You're not getting my MONEY! Buyer Beware!

[CoolP 283]

You've repeatedly called me a liar.

Not a single time, but if you mistrust my statements in the same way I do question your "numbers", you may get that impression. But, please beware, it has a two side presence then. :wink:So as long as I'm not complaining, you shouldn't do too. Since devs aren't persons being situated above all "normal guys", the protection (of our freedom to speak) therefore has the same amount. Lets keep it like this.Sir, trying to grab the victim role now is a more than obvious attempt to get rid of the need for some facts. Just wanted this to mention, in full heartiness.Maybe some readers join in now, stating how they are seeing your and my role here. I'm not blaming fellow forum members or insult them, this would be beyond my personal attitude. I'm just asking some (inconvenient?) questions while I answer things which I was asked. I'm calling this a discussion and matured people are able to hold some polite level there. In my view, I didn't fail and in my view, somebody now tries to leave the argument paths, using this "insult thing" as a protection, still avoiding to answer my questions.Clever? I don't know. But interesting to follow, that's for sure.The nature of these forums allow customers and devs to act outside the protected dev space (meaning devs forums, own rules there). Sometimes, this leads to some interesting discussions and we already had some of those threads in the last few days.So lets not abuse the nice and free 'on the same level' opportunity at Avsim by using this 'I'm so offended now' thingy. :wink:Stay on topic, I will too, as shown to be able so far.

[WarpD 824]

Not a single time, but if you mistrust my statements in the same way I do question your "numbers", you may get that impression. But, please beware, it has a two side presence then. :wink:So as long as I'm not complaining, you shouldn't do too. Since devs aren't persons being situated above all "normal guys", the protection (of our freedom to speak) therefore has the same amount. Lets keep it like this.Sir, trying to grab the victim role now is a more than obvious attempt to get rid of the need for some facts. Just wanted this to mention, in full heartiness.

No sir. You asked if we could provide information that indicates the value of copy protection. I did. You then stated you don't believe my statements to be true. That is in essence calling me a liar because you offer no evidence to refute the statements you just claim they're false.This forum is not free speech, nor is freedom of speech protected in any forum (seriously).You can 'spin' this however you like, but you have indeed crossed the line, repeatedly.You asked for information, it was provided. Unless you or anyone else can show the information to be inaccurate, it must be allowed to stand on it's own. That is the only way for any form of communication to function well. Your instant dismissal and personal slights towards myself is not proper discussion and fits better on a political forum, not AVSIM.

[ubersu 78]

..True! But since those check routines only catch the honest guys in "your" customer base while the other ones already got rid of the limits by applying a crack or something, one has to question the need and the experienced stress when using fancy protection stuff, right?I don't get the impression that those heavily checked customers are too happy about those 'are you still my friend' checks. Do you?That's not true - the checks very frequently catch folks who aren't in the customer base. Don't ask how; I won't tell you for obvious reasons. I don't in any way question the need for 'fancy protection stuff' as theft costs me time and money. I certainly don't have the impression that the vast majority of customers are unhappy with validation checks, or deeply stressed by them either, based on the very small sample in this forum. As Fr. Bill pointed out earlier in this thread there isn't a heck of a lot of cracked FS software actually floating around out there on the web and that situation is a direct result of validation checks. The problem of illegal distribution is caused, not by cracks, but by customers who can't resist sharing their legally obtained software with others who haven't purchased a license. That situation results in direct costs to us all, as a dev (non-FS software) it costs me direct income and increased overhead and it costs you a higher purchase price and more complicated validation schemes to compensate.DJ

[CoolP 283]

WarpD, are you trying to trigger a thread closure now? Just wondering.I suggested one, some posts before, because some statements from all sides where there and it was up to the reader to decide about true, not true, partially true and so on.I you like to leave the discussion now while trying to establish a victim role, that's ok with me.Your statements are still valid and they show your attitude, your facts, your knowledge, your believe and your policy in some very interesting span. That's all I could hope for and my statements and questions in between just stress your public picture some more.You've showed some class, especially at the end where some answers of yours where still lacking. I, honestly, thank you for that and may well leave you with the repeated suggestion to check some other companies on the market, those often named "B" ones with the happy customers, the basic protection and the good sleep (and, obviously, sales). :smile:There's some new Orbx stuff out, lets go and check it. Yes, I've bought it and always will do again.

