CompuServe Messages

Copy protection?

    15-May-94 22:59:13
Sb: #81740-Copy protection?
Fm: Alex Baker 75606,563
To: Syndesis 76004,1763
>> Welcome to an open discussion about copy protection. Please feel free add your opinions >> to this thread. Against my better judgement, I decided to wander over here and check out this thread…. I do not pirate. No ifs, ands or buts. (I'm probably the only person I know who bought more than one copy of the MS Dos upgrade because I had more than one computer.) But then I've also been fortunate to have been a Alpha and Beta tester for Amiga and Mac software. Which has resulted in being the first on my block to get to play with some neat new stuff, and in a couple of instances, having seen items on my wish list getting incorporated into the final product. I refuse to buy dongleware, or software (one disk games excepted), that will not install on my hard drives. I also strongly dislike key disk copy protection. I realize that copy protection has become necessary, but prefer it to be as non intrusive as possible. My favorites, are protection that requires the manual, at installation time, and then remains dormant as long as the software location hasn't moved on the disk. (If the disk is defragmented, and the software moves, then a trip back to the manual, isn't beyond my patience.) Next is lookup questions at the start of each session. Top priority is for the software to leave me alone, and let me do my work. I travel a lot, and the thought of dragging dongles and manuals around, just so I can use my computer is not soemthing that brings a warm fuzzy feeling to my heart. >> We're looking at the Rainbow Technologies "Sentinel Super Pro" dongle. This is their >> newest security key, one model newer than the one that ships with 3D Studio. It costs >> Syndesis about $30, a sort of "protection money" that is simply passed on to the >> consumer, inflating the price of the product. Now here is a statement that really leaves me cold. If a dongle is going to be used to ensure that people have to buy a legal copy, shouldn't it pay its own way? The idea of copy protection is to generate more sales. Which seems reasonable to me, except now you tell me you are going to have to charge me more money to generate those sales. It would seem that the extra sales should pay for the dongle, or the dongle is not cost effective. How about if I pay you the extra 30 dollars and you keep the dongle? The thought of paying more money for software that is more inconvenient, ranks right up there with another root canal. Actually the point is moot. I absolutely do not buy dongleware. I feel that the only vote I have, as a consumer, is with my wallet. It is a vote I cast with no small amount of thought. I decided some time back that I would make do, with whatever software I could buy that did not use a dongle. Even if it is not the software I might choose otherwise. If enough consumers feel the same way, dongles will dissappear, or the companies that insist on using them will. The software is yours, there are laws and court decisions attesting to that fact. However, the computer is mine, and dongleware will never cross my hard drive. For major apps, I'd prefer seeing a cheaper CD Rom version, that would require itself to run from the CD Rom. However, since this discussion is about a Windows product, I think three or more dongles would be no problem. Look what they put up with, to run a graphical "multitasking" interface. <g>