There are many abandonware or freeware games on gog wishlist, which shows that many people want to see these games in gog's collection, although they are free to get and easy to find. I guess the reason is that people want to have all these good old games in one place.
My suggestions are:
1)Either put abandonware games on gog for free (people would love it and good advertise)
or
2)Create packages like 10in1 or 5in1 and sell it for a considerable price with all the vista support and wallpapers
or
3)Sell each game for a very low price like 0.99. I guess the nostalgic gamers would still buy them just to support gog and I personally would love to see Abuse (which has 64 votes at the moment) in my account and be able to download it anytime i want.
Anyway all these games still needs to be vista/xp supported and come with extras such as dosbox support, latest patches, avatars etc.
What do you think?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commercial_games_released_as_freeware
here is a list of abandonware games. Most of them are in gog's wishlist as well!

Therefore the Wishlist is badly wrong :-P
Seriously, freeware games can be downloaded elsewhere on the net and "abandonware" means absolutely nothing, from a legal standpoint (the games are illegal, you know)....

True. As long as an existing company holds the rights to a game, regardless of whether or not they've stopped selling and supporting it a long time ago, there's really no difference between that and any other commercial game.

[url=]http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/free_content_system/22/1[/url]
there are also a nice idea

The advantage of the games on GoG is they're guaranteed to work on XP and Vista. So I don't see it as a good idea for GoG to offer games (even for free) that may have issues running on these two OSes. I also believe that may be a part of the reason those games are appearing on the wish list.

I disagree.
People with a technical bent like me are quite happy fiddling with Windows, WINE (on Linux) and DOSBox to get old games to work but I suspect the vast majority of gamers just want to play games without mucking about - therefore GOG is right in appealing to that lowest common denominator.
I'm sure the people at GOG realise that they've found a niche in the market where they can offer older games that they can test and get to work in the new Windows OSes and charge a reasonable cost for the game with the ability to offer some degree of support to the buyer as well.
I hope GOG succeeds because the games industry is totally stale at the moment and it would be nice to go back to a time when small groups of people are producing more complex and innovatiive games. There's a lot of good "cottage industry" games out there from the likes of Big Fish Games and others, but they tend to focus on the puzzle-type games that are easier to product than, say, a complex FPS with 3D graphics.
I'd like to see more Open Sourcing of old games engines (like has been done for the Doom, Quake and Build (Duke Nukem) engines) and see it made easier for mod and level developers to get paid for writing good games mods, rather than having to release the stuff free so they don't face licensing issues.
It is potentially a very exciting time for gaming because of the large amount of free stuff out there and GOG has filled a good niche that makes it convenient for modern gamers to see what was so special about many of the older games.
I swear that if I see one more "Need For Speed" sequel or another modern-day tactical shooter, I shall scream...

I'm more happy with GoG focusing on their original concept and growing THAT business first. From my point of view, they are a seller of old, critically successful and/or cult games which are free of DRM and altered to work on XP and Vista. So their focus should be on growing their library first and foremost and improving related services, imo.
They have no business wasting resources on providing redundant services unless there's an unique slant to it.

*sigh*
Some people just don't understand the boundary between legal and illegal, I see...
GOG is all about _legal_ distribution. And to be able to do that, they need permissions from copyright holders - which typically involve some sort of reimbursement of C.H. - either through a one-time payment or through a percentage from each sale of the given game.
You want illegal content to be sold on GOG? Wait till hell freezes over, then ask again - altough the answer will still be "no".
Selling games without licensing agreement from the copyright holders would result in a near-immediate shutting down of GOG by a horde of blood-thirsty copyright holders and their pet lawyers, followed by a positively massive lawsuit for damages.
News flash, kid: Abuse is open source, and everything but the sound files has been released as public domain a while ago.
Latest patches? Pshaw. http://www.patches-scrolls.de is there for a reason. Or just learn how to pray to St. Google.
Dosbox support? LULZ. Those games _are_ already supported by DOSBox. GOG's distribution of the games as a self-contained installer including DOSBox and a pre-made config file makes it easier for the end user, yes. But running a game - ANY DOS GAME -in DOSBox is something you can do yourself without artificial crutches like custom installers or frontends if you just took five minutes to read the DOSBox readme.
This is coming from a maniac who has thus far set up 130 (ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY) games in DOSBox with tailored config files and shortcuts. Double-clicking a shortcut runs DOSBox and automatically starts the game. Leaving the game closes the emulator.
Once I paid attention to certain parts of DOSBox readme and made connections between them, I had my first such shortcut set up in fifteen minutes.

Or you could just use one of the many excellent DOSBox frontends, which will do most of the work for you. There really isn't any need for memorizing oodles of command line parameters.

I don't call frontends "artificial crutches" without a reason. Oh sure, they certainly have a nice newbie-friendly interface.
Until you run into a game which requires specific config settings to run, and then you'll have to do this "most of the work" anyway.
Oodles? I count six in all.
One which can be automated and two which are only used to run games from disk images.
Three of these are DOS commands used for changing current drive, moving in the directory structure and listing contents of current directory.
The remaining three are
* MOUNT
You can automate it by putting the appropriate MOUNT command in the [autoexec] section of DOSBox config file.
* IMGMOUNT
Which is optional, since you only need it to run games from disk images (be that CD or floppy ones)
* BOOT
Which is optional again, since you only need it to run booter games.

I could abuse you now if you'd like...

How strangely erotic.

Quite frankly? I find it more benificial to download something small and self-contained from GoG while I'm at work rather than spending the time (and work to hide) to install a stand-alone version of DosBox and so-on.
It's convenient for the games that GoG provides, even if our DosBOX wizard thinks it's a crutch.