Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!gatech!bloom-beacon!husc6!husc4!hadeishi From: hadeishi@husc4.HARVARD.EDU (mitsuharu hadeishi) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Copy protection: boycott it! Message-ID: <2489@husc6.UUCP> Date: Wed, 8-Jul-87 12:13:57 EDT Article-I.D.: husc6.2489 Posted: Wed Jul 8 12:13:57 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 11-Jul-87 06:37:55 EDT References: <4826@sgi.SGI.COM> <4238@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> Sender: news@husc6.UUCP Reply-To: hadeishi@husc4.UUCP (mitsuharu hadeishi) Organization: Harvard Univ. Science Center Lines: 148 Keywords: software terrorism, copy protection, South Africa Summary: Winding down . . . iety of good reasons) starts at a major >disadvantage to any competion. If EA can get past those two hurlds >with software I want to buy, I'll buy it. Well, that is your choice. I personally prefer key-disk copy protection to "lookup-word-in-the-manual" copy protection because it is faster and easier without sacrificing backupability or having to lug around a fat manual. I should note that nothing in this copy protection method prevents you from using your own startup-sequence, your own boot environment, whatever. And two weeks later you can even throw away the key disk. How this makes DPaint II "unusable" for two weeks you'll have to explain to me. >I said that companies that persist in selling only copy protected >software should go out of business *unless they change their ways*. A Again, I think EA at least has acted in good faith and has tried to eliminate the primary problems with copy protection, and it did so very rapidly, formulating a new policy within a couple weeks of hearing user complaints (it took some time to implement it; it had to wait until new products were introduced.) I know, because I was one of the people who relayed the complaints (with which I agreed, particularly as regards tools like DPaint). People complained that: 1. You could kill the tools (like DPaint) by writing to the original disk. 2. You could not back it up. 3. You could not copy it to a hard disk or ram disk. 4. You could not use your own environment (boot disk, startup-seq) with it. All of these complaints are answered in the key disk scheme EA came up with (again, within a couple weeks of hearing the complaints), and in addition they provided completely unprotected copies to the user community for a charge of $20, similar to Borland. The scheme answers user complaints, gives options, while retaining a copy deterrent situation. This is called "compromise". Perhaps if you were in charge, things would be done always your way, with no consideration for the other points of view. This is a typically white-male style of negotiation (i.e., no compromise negotiation.) >Sigh. Go back and read what I said. Companies that sell good, useable >software deserve to stay in business - though not all will. Companies >that sell unusable software desrerve to go out of business - though >not all will. Companies that sell useable software through contorted >paths (like having to buy a copy and then wait for the useable >version) deserve to have a harder time staying in business - though >not all will. We agree on this one! >< Again, I should note that Word has some major bugs which cause >>I'm glad to see that MicroShaft hasn't changed any since I stopped >dealing with them. I stopped dealing with them because they >persistently and publicly ignored complaints of bugs in their >software, and in at least one case stated (in public!) that they >didn't consider the problem to be a bug (the problem was a FORTRAN IV >feature that didn't work in what they advertised as a full featured >FORTRAN IV compiler). Since every product of theirs I dealt with had >funny bugs in it that cost me time and money, I gave up and went to >other companies - and got software that worked. Yes, I agree, MicroS--- is highly unprofessional. But Word is still the best WP for the Mac, and reports from people who know MS insiders say they are trying to fix all reported bugs ASAP. Of course, they shouldn't have been let out in the first place, but who else had written something as good as Word? Even my Mac hacker friends use Word, despite the bugs. My personal preference is to kill ALL bugs before release. I can't stand the thought of a naive user, in the normal process of using my tool, having to talk with the GURU. It is generally possible to catch most bugs in small products; I am fairly sure my current project is bug-free in the older functions (I haven't yet fully tested all permutations of the newer functions). But I realize how difficult it is to produce bug-free code, and despite the shortcomings of Word (and I swear at MS too) I would use it and recommend it to my friends (with reservations). However, I can understand not wanting to deal with the bugs, and chucking Word. In my experience, however, it is possible to write theses and other long documents with Word, and much easier than with MacWrite. >they are a *company*, not a concept. I urge people not to buy buggy >software, and will tell them that the specific products I bought from >MicroShaft were buggy, *and* that other MicroShaft prroducts may not >be buggy. I agree with this. >You mean most consumers don't boot their games more than about a dozen >times? That's what I got out of my EA games (both of them) and DPAINT >I - until I bought the useable version. I'll report this to EA. I've had no problems, but if you had those problems with three disks it's pretty good evidence that the CP scheme needs to be looked at for reliability problems. >Right, those kids are guilty. So why am *I* being punished? Because >it's assumed that I'm guilty, until I sign some papers and send in >more money to proof that I'm innocent. And I don't even have that >option for some products. You're beginning to sound like a conservative economist. There are certainly good arguments that certain measures which "penalize" the whole slightly are justified for the treatment of individual injustice. Social Security, insurance policies, air bag legislation, health and safety regulations, these all place restrictions and make life more difficult for everybody so that certain worst-case injustices are deterred. As long as the measures do not go too far or are not too inconvenient, there is certainly a good argument for them. >I think you're working for EA has biased you towards them, and copy >protection in general. They are a major force in the Amiga market. Them >going out of business would be a moderatly bad thing for the Amiga Not to mention a terrible thing for the people who work there. Oops, I forgot, we're only considering one side of the issue here. >< However, it is clear that game manufacturers have a hard time > >Ah, so you think the Amiga is a game machine, then. Or you want the >populace to percieve it that way. Non sequitur. >That's exactly the kind of blind following that's lead to the downfall >of nations. Remember - Question Authority. Right on! (I'm just questioning Your authority in this case.) >I've never urged people not to buy all products from any specific >company. But some people do. I'm just objecting to that blanket stance without actually looking at how EA has responded to criticism (again, referring not to you, Mike, but to the "people who would never again buy an EA product.") Well, I think I've said everything I care to say on this topic. I would appreciate continuing this discussion via email, since everyone is probably getting bored of it by now. Apologies to those who feel this is a waste of bandwidth; I just wanted to clarify a few points before taking the discussion off the net. -Mitsu