Re: [PEDA] Activation
Strange, I received the full package. Manuals, CD, and some code to be mailed to Altium. I got the license code in return. It is running now. The handling might depend on the distributor in your country, I guess. Colleagues in a neighbouring country didn't get anything at all yet. Not even an announcement, that they'll get it soon. nothing. Rene Fisher, Jerry wrote: The activation shows 2 options e-mail and on line. I haven't done it yet because I don't have the activation code. I have tried to get one but was told that only new customers are receiving them now. Users who get the free upgrade aren't entitled to them yet. I thought it would be the other way around. -Original Message- From: Phillip Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 7:31 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: [PEDA] Activation I don't have Protel 2004 yet, so I haven't seen what is required for activation. Am I to understand that the new activation must be done on-line? On the system Protel 2004 will be running on? Part of the reason I built my CAD system in the first place was to separate it from the risks of my other gaming/e-mail/browser/on-line (Win98) system. There were other reasons too - A faster system, the move to W2K for DXP, etc. But when I built my CAD system, I very purposefully left it off-line *by design*. All I need to tell me that I really *don't* want to go back to having my CAD system exposed to the 'Net is to look at the number of hits in the firewall logs (of the Win98 system), and at the number of Virus/Trogen /Spyware/Adware/malware programs that are out there now. There are hundreds of firewall hits/hour. How long would it be before something bad gets through? It will be unfortunate if I now have to subject my CAD system to these risks in order to satisfy an activation procedure. Not to mention I'd have to firewall the CAD system, install a modem on it, or somehow get Internet traffic routed over to it. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Activation (was Anybody else recieve these types of messages...)
At 10:40 AM 3/11/2004, Bagotronix Tech Support wrote: As far as Activation goes, I think it blows. The only s/w I have that has Activiation is my new Fujitsu laptop, which came with XP Pro. I don't call what Protel has "Activation", it's a license manager. I like Protel's license manager. When a regular license is installed, it is permanent. But it seems that this may not be true with all licenses, such as demo or beta licenses. If a demo license must be activated and not only does the demo expire, i.e., stop functioning, but reinstalling it requires a new activation process, this might inhibit continued use more seriously. Let me be clear, it is Altium's perfect right to do this. But it might inhibit sales in the long run. An impoverished startup could still reinstall with a new user, real or phony, so it is not as strong a measure as, say, W-XP activation. In this case, the irritation level of continuing would be higher and it *might* stimulate sales a little for some users. The trick, as I would see it, is to keep use-contrary-to-license from cutting into actual sales while at the same time encouraging as many people as possible to learn and use the program (which stimulates sales in the long run, if the program is at all good). Very strong copy protection/Activation, in my opinion, will generally harm sales. No protection may or may not harm sales, probably it harms sales in the short term and *may* help in the long term. Modest protection -- a nuisance to keep using the program but still doable -- might be the best option. A demo program might incorporate some advertising that is refreshed if an internet connection is active. Some programs are licensed completely by the user permitting advertising. I'm writing this mail on sponsored Eudora. I paid for a license, but that was on another computer and besides, I'm using the latest version, I'd need to pay them again. The Eudora ads are unobtrusive, but if I have Eudora open and cover up the ad (it is not large and I can move it about), I do get a window that pops up and warns me. I always uncover it immediately... but, wondering, I just moved the ad down off-screen. I'm waiting for something to happen. So far, nothing. Eventually, I'm sure, I'll get the warning, and possibly Eudora will eventually refuse to function if the ad is not made visible. Okay, after a few minutes, the "probably it is unintended, but..." warning popped up. I ignored it. Eudora is still functioning. My guess is that the warning will get more and more insistent. Since there is a small possibility that Eudora would lock up, and I don't want to lose this mail, I moved it back. Anyway, I've certainly clicked through on some of those ads and I've made purchases. Eudora is making money from my usage of the program, even if I never again pay to get rid of the ad (and to get a couple of advanced features that only function in the paid version -- it's all the same version, just different functions are activated. There is a basic version, Eudora Light, that is free and has no ads. It is really all the same program. On my wife's computer, the ad doesn't work for some reason. When I copied her mail system to my notebook while we were travelling, Eudora automatically reverted to the Light version. Restarting it and selecting the Paid version brought it back even though the ad display is still broken. My point is that there are ways to make money and to promote sales even from users who are not paying. At the very least, they can be pestered to buy the program. If you make a demo impossible to continue, you lose the opportunity to make offers to them, to pester them, to sell advertising targeted at them, etc. Thinking of unlicensed users as criminals gives up all these opportunities. Sure, what they are doing is often illegal, *but* that is a creature of statutory law. Under common law, what they are doing is not a crime. Some forms of copyright violation are not, shall we say, sins. They do not steal anything from the copyright owner. I'm not against copyright, just against attempts to make a huge moral and criminal issue out of what is basically a civil offense, created and defined by statute, not by natural moral law. It's like speeding. Various jurisdictions have set speed limits that are low enough that the majority of drivers are speeding. The large majority. In the U.S., this is actually illegal, there are some sound legal grounds, in my opinion, for considering speed limit signs set contrary to national standards (which generally do not allow a speed limit to be set below the unimpeded 85th percentile speed) to be unenforceable. But some people think, "speed kills, these speeders are morally repugnant, they should be obeying the law." Now, studies have shown again and again that speed limits signs have very little effect on actual driving speeds. If a government really wants to save lives by lowering speeds, it needs to
