lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell) (05/07/91)
In article <3111@krafla.rhi.hi.is> frisk@rhi.hi.is (Fridrik Skulason) writes: > >Well, I am the author of a fairly successful anti-virus program (which >was just posted on c.b.i.p.) and it not crippled or has any registration >reminders other than a few lines in the documentation. In fact, the only >difference between this program and the full version which is available in some >countries is the lack of a printed manual and a lower level of support. > >Do I get registrations ? Hopefully you will get more. Why is it MOST shareware writers seem to ENJOY making things difficult to install and use? Put any dates in the code, mess with my AUTOEXEC.BAT or CONFIG.SYS files and I will swiftly remove your product from my machine. MOST SHAREWARE IS JUNK! Too bad so many authors refuse to acknowledge this and try to understand WHY users feel this way...might improve the breed. There ARE, however some real gems in the shareware business...enough so that it is IMHO worth wading through the garbage that is spewed out. I register any shareware I use....as do most of my acquaintances. > >If I get a request for a new feature, I evaluate it regardless of whether >the person requesting it is registered or not, and even if he is not, I >will send him an update if I add the feature. A tip of the hat to you sir....although I haven't seen your products, you appear to have the right attitude. Although I think a free copy is overdoing it, most programmers are so antagonistic to suggestions that they deserve the type of criticism they get.
kds@physics (Kevin Stokes) (05/07/91)
In article <154598@pyramid.pyramid.com> lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell) writes: ...stuff deleted > Put any dates in the code, mess with my AUTOEXEC.BAT or > CONFIG.SYS files and I will swiftly remove your product from > my machine. > I wouldn't want my autoexec.bat or config.sys messed with either, but why would you object to a program keeping track of the date, by re-writeing its own .EXE file? This is the scheme I use in my shareware product. I think it works well, because it doesn't nag the user, and lets them try the full featured product for a reasonable period. I will also say from experience, that shareware with no protection brings in almost nothing. The trick is to put the protection in, but in a way that doesn't annoy users. -- Kevin Stokes Duke University Dept. of Physics kds@phy.duke.edu Durham, N.C. 27706
lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell) (05/08/91)
In article <22247@duke.cs.duke.edu> kds@physics.phy.duke.edu (Kevin Stokes) writes: > I wouldn't want my autoexec.bat or config.sys messed with either, >but why would you object to a program keeping track of the date, by >re-writeing its own .EXE file? > This is the scheme I use in my shareware product. I think it works >well, because it doesn't nag the user, and lets them try the full featured >product for a reasonable period. > I will also say from experience, that shareware with no protection brings >in almost nothing. The trick is to put the protection in, but in a way >that doesn't annoy users. > > You are a writer, I am a user. We might just have drastically different opinions on what is or is not annoying. Your experience is counter to my practice or that of most acquaintances. Perhaps we all tend to pay for GOOD shareware because we are "in the business" of computers....and possibly also because it is pretty rare. If you DO put in expiration, it sure would be nice to note it in REAL big letters when you first fire up the program. The consequences of expiration should be polite and benign. Overwriting ANY file on a drive could result in some pretty ticklish legal issues....and most corporate buyers won't tolerate this kind of software. You might try what some commercial vendors do....unregistered software is strictly demo grade. You would restrict the scale of capabilities or the ability to save useful work. (Why corporate buyers tolerate this rather than the "Too Bad, Code Expired" type software is a mystery to me as well...) Some more pet peeves: (I am not accusing you of these, but it is really discouraging how many shareware authors cannot deal with humans...and their programs show it.) o If I need to input filenames to run a program, the least you can do is allow me to request a directory (and change drives, etc.) from WITHIN your program. If I have to exit to do this, your source floppies get formatted. o If I want to view info about you, this program, and your registration procedures, I'll expect to look in a file called "Foo.info" or AboutFoo. Put it on my screen unsolicited and I get annoyed. Make me sit thru this every time I run the program and floppies >> dev/null again. I will admit that creative, particularly animated, adverts while you load up files or initialize resources do get more than a few points. o I bought a mouse and joystick because I don't LIKE carpal tunnel syndrome. Don't attempt to cause it by pretending you don't know what these devices are! o When I attempt to exit, unless I have work in progress that I have forgotten to save, I usually mean I want to exit. I know that you really feel that the only proper persuit of man is to spend time using your program, but asking me to confirm a request to cease this frivolity is really quite annoying. o RAther than mess with my environment files, how about noting the needed changes and let ME make them? We might just have differing ideas about how we would like to run our computers. Off soapbox. _ /| \'o.O' =(___)= U THPTH! ACKHH! Support Bill the Cat in the president's War against MS/DOS!
