More copy protection...

[Richard_Synapse]

8. Do not punish with Dongles
This will build negative reputation and hedging among your customers. Avoid.

I wouldn't mind if this were true, but ihmo it is not. Look at the most successful companies out there, almost all of them use dongles or at the very least some form of online activation.

Richard

[Urs]

8. Do not punish with Dongles
This will build negative reputation and hedging among your customers. Avoid.

I wouldn't mind if this were true, but ihmo it is not. Look at the most successful companies out there, almost all of them use dongles or at the very least some form of online activation.

Richard

It's still punishment, and it drains a lot of money from the market. It's an overpriced solution that does not work in the long run (only for their pockets, of course)

(reminder: When some version of iLok protection got cracked, they sent out a letter to developers somewhat akin to "Oh, you should have upgraded to the new version, you silly people". So they force everyone to update everything every so and so many years, because, well, yeah, they're competent only in marketing... having their stuff cracked is part of their business strategy, so much should be obvious to everyone by now)

[Richard_Synapse]

It's still punishment, and it drains a lot of money from the market. It's an overpriced solution that does not work in the long run (only for their pockets, of course)

I totally agree with you Urs. It's just that users don't seem to punish companies who employ dongles.

Btw a hint for the crackers... you can actually earn good money breaking protections, e.g. the Codemeter:
http://www.wibu.com/hacker-contest.html

Better than not getting anything at all, and it's perfectly legal. And you'll feel better than hurting small developers with weak or no protections and potentially driving them out of business due to cracks.

Richard

[sjm]

Agree very much with the sentiments expressed by Vertion on the previous page.

Too many software developers across the board have great difficulty developing and designing software for users. They find it incredibly difficult to distance themselves from the implementation side of things, and understand what their users actually want in more abstract terms. I am sure that this is at least partly down to software still being a male dominated field, and empathy - the ability to put oneself in someone else's shoes - is something that women just tend to be a lot better at.

I'm not a big fan of buzzword-compliant software, but there is something to be said for the agile mindset, which is about forcing developers to step back and approach software design from the point of view of a user. Using this approach, we can define a very simple requirement for any software:

Code: Select all

As a user
I want to use the software without hassle
So I can get shit done

Now that's such an obvious requirement that I'm sure most of you wouldn't even qualify it as a requirement. It's implicit right?

Well no, it's not actually. A lot of software has all sorts of UX and UI problems that means it doesn't meet this requirement. Copy protection is just one aspect that can be anything from largely transparent to a real PITA to deal with.

u-he's method seems to fit nicely into the largely transparent category, along with things like serials and keyfiles you can back up. I don't mind spending 30 additional seconds during the installation process to register my software. That's no hassle. Anything that makes me rely on the vendor's architecture (including still being in businees) means hassle - at least somewhere down the line, even if the hassle isn't immediately apparent as a new customer.

Anything above and beyond ~30 seconds already violates your first requirement. As a user, I hate that shit. There's nothing worse than spending a few hours faffing around to get software you own to work.

In fact, making your software a hassle to use has a much more detrimental effect. If your copy protection is a pain to deal with, I'm much more likely to look for a crack. Back in the day, when games were released on CDs that you needed to have in the drive, I would download No-CD cracks for all of them. Having to search for a CD is a hassle. Just starting the app isn't. Steam has solved this issue for me, so thank heavens those days are over.

Any software using copy protection that makes cracked versions superior is self-defeating. In fact, it has the effect of pushing legitimate customers to the dark side. Furthermore, it discourages many people from purchasing your software in the first place. Dongles and C/R are prime examples of copy protection that violate the fundamental requirement of sofware not being a hassle to deal with. Note that this doesn't mean that it's always a hassle every time you use the software. When i-Lok works it works; it's when it doesn't work that you're screwed.

When designing your software, which includes copy protection, you therefore constantly need to be validating the basic requirement - the software isn't a PITA to use - with your copy protection mechanism. The question shouldn't just be "will this be hard to crack?" but "will this be unobtrusive enough to make people want to use our software and even buy our other products?". The first question is all about the developer's self interest: "IT'S MY PLUGIN!" That's understandable and valid, but your plugin/software is still better served by being a joy to use. Your customers don't care what CP you use as long as it's transparent.