Re: [PEDA] Activation
> I don't have Protel 2004 yet, so I haven't seen what is required for > activation. Am I to understand that the new activation must be done > on-line? On the system Protel 2004 will be running on? Every time I install some piece of software I suspect might "phone home", I yank the ethernet plug first. That way, if the installer can't get it's authorization, I'll know it was sneaking out onto the net. I start up the software and run it for the first time with the plug still yanked, and see if the software complains. > Part of the reason I built my CAD system in the first place was to separate > it from the risks of my other gaming/e-mail/browser/on-line (Win98) system. > There were other reasons too - A faster system, the move to W2K for DXP, etc. > But when I built my CAD system, I very purposefully left it off-line *by design*. Good plan. > All I need to tell me that I really *don't* want to go back to having > my CAD system exposed to the 'Net is to look at the number of hits in > the firewall logs (of the Win98 system), and at the number of Virus/Trogen > /Spyware/Adware/malware programs that are out there now. There are > hundreds of firewall hits/hour. How long would it be before something > bad gets through? No kidding! It's astounding the amount of port scans that are going on. I remember about 5 years ago I might get 3 port scans a day. Now, my cable modem light is always blinking, and the Netgear firewall is dropping malicious packets like crazy. I've heard horror stories of people taking their new PCs out of the box, turning them on, going on-line and within 30 seconds, BAM! they are infected. At my father's house, their cable company uses some kind of periodic ping polling to the cable modem. The unfortunate consequence is that it is impossible to distinguish the polling from malicious port scans by looking at the blinking LED. I talked him into installing Norton Firewall last year, and later adding a Belkin firewall box too. I shudder to think what could have happened if he hadn't heeded my advice (he runs NT4 at home). Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message - From: "Phillip Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 1:17 PM Subject: [PEDA] Activation > > I don't have Protel 2004 yet, so I haven't seen what is required for > activation. Am I to understand that the new activation must be done > on-line? On the system Protel 2004 will be running on? > > Part of the reason I built my CAD system in the first place was to separate > it from the risks of my other gaming/e-mail/browser/on-line (Win98) system. > There were other reasons too - A faster system, the move to W2K for DXP, etc. > But when I built my CAD system, I very purposefully left it off-line *by design*. > > All I need to tell me that I really *don't* want to go back to having > my CAD system exposed to the 'Net is to look at the number of hits in > the firewall logs (of the Win98 system), and at the number of Virus/Trogen > /Spyware/Adware/malware programs that are out there now. There are > hundreds of firewall hits/hour. How long would it be before something > bad gets through? > > It will be unfortunate if I now have to subject my CAD system to these > risks in order to satisfy an activation procedure. Not to mention I'd > have to firewall the CAD system, install a modem on it, or somehow > get Internet traffic routed over to it. > > ---Phil * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Activation
The activation shows 2 options e-mail and on line. I haven't done it yet because I don't have the activation code. I have tried to get one but was told that only new customers are receiving them now. Users who get the free upgrade aren't entitled to them yet. I thought it would be the other way around. Jerry Fisher C.I.D. Assoc. Elec. Engineer Pelco 10 corporate Dr. Orangeburg N.Y. 10962 (845)398-8700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Phillip Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 7:31 PM To: Protel EDA Forum Subject: [PEDA] Activation I don't have Protel 2004 yet, so I haven't seen what is required for activation. Am I to understand that the new activation must be done on-line? On the system Protel 2004 will be running on? Part of the reason I built my CAD system in the first place was to separate it from the risks of my other gaming/e-mail/browser/on-line (Win98) system. There were other reasons too - A faster system, the move to W2K for DXP, etc. But when I built my CAD system, I very purposefully left it off-line *by design*. All I need to tell me that I really *don't* want to go back to having my CAD system exposed to the 'Net is to look at the number of hits in the firewall logs (of the Win98 system), and at the number of Virus/Trogen /Spyware/Adware/malware programs that are out there now. There are hundreds of firewall hits/hour. How long would it be before something bad gets through? It will be unfortunate if I now have to subject my CAD system to these risks in order to satisfy an activation procedure. Not to mention I'd have to firewall the CAD system, install a modem on it, or somehow get Internet traffic routed over to it. ---Phil * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Activation (was Anybody else recieve these types of messages...)
