did the recordings. Anyway, I've used it for radio/TV stuff in the past, and I've had few problems with it (other than recording in a format that Media Player didn't really like.

  54. http://audacity.sourceforge.net/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

  55. MOD PARENT UP! by tommck · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm so sick of uninformed people bashing Microsoft with inaccurate information!

    I mean, really, there are TONS of ways to CORRECTLY bash them! Check your facts!

    --
    ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  56. Pro Tools has free version silly man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not get something free that is real quality?

    http://www.digidesign.com/ptfree/

  57. Was there really lots of freeware?-Good Will. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The problem is there wasn't enough good will to buy groceries with. "

    Maybe that's one of the reasons for OSS popularity? You can keep the software and not put out the "good will", and it will not have an impact on others.

  58. WinAmp! by spongman · · Score: 2, Informative

    use WinAmp, with it's bundled Disk-Writer plugin.

  59. Shocked! Appalled! by Rallion · · Score: 3, Funny

    Maybe MS programmers will start participating with the community and answering questions on the developers newsgroups.

    Hold up...did the parent just imply that Linux users were helpful and would answer questions?!?

    Hah, it's a joke! I'm kidding!

    Sorta!

    1. Re:Shocked! Appalled! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Complaining huh?

      So go fix the problem! You know where to look...

    2. Re:Shocked! Appalled! by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

      and here I was about to ask what planet they were from.

  60. 2004 to 1997, hang on! by Dr+Cool · · Score: 1

    Hey 1997, this is 2004. Just hold on a little longer, there's a great new search engine just around the corner. It's called Google and it beats the pants off of the ad-crippled AltaVista!

    1. Re:2004 to 1997, hang on! by geoswan · · Score: 1

      Hey 2004! Google is on this scheme too!

  61. Its changed, not disappeared by RhettLivingston · · Score: 3, Informative

    Probably over half of the programs that I run on my Windows machines are GNU or open source programs (Perl, Python, PHP, MySQL, GIMP, grep, awk, sed, and even things like Bash). There are very few major GNU/Linux programs that don't run fine under windows these days either because they were written to be portable in the first place or because CYGWIN does a pretty decent job of emulating the unix libraries.

  62. Exact Audio Copy by recursiv · · Score: 2, Informative

    I see someone already mentioned Audacity, but I also wanted to mention that Exact Audio Copy will do exactly what you want, despite primarily being a cd ripping tool.

    --
    I used to bulls-eye womp-rats in my pants
  63. Don't be so damn cheap! by rcharbon · · Score: 1

    I'm all in favor of people working hard, writing good software, and giving it to me for nothing. But if I can't find what I want for free, I don't whine about paying a reasonable fee. I've paid the munificent sum of $12 for Total Recorder, and I haven't regretted it yet.

  64. The proper solution is... by jo42 · · Score: 1


    Being /., the proper solution to this question is to download and install your religious denomination of Linux to perform this relatively minor task.

  65. Get a Mac! by 4Lorn · · Score: 1

    Mac OS X has that property Windows had in its youth - university people and enthusiastic young programmers are starting to discover it, making it their domain for personal programming needs. You can find opensource ports, scientific visualisation software and small freeware utilities.

    Alternatively - Linux, same reason, more software, possible hardware support problems.

    1. Re:Get a Mac! by vikman · · Score: 1

      It's even harder to find Mac freeware though.

      --
      --
    2. Re:Get a Mac! by 4Lorn · · Score: 1

      Mostly true, but it depends on what you need and where you search.

      Several sites list very good mac freeware, including apple.com.
      The best thing is that it's easy to find simple scientific programs like calculators, plotters and such, that are rather hard to get for Windows. Probable cause - scientists who use windows buy expensive programming environments and sophisticated scientific software, scientists who use macs have compilers for several languages within the system and make minimalistyc scientific software for themselves.

      And there's always sourceforge and the platform=MacOSX filter...

  66. yes virginia, you can you windows sndrec32 by way2trivial · · Score: 2, Interesting
    You can use sndrec32 to convert analog to mp3

    record a blank file, about 2 seconds,
    using 'effects' increase the length by 'decreasing speed' as needed to length required for project.


    start at beginning of file, and hit 'record' this causes your new sound to mix with the file

    using windows sound recorder, it's ability to convert, and the lame codec, I actually have a friend I setup converting his old LAME punk rock from casettes to mp3's using just soundrec.. I actually created blank wav's for him in 180, 240, and 900 second versions, and have used it successfully to record an entire side of a 45 minute casette onto one file, 2800 second blank wav, pared down as needed after the casette was in.

