Free Technology Newsletters
» All 33 InfoWorld Newsletters
Technology & Business Daily
 
InfoWorld
 
   

New Frontiers in Frustration

By Ed Foster, Section Columns
Posted on Thu Aug 19, 2004 at 08:24:36 AM PDT

Are software publishers bound and determined to test the limits of customer frustration over copy protection? You'd think so, because every week seems to bring reader reports of yet another company that's found yet another way to treat its customers like outlaws.


The crux of many reader complaints is how the software publisher handles users who have exceeded their allotted number of re-installations. "I installed the $40-$50 program PDF Converter from ScanSoft," wrote one reader. "Then I upgraded the processor, and the system kept rebooting spontaneously. So, after two more reinstalls, I got a different motherboard and reinstalled PDF Converter for the fifth time. Oops. Install failed because apparently five installs exceed the number of permitted activations. OK, I e-mail customer support. Oops, you have to register with the customer service hotline to do that. What's another password? After two days I heard back. Photocopy the CD - yes, the CD -- and your purchase receipt, and ScanSoft will consider providing you with an additional activation."

The reader noted he did not have similar problems with considerably more expensive programs on the same system that are also copy protected. "Thanks a lot, ScanSoft," he wrote. "Why did I even bother to register the program? And will I ever deal with another ScanSoft program again? Never. They are on my short list of companies that I will never do business with again. And though I have copied the receipt and CD and will send it to them, I will never again use the product."

If reactivation hassles aren't enough to deal with, how about having the program regularly phone home to authenticate the license? "Pegasys is the maker of two good programs, the TMPGEnc MPEG encoder and TMPGEnc DVD Author," says another reader. "But their latest version, TMPGEnc Express 3.0, requires license validation over the Internet on a periodic basis."

The explanation of "Periodical License Validation" on the website of the Japan-based Pegasys isn't in the most elegant English, but that just makes the message all the more clear. The programs must be used on a system with an Internet connection so the license can be validated "from time to time." The company's statement acknowledges that its DRM might require customers to change security settings and just won't work in some environments. In other words, if you want to use the software, you have to accept the fact it will likely break a lot of stuff, and on a continuing basis. "I now refuse to buy their program, and I've written them as such," says the reader. "It's bizarre. I doubt they realize the impression they're giving."

Of course, even those product activation schemes that have been with us a while don't get any sweeter with age. A reader who had just moved his old copy of Microsoft Office and separate copies of Publisher and FrontPage to a new laptop wound up having to exchange the machine for another configuration. "When I got the new one I had to reinstall all the software, and that's when I ran into Microsoft's silly activation scheme. Not only did I have to activate the products, but I had to complete three separate activations, because of the different versions of the software I had on my system. Have you ever gone through Microsoft's phone activation? It's a trip! You have to spend close to ten minutes dealing with voice recognition software before you're told that the machine can't activate the software and it then passes you to a human being. And I had to make three separate calls, as Microsoft considers them three separate installations. All in all, it took about an hour to reactivate three products."

What made that hour seem longer to the reader was the question of why only honest customers have to endure such sessions. "I don't know why these companies think that these activation schemes are putting a dent in software piracy," says the reader. "All one has to do is log into any P2P network and search for pirated copies of just about any application. Frankly, I considered doing that rather than wasting an hour trying to reactivate my licensed applications. The way I see it, all that these silly activation schemes accomplish is to punish the customers who have legitimately purchased software licenses."

As software DRM grows ever more common and ever nastier, it means another new frontier of frustration is approaching. After all, if it costs an hour now to upgrade your copyright-protected Microsoft applications, how long will it take in the future when presumably all applications will demand customers jump through these reactivation hoops? The day is coming, if it's not already here, when honest customers have no choice but to move to open source. If that's what the software industry intends its activation schemes to accomplish, it may find the ultimate frustration is its own.

--------------------

Post your comments about this column below or write me directly at Foster@gripe2ed.com. To receive this column every week in my free e-mail newsletter, please go to my subscription page and follow the instructions to opt-in for the EdFoster mailing list.

< Dealing With Symantec | Citibank Rejects Phishing Report As Spam >


Display: Sort:
New Frontiers in Frustration | 34 comments (34 topical) | Post A Comment
Won't Touch This Kind of Software[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#1)
by Anonymous User on Thu Aug 19, 2004 at 08:58:38 AM PDT

When Microsoft moved activation into Windows XP and later into Office, I saw the writing on the wall. They had made it okay for mainstream software makers to include such draconian methods and it was time to switch platforms. Now I use my Windows machine only for gaming. All of my real work (development, writing, e-mail, etc) is done under OS X -- activation free computing.