But there is another side to every coin. Let's look at our first requirement again:

Code: Select all

As a user
I want to use the software without hassle
So I can get shit done

This requirement also applies to any cracks. If the crack is easier to use, you will lose customers to the crack. You will even have legitimate customers buying the software and installing the crack because it's superior software. The trick isn't to make your software uncrackable. It's to make the paid version superior to the cracked version. I think this last point is also something a lot of developers fail to understand. "How do you compete with free?" they ask. By offering a superior product, as in any other market.

And that's where Vertion's other points are particularly relevant. In particular, keep the upgrades coming regularly, and make these upgrades of value. If it becomes a hassle looking for a new crack for every update - or if the crackers have got bored and moved on to newer pastures and there is no crack, the paying customers are getting the sweeter deal. Assuming of course that you aren't screwing them over with some overbearing copy protection system.

[Soundplex]

It's still punishment, and it drains a lot of money from the market. It's an overpriced solution that does not work in the long run (only for their pockets, of course)

(reminder: When some version of iLok protection got cracked, they sent out a letter to developers somewhat akin to "Oh, you should have upgraded to the new version, you silly people". So they force everyone to update everything every so and so many years, because, well, yeah, they're competent only in marketing... having their stuff cracked is part of their business strategy, so much should be obvious to everyone by now)

I disagree. Not long ago my pc broke and I had to finish important projects. I quickly got a 2nd pc as a temporary workstation replacement. All I had to do was put the dongles in and have fun... Some companies made me angry. I had to deactivate the old licence first, which I obviously couldn't. Talking to the support was timeconsuming. Sorry, but walking through 1000 activations, c&r, keyfiles is just a pita.

Also I talked to a someone long time ago who said mostly its the fault of the dev if a dongle protection failed. They can always configure the strength (degree of protection, vm, checksums) as well as the frequency of checking and the content that shoudl be checked.
Of course there are always some issues from the dongle companies, but the ones that have their own copy protection schemes, also fail more often (e.g. leaked keys & serials, bad implementation).

I prefer dongles over any other cp.

[Richard_Synapse]

Not long ago my pc broke and I had to finish important projects. I quickly got a 2nd pc as a temporary workstation replacement. All I had to do was put the dongles in and have fun... Some companies made me angry. I had to deactivate the old licence first, which I obviously couldn't.

Sounds like a poor implementation. In our implementation, you never need to deactivate anything, re-activation just works and is at least as simple as a dongle (if people did have a problem we would know that since they would contact us).

Richard

[Kylotan]

The trick isn't to make your software uncrackable. It's to make the paid version superior to the cracked version.

The problem is, this isn't possible in the general case. If the crack is perfect then there is no difference in functionality except one product cost money and one did not. The same applies for your argument of competing with free by offering a superior product - if someone offers my exact product for free, my product isn't superior, by definition. Or if they offer a bigger competitor's more expensive product for free, that's impractical to compete with. (You don't just compete in a market by offering a better product, you can compete by offering more value for money - not possible if price differentiation doesn't exist due to downloading.)

It is always a tradeoff here and it really sucks that we developers put things in place that inconvenience consumers - but taking it out entirely means we can rarely survive as a business in a world where copying bytes is essentially free.

[sjm]

The trick isn't to make your software uncrackable. It's to make the paid version superior to the cracked version.

The problem is, this isn't possible in the general case. If the crack is perfect then there is no difference in functionality except one product cost money and one did not.

That's why Vertion and I stressed the importance of updates. If you don't differentiate the paid version from the cracked one (except that the paid version is a PITA due to draconic CP), then you have intentionally made the cracked version superior. That's self-defeating and why you need a different approach that ensures the functionality isn't the same and that the paid version is superior.

[Richard_Synapse]

The trick isn't to make your software uncrackable. It's to make the paid version superior to the cracked version.

The problem is, this isn't possible in the general case. If the crack is perfect then there is no difference in functionality except one product cost money and one did not. The same applies for your argument of competing with free by offering a superior product - if someone offers my exact product for free, my product isn't superior, by definition. Or if they offer a bigger competitor's more expensive product for free, that's impractical to compete with. (You don't just compete in a market by offering a better product, you can compete by offering more value for money - not possible if price differentiation doesn't exist due to downloading.)

It is always a tradeoff here and it really sucks that we developers put things in place that inconvenience consumers - but taking it out entirely means we can rarely survive as a business in a world where copying bytes is essentially free.