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:yes virginia, you can you windows sndrec32 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "using windows sound recorder, it's ability to convert, and the lame codec, I actually have a friend I setup converting his old LAME punk rock from casettes to mp3's using just soundrec.. I actually created blank wav's for him in 180, 240, and 900 second versions, and have used it successfully to record an entire side of a 45 minute casette onto one file, 2800 second blank wav, pared down as needed after the casette was in."

      Any idea how much easier this is with Audacity?

      Press "record", start playing the record, wait an hour.

      Highlight each track, "save to MP3" in the file menu.

  67. Free windows development by armentage · · Score: 1
    Personally, I'm not a fan of any sort of GUI Form editor. I tend to create my forms by hand, in my code, and position them dynamically using Layout Managers, the sort used in Motif and Java/AWT.

    Whats sad is that most people use GUI Form editors as a litmus test for a "good, complete" enviroment for "power developers". I think Form editors should be a crutch for beginners (to GUI programming altogether), until they learn how to visual a layout in their minds.

    Forms are just that - Forms, for simple Dialog boxes. The trend in UI design has been moving away from "Dialog Controls" and OK buttons for years now. Forms are almost becoming irrelevant and are being replaced with floating tool palettes and web-page like UIs surrounding very powerful "Views" designed to interact with specific kinds of data.

    The only GUI package I know of that is intended for this sort of design is WTL (Windows Template Library), which happens to be free from Microsoft.

  68. Another vote for Total Recorder, & why it work by aquarian · · Score: 3, Informative

    I find Total Recorder very useful too. Just paying $12 for it is easier than trying to find free programs to do the same thing. What's your time worth? I searched for weeks to find something that would record streaming radio broadcasts on Windows (Linux can do this all by itself, with a few command line untilities piped together). Anyway, Total Recorder was the only thing I could find, free or not.

    A problem with developing this kind of software is needing proprietary libraries, etc. So virtually all software of this type is non-free. Total Recorder gets around this by recording the output of the sound card. Methinks Java could be used for this and it could be cross-platform, but so far no one's bothered.

  69. it went here by LuckyJ · · Score: 1

    http://www.snapfiles.com/freeware/

  70. Was there really lots of [cripple]ware? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Granted, this is a single example and may not be representative of all situations, but it's the best study I'm aware of so far. It puts the "people who will buy it will pay for it anyway, don't piss people off by crippling the product" position in serious doubt, at least in my mind."

    So what does that say about crippled CD's? Or any other "crippled" product to begin with.

  71. I blame VB... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems the problem is much older than that. When VB became popular, everyone who could make a dialog box pop up figured he or she could slap together some (usually) crappy piece of semi-functional-ware, charge $29.99 and become rich. It didn't help that shareware had been successful for a lot of products (mostly because the successful products were _good_). Shareware _is_ a great idea, but there is so much stuff out there which is complete crap, and you'll see 10 wastes of disk space for every app that is actually worth the 30 seconds to download.

    My frustration is not so much finding free tools but finding _any_ tools that don't suck for small simple needs like the one described. I'll gladly pay a small fee for a small utility that does something really well, but the freeware actually tends to be better than the shareware in so many cases, probably because the creator is motivated to make a useful app rather than just become the next WinZip (which I happily paid for years ago, but now I use WinRAR, also paid for). Big commercial apps have their place, but most of the time, what I'm looking for is a simple tool to fill a simple need, not something that tries to be everything to everyone.

    Between sourceforge.net and freshmeat.org and maybe a little learning curve with cygwin, there is plenty of good Windows open source software out there to be had, but it should be a lot better.

    Recently I wanted a good font manager for Windows, something that would let me browse through hundreds of fonts and install or uninstall them quickly and easily. I found the same thing... a bunch of crappy shareware (or at best, decent shareware that lacked features I required), so in frustration I started writing my own using old Ziff-Davis free utility source code as a starting point. I haven't gotten far because of work demands, but if I ever get something good, I will release it Open Source.

    And please, Windows programmers, if you are going to release freeware, give us the source. Many marginal piece of software could be very valuable if the source were available.