The problem of illegal distribution is caused, not by cracks, but by customers who can't resist sharing their legally obtained software with others who haven't purchased a license.

I was just stressing the need to investigate in the reasons for this bad customer attitude. Building higher walls won't convince them, it never did so far.

That situation results in direct costs to us all

Can you name some of those costs? Roughly spoken? Would be a interesting and valuable input in this thread.What does a fancy protection thing cost the dev and what about the value then, when it gets cracked some two hours later as the basic one?Still believe that all links are 'dead'? Still believe that heavy protection slows down pirates for days, weeks, months?Seems like and, yes, I respect that viewpoint but I really can't follow it.I'm a reader only when it comes to your statements, not a believer assured.

[WarpD 824]

WarpD, are you trying to trigger a thread closure now? Just wondering.I suggested one, some posts before, because some statements from all sides where there and it was up to the reader to decide about true, not true, partially true and so on.I you like to leave the discussion now while trying to establish a victim role, that's ok with me.Your statements are still valid and they show your attitude, your facts, your knowledge, your believe and your policy in some very interesting span. That's all I could hope for and my statements and questions in between just stress your public picture some more.You've showed some class, especially at the end where some answers of yours where still lacking. I, honestly, thank you for that and may well leave you with the repeated suggestion to check some other companies on the market, those often named "B" ones with the happy customers, the basic protection and the good sleep (and, obviously, sales). :smile:There's some new Orbx stuff out, lets go and check it.

Eaglesoft, whom I have developed for, uses the Flight1 wrapper. It is easy and fairly painless for the customer. It also has installation limits. A vast majority of customers would disagree that the installation limits are 'instrusive'. I think you're just crying foul and making much ado about nothing.As for 'leaving the thread'... your wanting that does actually violate the freedoms we both enjoy in this forum. Imagine that. :(

I was just stressing the need to investigate in the reasons for this bad customer attitude. Building higher walls won't convince them, it never did so far.Can you name some of those costs? Roughly spoken? Would be a interesting and valuable input in this thread.What does a fancy protection thing cost the dev and what about the value then, when it gets cracked some two hours later as the basic one?

To investigate why one chooses to be dishonest is a job for a psychologist, not a software developer. It's not a 'bad attitude', it's a lack of good moral ground. Plain and simple.As for costs, no we're not about to open our financial books to anyone. Copy protection itself is no more expensive than the actual product development as it's used across multiple projects and thus automatically defrays the cost to a negligble level. Also... quality copy protection (of which I've written for FS addons) takes a great, great deal longer than 2 hours to crack. Try a minimum of 12 months, for each addon.

[ubersu 78]

...I was just stressing the need to investigate in the reasons for this bad customer attitude. Building higher walls won't convince them, it never did so far.Can you name some of those costs? Roughly spoken? Would be a interesting and valuable input in this thread.What does a fancy protection thing cost the dev and what about the value then, when it gets cracked some two hours later as the basic one?

I have no interest in convincing them - my job is to make their actions as difficult to accomplish and easy to detect as possible. If they were so deeply put out with these schemes they wouldn't purchase protected software; the market shows that they do.The last piece of work I was involved with cost the company around 25K in time and testing. It hasn't been cracked yet and I don't expect it to be cracked in the near future for many reasons. Note that your 'two hours later' figure is completely off the wall - as noted in my earlier post most FS software hasn't been cracked and isn't available as such.DJ

[CoolP 283]

Eaglesoft, whom I have developed for, uses the Flight1 wrapper. It is easy and fairly painless for the customer. It also has installation limits. A vast majority of customers would disagree that the installation limits are 'instrusive'. I think you're just crying foul and making much ado about nothing.As for 'leaving the thread'... your wanting that does actually violate the freedoms we both enjoy in this forum. Imagine that. :(

