#Disney Copy-Protect
17 messages in this thread
This is a great program but it has horrible protection (manual kind). This
is unacceptable for a productivity program. Someone please upload a patch
before I destroy this program.!!!!
GreggT.
Gregg – I agree!!!!
Have you looked at the program with a good editor? Load it in and have a
look.
.Betty
I strongly recommend you return the software to Disney or your dealer, ask
for your money back, and explain that you are unable to use the program in
accordance with the license agreement.
I think a large letter writing campaign is in order. Electronic Arts took
the protection off of their Tools. This is Disney's first and they need to
know that we will not stand for it!
GreggT.
Greg,
It is my understanding that it was Disney – not the programmers – who
insisted on the protection. Anyway, you can talk with Reichert von
Wolfshield, the designer of the software, this Wed. night. He'll be here
for a formal CO. This protection scheme will HAVE to be part of the
discussion, but I do hope people will not be so harsh with him that it
makes other programmers/designers/publishers refuse to come here! I talked
with him in person at both SIGGRAPH and at DevCon. He's an awfully nice
person.
SO, let us do talk with him about the protection, but do let us all be
reasonable!
.Betty
I couldn't believe that the poor guy stood there the whole SIGGRAPH
demo'ing that thing. He was the only one who knew the software. And he was
always going a mile a minute! I get tired doing shows, even when I have
relief! (He must have better shoes.)
He did it well, too. Always with enthusiasm, and always taking an interest
in the viewers – even late in the afternoon!
The copy protection is very easy to remove. So easy I think the
programmers made it easy on purpose because they didn't want to put it in.
If there is enough interest I can upload a patch program to do it.
Now on to the actuall program. When I first saw this program about 5
months ago I was very impressed but now that I've used it I'm not so sure.
I'm not a paid animator but I would like to create some animations so I
purchased this product. I started to create an animation but then I
noticed many feature I feel are missing.
(1) No ANIM Brush capability. If I draw one bird and then I want to create
a flock of birds I have to draw each bird in the entire flock . This would
be true of many other things. Ripples, Bubbles. I took the
Two-Legged-Walk anim and wanted to some circles passing by under his feet.
After drawing the about one inch of movement (16 frames) all I wanted to do
was repeat those 16 frames in different positions. No way to do it.
(2) Most of the editing tools are missing from Ink & Paint. In last
example I originally wanted to do this in the Ink & Paint program quickly
but instead I had to go back to Pencil add about 256 individual circles in
stead of 16 circles anim-brushed 16 times.
Then I want back to Ink & Paint and had to re-color the man and also color
all the circles.
(3) There is no what to merge CFAST files. I'd like to make a CFAST file
of a man walking, and other of a man running. Pull both (one at a time)
into Ink & Paint, color them in. Then merge one with the other so that the
running man passes the walking man. This should be easy. Just setup the
frisket and merge with a CFAST file but I don't think the program will let
me do this. In other words this program may simulate onion paper but it
does NOT simulate CELLOPHANE (as in CEL-animation) very well.
GreggT
This is simply my humble opinion, but, I think Disney would rather quit
publishing the software rather than remove the copy protection. Just my
impression. To be fair, their "look up the word" protection is the best
and most convienient I've seen. OTOH, copy protection, ESPECIALLY on
productivity software, brings my opinion of a program down quite a few
notches! Add my name to the list of people who want want the copy
protection stripped from this otherwise fine program!
Interesting. When I got the demo of it at Siggraph, from the developer
himself, I never saw a CP screen. Nasty.
John,
They did try to make it rather easy on the user, considering what it is.
They give a complete sentence from the manual, with a single word omitted,
and then tell you how to find that word on the page. That does eliminate
tedious counting of words, lines, etc. and it does make it much easier for
the dyslexic to use the thing. Many dyslexics are totally incapable of
doing the word from the manual stuff. Their handicap makes it next to
impossible to do all that counting – and a very high proportion of computer
users are dyslexic, at least to some extent. But I still hate having to
grab that manual and go hunting for a word every time I want to use the
program. Surely they will offer some way to get an unprotected version.
.Betty
I'm on a shoot Wednesday night so won't be able to attend the discussion.
But please add my voice to the rest who are complaining about the copy
protection scheme. I cart my machine around a lot; I have dozens of
programs on the hard disk and I do NOT lug manuals around. I therefore
will not purchase the Disney product, which I otherwise would have bought.
I agree with you completely that guest programmers should not feel like
they will have rocks thrown at them when they are kind enought to attend an
online discussion. But the message is clear from the users: copy
protection schemes are unacceptable and many of us will not purchase
products that contain them.
Pete
PS – it should be made clear to him that everyone knows the problem is not
with him, it's with Disney; but he should know who to relay it to.
It is just as easy to complain politely as to be rude. One can be just as
firm, and far more effective, if the language is kept mild. I would not
want to squelch any of the IDEAS on AmigaForum – but we could really use
with some better ways of expressing them sometimes. I just hope this will
be one of our finest hours. So sorry you cannot be here. We will miss
your input.
I agree completely that language should be kept polite at all times. I
have occasionally seen rude exchanges on the various forums, and you are
correct in your observations. On the other hand, a simple statement that
one will regretfully decline to purchase a product, whatever its merits, if
that product contains a copy protection scheme, is not rude: it's a
statement of fact. To make a stronger statement (along the lines of,
'those Disney people are a bunch of morons if they think we're gonna put up
with…') is unnecessary and unproductive.
I would disagree with you, though, if what you mean is that we should say
"Gee, we wish you didn't have copy protection" and leave it at that,
because that would not do an adequate job of conveying the absolute
unacceptability of copy protecting productivity software. The message has
to be definite: there are a large number of people who will wait for the
removal of copy protection prior to purchase.
No – I would never want our people to think they could not be forceful. You
have summed up my intentions very nicely in your first paragraph. I only
ask that the language be polite. I certainly HOPE that I have not given
any other impression.
I hate that protection, much as anyone. I bought the product without
knowing the protection was there, and would not have purchased it if I had
known. And i don't mind saying that- – politely.
Add my voice to the ones at the CO who won't buy Animation Station because
of CP. I won't be able to make it to the conference either, (my ci$ bill
is high enough 🙁 ) but I want to make it known that I won't buy CP
productivity software. I just want to add my 2 cents.
John
I agree with you, I believe productivity software should not be copy
protected as such requiring a manual or excellent knowledge concerning
technical terms of animation. I think the market is mature enough to
justify productivity software surviving w/out copy protection. Anyhow, I'm
sure that pirates will break the copy scheme in a matter of days. Knowing
this, I think its mute to include any sort of copy protection. (Since it
will be removed anyhow)