IMO that's not the point for all.brok landers wrote:ttoz wrote:but is still 100% uncracked on mac to this day...Kriminal wrote:would you like me to post links to all the sync stuff that is 'available' ?Nokenoku wrote:Wrong.EPtMe001 wrote:Now, Syncrosoft... This copy protection scheme is idiotic. Here's why.
1). It doesn't offer any protection against piracy.
Inform yourself!
considering most devs say the mac sales account for half usually, that's still something...
not to mention, it took the team 3 years between releases, the first time they said they'd never do it again, they skipped Cubase 4, then they spent like 10,000 hours or something to do C5 LOL....
guess what, steinberg is now in the process of updating it again, so it will take them 3 years again probably. See what i mean?
so to say it offers NO protection is just silly.... there was no sync crack for at least 2 years and in those years people that wanted the plugs had to buy them.
ttoz, so it is ...
Idiotic only because who produce this scheme claim that is unbeatable.
Doesn't offer any protection (for the developer of course), isn't totally true.
Perhaps if weren't a copy protection more people were legitimated to use illegal copies.
Unc*acked on macs because maybe no one have decided to do, as I think that their goal isn't to supply poeple some software for free, it's more believable that they are trying to demonstrate that nothing is "un*rackable".
If you think you already said this with your sentence:
"steinberg is now in the process of updating it again, so it will take them 3 years again probably"
Otherwise why spend so much hours for nothing in change?
Then the problem is more from a "human" point of view than an "if and how is possible to do".
I'm wondering...at the end, where's the root of the problem?
People that prepare drugs or people that are going to take drugs?
If people were educated to do the ethically right things, with a choice "stolen for free OR have to buy", people will choose "have to buy".
As there will never be a world with all the same thinking people (perhaps in a 1984s machines world) this problem will never see a solution IMO.
Soon i will have some my products over the web, and I already know that they will probably copied and spreaded.
I can't argue on one of the basis of the system that we are using, every OS have a copy function that can do the perfect copy of the original.
We aren't in the "one picasso piece in the world" era.
But i'll trust that people knowing, or imagining, my efforts will support me.
That's the only "protection scheme" that i can consider "un*rackable".
(I know that i were in the kvr rules limit and i'm sorry for the off topic)
