CompuServe Thread

Dongle Protection

12 messages in this thread
#30187From: Pete GouldMay 17, 1993 5:17 PM
Hi, all! I wanted to get your opinion on the following: Recently I received a hot new video-related program that's supposed to leave everything else in the dust. Price is in the $600-$700 range. When I opened the package, I found that it uses dongle protection. To operate the program, you need to insert a hardware device into the computer's second mouse port (an optional dongle is available for the parallel port — the optional one will pass printer data through a passthrough connector). I noticed on the company's warranty disclaimer the following: [COMPANY NAME OMITTED] warrants the dongles from manufacturing defects for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of pur- chase. Should the dongle fail in the course of normal use within this 30 day period, and it is returned to the dealer from whom the program was purchased not later than five (5) days after the end of such 30 day period, the dealer shall, at the dealer's option, either repair or replace the dongle. [COMPANY]'s liability is limited solely to repair or replace- ment of the defective product and shall not in any event in- clude damages for loss of use or loss of anticipated costs, expenses or damages, including without limitation any data which may be lost or rendered inaccurate, even if [COMPANY] has been advised of the possibility of such damages. I was wondering how popular opinions currently run as to the use of copy protection in general, and hardware protection in particular, on professional application software. All replies will be sent to the manufacturer of the product. Please excuse me for not embarrassing them by using their name, but my purpose is to educate them, not blindside them. Hope you understand. Any responses, on either side of the issue, greatly appreciated. Pete
#30229From: Paul ToalMay 18, 1993 2:55 AM
Without the program name and functions, nobody can make a comment, what are you doing? –Paul < Motorola Inside >
#30239From: James GreenMay 18, 1993 11:40 AM
I;ve heard Real 3D 2.0 has dongle protection…base your ideas on using that program, if it helps. Personally, I think dongle protection is absurd. Although, every LW user is stuck with one.
#30264From: Pete GouldMay 18, 1993 8:53 PM
Paul, Well, my question was kind of limited in scope. Specifically, how do you feel about using dongle protection on serious application software (as opposed to, say, games). Perhaps you're unfamiliar with dongle protection. Let me clarify. Dongle protection is a form of copy protection in which the manufacturer supplies an electronic module with the software. The module — popularly called a "dongle" — plugs into one of the spigots on your machine (could be the parallel port, serial port, mouse port, etc., depending on how the manufacturer chose to implement it). The sole purpose of the module is so the program can check for it and refuse to run if it's not there. Since you only get one module, you can only run one copy of the program. Of course, if the module fails, the program cannot be used until it is fixed/replaced. For obvious reasons, you cannot obtain a spare. So my question is — how do people feel about this type of protective device being used on business software? Would you feel comfortable, for instance, depending on such an approach if you were on a tight deadline to complete a project that required the use of this software? What do you think? Pete
#30279From: Paul ToalMay 19, 1993 5:06 AM
To be honest, I'd say piss on 'em. This is not a company worthy of respect. The 30 day bit is what makes it ludricous AND worthless. –Paul < Motorola Inside >
#30750From: Jim SakladMay 28, 1993 12:01 AM
One man's opinion: the dongle is the only form of copy protection more obnoxious than "key disk" protection. Neither belongs on any serious software, although I am not generically opposed to the basic _idea_ of copy protection. . . . . JimDoc, on AutoPilot
#30849From: Mr. ChalleronMay 29, 1993 9:23 PM
Yeah, but due to piracy, we're likely stuck with them: I saw a recent issue of Byte Magazine that had ads for no fewer than FOUR manufacturers of dongles…. And I don't know about what "belongs on any serious software": Quite a number of Unix-networked systems have been living with "I.D. Modules" for years now; they tend to be something that you install, hope they work, and forget about afterward. (They _also_, in the case of Hewlett-Packard systems, can be set up so that any number of applications will use the _same_ I.D. module code; but we can't much hope for that sort of systems support: We can't hardly find _dealers_….)
#30855From: Mike SchillerMay 29, 1993 11:46 PM
Mr Challeron: While I understand the need for dongles, I too hate them. My local dealer (who deals mostly in high end video applications) has several PC's setup in his store, and most of them have between 5 – 15 dongles hanging off the back of them. The dongles got so long he had to add a short cable between the machines, and the dongles so he could have them laying next to the computer, rather than forcing him to move the machines forward on the desks to accomodate all the dongles. It gets to the point where almost all high end PC stuff comes with dongles, but when you're talking about software that sells for more than the cost of the PC that is running it (several of the packages he sells go for over $3000.00 which if you ask me is absurd in itself, but who am I to question the pricing structures of the likes of AT&T, Corel, etc. -Mike Schiller online with my AT&T 3b1
#30974From: Mr. ChalleronJun 2, 1993 1:04 AM
The real problem is that there seems to be no moral stigma about stealing software: It's not _really_ theft, after all, _he_ paid for it; but what a neat program; can I borrow your disks?…
#31005From: Ron LegroJun 2, 1993 5:19 PM
I wonder if DSPs somehow could be used as a sort of dongle protection mechanism….
#31323From: Charles BlaquiereJun 9, 1993 8:48 PM
This has nothing to do with the current thread, but I've noticed you've been using a partial name for several weeks; I'm surprised no Sysop has nicely asked you to change your username to a full name yet. (Unless "Mr" is a valid first name, in which case I apologize for being Eurocentric) You can, I believe, use the NAME function at any ! prompt while in this Forum. Blaq!
#30284From: Jack R HolmesMay 19, 1993 9:52 AM
I'm not very fond of dongles, on a general principle. Though I recognize the value to a programmer (they make more certain that all the copies out there are paid for), they impose a tremendous hassle to the USER. Imagine a number of programs using dongles. Either you have to keep switching dongles as you load each (a real problem with a multitasking system like the Amiga), or you've got a 6 inch chain of dongles hanging out the back of your computer. In the past, chained dongles caused problems in a number of ways: each joint in the dongle chain added noise to the line (most often the parallel/printer port), or there were incompatabilities between the dongles (can't use dongle C with dongle F in the chain). Perhaps these problems have been cleared up, but they still impose a burden on the user. If a programmer wants to optionally use a dongle, I like the solution of offering two packages: one with not copy protection (no dongle) and a discounted offering including the dongle. In this way, the user can make his choice. Though in the past when this solution was offered, purchases overwhelmingly went to the unprotected package (probably a matter of selecting appropriate price levels for the two packages). JR (Holmes)