[edit] Others

Other possibilities: guiltware, payware, abandonware, public domain --Cfailde 12:48, 2004 Oct 3 (UTC)

This infobox could probably be replaced by a category. — Gwalla | Talk 23:36, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I don't think it should be replaced with a category. Categories serve a different purpose; this is for navigation. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-15 01:35Z

I do think a significant format change is needed to separate concerns: categorization by distribution method and licensing (freeware/open source/etc) versus intent (adware/spyware/etc). —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-15 01:35Z

[edit] Removal of entries

I've removed baitware, greetware, hostageware, loyaltyware and Prayerware because all five of those terms have few google hits for an internet term; I redirected loyaltyware to adware because it's admittedly a subcategory of adware. Graham87 10:39, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Closed-source/Proprietary Software

Shouldn't closed-source software be added to the template? The distinction between these two is not clear. As of right now, proprietary and closed-source occupy different articles with references to each other. I don't see why closed source is orphaned from the logical antonym, "open source." Mbelisle 19:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ransomware problem

I don't know enough to fix it but I clicked on Ransomware to read about it and this box does not appear on the Ransomware page which is annoying if not a violation of some policy somewhere. --203.2.182.254 21:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, kinda corrected it... that meaning of Ransomeware is not a type of software distribution.Sega381 22:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm really not sure that's a solid solution, as "Ransomware" is a disambiguation page. It appears to me as though the intended target is neither the disambiguation page or "Ransomware (malware)", but rather ransomware-as-application-of-SPP ... the real problem being that there is no separate article for this software distribution model. I think this template should be removed from the disambiguation page, and "Ransomware" within it should either be stricken or point to the SPP article until such time as the distribution model owns its own article space. D. Brodale (talk) 13:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

In support of outright deletion of the template from Ransomware and removal of linkage from the template itself, it may be worth considering the prior AfD discussion of ransomware as a distribution model. It didn't appear to gain much traction back in May with respect to even being widely recognized as such. D. Brodale (talk) 13:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] freemium

Does freemium need to be added to this template / this template added to the freemium article? --68.0.124.33 (talk) 16:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)