But even with this move, I had to drop some applications. When Macromedia added activation to their latest MX suite on both platforms, I did not bother to upgrade, but I did bother to let them know why I would not be upgrading. The response I received was canned and gave the impression they just do not care.

Adobe added activation to Photoshop CS for Windows, but not OS X. A letter to them also received a canned response about how activation would only be a small inconvenience to most users. Given the horrendous quality of support in this industry, I cannot take another 'small inconvenience'. For now, I continue to use Photoshop, but only for as long as activation is kept out of the OS X version.

The list of vendors I refuse to do business with continues to grow each year. Whether it is terrible support, unacceptable licensing terms, or product activation more and more companies begin to dabble in these ridiculous practices each day. What's sad is I believe it is causing irreparable damage to an industry I love. Innovation has shifted from new ideas in products to new ambiguous clauses in license agreements.

As a software developer myself I understand the desire to stop piracy. Activation is not the way to do it.

[ Reply to This ]



open source is certainly an option[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#2)
by Anonymous User on Thu Aug 19, 2004 at 09:28:50 AM PDT

I am the tech guy at a 50+ user company. Most of us used Office in the past. But due to the licensing challenges (not the money), we have switched to OpenOffice. We are about 30% switched over, with no major problems. By the end of the year, we will be Office free! It can be done!

[ Reply to This ]


Software Companies & Outlaws[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#3)
by Anonymous User on Thu Aug 19, 2004 at 09:32:44 AM PDT

Wonder if software companies treat customers as thiefs because they spend so much time looking in mirrors? Does "takes one to know one" apply here?

[ Reply to This ]


Macromedia's Dreamweaver MX activation[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#4)
by Anonymous User on Thu Aug 19, 2004 at 10:33:11 AM PDT

We've been using Dreamweaver in our web design department for years, and when their MX 2004 package was announced, we upgraded. It sounded so promising, with all the new features they were adding. Man, if we only knew what we were getting ourselves into.

Through a series of system problems and hard drive issues, I was forced to re-install Dreamweaver several times. And on each occasion, had to activate the software via their web site. On the 4th installation, I was told that I had run out of activations and could no longer use the software. It was only 8 months old. I was furious.

I called Macromedia's tech support department (worthless) and was given the runaround for almost 3 hours, interrogated as if I were a criminal. After my 5th call to their support desk, they finally gave me a new activation number that worked, and I was back to work. Their brand of customer service is only outdone by their so-called software activation technology that apparently should never have seen the light of day.

Needless to say, I won't be purchasing any more Macromedia products in the future if they continue to run their software registration process in this manner. It's one thing to charge as much as they do for their software (which is flawed beyond belief), but it's disgraceful to treat honest, paying customers like common street hoods.

[ Reply to This ]


re: Macromedia's Dreamweaver MX activation[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#14)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 23, 2004 at 09:31:02 AM PDT

"Through a series of system problems and hard drive issues, I was forced to re-install Dreamweaver several times. And on each occasion, had to activate the software via their web site. On the 4th installation, I was told that I had run out of activations and could no longer use the software.  It was only 8 months old. I was furious."

I'm sorry for the trouble you experienced. It's bad enough to re-install, re-serialize, and re-authenticate software, but to have the come atop multiple OS installs and hardware replacements, I'd be pretty unhappy too.

That repeated serial-authentication through "product activation" should be pretty easy to minimize, though. If you know you'll be replacing part of your hardware, thus breaking the old activation key, then just use that "Transfer Your License" item in the Help Menu. (This shouldn't usually be necessary, but if you're doing multiple hardware replacements within a short period of time then it can help.) Here's source info:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/faq/#itemE-6

The goal here is to reduce casual copying, particularly among businesses, so that honest individual users don't end up paying more than their share for software development. But at the same time, this can't become any kind of hassle for the actual customers. If you see a situation in which the Macromedia activation implementation gives you a hard time, I'd strongly request that you drop a note at that "Activation Feedback" link, so that we could smooth out any remaining rough edges. Thanks!
http://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/

Regards,
John Dowdell
Macromedia Support

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



re: Macromedia's Dreamweaver MX activation[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#17)
by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 03:50:16 AM PDT

John Dowdell wrote:

If you know you'll be replacing part of your hardware, thus breaking the old activation key, then just use that "Transfer Your License" item in the Help Menu.

