At 05:20 PM 1/18/2002 -0500, Andrew Jenkins wrote: >That is, aside from the complacency that we've all become so used to from >Protdel, what holding them back from completing this long-standing (over >five years, by my last count) request?
Well, I think this is bit of an exaggeration. Protel version 2 had a demo version that was full-function and thus served as a file viewer. It was even full-function *including* file saves for small files, thus hobbyists could use it for very small boards. The file dates for the demo are the beginning of 1995. Since version 2 continued as the current version for some time, there would not have been, I would think, much agitation for a viewer until well into version 3, I don't know the dates for that. I *highly* recommend that the demo be converted to a viewer upon expiration. As far as worries about cracks are concerned, as long as there is a demo of the kind that already exists, it is trivial to continue to use the demo beyond the expiration, it does not take a rocket scientist or sophisticated hacker. I'm not going to explain how, so don't ask. There is even another way, even easier, given Protel policies. Just buy the program, then return it. Of course, this means lying to Protel. But my point is that allowing continued operation of the demo with only file save and certain other operations disabled would not increase the risk of losses due to hacking and cracking. Further, being able to look and manipulate but not save might provide continued encouragement to go ahead and buy, and the familiarity of the user with the Protel interface would be maintained, one more weight in the scale toward purchase of Protel rather than some other package. (I've expressed my opinion many times that illegal software use, provided it does not become the norm, does not harm the software company and that figures widely reported about "losses" due to illegal use are based on a very shaky assumption that all the illegal use represents purchases that did not take place. It is just as likely that illegal use eventually becomes purchase as a user wants to come in out of the cold. Many years ago, starting out and very much short of cash, I was given a copy of Microsoft Works. Within one year, I bought a license to get the upgrade to the next version. How much did Microsoft lose from my "piracy"? If there had been no "illegal" option, would I have rushed out to buy the software earlier? I can be quite sure that, no, I would have used something else, maybe I would have ended up with Works, maybe not. That I used and became familiar with Works, however, made it very certain that it was Works I bought in the end. To my knowledge, the most successful software is also the most pirated software; it is quite possible that efforts to prevent piracy *reduce* software sales. It will be interesting to see how XP goes. It is quite possible to prevent piracy entirely, if users are willing to tolerate a requirement for an occasional net connection or other proof of legal ownership. But will this increase sales? I doubt it. Better software at affordable prices will increase sales, in general, since most software money is from business use and serious businesses cannot afford to depend on illegal software.) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Abdulrahman Lomax Easthampton, Massachusetts USA * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
