Re: ProfileMaker 4.1
Re: ProfileMaker 4.1
- Subject: Re: ProfileMaker 4.1
- From: "Dennis W. Manasco" <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 9 Nov 2002 04:32:44 -0600
At 12:10 pm +1100 11/8/02, Graeme Gill wrote:
But if the reliance on hardware is such an issue for you, then of
course you have invested in redundancy in all your equipment,
including having a spare dongle for any dongle protected software,
right ?
Spare dongles, which usually cost as much as a secondary purchase of
the software, were not the focus of the thread.
The focus of the thread was that the software was _UNUSABLE_ because
the dongle and its associated drivers were misbehaving; an extra
dongle or two wouldn't have made any difference at all.
And you're being rather unfair blaming "pinheaded developers" for
the use of dongles - such decisions are driven by managers and
owners of software companies, developers generally just do what
they're told in this regard.
I apologize. I should have said, "pinheaded software companies and
the developers who 'were just following orders' from them."
Dongles aren't used because of customers, they're used because of
non-customers.
That makes a great rallying cry, but it doesn't change the facts:
Extreme copy-protection measurers always inconvenience and hurt the
legitimate user more than they dissuade the dedicated cracker (and
those who feed off of the cracker's efforts).
This thread is an example of a situation in which legitimate,
licensed, users cannot use their software because of the software's
perverted copy-protection scheme. Can you defend that position?
But if the reliance on hardware is such an issue for you, then of
course you have invested in redundancy in all your equipment...
For essential hardware we would be foolish not to have enough
redundancy to allow multiple paths. Multiple redundancy of
developer-imposed copy-protection devices is a ridiculous expenditure
of capital.
However, that is not the problem being discussed: The problem is that
a customer-vicious copy-protection scheme has acted to deny customers
the ability to use the software they paid for. I can see no logical
or ethical difference between forcibly installing this demonstrably
defective piece of hardware on a user's computer and the planting of
a logic-bomb Trojan horse on their computer.
-=-Dennis
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.