Very well put. To add to that, I think the deeper problem is in the socialization. We all know it's wrong to steal, we learned that as kids. But we never really learned it may be wrong to copy digital things. When you think about it, uploading commercial software, music, videos or games may do as much or more financial damage than stealing someone's car. It just doesn't feel that way. Likewise, on the net we abuse people much more easily because "it's the net" and it doesn't feel real. Yet it is all very real.

Richard

[AnX]

It's just that users don't seem to punish companies who employ dongles.



Richard

I do. I dont buy their products.

[Vertion]

I can agree on that. But I still have shitloads of floppy disks I never threw away. Can I still run that? Computers have changed drastically since, so I'd probably need to run it within a DosBox or whatever. Will I do that indeed? Hell no. Time is moving on, and the software I used some years ago on a daily basis is not anymore on my shortlist to install tomorrow on my new machine. Maybe with plugins it's a bit different, and some will age well. But might need a 32/64bit bridge ofcourse.

Oh yea? Well, since today is my birthday, I'm a bit feeling lucky. I'll make my fellow devs here a bet.

Bet: To any dev who can beat my score of 20040 on Ninjer(Ninja) in DosBox, post an image of your score and I'll make you a free preset bank to one of your plugs in honor of your win (I most likely already am a customer) and upload it on kvr (gruntwork). If you so choose to accept this challenge and can't beat my score, you owe everyone a Vertion Birthday preset bank. lol



I still have the floppies for this game somewhere.... anyone have a spare 5.25 floppy drive?

EDIT: Richard, you might enjoy playing the MSDOS Dune game. Another valid reason for a trip to the past for celebration with plenty of spice beer and a baliset.

[Zaphod (giancarlo)]

The trick isn't to make your software uncrackable. It's to make the paid version superior to the cracked version.

The problem is, this isn't possible in the general case. If the crack is perfect then there is no difference in functionality except one product cost money and one did not. The same applies for your argument of competing with free by offering a superior product - if someone offers my exact product for free, my product isn't superior, by definition. Or if they offer a bigger competitor's more expensive product for free, that's impractical to compete with. (You don't just compete in a market by offering a better product, you can compete by offering more value for money - not possible if price differentiation doesn't exist due to downloading.)

It is always a tradeoff here and it really sucks that we developers put things in place that inconvenience consumers - but taking it out entirely means we can rarely survive as a business in a world where copying bytes is essentially free.

Very well put. To add to that, I think the deeper problem is in the socialization. We all know it's wrong to steal, we learned that as kids. But we never really learned it may be wrong to copy digital things. When you think about it, uploading commercial software, music, videos or games may do as much or more financial damage than stealing someone's car. It just doesn't feel that way. Likewise, on the net we abuse people much more easily because "it's the net" and it doesn't feel real. Yet it is all very real.

Richard

Best post to date.
They will learn it is a boomerang

[antto]

do any of those crackerz actually code any software..?
like any useful software, making tools for easier cracking experience doesn't count, i guess

[resynthesis]

do any of those crackerz actually code any software..?
like any useful software, making tools for easier cracking experience doesn't count, i guess

Many of the students I mentioned earlier were excellent programmers and now work in the software industry. For example, one of the lads I knew who was reputed to be a keen cracker wrote a very nice decompiler as part of his PhD (along the lines of Cristina Cifuentes' work) and now works on static and dynamic analysis tools for real-time, safety critical systems. As I wrote earlier I'm not sure whether any of these cracks ever made the net but were more a puzzle.

[JCJR]

Good quality, reasonable price and serial-number-only protection is about the only thing I will buy. I save the serial number in a text file, in the same folder holding the program, and back it up multiple places. Installing on a new machine is simple. Open the text file and copy the serial number, run the installer in that same folder, paste in the serial number, then go to the next program to install.

There are exceptions. Windows OS is a "user friendly" transparent challenge-response. Mostly invisible until something goes wrong, then you have to convince some fella at a MS call center that you are not a criminal, in order to get the OS running again. MS purt much has me over a barrel unless a legal, completely windows-compatible OS would come along with lower price and looser licensing restrictiions. Maybe I'd even pay a higher price for looser licensing restrictions. Am soured on MacOS and do not want to invest in learning unix good enough to replace winders.

Maybe people who think they can't do without protools would feel similarly "over a barrel" about Avid and its ecosystem partners.

Would have to desperately need a software to put up with challenge-response or web-based authorization. I have no hostility to those companies. I just don't need what they are selling.