> I have multiple computers. I like Windows XP, but I'm continuing to use > W2000 on the majority of my computers. I bought Office XP. I can only use > it on this computer. I see no good reason for this. I'm a single user, my > use of the software in multiple installations would not increase the cost > to Microsoft by any significant amount (potentially, there might be an > increased support cost, though not in actuality), it is purely arbitrary > that multiple installations are not allowed. Essentailly, MS thinks, it is > a way to double their income with little increased expense, a way to really > extract more cash from the same customer base. But it isn't working with > me. I've just restricted my use, I do all my web site design, for example, > on this noteboook, the one running W-XP and Office XP. Microsoft has, from > me, not made a penny from their Activation scheme; in fact, I'd have bought > XP long ago if not for Activation. Activation has definitely cost them at > least a thousand dollars in sales on my account. I don't think I'm unique; > I might be a tad cantankerous, true, but dislike of Activation has been > widespread wherever I've seen it discussed. I belong to an MYOB accounting > software user list, and when Activation was discussed there -- MYOB just > implemented Activation with the latest release -- *many* users said they > were not upgrading because of Activation, users that had been upgrading > every year for years. I think it pretty likely that they (MYOB) shot > themselves in the foot. Abdul, if you need office suites on your other PCs, try OpenOffice. It's pretty good. And it's free. I use it on my laptop. As far as Activation goes, I think it blows. The only s/w I have that has Activiation is my new Fujitsu laptop, which came with XP Pro. I don't call what Protel has "Activation", it's a license manager. I like Protel's license manager. On those rare occasions that me and my assistant have started Protel up at the same time, a polite warning dialog box pops up on the screen, and one of us shuts down our Protel session until the other is finished. So that way we don't infringe. I have refused to upgrade Quickbooks Pro because Intuit products (Quicken, Quickbooks, Turbotax) now have Activation. I have refused to upgrade Windows boxes to XP because of Activation. So if the software industry continues to experience a slump, maybe it's their own fault. Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com - Original Message ----- From: "Abd ulRahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:24 PM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Activation (was Anybody else recieve these types of messages...) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [PEDA] Activation (was Anybody else recieve these types of messages...)
At 02:26 PM 3/10/2004, Tony Karavidas wrote: I think Altium's protection is decent.[...] It's a simple activation that give you a file which allows the S/W to run indefinitely. I can install it on a couple machines and all is well. If my copy gets out on the net, Altium knows I messed up. Altium's protection is not, in most cases, fully what I'd call Activation, which is shorthand for something like XP activation. I'm a little worried by the expiring activation codes, though. Strong Activation has two effects: it really would make unauthorized use of the program very difficult, not just inconvenient, and it also creates a risk of program failure for a legitimate user, who might not have, for example, internet access. And it might be a weekend with the software company staff not available. Or it is a few years down the road and the company has gone belly-up. The receiver in bankruptcy realizes that there is money in continuing to provide minimal service: for a fee, we'll fix your program that shut down because of an Activation problem. I don't think activation hurts at all. There are two separate questions. One is how an activation scheme affects legitimate users. Some schemes may have little effect on them. The other is how it affects illegitimate users. Now, Altium apparently has a strong educational discount program. That makes a path for startups to acquire the software cheap (that's not exactly how an educational program is designed to be used, but it could be "abused" by, for example, enrolling an employee in some educational program). What is important for the health of Altium is that new users out there, even if they have little money, are given a way to start using the program. This is software, not hard goods where "theft" is really theft, i.e., a direct loss. The situation with Protel 99SE was quite what I'd think would be good for business in the long run. A user can download a demo and it is not hard, just a nuisance, to keep the Protel 99SE demo running indefinitely. Just the right amount of obstacle, I'd say. I don't know how much the situation has changed. Not having a downloadable demo will somewhat depress demo usage while it increases the cost of providing demos. If the activation scheme is really effective in suppressing software reinstalls, I'd think that the long-term effect on sales will be negative. Short-term, less of an effect but probably not positive. A sensible software company will want as many people as possible using the software, paying or not! As long as the situation does not become such that significant numbers of customers who would pay don't pay because they can get away with using the program contrary to license, there is no loss. Rather, the more people who are using the program, the more who will eventually buy it or cause others to buy it. If it is a good program. If it is a lousy program, by all means, copy-protect it so that only people who buy it and who are stuck with it use it. Nothing worse than having a lot of non-paying users bad-mouthing the program!!! I"ve explained this many times, but I'll essay it again. I'm a newly-graduated engineer and I'm starting a company in my garage with a few friends. I need to