Carbon Copy Cloner, my favorite bit of donationware, is so useful to me (and has saved my bacon so many times) that I send the developer a donation each time it gets me out of a jam.
I don't think that donationware is really a very good business model, honestly. Much as I hate to say it, I think that the best course for developers to take is to release software with some features disabled, and then enable them for registered (eg, paying) users.
Interesting that you mentioned Carbon Copy Cloner. Mike Bombich is the coolest developer I've ever run across, which I say because of the manner in which he treats CCC users as respects ad banners.
In my case, I consider Butler so integral to my Mac experience that I've upped my donation on occasion to keep it in line with amounts I've paid for less important apps.
I basically agree with your feelings about donationware, but I think it would be a better, perhaps even viable, business model if the d/l websites would list it as such, rather than as freeware; their insistence on not doing so necessitates users spending time and exerting effort to determine whether the apps they've d/l'ed are free or donationware, and searching for solicitations for money is hardly a "Let's go for it!" endeavor.
Further, and this brings us full-circle to the Safari Extension that inspired my rant,
"Apple only accepts free stuff on their Extensions Gallery" (Quoting Philippe Martin, developer of SnapBack), and although donationware is apparently permissible (Ref. AdBlock for Safari's "AdBlock Options" page), a great many, perhaps even the vast majority of, Extensions and their updates are d/l'ed and installed (via Safari > Prefs > Extensions) with no reference, let alone redirection of users, to their developers' websites and solicitations.
No... In this instance I think the onus is on Apple to recognize that Extension developers are no more eleemosynary than is the corporation itself...to enable them to solicit donations "in the light of day."