I'm not sure if I am more distressed by the speciousness of this suggestion or that it seems to have been posted with the sincere belief that it is an appropriate response to the original posters problem. All too often, hardware changes are unanticipated, unplanned, and unpleasant. When a system component fails, my principal concern is restoring the system to operation. This can consume ample time without having to fiddle with an activation transfer. Moreover, how many activations should I be expected to do? If I do a planned replacement of a hard drive, should I have to budget time to transfer licenses for 15 applications? Or is it unreasonable of me to expect to use my computer with more than one application? I thought the goal was for my computer to save me time.



[ Parent | Reply to This ]


re: Macromedia's Dreamweaver MX activation[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#18)
by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 08:57:47 AM PDT

"All too often, hardware changes are unanticipated, unplanned, and unpleasant."

Agreed, which is why I started that sentence with "If you know you'll be replacing...".

There will indeed sometimes be sudden hardware replacements, which is why the default serial-authentication accommodates this scenario. It's rarer to have a whole sequence of hardware replacements within a short period of time, but if you're in this situation, then just de-activating any software you installed between hardware replacements will make it easy.

If you're for some reason in a situation where you're doing a series of hardware replacements within a short period, ,and install, serialize, and authenticate software between each hardware replacement, and don't de-activate a license after authenticating it and before the next hardware replacement, then you will need to speak to a human before the software permits additional authentications.

That situation should be rare, though, because the software runs in trial mode for a month before requiring an authenticated-unique serial number.

I wasn't being "specious" here... the system is indeed set up to minimize hassle for legitimate customers. But if you *do* find a situation that's an actual problem for you, then we'd definitely want to get that non-anonymous contact through the feedback form so the group can address it, thanks.

Regards,
John Dowdell
Macromedia Support

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



re: Macromedia's Dreamweaver MX activation[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#19)
by Ed Foster on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 10:24:42 AM PDT

I certainly don't see anything specious about Mr. Dowdell's posting. I appreciate his taking the time to address the earlier posting.

One thing I have noted previously is that Macromedia is one of the few companies that has implemented a license transfer capability in its product activation, and I think they deserve some credit for that, however you may feel about the activation itself.

Ed Foster



[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Minimize hassles?[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#20)
by pfaut on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 11:19:11 AM PDT

the system is indeed set up to minimize hassle for legitimate customers

I don't buy that. Minimum hassles would be install-and-go. Activation schemes are only adding hassles.



[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Macromedia Does Not Get It[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#24)
by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 01:58:16 PM PDT

Activation is always going to be a hassle for legitimate users. What about system crashes? I certainly cannot unbind my license ahead of time in that case. And even if I could, if I have iTunes AAC songs, Dreamweaver MX 2004, Photoshop CS, etc, I have a whole slew of applications I must unbind in different ways. Will users forget to unbind some apps and media? No doubt. The point is this is nothing but a hassle for me, the legitimate user.

I have contacted Macromedia through the method you mentioned when MX 2004 was released. Like with Adobe, I received nothing beyond a boilerplate response -- absolutely none of my concerns were addressed.

All this leaves me with a single choice: I do not use you products and when I consult with others, I advise the same (and am very effective, I might add).

It is time for software companies to start focusing on the customer again. Adding activation schemes, reducing the quality of support, and making it nearly impossible to talk to a human being seem to be the norm these days.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



Your product activation[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#30)
by Anonymous User on Wed Sep 08, 2004 at 12:17:42 PM PDT

I already sent you an email stating that I will not be held hostage by you or anyone else and that includes the assumption, by you, that I am guilty of software piracy until I prove otherwise by activating my software! Whether you realize it or not it is insulting and demeaning! I purchased Dreamweaver MX and since that is the last version that is activation-free, it will be the last copy of Dreamweaver I will ever purchase. I have already said the same to Adobe as I have the last versions of four of their major products that are without activation. Those will no longer be upgraded as well for exactly the same reason. Voting with my wallet is the only recourse I have against you and this mass stupidity that is taking over the industry. I hope to hell that a groundswell of consumer animosity takes place and you and every other company that has foolishly taken this course finds yourr revenues dropping through the floor and end up staring bankruptcy in face! It is the only thing you seem to understand and the only thing you deserve for treating your customers this way. See-yahhhh!

