From: AES on
> >> And just for the record, I'm not trying to evade any such restrictions.
> >> But at the same time, I'm not fond of any such honor systems where a
> >> commercial vendor is attempting to get the benefits of various
> >> restrictions without actually being prepared to enforce them --
> >> especially when the terms of this honor systems are unclear or
> >> imprecise.
> >
> > Would you rather they require you to enter a registration code, and then
> > have the OS "phone home" to validate the registration, or have you make a
> > telephone call if the computer is not connected to the intertubes?

To give a straightforward answer to this question, if the software is
expensive but worth it -- if it "delivers value for money" -- I may not
take great joy in going through a reasonable registration process such
as you describe; but I'm willing to do it, and consider it a reasonable
requirement by the vendor to protect the investment they've made in
developing the software.
From: George Kerby on



On 7/13/10 12:44 PM, in article
michelle-A4BBF9.10440713072010(a)reserved-multicast-range-not-delegated.exampl
e.com, "Michelle Steiner" <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <C8620BEA.38DBA%ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com>,
> George Kerby <ghost_topper(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Would you rather they require you to enter a registration code, and
>>> then have the OS "phone home" to validate the registration, or have
>>> you make a telephone call if the computer is not connected to the
>>> intertubes?
>>
>> Can we say "Adobe"?
>
> I was thinking "Microsoft".

Peas in a pod...

From: Wes Groleau on
On 07-13-2010 14:16, AES wrote:
> To give a straightforward answer to this question, if the software is
> expensive but worth it -- if it "delivers value for money" -- I may not
> take great joy in going through a reasonable registration process such
> as you describe; but I'm willing to do it, and consider it a reasonable
> requirement by the vendor to protect the investment they've made in
> developing the software.

But if the vendor produces _better_ software, yet chooses to not
impose that inconvenience on you, you are "not fond of any such
honor system" ?

To each his own....

--
Wes Groleau

Krashen vs. grammar?
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW?itemid=114
From: David Empson on
Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <siegman-7802E7.11162313072010(a)sciid-srv02.med.tufts.edu>,
> AES <siegman(a)stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> > > >> And just for the record, I'm not trying to evade any such
> > > >> restrictions. But at the same time, I'm not fond of any such honor
> > > >> systems where a commercial vendor is attempting to get the benefits
> > > >> of various restrictions without actually being prepared to enforce
> > > >> them -- especially when the terms of this honor systems are unclear
> > > >> or imprecise.
> > > >
> > > > Would you rather they require you to enter a registration code, and
> > > > then have the OS "phone home" to validate the registration, or have
> > > > you make a telephone call if the computer is not connected to the
> > > > intertubes?
> >
> > To give a straightforward answer to this question, if the software is
> > expensive but worth it -- if it "delivers value for money" -- I may not
> > take great joy in going through a reasonable registration process such
> > as you describe; but I'm willing to do it, and consider it a reasonable
> > requirement by the vendor to protect the investment they've made in
> > developing the software.
>
> I consider it unreasonable. Apple never had such a procedure for its OS.
> And even its software that did require a registration code (e.g., iWork
> before iWork 09), there was no "phoning home".
>
> And Apple hasn't suffered any by not requiring registration for its
> software.

Apple does require licence keys for its professional software (Aperture,
Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio) and for Mac OS X Server. They do local
network checks but I don't think they "phone home" to check for mutiple
uses at different locations, and they don't require activation.

FileMaker Pro is an interesting example. Back at least as far as version
4, it has a licence key which must be entered to use the software, and
it checks on the network for other instances of the same serial number.

In single licence editions of FileMaker Pro 9 and FileMaker Pro 9
Advanced, they introduced an activation scheme which required "phoning
home" to allow continued use of the software, and ensured that you could
only have two installations for each licence key (two are allowed for a
work computer and a portable or home computer, as long as they are not
used simultaneously).

This mechanism was obviously unpopular: in FileMaker Pro 10, the manual
still described how to do activation, but the feature wasn't actually in
the software (or at least was bypassed for the licence keys they were
issuing).

When I needed to reinstall FileMaker Pro 9 after my previous computer
suffered a temporary failure, I found that I couldn't activate it any
more (or deactivate the old one). It turned out that FileMaker Inc had
shut down their activation server, and they issued me a new licence key
which did not require activation.

Still have to type in the licence key, of course.

--
David Empson
dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz
From: AES on
In article <1jlm86d.4ewvfw2j2ixyN%dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz>,
dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:

> Apple does require licence keys for its professional software (Aperture,
> Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio) and for Mac OS X Server. They do local
> network checks but I don't think they "phone home" to check for mutiple
> uses at different locations, and they don't require activation.
>
> FileMaker Pro is an interesting example. Back at least as far as version
> 4, it has a licence key which must be entered to use the software, and
> it checks on the network for other instances of the same serial number.
>

Around 2007 I installed the 2004 version of MS Office from its CD onto
my MacBook and my wife's MacBook Pro, both of which were on our home
Airport network. The result was the neither of us could use any of the
three apps (Word, PowerPoint, Excel) on our Mac unless all three of them
were shut down on the other Mac.

(At least, that's how I remember it -- I think the three apps were
sufficiently linked that running any one of them on one Mac blocked all
three of them on the other Mac.)

Once they were installed and had been run once on each machine, however,
I don't recall that any license key had to be entered to run them again.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Console question
Next: Multiple menu bar icons