Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.4 $; site uiucdcsb
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcsb!authorplaceholder
From: jabusch@uiucdcsb.Uiuc.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: software protection - dongles
Message-ID: <5100077@uiucdcsb>
Date: Tue, 2-Jul-85 15:53:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uiucdcsb.5100077
Posted: Tue Jul  2 15:53:00 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Jul-85 00:41:32 EDT
References: <566@alberta.UUCP>
Lines: 16
Nf-ID: #R:alberta.UUCP:-56600:uiucdcsb:5100077:000:826
Nf-From: uiucdcsb.Uiuc.ARPA!jabusch    Jul  2 14:53:00 1985



	This is just the sort of thing that is most distressful about
the current state of software development.  It seems that a lot of
companies are placing more time, effort and money into copy-protection
schemes than into useful software research.  Just think how far the
most powerful programs that are popular today might be by now if all
the software protection was forgotten and someone actually concentrated
all their efforts into the software itself.   I guess that's too much 
to ask since so few seem to think that this is the way to go.  Instead
you get all of these brain-damaged ideas for hardware protection and
software protection.  I wonder how many of these people feel that they
should flame Intel for segmentation?

[ these are solely my views ]          John Jabusch
					CSNET:	jabusch%uiuc@csnet-relay.ARPA