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


activation == cheaper prices[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#31)
by Anonymous User on Tue Oct 26, 2004 at 02:58:10 PM PDT

The goal here is to reduce casual copying, particularly among businesses, so that honest individual users don't end up paying more than their share for software development.

Since when did activation become a factor in pricing of products? How much did you reduce the price after you added activation? Did your user base increase or decrease??

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


treated like a thief[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#29)
by Anonymous User on Fri Sep 03, 2004 at 10:20:58 AM PDT

"Needless to say, I won't be purchasing any more Macromedia products in the future if they continue to run their software registration process in this manner. It's one thing to charge as much as they do for their software (which is flawed beyond belief), but it's disgraceful to treat honest, paying customers like common street hoods." How come people object to software companies that treat them like street hoods, but continue to flock to places like CostCo, where they are treated like shoplifters? Sure, checking my receipt against the one item in my hand will cut down on theft, but once I've paid for it, why do I have to show them anything? It's the same thing.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


It's Self-Importance[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#5)
by Anonymous User on Thu Aug 19, 2004 at 10:35:20 AM PDT

You see it in almost every industry at some point (viz the RIAA): once a company gets big enough or profitable enough, they seem to think that their success and their cash flow is a right to which they are entitled, and that a threat to either can be legitimately dealt with through any means necessary. Science fiction author Robert A. Heinlein summed it up in his short story "Life-Line":
There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or a corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest.
(Then again, the judge in the story followed this up with:
This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped, or turned back.
We can only hope.)

[ Reply to This ]


Vote with your money[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#6)
by MycroftMkIV on Thu Aug 19, 2004 at 11:06:10 AM PDT

The battle over copy protection has been going on since Bill was a pup. Lotus tried it in the DOS days, and many other companies tried it with both software and hardware (dongles). We told them what to do with their copy protection, and backed it up by not buying their products.

With the advent of the Internet, those companies now have a new way they never tried to implement copy protection. If anything, it is more annoying than the old methods they've tried. So why should you put up with it? Use another product and tell them why you are not purchasing theirs.

Copy protection serves no useful purpose for the purchasers of software. It only serves to annoy them. I'm glad I use an open source operating system, so I no longer have to put up with this nonsense.

Mike

[ Reply to This ]



5 activations are not enough??!![ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#7)
by vrml on Thu Aug 19, 2004 at 04:36:41 PM PDT

The ScanSoft user installed the products 5 times, then was asked to provide a proof of purchase when he wanted to install it the 6th time. This is unreasonable of ScanSoft? He complains about not being able to install a $49 product 6 times, yet buys new motherboards without complaint? I think you are being unfair to ScanSoft. It does cost money to make software, and it seems most people won't burn through 3 motherboards in a day.

[ Reply to This ]


WHere does it say...[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#8)
by Anonymous User on Thu Aug 19, 2004 at 06:51:34 PM PDT

... he purchased new motherboards without complaint? Looks more from the text like he returned a faulty motherboard for a replacement. Amazing how only the people who purchase the software have to put up with activation and its associated inconveniences...

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


yes[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#34)
by maderikapapa on Fri Jun 27, 2008 at 08:36:29 PM PDT

出会い出会い系サイト出会い喫茶出会い掲示板ナンパ出会いカフェ人妻出会い無 009;系サイト優良出会い系攻略 完全無料。アダルトビデオアダルト動画アダルトアニメアダルト画像アダル 488;サイト無料DVDアダルト風俗サンプル無料風俗優良アダルトサイト比較海 806;。人妻画像人妻パラダイス知合い人妻援護会人妻コレクション風 439;告白。熟女画像東京熟女掲示板動画熟女ビデオおまんこオナニーエロ画像エロフラッシュアニメ 456;ロ動画エロゲームエロ漫画無料エロサイト。エッチ画像エッチ動画エッチ小説写真エッチ 450;ニメエッチ0930。セックスアナルセックス画像セックス動画セックスフレンドスワッピングSEX写真セックスボランティセ 483;クス体位東京セックス仕方 SEX。おっぱい画像おっぱい村長おっぱい楽園掲示板お 387;ぱい命おっぱいゲーム。巨乳動画巨乳画像アイドル巨乳 522;示板風俗。セフレ募集セフレ掲示板セフレ画像掲示板セフレの作り方出会い無料素人セフレ。童貞狩りエロ漫画童貞狩り童貞喪失童貞オークション素人童貞逆援不倫パートナー不倫出会い人妻不倫不倫を楽しみたい方にはお薦め 154;妻画像など満載出会いサイトを楽しむならココ無料出会いで一緒に遊ぼう出会いはLOVEアゲインで決まり