design PCBs. What program am I going to use? I have little money, this is a shoestring-startup. Am I going to use program A, which has a good reputation but has strong copy protection so I have to buy it for, say, $10,000, or program B, also with a good reputation, which has looser copy protection, I can get around it, and it sells for $8,000, or program C, which is primitive but will get the job done and is licensed at $300 per year with strong copy protection (a dongle). I'll want program B, for sure, though I might go with C. If software company B goes with strong copy protection, I'll definitely go for C. So strong copy protection will *not* cause me to buy program B. I might buy B, I might buy A, if I can afford them, but I can't. In a startup, one does not know how much money is going to be needed to get over the hump. In the situation described, many startups, in the early, informal days, would go for B and get around the copy protection. If they fail, that's it. Nothing is purchased. If they succeed, they almost certainly *will* buy B. If they are among what may be a minority of young engineers who just won't ever do anything illegal, they will go for C. Not B. My informal proof: what company's software has been most commonly been used contrary to license? What company has allegedly "lost" the most money to unlawful use? And what software company is the largest, the most financially successful in the world? I do not find it surprising that the same company is the answer to all three questions. How can you "lose" the most money and end up the richest? The answer is that illegal software use does not cost the software vendor *anything*. Illegal *sales* might represent a loss, under
Re: [PEDA] Activation (was Anybody else recieve these types of messages...)
I think Altium's protection is decent. It's not a dongle, those break at the worst times. I used to work in a place that had a bunch of PowerPCB seats and once or twice a year we had a system down due to a failed dongle. It's not a timed node locked FlexLM lock which locks it down to one machine. (Can't run THAT at home or on a notebook) It's a simple activation that give you a file which allows the S/W to run indefinitely. I can install it on a couple machines and all is well. If my copy gets out on the net, Altium knows I messed up. I don't think activation hurts at all. Now I do dislike it the way Microsoft did it because I can't install on more than 1 machine (even if I'm the only one here). Apple was a lot better about having a family pack license. It fits better with the way people use computers. (Hand-me-downs for the kids, etc.) Tony > -Original Message- > From: Abd ulRahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 10:24 AM > To: Protel EDA Forum > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Anybody else recieve these types of messages... > > At 10:07 PM 3/9/2004, Brian Guralnick wrote: > >Look at what I just received in my in-box... > >i need protel 99 se for desingning my projects so if u have it full > >working or crack please send me as possiable > > My own response to this person would be > > You can get it the latest version free from Altium, full working. > http://www.protel.com/evaluation/default.asp > > Someone may be able to give you a Protel 99SE demo disk. It's > possible that it is also available somewhere for download. > This would be a full-function demo, 30 day time limit. After > the 30 days, continued use could be a violation of the user > agreement and might require a hard drive reformat. > > I do know you can get Protel Advanced Schematic and Advanced > PCB version > 2.5 from various web sources. These are full-function demos. > PCB has a size limit. > > If I were Altium, I would not invest much in the way of > resources trying to track down this sad sack. He's not going > to buy the program no matter what, so if he uses an illegal > license, Altium will not have lost any income. > Making an example of him will probably have little effect on > other piracy. > > The interesting thing about software piracy, when it comes to > a program like Protel, is that the probably effect of it in > the long run is an increase of sales. Why? Well, as long as > such piracy is illegal and does not become the norm, it will > have little effect on sales. And in the event that the > illegal user does eventually become part of a successful > organization, that organization will need to have legal > software. What will this user recommend? A program that he'll > have to learn, or one that he knows? Let me guess > > I've never seen any statistics on the effect of strong > anti-piracy measures. The experience of the music industry > might have some lessons, though music is quite different from > engineering software. It would be interesting to know if my > theory is correct: Activation, as a strong antipiracy > measure, might be hurting sales. Some users, perceiving > activation as a planned failure mechanism, avoid buying > software that incorporates it. I know this is the case with > some programs, it is true for me. (I've been upgrading every > year an accounting program that we use. > Except this year, because of Activation. That company's major > competitor tried activation and abandoned it, I think their > sales suffered.) So the question is which is the greater > effect: Gain in sales as users who would have used a pirated > version use instead buy the program (I don't think this > happens very often with expensive software), or loss in sales > short-term because of user rebellion plus long-term loss from > reduction in the conversion of illegal users to legal ones. I > suspect the latter is the case, but it is not easy to test > and I certainly have no proof. Activation has a significant > cost, especially in support, so a neutral effect on sales > would be a net loss. > > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 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] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
