Re: [little OT] Licensing/Implementing in Cocoa/Obj-C
Re: [little OT] Licensing/Implementing in Cocoa/Obj-C
- Subject: Re: [little OT] Licensing/Implementing in Cocoa/Obj-C
- From: Greg Hurrell <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 14:13:01 +0200
El 20/04/2004, a las 13:19, Andreas Mayer escribis:
Am 20.04.2004 um 12:46 schrieb Greg Hurrell:
[...] knowing that the company could go out of business and I'll
never get any support or updates, even though their product could
cease to work the next time Apple updates their OS.
Yes. But product activation adds another point of failure - and a
completely unnecessary one in my opinion.
Unnecessary in the sense that it doesn't provide you, the honest user,
with anything that you perceive to be of value (although I offer a
counter-argument to this below).
But nevertheless extremely valuable from the point of view of the
seller, because it puts up a huge barrier to piracy. If it weren't of
value from a business perspective, do you think that Microsoft would
have implemented it?
Although you, as an end user, don't perceive product activation as
something which adds value to the software on the market, you
indirectly benefit from it. You benefit from better anti-piracy
technology, because it means that software vendors are less likely to
go out of business. They can hire more developers, invest more in the
devlopment of their products. They can release more products, better
products, update them more often, offer better support etc. For all
these reasons I am an enthusiastic supporter of anti-piracy technology,
and have no objections at all to product activation, if, as I said in
my original post, it is done well and done fairly.
Those who object to the activation can shop elsewhere.
As I said, that's what I'm going to do.
Good for you!
Cheers
Greg
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.