Archived from groups: alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim (
More info?)
"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:25D4e.1419$An2.1136@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Dudley Henriques"
>> I'm doing a bit of research on Cloud 9's activation system
>
> To me it's not enough to make me say I wouldn't buy the product. The
> reality is that you generally don't make that many changes to your
> hardware
> once you're set up and it sounds like the occasional change is automated.
>
> (If you guys haven't noticed I find software security a fascinating
> subject... Yeah, I know... "Get a life!"..
No, your life is fine Dal.
)
This is going to be a real issue for the industry down the line. It effects
me peripherally because I have to evaluate installation procedure for the
aircraft I review as part of a review.
The issue is quite complicated really and goes deeper than it appears on the
surface.
On one hand, the developers have every right to protect their time, creative
talent, and product. On the other hand, the end user has a right to own
without restriction something paid for in good faith.
This installation procedure is going to be extremely controversial with some
people. I personally don't like it. The readme on this reads like a severe
rental contract rather than a simple sales receipt. It's extremely
proprietary in nature and places many restrictions on the user. Some will
like it and some won't. I'm in the negative column on it, but I want to
treat it objectively and with other people's opinions in mind if I have to
write on it somewhere down the road and I'm fairly certain I will. Getting
this feed back on it helps me a great deal, as even though I don't like this
system myself, I want to be completely fair to a hard working developer
whose rights and ligitimate concerns about software proliferation I
completely understand and agree with.
Dudley