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


X1 also phones home or locks...[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#9)
by mwexler on Fri Aug 20, 2004 at 06:58:41 AM PDT

which is too bad. Its a nice tool, but its expensive. When free (Lookout) or cheaper tools with similar functionality exist, a company should work harder to get my business and make the experience easier. Instead, via a somewhat hiddden phone home (its in the priv policy and mentioned in the forums, but nowhere else), its been eliminated from consideration from my company and all my consulting companies. Interstingly enough, they do let you turn off the diagnostic and performance reporting the tool can send X1... but they don't really mention that the tool still phones home... Michael

[ Reply to This ]


Yeah[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#10)
by nmyers on Fri Aug 20, 2004 at 01:49:42 PM PDT

Companies should be allowed to do whatever they want. I feel they are entiled because they own the product.
http://myweb.nmu.edu/~nmyers
[ Reply to This ]


How long do they own it?[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#11)
by Mason on Fri Aug 20, 2004 at 05:00:37 PM PDT

Do they own it once they sell it to a retailer?  Do they own it once I pay for and purchase it?  Some company, not me, owns all the crap in my house?

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


You never really bought it.[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#13)
by JimB on Mon Aug 23, 2004 at 08:26:35 AM PDT

You may not be aware but much of the retail software you buy contains a EULA, (an End User License Agreement). Almost none of the EULAs actually allow you to own the software. What you really bought was a license to use the product.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Not quite true ...[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#15)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 23, 2004 at 10:23:28 AM PDT

... vendors want you to believe this, but there is no precedent case to support it.

If loss of the activation - or the CD - results in loss of use, then they are NOT licensing it, they are selling it.  If it was truly licensed, then they would be responsible for continued service.

And shrinkwrap style (you can read the terms after you've accepted them) contracts also negate the legal contractual aspect necessary for a purchase to be a license instead of an outright acquisition.

But no one (with deep pockets) has taken this issue all the way through the legal system to set a precedent one way or the other.  But it offers the best SHORT TERM deal to companies, so they utilize it.  And short term - next quarter's numbers and bonus $'s - are all that drives this thinking.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



Not quite true ...[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#16)
by JimB on Mon Aug 23, 2004 at 01:48:31 PM PDT

Most Eula's avoid the by stating that the software may or may not actually function. You can most certainly license something that doesn't do what you thought it would. Here is the text from a EULA I just installed.. "NO WARRANTIES FOR THE SOFTWARE. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND WITH ALL FAULTS. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO SATISFACTORY QUALITY, PERFORMANCE, ACCURACY, AND EFFORT (INCLUDING LACK OF NEGLIGENCE) IS WITH YOU. ALSO, THERE IS NO WARRANTY AGAINST INTERFERENCE WITH YOUR ENJOYMENT OF THE SOFTWARE OR AGAINST INFRINGEMENT." This type of contract is called a contract of adhesion. Mark Minasi wrote a great book called the Software Conspiracy, that goes into great detail about how EULAs work (or don't)

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


What Purpose Does Copy-Prevention Serve?[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#12)
by Anonymous User on Sat Aug 21, 2004 at 09:51:26 PM PDT

Copy prevention and "activation" schemes are a disease. To those saying "oh well it's their product, they can include it if they want" - well, I can choose not to buy it, but in many niche markets, software companies hold virtual monopolies. Worse, trashy features like this trample consumer's rights in many countries, where by law they have the right to backup software.

Don't be swayed by industry terms like "rights management" and "copy protection" - these schemes are designed to PREVENT users from making copies. Developers are well aware that legit customers are the main ones being affected, and they don't care - in fact, they're banking on some of the less-knowledagble users just going out and buying a new license. Those, and corporations with fat budgets and rubber stamps with lots of ink.

Every single product listed in the article - and in the talkback here - has been cracked. Macromedia's prevention scheme, Adobe's, ScanSoft's, etc., they've all fallen victim to warez groups. These companies are well aware of this, in fact they fully expect it. They're just interested in sucking a few extra dollars out of Joe PC User's pocket.

