Extortionists!

The authors require of donations. You can not download the sripts without payment, even though they write everywhere that it's opensourse. It's disgusting.

Dear Garry, first of all it seems you don't know what "open source" means. If you think that open source means gratis, you are wrong.

Second, I invite you to avoid insulting people who spent thousands of hours working on this project since 2000 and tried to turn their passion for the project in a real job in the most fair way possible: asking for a variable donation.

Reading message like this one is incredibly frustrating.

Dear Garry, first of all it seems you don't know what "open source" means. If you think that open source means gratis, you are wrong.

Second, I invite you to avoid insulting people who spent thousands of hours working on this project since 2000 and tried to turn their passion for the project in a real job in the most fair way possible: asking for a variable donation.

Reading message like this one is incredibly frustrating.

If you think that this is a commercial project, assign the price, but not extort alms. Stupid marketing can ruin the best project.

Again, you just don't know the terms.
It's not Open Source Vs Commercial, It's Open Source Vs. Closed Source.

And I think that setting a very low minimum donation that in many countries everybody can afford and let "richer" people pay more (if they will) could be a modern and fair approach to sustain software development. This is what I'm trying to do and I believe in that, maybe I am wrong, but at least I don't insult people who think different from me.

Well, having to pay just to have a look at the overall architecture is, sorry to say, a bit weird. Most of us would definitely like to see whether the structure of the library/framework might suit our own needs at all. In this case you will unavoidably buy (or donate for) a "pig in a bag". And the Paypal payment page is in Italian... sigh...

My own experience proves that out of 20 libraries/utilities I have a look at only one may be usable and in most cases I discard a product after having had a quick look at the class structure (if there is one). Now just having a peek at this information will cost me three euros.

The documentation of Dadabik is not sufficient, either: by searching for "object", "class" or "template" one will find nothing so it remains totally unclear whether the system is class based or whether it uses templates and where/how the grid/form structure/CSS is defined.

Then again, if this is "programming without coding" and very possibly a procedural project instead of an OOP one why on earth display it here where everybody is an OOP coder.

Moreover, the demo does not even validate to clean HTML.

Just because the code is available does not make it better than commercial software. But it also does not make it worse. The face that you can choose the price is very generous.

In your town there is no-one you can even get to deliver a pizza for free, but here this man gives you all his work for only 1 dollar and you come here and complain. In truth you sir, are the beggar, and the man with the code is the one who has what you need.

Alms is something you give to someone in need in return for nothing. here you want a 10 year developed product for free. That is not asking for alms. That is explaining to you in no uncertain terms that it actually costs money to make these things.

I think maybe the guy complaining must get no more salary at his job, we can say his salary is Open Salary. Then when he wants to get paid we can tell him that is "taking away our freedom".

In other words you want to have the keys to evaluate and then say you will not use it, but you will use it anyway and not even say thanks.

Robin,

Please be civilized and stop putting words to somebody's mouths. That is very immature and utterly impolite. I have paid for quite a few tools and libraries since the mid 80's and will continue to do so provided there is some value in the library/tool. I have made some bad purchases in the past as well. That is why I stress the value of proper evaluation before purchase.

There are ways to have evaluation products (like using bytecode encoders with time limitations) and they are just fine. What is absolutely not fine is have to pay a fee from a "pig in a poke", knowing absolutely nothing about the usability of a product.

The positive thing is that one can decide the sum of the donation. This was, however, the case in 1987 when I purchased my first-ever shareware product, nothing new in there, either.