Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site ISM780.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!cca!ISM780!patrick From: patrick@ISM780.UUCP Newsgroups: net.micro.pc Subject: Re: Lotus 1-2-3 question Message-ID: <31300005@ISM780.UUCP> Date: Fri, 16-Aug-85 01:27:00 EDT Article-I.D.: ISM780.31300005 Posted: Fri Aug 16 01:27:00 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 19-Aug-85 21:33:22 EDT References: <31300003@ISM780.UUCP> Lines: 48 Nf-ID: #R:ISM780:31300003:ISM780:31300005:000:2686 Nf-From: ISM780!patrick Aug 16 01:27:00 1985 Thanks for the suggestions guys, but I'm not there yet. I can't use a "keyboard enhancer" because the need for backward compatibility with previously-existing software (PC/IX) precluded the use of BIOS to read the keyboard. Why? Because Microsoft in their wisdom seem to have decided that no-one will ever want to use the "5" key on the numeric keypad (in its non-numlock mode). BIOS refuses to return this value to me. There's a gap in the table of "Auxilliary Byte Values" where this code should be (cursor left returns 75 and cursor right returns 77). You can hold down the 5 key till you drop, but the BIOS won't return a 76. Anyone from Microsoft care to explain this to me? Unfortunately this key is the HELP key for the PC/IX editor, and I couldn't reassign it. So, no BIOS, and no nifty keyboard enhancers. As to disassembly, and cracking the copy protection (I assume that the sign-on message is part of the copy protection scheme), there's not much I can say in a public forum; I'll restrict myself to a discussion of the general principles. As someone who is responsible for developing a PC product which has cost a lot of money, I fully understand the urge to protect such an investment by protecting the resulting software. However, our product is not copy protected. I wouldn't have the nerve to tell my customers that they couldn't install it on a hard disk, or that they could not back up _every_ portion of it for their own protection. We will sell site licenses, and will assume that our (corporate) customers will abide by the terms of those licenses. I admit that the decision would have been much more difficult if we were selling single copies to the general public. Our product is designed to be used in conjunction with 123 and other popular PC packages. If 123 were capable of purely batch-type operations, I could download data from my host system, manipulate it with 123, and ship the resulting report back up to the host for distribution by electronic mail. All of this without human intervention (I could take a coffee break while the machines did their stuff). As it is, I must stand by the PC, ready to "Press any Key to Continue". So, in order to protect their own investment in software development, Lotus have implemented a copy-protection scheme which makes our product a little less useful, and hence reduces the returns on _our_ investment in software development. I would gladly exchange this copy of 123 for one which was copy-protected in any other way, but which allowed me to perform true batch operations. Anyone from Lotus want to take me up on this? Where are these dongles you keep talking about? I'll take one now.