    I have nothing against shareware or commercial software, but if you are going to go that route, your app better be worth the download, and from what I've seen, most aren't.
    At the end of the day, any good software is hard to find.

    --
    You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    1. Re:I blame VB... by ssmith39 · · Score: 1

      Right on!

      I have to say, though, that some of the crappiest software I've ever seen was commercial (no, I'm not talking about Windows). I installed a host-based sniffer product on Windows that required a service pack that was not one but two generations old. And it still didn't work.

      --
      Intelligent is to conservative as goat is to parking meter.
    2. Re:I blame VB... by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, the _worst_ software is often the most expensive: Vertical applications that cost thousands or tens of thousands of dollars per seat. You are paying for very specialized functionality, and are often dedicating an employee or employees to using the software. Companies that do these kinds of packages have little or no incentive to make them usable because they often have little or no competition. If you're the only one who makes this specialized software, your customers are locked in, so you keep them just slightly less than ticked off enough to stop doing business with you.

      Either that your Rational or Real, or in many cases, Microsoft and you simply hate your customers.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    3. Re:I blame VB... by DrEasy · · Score: 1
      Either that your Rational or Real, or in many cases, Microsoft and you simply hate your customers.
      Funny that when you're "rational" or "real", you hate your customers...

      --
      "In our tactical decisions, we are operating contrary to our strategic interest."
  72. Better than TUCOWS... by dublin · · Score: 1

    In addition to the sites listed above, don't forget the site even older than TUCOWS, the site that was arguably the first real download site on the net: Simtel. (http://www.simtel.com

    Simtel is still pretty good, and has always been a good place to find free or cheap software. AFAIK, it was the first large-scale public repository for free and open source software. Before sunsite.unc.edu, before ftp.uu.net, there was Simtel - in the old days, the first place to look for programs or source was ftp.wsmr(for White Sands Missile Range).army.mil. Simtel had *gigabytes* of stuff availabe even before AUPs allowed commercial use of the Internet.

    OK, while I'm dating myself - How many people here remember what TUCOWS is an acronym for? (Hint - think Windows 95...) Not many, even here on Slashdot, I'll bet...

    --
    "The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last ./ post
    1. Re:Better than TUCOWS... by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      From http://resellers.tucows.com/about/history:

      The origins of what is now Tucows Inc, began in Flint, Michigan in 1993. At that time, while working for local libraries, Scott Swedorski noticed the public's increasing interest in the world wide Web and used his personal website to offer downloadable software. He dubbed this service TUCOWS -- an acronym for The Ultimate Collection of Winsock Software -- which quickly gained worldwide recognition as the first site to offer software on a "freeware" or "shareware" basis.

  73. ...and OnlyTheBestFreeware.com by SchnellDavis · · Score: 3, Informative
  74. Usenet by rudy_wayne · · Score: 0


    alt.binaries.*

    end of story.

  75. maybe because... by CarrionBird · · Score: 1
    Those "free" programs you speak of were shareware, and users were on thier honor to pay for them eventually if they continued to use it.

    Maybe they noticed that there wasn't much "honor" out there. Maybe they noticed thier software being used everywhere and how few people were willing to pay the usually dirt cheap registration fee.

    Any-way, what you're looking for is called OSS, and it does exist for windows too.
    --
    Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
    1. Re:maybe because... by Russellkhan · · Score: 1

      " Those "free" programs you speak of were shareware, and users were on thier honor to pay for them eventually if they continued to use it."

      Not true. There has always been true freeware for Windows. Back when I used to have more need for it, one of the best sites for freeware was NoNags. Take a look at their listing guidelines to see for yourself whether these are really shareware.

      All that said, I haven't tried to use the site in several months, so I don't really know how good the selection is these days - or whether quality is as high as I remember it.

      --
      Information doesn't want to be anthropomorphized anymore.
  76. analogx.com by redmond · · Score: 1

    www.analogx.com
    It's free (as in money) and this guy has lots of cool little apps for win32.

    --
    :wq
  77. SimTel.net by Jedsmeny · · Score: 1

    I don't know if its any good anymore. I havn't used it in ages, but back in the day I could find quite a few useful programs on it.

    www.simtel.net

    --
    --me
  78. Jet Audio by attaboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Did you try Jet Audio Basic?

    See download.com

    --
    The facts have a liberal bias. --The Daily Show
  79. Re:Switch to Linux by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 1

    So become part of the growing Linux community, install linux today, because this is where the cool windows programmers have gone!