And I wonder, where on the packaging do some of these apps inform consumers that they are limited and will expire after a certain number of installs? When you purchase a program, you presume it to work indefinitely, through any number of upgrades to your PC.

[ Reply to This ]



yes[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#33)
by maderikapapa on Fri Jun 27, 2008 at 08:33:42 PM PDT

出会い出会い系サイト出会い喫茶出会い掲示板ナンパ出会いカフェ人妻出会い無 009;系サイト優良出会い系攻略 完全無料。アダルトビデオアダルト動画アダルトアニメアダルト画像アダル 488;サイト無料DVDアダルト風俗サンプル無料風俗優良アダルトサイト比較海 806;。人妻画像人妻パラダイス知合い人妻援護会人妻コレクション風 439;告白。熟女画像東京熟女掲示板動画熟女ビデオおまんこオナニーエロ画像エロフラッシュアニメ 456;ロ動画エロゲームエロ漫画無料エロサイト。エッチ画像エッチ動画エッチ小説写真エッチ 450;ニメエッチ0930。セックスアナルセックス画像セックス動画セックスフレンドスワッピングSEX写真セックスボランティセ 483;クス体位東京セックス仕方 SEX。おっぱい画像おっぱい村長おっぱい楽園掲示板お 387;ぱい命おっぱいゲーム。巨乳動画巨乳画像アイドル巨乳 522;示板風俗。セフレ募集セフレ掲示板セフレ画像掲示板セフレの作り方出会い無料素人セフレ。童貞狩りエロ漫画童貞狩り童貞喪失童貞オークション素人童貞逆援不倫パートナー不倫出会い人妻不倫不倫を楽しみたい方にはお薦め 154;妻画像など満載出会いサイトを楽しむならココ無料出会いで一緒に遊ぼう出会いはLOVEアゲインで決まり

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Product Activation`[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#21)
by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 11:44:28 AM PDT

As an old timer who has been in the computer industry since the CPM operating system was King, I've taken an aggressive stance against Software Protection on Software I've paid for. When "up against the wall" from abusive Software Publishers, I simply go to the newgroups and download a cracked version to get back in service. I've paid for use of the software so I don't care if I cirmcumvent their system. I'm a Microsoft Partner and get all the NFR software but it's easier for me to just bypass their protection schemes. I paid for the software, so to hell with them. Think for a moment ....don't abusive companies make people want to install cracked versions and never buy another program from that company?

[ Reply to This ]


A good approach, to a point[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#28)
by Anonymous User on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 08:17:37 AM PDT

I'm another "old timer" that has little tolerance for software publishers that make it harder for me to work with software that I have paid for. Activation has caused me to change the way I work with and purchase software. The first step has been to stop upgrading software to new versions that utilize activation schemes whenever possible. This has become the primary reason I don't upgrade or buy new software as frequently as I used to.

For software that I just can't live without, I have resorted to circumventing the schemes by obtaining cracked versions so that I can be free to use it the way I want to. Unfortunately, a major drawback to this approach is that sometimes the cracked versions are not as stable as the originals. Paying for software that is not reliable is probably the only thing more aggravating than the activation schemes themselves.

I do understand that the software publishers are trying to protect their property. However, until a scheme can be devised that doesn't penalize honest users by limiting the number of machines they can work with, the number of installs that can be made, or adding significant maintenance and administration overhead, I will continue to resist the trend.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


I have always disliked copy protection[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#22)
by FocusWiz on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 11:59:48 AM PDT

I have valid licenses for all of the products installed on five machines in my home plus licenses for many products that have long been uninstalled.  In addition, for some products, (like McAfee) I have useless old licenses for products that can't be upgraded because even though I have five licenses, their policy allows only one to be "upgraded" per user, so I need to purchase 4 "new" licenses whenever upgrading (except in certain volume purchase scenarios that they seem to have stopped offering).

I had problems with Office XP which deactivated itself when I rebooted too many times with different disk configurations.  I had to call product activation and deal with their questioning me about how many machines I was trying to use this on and their insinuations that I was trying to cheat them out of their hard-earned money.  They must have a stress meter on their phones that tells them when someone is getting so annoyed that they must be a valid registered user.

