Guys, it's the exact opposite from how it looks for me. DrumAddict and hivkorn, you two are the very suspicious looking here in this context.hivkorn wrote:+1DrumAddict wrote:an legit user which looks like very well informed whats cracked .ferranastals wrote:
As always legit users (like me) are the most affected for bad implementations of copy protections, because warez users use a better version than me.
Good job psp
personal if ive reading your message i higly dont believe that , that you are an legit user .
Why? Because you act like children, who quickly point at a single point to distract and thus distance themselves from possibly being caught themselves. Basic psychology 101. Anybody with kids will probably recognize this pattern (and you see this behavior in the normal work space, among adults, as well).
The fact is: It's not at all uncommon to be informed. I too know pretty well what is cracked and what is not. It isn't exactly a difficult thing to do (granted, I get asked to check and report every once in a while).
I think part of the original point was that if PSP want to go iLok due to protection, then they are wasting their money and time. They could simply develop a much easier copy protection system than the one they are currently using. A very simple serial number thing or heck, no protection at all with the user info watermarked into the plugin .dll file. Yes, it would get cracked.. but it already is, and if they go iLok, then it still will be. So there's nothing to lose yet everything to gain from a customer standpoint.
My experience says otherwise...
