Piracy protection and common sense

[eslader 1,774]

5 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

All they do is make it more difficult for legitimate owners to install their products.

And the trouble there is that it *encourages* piracy, because if someone's not worried about the ethics, and buying the product means they have to jump through a lot of annoying hoops to use the product whereas stealing the product means they can use it without effort...

Some companies don't seem to be aware that harassing their legitimate customers isn't the best way to combat theft.

 

[flyforever 267]

After my first post, the developer contacted me, offering to help me bring things to normal via Teamview. This was Saturday, a day in which most developers do not provide support.

I kindly explained to him that I did not want to use TeamView. I preferred to do it via written communication, since I am quite capable of navigating folders and files, especially if the problem is in my computer.

This morning I received written instructions on how to reset a number of items in my folders. Sure enough, the aircraft started right up. It took a total of 5 minutes, and I was up and running again.

In my happy reply to the developer, I suggested that perhaps providing the customer the option to either follow written instructions or use TeamView might be helpful when they first receive the support notice. All they had to do is ask the customer.

I am sure that, in my case, this issue would have been solved on day one.

I don't know why the developer prefers this method or perhaps it will change in the future.

I stand by my initial decision to keep the names out and in my belief that serious developers pay attention to what customers say. The fact that I had been operating the aircraft trouble free, even when getting updates, told me that they stand behind their product.

As to whether this incident changes their piracy protection practices remains to be seen. A lot of time was wasted.

In sum, I'd like to think that several lessons were learned by all participants, and from this our hobby moves forward in a positive manner.

tc

[Ray Proudfoot 8,919]

Glad it has worked out for you. I suspect I know which company you're referring to now as the main man there has also used TeamViewer to assist me with a problem some years ago.

I hope they take your complaint onboard and think about how they handled it. There is room for improvement certainly.

[dave2013 1,123]

On 2/11/2019 at 10:25 AM, dave2013 said:

Last year I informed the developers of some aircraft that it would be helpful if they removed the requirement to use another developer's addon manager in order to use their product.  I received no reply.

Therefore, I will not be buying any more products from them until they change this unwieldy software authentication/installation requirement.

I have no problem with online authentication, i.e. checking your info and license or serial# against their database of legitimate users, or simply requiring the input of a code for the installer/wrapper, but I find it amusing how some of these software developers go out of their way to protect their products from piracy by implementing annoying anti-piracy schemes like the one these amateurs are using.  All they do is make it more difficult for legitimate owners to install their products.  They do not protect it from piracy at all.  Almost any software can be illegally downloaded and "cracked", i.e. the authentication process bypassed or tricked.

Amateurs, pure and simple.

 

Dave 

 

Wanted to provide an update on this:  I just reinstalled one of this developer's aircraft the other day and they have switched to Flight1's wrapper and installer system, so no more addon manager required in order to use it.

Thanks a lot to the devs on this who must have been listening to those of us who complained about this.

Dave