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