You wanted to leave or wanted me to go or wanted the mods to close the thing. I was just stating this impression. Wrong? Sorry, honestly.So lets continue on the logical side, shall we?You've mentioned the nice handling (I did already stress that) F1 method. I've bought quite some stuff there but, this may shock you, never liked the limits or the protection on those buys.So, as you see, I can question or even complain about a thing in general while still being able to say that this particularly example at least shows some nice handling way of heavy protection.Doesn't affect my overall critics on the heavy stuff though. In fact, it once again shows how the customer is forced to "support" ideas. If you want to fly that thing in the sim, you have to go through (easy handling, at least) pain. If you then have gone through it, you will be counted in as a supporter of the idea. Can't do anything about it. Nice trick.Sure, you could leave the product out or become a pirate in this case. Are those the opportunities a customer dreams of? Still doubts on my side.As pointed out before, if a guy has the opportunity to choose the sympathetic dev and the other one, he may choose the symapthetic one, with the easy and basic protection. I prefer to do this as often as I'm able to. Viewpoint ok and free of insulting things? I hope so.

[Gazzareth 808]

Looks more like a case of believing what you are supposed to believe. Are you politically interested by the way? The statements of the mentioned devs lack of facts. There isn't a single valid proof for this one.

I have no affiliation to any dev, other than being a happy customer of all of the devs that have contributed to this thread.Throughout this thread you have stated your opinion to be "fact" and criticised anyone else who has an alternative opinion, or access to more insider knowledge and able to give a reason as to why they do what they do.Copy protection purely by serial number is no copy protection at all, unless it is verified and tracked online. If it takes a couple of extra steps to activate or reactivate a product when it is reinstalled - in my case that has happened twice in the years I have been using FSX then I hardly think that constitutes HEAVY copy protection. Unless of course you are charged for the pleasure or forced to spend a ridiculous amount of time waiting to get it done.G

[Tabs 2,790]

Our MD-11 was cracked something like a day or two after it was released. Our J41 took something like 2 & 1/2 months after we put a better protection system on it. (one that's actually far less intrusive to the customer than the MD-11 one was I might add too) I'm sure Mr. CooIP here won't believe this, but the J41's sales were FAR better. We absolutely do attribute a lot of this to the fact that there wasn't a torrent with 20,000 combined leechers and seeders on it within days of the release like there was when the MD-11 came out. Yes, there are people out there who will wait for the crack and steal it regardless of how long it takes, but there are also people who were intending to pirate but will get sick of waiting and just pay for it if the product is not cracked soon enough. They get impatient because they see others talking about how great it is, they see their friends flying it online, and so on. While impossible to "exactly" quantify, this is a very real phenomenon and it can mean the difference between having funding for the next product and going out of business. Had our J41 not sold, I likely would not be here right now telling you this. Until you've put your own time (countless hours in our case) into developing and testing products only to have to contemplate things like the above as you watch the numbers of people stealing your work on a torrent skyrocket, I don't expect that you'll ever understand the rationale those of us who have do for wanting at least some assurance that our work isn't going to be stolen on the same day we release it. It's very easy to go on some ideological crusade about this issue when your own livelihood isn't affected by the consequences of what you're saying.

[CoolP 283]

Note that your 'two hours later' figure is completely off the wall - as noted in my earlier post most FS software hasn't been cracked and isn't available as such.

If you say so. Note from my side: One of your (also?) commercial members (from your statements, you seem to be one, but you aren't marked as one, that's why I'm mentioning it) would have interpreted that 'off the wall' statement as a very insulting thing, I guess.So my tolerance may come in handy, leaving your viewpoint and "facts" open to the readers, just as mine.Now that's why I call freedom and each one of us may differ in knowledge, awareness and ability to prove/disprove things.I can only suggest to start wondering about all that fancy (means the heavy things only) protection stuff if they get cracked either way and much sooner as some of you commercials may think.Type "B" companies show that you can maintain a whole and successful business without them (means basic protection only) and they would never even run the risk of getting into a discussion with annoying guys like me about their protection thingies. If your or WarpD's mood aren't a clear sign of all that stress coming with the usage of your wonderful protection stuff, I wonder what should convince people more.