    [snip]

    We now return you to your regular slashdot reading.


    Honestly, that sounds _exactly_ like my regular SlashDot reading...

  80. Get Audacity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get the free sound editor called Audacity, it will record from any source and works on Windows / Mac OS X / Linux. http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

  81. Cost of Development by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Part of the problem is that the cost to develop for windows has increased.

    Another issue is the mentality of 'profit' that is associated with windows.

    And... a lot of the better developers just moved on to different horizons.. ( they grew up and now have a family to support.. only so much time in the day between work and life...)

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  82. Linux happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Authors smarted to use Linux.

  83. web searching... by maevius · · Score: 1

    When I want a program for a given purpose, I usually do a web search, find at least 5-10 candidate programs (by checking website quality, list of program features). I download about 5 of them and test them. At least one of them suits my needs.
    I once searched for a sound recording program and I was really dissapointed by what I found as well but usually I find what I search for.

    For music programs I find everything I need here

  84. Audiotime - Free for personal use by fear025 · · Score: 1

    I had the same problem, I wanted to record a radio show through the sound cards every weekend.
    Eventually I came across this Audiotime which is free for personal use.

    It sounds like it might fit the specific task you have.

  85. A lot of freeware sites are also gone or... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...merged.
    BHS.com - gone
    tucows - gone commercial (ads, domain reg, etc)
    winfiles - merged
    cdrom.com - sucks

    I'm leaving a bunch out (I can't remember them right now - old age and all).

  86. Goldwave? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been using a program called Goldwave for the longest time to record audio. Technically, it's shareware, but if you're a bad person you can use it for free.
    http://www.goldwave.com/

  87. Lots of Freeware for OS X by rocketjam · · Score: 1

    Here's where you can offset the upfront cost of getting a Mac! There is tons of freeware available for OS X. As well as projects like Gnu-Darwin and Fink which are porting Unix programs to X.

  88. zerg by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1

    If you don't like it, why don't you be an entrepeneur and code it yourself or take advantage of consumer choice in a free market and switch operating systems?

    --
    [o]_O
  89. Wow. by /dev/trash · · Score: 0

    You can still only record 60 seconds in XP?

  90. Re:Audacity (MOD PARENT UP) by megabyte405 · · Score: 1

    I wholeheartedly second that.

    --
    I recognize people by their sigs. Is that a bad thing?
  91. The new freeware by dtfinch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's plenty of open source out there.

    The problem with looking for freeware on freeware/shareware sites is that those sites are desperate for some sort of revenue, so they prefer to host shareware and demos that they can earn revenue from through affiliate links. Having worked for such a site, I ought to know.

    Most of the best freeware is open source nowadays. Whenever it's not it's usually to promote a commercial product. CDEX is one of the best cd rippers, sound recorders, and sound converters all in one.

  92. Freeware players by prltdbob · · Score: 1

    I subsubscribe to Rhapsody and jet audio can record the downstreaming music to a file of your choice in several formats

  93. The best free C IDE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Search for lcc-win32. I used this on my Windows days...

  94. Write it yourself by Steven+Reddie · · Score: 1

    If the software you want is so trivial to create that it would be given away as freeware then why not write it yourself (and give it away as freeware)?

    1. Re:Write it yourself by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      well, that is good advice to me (who has been writing software for 14 years) - but to the average computer user/enthusiast your advice is a bit unrealistic, not to mention somewhat affected.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  95. http://www.bloodshed.net/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use Bloodsheds Dev-C++ for C\C++ windows development.

    1. Re:http://www.bloodshed.net/ by kaens · · Score: 1

      definately. dev-c++ all the way.

  96. It's all because of those TPS reports, you clod ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I think the amount of windows freeware is almost as abundant as there was in 1999/2000; it's just that bandwidth is no longer handed out like candy on Halloween in America.

    That forces places like download.com to charge for their listings; and programmers then need to recoup their increased costs.

    Plus, employees have less time to work on their programs; since they can't do it @ work anymore
    (legal issues; having less leisure time there, etc.)

  97. Heres the solution by Cow007 · · Score: 1

    Just grab a serial number list and regester thoes stupid progs. (the moderators will love this one)

    --
    411 Y0UR 8453 4R3 8310NG 70 U5!! -NSA
  98. Framasoft by Krunch · · Score: 1

    When I need some software for Windows, I usually find what I want on Framasoft. It lists only Free software but it's in French. The English translation doesn't seem very complete but you can try the Google translation.