I also had an issue with an upgrade to Microsoft Project.  Upgrading to Windows XP rendered my older version unusable, so I uninstalled it and purchased an upgrade.  Installing the Microsoft Project upgrade asked me for the prior version's CD but rejected it because it also was an upgrade.  After talking with Microsoft for an hour, their solution was basically to unistall Windows XP and revert back to Windows 98 so that I could reinstall the original Microsoft Project and the first two upgrades, and then install the newest upgrade before upgrading to Windows XP.  It took another hour to convince them that this was not a viable solution.  

On the other hand, Adobe did something nice with Version 6 of Adobe Acrobat.  Rather than making me go back and re-enter the code from my version 3 disk as they had in the past, they have given me a new key code for this version and they accept the version 5 upgrade CD as proof of ownership.

However, I also have problems with companies that seem to want to control piracy problems but who are not set up to handle a single user with multiple licenses.  I have five licenses of SystemSuite 5 from V-Communications.  I am fairly certain that if you go to their records, they will show only one.  Why?  Their system ties the license to the email address of the user and I try to keep that standard when I register my products.  Spy Sweeper is a similar problem.  I have three licenses for that and found out that there was an upgrade available for registered customers.  Every time I go to their site and put in the information they request to get a key code for the new version, they give me the same key code even though I am entering a different CD-Key from the original packages.  I am certain they would think it is a problem if I try to run the same key code on three different machines.  

I do not believe in software piracy, but I have not seen any solutions which will not cause frustration to a valid user under some circumstances.

[ Reply to This ]



Don't mess with it. Pirate it![ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#23)
by WhiteSandBeaches on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 12:37:19 PM PDT

That would seem to be the message being sent by bloated companies that have grown to big for their britches.

It's just too easy to get this software for free.  Why would anyone go through this hassle more than once?

My experience as a computer professional for over 15 years, is that licensed, copy-protection-FREE software succeeds astronomically beyond these feeble attempts at control.

I gladly pay for software that is copy-protection-FREE.  Software with copy-protection, including the insidious "Product Activation," I avoid like the plague.  Even better, is when there is an open source solution.  The open source option is growing so huge, that I am absolutely thrilled!

This is the free market exercising its collective will.  RIGHT ON!

I believe in Capitalism, but when companies grow too big and abuse their customer base then f*** 'em!  I have the right to choose...as does *everyone* else out there.  So CHOOSE!  Do you want to continue to be violated from the backside or do you want pick one of the myriad alternatives that REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS?

I will no longer give my or my company's hard-earned money to abusive companies.  Their limp defense of activation *screams* of desperation.

I choose the free market and those businesses who understand who holds the power here...those with the money.

Cheers to those who make a difference in this world!

[ Reply to This ]



Desperation or idiocy?[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#25)
by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 02:26:39 PM PDT

The most succesful word processing software of the late 80's was Wordperfect which came without copy protection and was the one who (I believe) was the first stating that it was FREE for student, professors and on personnal computer "if you had it at work". Everybody who got out of a course at the time knew it and how to use it... (It fell down when it missed the Windows 95 step...) Remember DBase IV? The best copy protection scheme at the time! Maybe you know of Lotus 1-2-3? They had the best spreadsheet (well protected) in the market!

Here's another one. What computer was build in such a way that you could make a copy as long as your BIOS wasn't copied? The PC! How many PC are there in the world now?

The most copied softwares are probably Windows and Ms Office. Look at how poor Microsoft is!

I believe most of us are getting strongly annoyed by the time spent uselessly fighting customer service for a right we paid for. As many said above, we vote with our money. When companies put a copy protection scheme in their software, they prepare the way for the one who will overthrow them.

I'd pay to know exactly how much such protection cost and how much more money it really get. In the long term, I believe they always lose.

JR

[ Reply to This ]


No One Has Yet Mentioned...[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#26)
by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 24, 2004 at 04:23:45 PM PDT

No one has yet mentioned the most disturbing aspect of product activation - and that is what happens to the user when the company closes up shop or goes bankrupt ? Look at DVDXCopy - they incorporated activation in order to make a stronger case in court that they could track pirated copies of movies back to an individual user. Now that they have been sued out of business by Hollywood - people who bought ANY of their software - even software that had nothing o do with copying DVD's are "outta luck" and out of pocket ! In addition, every publisher maintains that activation is their activation scheme is "painless" and takes less than 5 minutes ! Well thats fine if theirs is the only software requiring activation - but when you have a few dozen programs - all of which you have to go through hoops to reinstall when you purchase a new computer - well that 5 minutes add up quick. This is especially the case if you want to keep the computer off the internet to keep it truly safe and secure. Telephone activation is by no means a painless process ! I hope ALL computer magazines that review software will make prominant in their reviews whether or not a program uses any sort of activation scheme. I, for one, will NOT purchase that software if there are ANY alternatives available. In fact, since the MAC versions of many of these same programs do NOT have activation - (are MAC users inherently more honest ?) - I might even buy a MAC !