I'm sure Mr. CooIP here won't believe this

I'm believing everything and nothing at the same time. Just doing investigations like you guys may do too and, therefore, I'm always up for some interesting statements and facts, no doubt.Pushing me in the cliché corner isn't a valid way of discussing, but it happens, as seen.The problem of this sentence (part)

but the J41's sales were FAR better.

is that you can't relate the better sales to the better protection. You're assuming that the protection had an influence there but the only valid prove would be to start at the same market, with the same product and at the same time. One with heavy and one with basic protection only. (Note the lack of the 'no protection' variant in my statement).Since this isn't possible (or is it?), you may come to catch my point why I question some "valid" numbers, even their existence.

It's very easy to go on some ideological crusade about this issue like this when your own livelihood isn't affected by the consequences of what you're saying.

Another assumption there. What exactly do you know about my 'livehood" and background and how are those items affecting a clear and valid statement then?Ryan, in case you get me wrong, I'm not speaking about 'no protection here' (never did so far) and I'm not for a single second questioning that it is a sad moment to watch one's work getting copied.The point and tenor of my statement still is that the run for better protection methods seems to distract quite some devs from their main source of money, motivation and, if you like, future. Talking about their (happy!) costumer basis and not about a protection method, forcing people to smile all the time when they are forced to active their new buy.You, so far, did not raise any thoughts of mine for being a somehow negatively biased and overall mistrusting guy. I've got that impression at some of your colleagues though and this is just a very personal viewpoint.I'm therefore not harming any of your livehood sources, I'm just speaking about them as you would speak about the policy of another company or even social group.I still believe that this is a valid and reasonable thing to do. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[ubersu 78]

If you say so. Note from my side: One of your (also?) commercial members (from your statements, you seem to be one, but you aren't marked as one, that's why I'm mentioning it) would have interpreted that 'off the wall' statement as a very insulting thing, I guess.So my tolerance may come in handy, leaving your viewpoint and "facts" open to the readers, just as mine.Now that's why I call freedom and each one of us may differ in knowledge, awareness and ability to prove/disprove things.I can only suggest to start wondering about all that fancy (means the heavy things only) protection stuff if they get cracked either way and much sooner as some of you commercials may think.Type "B" companies show that you can maintain a whole and successful business without them (means basic protection only) and they would never even run the risk of getting into a discussion with annoying guys like me about their protection thingies. If your or WarpD's mood aren't a clear sign of all that stress coming with the usage of your wonderful protection stuff, I wonder what should convince people more.

I do say so - my comment with regard to your 'two hours' as off the wall also stands; you have no data whatsoever to back that up; I do, and avsim commercial members do. Had WarpD or any other commercial member made such a statement I would have called them on it in a heartbeat. I am not marked as a commercial member of avsim because I have nothing to do with the flightsim market except as a consumer. I suspect the readers will have no difficulty in discerning the facts.DJ

[N400QW 205]

WarpD, are you trying to trigger a thread closure now? Just wondering.Can you name some of those costs? Roughly spoken? Would be a interesting and valuable input in this thread.