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/08/91)
In article <22247@duke.cs.duke.edu> kds@physics.phy.duke.edu (Kevin Stokes) writes: > I will also say from experience, that shareware with no protection brings > in almost nothing. The trick is to put the protection in, but in a way > that doesn't annoy users. you mean "shareware with no benefit for registration". Me, I send the source code when people register Browser. Works fine, for a hobby. Wouldn't want to make a iving at it, though. -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/08/91)
In article <154724@pyramid.pyramid.com> lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell) writes: > o If I need to input filenames to run a program, the least > you can do is allow me to request a directory (and change > drives, etc.) from WITHIN your program. If I have to exit > to do this, your source floppies get formatted. If you're writing for a machine that provides file requestor capabilities, or for which free file requestors are plentiful, use them. If you're on the Amiga I can send you a copy of mine: it's functionally equivalent to the 2.0 requestor, and a lot less annoying on floppy based systems than ARP. > o If I want to view info about you, this program, and your > registration procedures, I'll expect to look in a file > called "Foo.info" or AboutFoo. Or pull down "about". If you have animations while you're loading, put them in a file (IFF on the Amiga) so I can delete them... and don't barf if your pretty pictures are missing. > o I bought a mouse and joystick because I don't LIKE > carpal tunnel syndrome. Don't attempt to cause it by > pretending you don't know what these devices are! Are you sure that this will help? I've been lately suffering from some sort of repetitive strain injury (not CTS), and mousing around is a great way to trigger it. I've been finding out just how bad I am at mousing with my left hand, and I'm glad AmigaOS 2.0 supports mouse acceleration. Back to the subject, joysticks are particularly bad for RSE. You might just be trading "Hacker's Hand" for "Pac-man Elbow". -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
john@newave.UUCP (John A. Weeks III) (05/09/91)
In article <154598@pyramid.pyramid.com> lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com writes: > In article <3111@krafla.rhi.hi.is> frisk@rhi.hi.is writes: > > Well, I am the author of a fairly successful anti-virus program [...] > MOST SHAREWARE IS JUNK! Too bad so many authors refuse to > acknowledge this and try to understand WHY users feel this > way...might improve the breed. You must be using the wrong kind of computer. There is an incredible amount of truely great shareware programs available for the Mac. There are also a lot of equally great freeware, beerware, and hapiware programs. I bet there is no "Net Bunny" for the peece. > Put any dates in the code, mess with my AUTOEXEC.BAT or > CONFIG.SYS files and I will swiftly remove your product from > my machine. Yes, that confirms it. No real computer needs ".BAT" or ".SYS" files. -john- -- ============================================================================= John A. Weeks III (612) 942-6969 john@newave.mn.org NeWave Communications, Ltd. ...uunet!tcnet!newave!john
buckland@ucs.ubc.ca (Tony Buckland) (05/09/91)
A lot of postings on this subject have recounted the outrageous demands users make on the authors of these practically-free programs. But I think the chutzpah prize has to go to the frequent posters on other comp. groups who ask for public-domain database management systems and language compilers, all state-of-the-art of course.