    --
    No GNU has been Hurd during the making of this comment.
  99. Freeware For Windows! by skanoza · · Score: 1

    Freeware for Windows have arguably more bugs than Windows itself. i tried the Pocket Voice Recorder a couple of days ago and the thing doesn't even install correctly. Most others are either 'lameware' or 'buyware'. :o)

    This may be yet another sign for switching to the Mac OS X. If Apple's iLife app's don't floor you, Apple's X11 (XDarwin implementation) should open you up to the world of freeware (yes, that means Linux apps will run on the mac too!).

    and if Audio, Video, Music app's are what you particularly need then i'd say no alternative looks better than the mac right now. and i'll bet not for a while at least!
    The Macintosh is the cleanest looking UNIX ever. Give Linux another 10 years (?) and Microsoft .. uh, give them a drawing board!

    1. Re:Freeware For Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Mac has the same problem that Windows has when it comes to freeware. The problem is more pronounced on Windows, simply because it's so widely used and developed for. It's kind of like shopping for music. Sure there's a lot of crap out there, but there are gems to be found amongst the dirt.

  100. Misdiagnosis? by cookie_cutter · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Sometimes the trouble isn't that the software (or whatever item your searching for) doesn't exist, but that search engines don't favour them, but rather rank up the search-engine tailored commercial sites instead.

    This is why it is often better to go to a site which serves as a portal to links to your subject of interest, rather than a general search engine.

    1. Re:Misdiagnosis? by Geekbot · · Score: 1

      That is an excellent observation. I (sort of) teach computer skills or technology infused lessons to K-8 students and I make it a point to let them know that some search engines are junk, some are good, some are great, but the best answer is always that you need to use the right search engine for the job. And very often that's a highly specific search engine, such as those that are dedicated to searching a specific site.

  101. Sourceforge? by Conor+Turton · · Score: 1

    Err there's Windows software on Sourceforge as well as *nix you know.

    I love the fact that the aMSN team have released a Win32 version which seems to be more secure than Microsofts and doesn't have the adware crap either.

    --
    Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
    1. Re:Sourceforge? by Conor+Turton · · Score: 1
      http://audacity.sourceforge.net

      Took me all of 2 minutes to find....

      I guess it is true what they say about Windows making you stupid.

      --
      Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
  102. I know it isn't Freeware, but... by Zathras11 · · Score: 1

    TotalRecorder is AWESOME! And CHEAP!
    And you get FREE upgrades! I've found
    it worth the small fee I paid ($10 or
    so, several years ago). You can record
    from any source, even things that are
    "blocked", because of the way it works.
    Check it out! I found it when I was in
    your position, actually...

    As for Freeware, you can check PC World,
    and Tucows. They still have some Freeware.

  103. I had the same problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was looking for a similar program, and afert finding nothing but the same, I turned to sourceforge, and found Audacity. Perfect solution, thank you sourceforge.

  104. Re:Another vote for Total Recorder, & why it w by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I searched for weeks to find something that would record streaming radio broadcasts on Windows

    You know you can do that in Winamp just by setting the output plugin to write to disk.

    Mike

  105. Obviously... by danila · · Score: 1

    Download.Com + Astalavista.Box.Sk

    --
    Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
  106. The OSSwin project: Open Source for Windows! by JaF893 · · Score: 1

    I came accross this SF project a few weeks back I thought I'd post it for the benefit of the slashdot readers. OSS for Windows

  107. cdlibre.org by paugq · · Score: 1
  108. windows is no longer such a big tent by iriefrank · · Score: 1
    But this difference in culture, while well described, alone does not explain why this freeware used to be plentiful and isn't now. I offer that a lot of the coders that are now writing OSS on free platforms used to work in Windows, before free unix variants were as widespread as they are now.

    Perhaps this was implicit in your analysis, but still worth pointing out to completely answer the question.

  109. Audacity! by apache802.11 · · Score: 1

    The tool u are looking for is Audacity at: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/ it is a very good free open source audio recorder/editor ... i love it and it sounds like the perfect solution to your problem.