CoolIP, you appear to have an inordinate and uncompelling interest in the actual inside information of various businesss entities.I'll be very clear. Such an interest on your part does not equate to an obligation to provide such information by any individual or development house.Having witnessed more than one thread regarding the tension between customers and vendors of either internet based, or brick and mortor business activity it is predictable that one or more participants will indeed overstep and cause the demise of this one as well.The various views have all been posted and eventually all will tire of this exercise in futility.:( :(

[CoolP 283]

I do say so - my comment with regard to your 'two hours' as off the wall also stands; you have no data whatsoever to back that up; I do, and avsim commercial members do. Had WarpD or any other commercial member made such a statement I would have called them on it in a heartbeat. I am not marked as a commercial member of avsim because I have nothing to do with the flightsim market except as a consumer. I suspect the readers will have no difficulty in discerning the facts.DJ

I think that the readers feel fine to follow some discussion. Wasn't complaining about your status, just wondering.I would mark you as 'commercial' (which isn't a bad thing at all) though since you're talking business matters now while I may be forced to just sit back and listen.Numbers .. the only valid number that comes to my mind now is the one of spoiled customers or the ones of the 'not so happy but still using the thing' ones (no other choice there, if you want to stay legal, must be the force some guys spoke of).As far as I could see, this thread collects quite some of them while, sadly, yours seem to stay in their "confidential" state. No problem with that. Just don't expect them to be as convincing as you may think they are.Still a valid and open (=repeated) question: What about the numbers of the other devs, with the basic protection only? Do they fail to interpret them or do they think about them in the way I think about your confidential ones?Could be that they don't spend as much time on investigating things like you guys do. This may lead to more time on the product, I guess.Looks, from my naive customer viewpoint, as a win for me as the product output at e. g. Orbx is way higher than at some more protected places while really showing top notch quality.I've said this before, I know, but this high and quality output is a main factor for good business numbers, happy customers (they protect you too, remember?) and no pointless piracy concerns (can't change much there, at least not with protection) in my eyes.N400QW, I really got that confidential point of yours. Although the wording now sounds impressively business like, if not political. I'm ok with the not telling thing, but only pointed out that trying to convince people with things you can't tell them sometimes fails.As said, the mentalities and fact basis' being used already showed up in this thread and I have to admit that we may be running in circles now since only the dev's name changes from time to time while the variation number stays close to 3 or so (some are watching more or less silently though, just from looking the name list under this thread and not knowing about their attitude of course. Are they smiling?).May the readers decide which one of us sounds more convincing. My viewpoint is far away from pirate clichés, this should have been emerged so far.Everyone got his point and opportunity so far and I'm not up to turn this thing into a 'please explain to me, exclusively' thread now (if it isn't already).So, if you want to get rid of some more clear or not so clear things, go ahead but focus on some new stuff. Otherwise the new Orbx release will eventually be my next item to look at.

[WarpD 824]

Looks, from my naive customer viewpoint, as a win for me as the product output at e. g. Orbx is way higher than at some more protected places while really showing top notch quality.I've said this before, I know, but this high and quality output is a main factor for good business numbers, happy customers (they protect you too, remember?) and no pointless piracy concerns (can't change much there, at least not with protection) in my eyes.

Do you really think that the time involved for designing one type of addon is even remotely the same as that required for developing another type of addon? Really?Oh, and I don't know if Orbx checks their piracy levels or not... but I have, and it's not pretty.

[CoolP 283]

Oh, and I don't know if Orbx checks their piracy levels or not... but I have, and it's not pretty.

Yeah, we may agree there and some outlooks for maybe making things better were already given. That 'we need more!' protection thing runs since decades now and hasn't helped. Time to think about it, huh?Oh, some question up there.Now, I don't think that devoting time to fancy (but pointless) protection mechanisms increases the quality of the product or the happiness of the customers, therefore sales. Does that help? :blush:Guys, my girlfriend hates me for doing this long discussion here.Since that last question seemed very much like a 'CoolP, go around in circles some more, we have understood your things but are hoping you fail on turning' I really have to leave now.We may all agree that there's more than money and the protection of things out there.I'm glad that this thread turned into some interesting read for allow current and future customers.I'm still with the type "B" companies as they establish the best value and confidence on my side while still staying protected of course. Your mileage may vary and I will respect that.I also respect some dev's viewpoints here, it's just .. I don't understand them. If things go on developing here ( in this thread) I will surely be back to take some burden or drop in another question. So beware.Stepped on somebody's feet so far? Ehm, relocatiing weight now.