Executor 2.0/executorv2.0.iso/pc/dos/extra/docs/maillist/text/archive.96/text8009.txt

Text File | 1996-07-25 | 3.7 KB | 80 lines

Newsgroups: comp.emulators.mac.executor
Subject: License managers and copyprotection (Was: Returned mail: User unknown)
Date: 12 Jul 1996 19:24:16 +0200
Organization: Markus Gutschke, Schlage 5a, 48268 Greven-Gimbte, Germany
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pppe137.uni-muenster.de
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.68)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Face: +.[`xCMz]E6GW}5ECgY#C"Er6&v$q7:oe+zPlPtOh>/US;9B>;)ro_lpLx9/]q_{u-\YR>r
 P&)Da0gS,PW{@BWSG,PIV)3#J<$Ft_t]qa!xF~'*wuwg-CJj*0:EUr3z}y
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.2.25/XEmacs 19.14
To: [e-mail]
X-MailNews-Gateway: From newsgroup comp.emulators.mac.executor
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk

Rachel Polanskis <[e-mail]> writes:
> Why can't the regkey be based on a double password, that only
> works with some information that locks the software to a single
> CPU, via a dongle or something?
>
> How about a linux license manager?

While I completely agree with you on all the other things that you
said, I do not like the idea of a license manager or of using
dongles. It has been my experience ever since I first used computers
sometime in 1984, that there is simply no way that you can possibly
come up with a 100% perfect copyprotection scheme. So, the harder you
try, the more money you need to spend on it, but eventually hackers
will be able to get around this protection.

On the other hand, sophisticated copyprotection tends to get into the
way of everyday use. It is utterly annoying if your software suddenly
fails to work, because you changed your ethernet card (which caused
the host-id to change). It is even more annoying if you cannot use
your parallel port for your ZIP drive any longer, because the attached
dongle interferes with the transmission. Even though I am a registered
user of Executor I would try to get hold of a cracked copy, if there
ever was a license manager!

I believe, a far better approach is taken by releasing software at a
reasonable price (including discounts for students), offering upgrades
at no or only very little charge (for bugfixes, the charge should be
no more than the cost of the medium and of handling/shipping), aiming
for good press coverage, providing excellent user support and letting
the user know about the amount of work that was required in order to
come up with this product. This way, there is only very little
incentive for getting an illegal copy, whereas most customers feel
that they invested in something worthwhile. Coincidentally, this is
exactly what Ardi has been doing all the time ;-)

There is yet another side effect. Customers tend to feel a lot more
comfortable with the product and have a better understanding of the
problems that the programmers encounter. I registered Executor
sometime in last year. Back then I was promised that E2 would be out
"real soon now (TM)". So far, this has not happened and I do not even
know, if all of the programs that I want to run can actually be
handled by Executor. Still I do not complain about this, because by
reading this group/list I learned a lot about Ardi and their policy
makes sense to me. Had they decided to adopt a more conventional
policy, more likely than not, I would have complained loudly about
them not keeping up to their promises and about selling incomplete and
buggy software. As this is Usenet, both bad and good opinions about a
product spread surprisingly fast and can have a major impact on
sales.

Ardi, keep up the good work!


Markus

--
Markus Gutschke            Internet: [e-mail]
Schlage 5a
D-48268 Greven-Gimbte
Germany