  110. Hey FOOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever heard of Audacity!

  111. Another tragedy, avoided if only ... by Kourino · · Score: 1

    P.S. Oh btw, the reason my friend declined their offers is that he lost the source code in a harddrive failure and he's too embarrass to admit it :)

    "Only wimps use tape backup; *real* men just upload their important stuff on FTP, and let the rest of the world mirror it ;)" - Linus

  112. Try free platforms by yuri+benjamin · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the kind of person who develops free software also prefers a free platform. This is not a flame or a troll - just a thought that occurs to me.
    If you don't want to install another OS, download knoppix. I'd expect there to be a record tool on knoppix.

    --
    You make the mistake of thinking you can educate the fundamental stupidity out of people. You can't.
  113. RadioRecord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try "RadioRecord" on sourceforge.net

    http://sourceforge.net/projects/radiorecord/

    RadioRecord is a simple utility that records, encodes, buffers, and dumps MP3 audio on-the-fly.

  114. They're called "viruses" now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    nt

  115. Ummm to name a few by xaoslaad · · Score: 1

    www.mozilla.org
    www.openoffice.org
    www.realvnc.c om
    www.lavasoftusa.com
    www.adobe.com
    www.chiark .greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty
    winscp.vse.cz/en g
    www.apache.org
    quicktime.apple.com
    www.cdex.n 3.net
    isorecorder.alexfeinman.com/isorecorder.htm
    www.foundstone.com
    www.shavlik.com
    www.cygwin. com
    www.xemacs.org
    www.borland.com/jbuilder

    Microsoft does have free programs and updates too:
    www.microsoft.com

    And some not so free but certainly worth it:
    www.winzip.com
    www.executive.com

    OK I'll stop writing now cause this could seriously go on forever

  116. CD player app by horatio · · Score: 1

    Funny thing, I've been dealing with the same crap trying to find a simple CD player which actually puts the sound to the CD audio channel, as opposed to the wav channel. WMP, for example, besides being so bloated, routes the audio through the wav channel, so you can't control the volume of a CD and your full-screen game independently.

    Winamp won't play 'enhanced'/mixed-mode CDs because it sees the data first.

    I want something simple - play the audio CD tracks in random order through the CD sound channel. I don't care about MP3s, or any other format. I'm probably going to end up writing my own app in Tcl/Tk.

    --
    There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.
  117. That's one way by PetoskeyGuy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hear is an easier one.

    record any thing

    Press Ctrl+C

    Press and Hold Ctrl+V until it's as long as you like.

  118. Feeling Nostalgic, eh? by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 1

    It used to be that if you wanted the latest greatest freeware and shareware for Windows and DOS, you'd hit the public FTP archives of places like my personal favorite, wuarchive.wustl.edu or you'd telnet or dialup your favorite BBS.

    Or even better, you'd take three floppies and knock on the door of some hip techie to get the latest Apogee computer game (remember, Commander Keen?).

    And when you couldn't do that, you'd flirt with some geek in the lab so that he'd teach you how to use rz or kermit to download freeware on your own. Ah, those were the days. I think I'll go fire up Telix.

    Today, if you can't Google it, you can always try Simtel, a great place to find classic freeware as well.

  119. GCC for Windows by tepples · · Score: 1

    scientists who use windows buy expensive programming environments and sophisticated scientific software, scientists who use macs have compilers for several languages within the system

    Mac OS X comes with GCC. You can get GCC for Windows, or you can get GCC plus a UNIX source compatibility layer for Windows.

  120. useful site by x3ro · · Score: 1

    Try HitSquad's Software Music Machine. Plenty of free/shareware there.

    --
    [ UNSIGNED NOT NULL ]
  121. Sound Recorder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Search for audacity 1.1 or 1.2. It is really comprehensive and works well.

  122. freeware for windows by chunkwhite86 · · Score: 1

    Freeware for Windows -- Where Did It Go?

    Oh, it's still there. It just costs money now.

    --
    I'd rather be a conservative nutjob than a liberal with no nuts and no job.
  123. There does exist freeware by localhost00 · · Score: 1
    that will allow you to record to WAV with the limit being your HDD capacity.

    Winamp comes with a Disk Writer (WAV writer)plugin. There is also a Line-In Plugin available on the winamp site that will allow you to run the Line-In input through the winamp equilizer and DSP Effects. As a consequence, if you set the output plugin to the Disk Writer and play the Line-In input, It will record what you want.

    Additionally, if you install the out_mp3 plugin, you could record the Line-In input directly to MP3 Format.

    --

    Calling atheism and agnosticism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.