[ Reply to This ]


Re: No One Has Yet Mentioned...[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#27)
by Anonymous User on Wed Aug 25, 2004 at 07:07:05 AM PDT

Good point. Not only do you need to fear the company going out of business, but what about the company that decides to force users to upgrade by halting activation for an earlier version of a product? Or what happens if that product is sold to a competitor who kills it off in favor of their own offering (we've seen this many times in this industry)?

Activation is one of the big reasons I have moved to the Mac. I would not go so far as to say Mac users are any more honest or dishonest, but neither Office nor Photoshop CS require activation under OS X as both applications do under Windows. OS X itself does not require activation either. I do hope this trend holds, however I could not help but notice that most reviews of the Mac version of Dreamweaver MX 2004 did not bother to even mention it had activation. Thankfully I found out through other means so I did not upgrade.

What I would like to start seeing in software reviews is blatant mentions of activation schemes, support options, and for the reviewers to test the quality of the support. Any gotchas in the EULA would be helpful as well. It seems these elements are often overlooked and many reviews are just a regurgitation of the additional features lists provided by vendors. The technology media could do so much more in informing users about these issues.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]



fth[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#32)
by Anonymous User on Mon Jan 28, 2008 at 01:25:21 AM PDT

I purchased QB2003 Pro with a $120 upgrade rebate. After not receiving it, I called the toll-free number. It had been disconnected. I called Intuit. They said someone would call. A week later, someone did call and asked me to fax the copies I had kept to him. He promised a return call when they received it. Another two weeks went by with no call, so I faxed them again. And again a week later.guild wars gold gw gold Maple Story Mesos Maple Mesos cheap guild wars gold guild wars money buy guild wars gold gw money cheap guild wars money cheap gw money MapleStory Mesos Maple Story Meso buy Maple Story Mesos cheap Maple Story Mesos buy Maple Meso cheap MapleStory Mesos cheap Maple Story Meso No response, but I finally got my $120. This wasn't some $3 rebate off a stack of CDs. It was for me upgrading and being a loyal customer. Well, if I can't get the rebate, Peachtree looks comparable.

[ Reply to This ]


New Frontiers in Frustration | 34 comments (34 topical) | Post A Comment
Display: Sort:
Recent Entries
Of Apple, Psystar users, and copyright
0 comments

The suspicious death of XP support
23 comments

Is the Do-Not-Call list not working?
33 comments

Threads of copyright abuse
11 comments

Google should defy court order
4 comments

Bill Gates and PC history
25 comments

More The Gripelog...

Submit a gripe
About the Author
Email Ed Foster

Help Ed and his readers build these projects:
The Gripewiki
The EULA Library

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Live Gripes
Has AOL Changed Their Ways?
15 comments

A Nestle SweeTarts Conspiracy
14 comments

AT&T Kills "Bad" Username
27 comments

DESPERATE! AOL HAS TAKEN OVER MY COMPUTER
48 comments

parkingticket.com SCAM on refunds
25 comments

Don't let Net Enforcers Ruin Your Day.
15 comments

More Live Gripes...

Sign up for my newsletter

To have my column automatically e-mailed to you, submit your email address in the form below. Of course, I will not turn your address over to any other party or send you any unrequested e-mail.

Infoworld Blogs

Recomended Sites
The AFFECT Coalition
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Electronic Privacy Information Center
Free Software Foundation
HearUsNow.org
Public Knowledge
StopBadware.org

Jeff Angus
Ben Edelman
Dan Gillmor
Bob Lewis
Brian Livingston
Freedom to Tinker
Lawmeme
PC World's Techlog
SunBeltSoftware Blog
Troubleshootsers.com

Rss Feeds
How this works
 Top News 
 Columnists 
 Tech Watch 
 Test Center Reviews 
 Applications 
 App Development 
 E-Business Solutions & Strategies 
 End-user Hardware 
 Networking 
 Operating Systems 
 Platforms 
 Security 
 Standards & Protocols 
 Storage 
 Telecommunications 
 Wireless 
 Web Services 

 

create account | faq | search