Why are we never allowed to demo payware?

[Ray Proudfoot 8,924]

Hi Par,If you've bought payware and found your system isn't capable of running it well I'm afraid that's down to you. You should research the product and read discussions from others who've bought it. Reviewers try to be objective and I believe they do a good job.As for your comment about downloading a pirate copy that is outrageous. You're committing theft and possibly causing the demise of the company producing the software. If that happens we all lose.Some companies do provide a way of you evaluating software before committing to a purchase. Have a look at FSDreamTeam here http://www.fsdreamteam.com/products.html who provide 10 minutes for you to evaluate Zurich.

[oqvist 11]

I have never mentioned that I download payware you have to read better. Just reread my posts I think you will understand :)Also it

[Ray Proudfoot 8,924]

Hi Par,In your first message you said If we don

[ubersu 78]

You said -<

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"Also it

[Guest zzmikezz]

jskorna and JohnCiWhat was totally uncalled for? I was responding to the following statement by Oqvist in the post #9 immediately preceding my post #10 ..."If you then want to demo you have to pirate it or just not buy the product of course."So there isn't even a need to presume that he condones piracy, he just said that not only does he condone it, he URGES it. He wrote what he wrote in post #9 and if it contradicts he wrote in an earlier post in this thread, that's too bad. No, I hadn't read what he wrote before #9 -- I didn't need to.Again, read his #9 words ... "If you want to demo you have to pirate it ..." This is not true, the Flight1 wrapper proves that statement to be false.Yes, I inferred a motive of supporting piracy. I always do when people say "See? The developers and publishers leave us not choice but to commit piracy under circumstances that we, the pirates, will decide are warranted."Jim,You have a long history of taking the position that Hi-Fi has nothing to worry about, and you do it in a way that clearly implies that nobody else does either. I could speculate from now till the cows come home why you folks take that position but it doesn't matter because ...a) You folks have every right to expose yourselves to piracy for any reason you see fit,while:( Other developers and publishers have every right to try to protect themselves agains piracy, for any reasons they see fit.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxYou type the words that indicate you don't condone piracy either. Yet when somebody (me) comes along and espouses position :( you often immediately criticize them. But I've never seen you throw down against a Big Gun like Ron Hamilton, Jim. Ron reaches the same conclusions that I do when people write the kinds of things that Ogvist did.So the only thing that you can take issue with is my style. Well, too bad. I express my opinions forcefully so that people won't think I'm saying something like "I'm against piracy but on the other hand I'm opposed to speaking in favor of anti-piracy measures, and I'm opposed to calling obvious pirate supporters 'pirates'."xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxBy the way, Jim, have you noticed that you can no longer play YouTube music videos from either Firefox or Internet Explorer? (Certainly all three of my computers cannot.) You get a popup saying that a FLash Player update is required but this presumably is some kind of false conclusion browsers are reaching because, at least on my computers, the Flash Player update does not make the music videos playable. (Other kinds of YouTube videos remain playable with or without the Flash Player update.)This is the music industry at work, Jim, the very approach I was recommending that you kept implying could never work -- hitting the pirates where they are most vulnerable, which is the ISP points of presence.If I get frustrated it's because of a) people like Oqvist who don't even have the courtesy to practice their vile trade under cover of darkness, and :( people like you who say "Honesty " -- which was the very statement of yours back in November that triggered my public discourse on this general subject. (You don't deny making that statement, do you?)xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSo I'll ask my question again, guys. What aspect of my post #10 was totally uncalled for?

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"So I'll ask my question again, guys. What aspect of my post #10 was totally uncalled for?"When someone posts......"Obviously you're fronting for one of the piracy sites and are doing some PR"Edit: ...and add this comment:"Will it be enough to get you to stop stealing? Or will you instead remain interested only in warez?".....they better make sure they have all their ducks in a row. I've seen lesser comments construed as libel. If you don't think that was uncalled for then I don't know what boundaries cannot be crossed here anymore. Capice?JC

[DadJokeCinema 145]

That's ridiculous.I'm watching a music video on youtube on Firefox right now. Trust me, it's you, not the music industry.

[Guest zzmikezz]

You're absolutely right, John.Let me remove the libelous aspect by inserting the words "In my opinion" before the statement you found offensive. By making this correction it is now absolutely factual because that is in fact my opinion.Thus, Oqvist, I retract my earlier statement and hereby offer a pubic apology for it. Similarly, I publically apologize for any other statement your or anybody else found to be offensive.Just behave as if I had inserted the words "In my opinion", as I am now going to do below in rewriting my post #10 ...xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxoqvist,Okay, I'll come out and play ...xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxIn my opinion you are fronting for one of the piracy sites and are doing some PR to try to get more of the public on your side. So I'll counter with the following ...Golly gee whiz, oqvist, didn't you know that every product sold by Flight1, and that every product sold elsewhere that uses the Flight1 "wrapper" protection scheme, has a 30 day no questions asked refund policy?xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxIn my opinion I have a right to ask the following rhetorical questions ... What's that? You mean you actually didn't know? Well, now you do know?And now that you know, aren't you glad? Tell us how you feel about this new information. Will it be enough to get you to stop engaging in endorsing the practice of what, in my opinion, is stealing? Or will you instead remain interested only in warez as, in my opinion, may very well be your posture?xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNow ... If somebody wants to delete my posts, or lock the thread, or delete the thread, or ban me from the site, that's fine. I will not stand idly by while people who are, in my opinion, aiding and abetting pirates, get treated with kid gloves.

[oqvist 11]

I am not even wasting energy on you Mike. I am sorry you failed... I am going to have to report your post though and urge you to remove all the comments about me being a pirate, stealing or whatever you try with.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"You're absolutely right, John.Let me remove the libelous aspect by inserting the words "In my opinion" before the statement you found offensive. By making this correction it is now absolutely factual because that is in fact my opinion."Kind of a day late and a dollar short, and seems to ring hollow in my "opinion". You knew what you wrote in that response and the damage was done, in my opinion.'Nuff said

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

"Obviously you're fronting for one of the piracy sites and are doing some PR to try to get more of the public on your side. So I'll counter with the following ..."OVER THE TOP Mike. You are jumping to conclusions and in so doing, calling someone a pirate without foundation. You may put 2 + 2 together and get 5, but not everyone would jump to that conclusion. Cease and desist.I am now locking this thread.