kkrueger@zeus.unomaha.edu (03/09/91)
About a week ago I downloaded LZ 1.01 from a local BBS, and found out that it was crippleware in that the program won't process files larger than 60K. Just today I downloaded LZ 2.00 from NASA and saw nothing stating that it was crippled. In fact, it said that it was in the public domain. The documen- tation also did not even mention the existence of an LZ 1.01. When I tried to use it on a file larger than 60K, however, I got this message: This version of LZ will process files larger or smaller than 60000 bytes This, to me, says it is not crippled, but the program refuses to function. I also find it strange that if this program is crippled, it does not explicitly say so, and it does not give the author's address or ask for money. LZ 1.01 did. So, my question is: What's going on here? Thanks in advance. -- Kurt Krueger | BITNET: kkrueger@unoma1 | //\ MBA student | Internet: kkrueger@zeus.unomaha.edu | \X/--\ M I G A --
jma@beach.cis.ufl.edu (John 'Vlad' Adams) (03/10/91)
LZ 2.0 is a pirated copy of LZ 1.0. The current highest version of LZ to *registered* owners is 1.03. All versions of LZ since 1.0 which are not registered are gonig to be crippled. $10 for the shareware registration fee is *quite* reasonable, especially with the speed that LZ compress and uncompresses at. So, LZ 2.0 needs to be deleted from ab20. -- John M. Adams --****-- Professional Student /// Internet: jma@reef.cis.ufl.edu Genie: vlad /// Only the Amiga Sysop of The Beachside, Amiga BBS, Paragon 2.0858 \\V// Makes it Possible Fido Net 1:3612/557. 904-492-2305 (Florida) \X/
umturne4@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Daryl Turner) (03/10/91)
In article <10226.27d7ba10@zeus.unomaha.edu> kkrueger@zeus.unomaha.edu writes: > > About a week ago I downloaded LZ 1.01 from a local BBS, and found out that >it was crippleware in that the program won't process files larger than 60K. >Just today I downloaded LZ 2.00 from NASA and saw nothing stating that it was >crippled. In fact, it said that it was in the public domain. The documen- >tation also did not even mention the existence of an LZ 1.01. When I tried to >use it on a file larger than 60K, however, I got this message: > >This version of LZ will process files larger or smaller than 60000 bytes > >This, to me, says it is not crippled, but the program refuses to function. I >also find it strange that if this program is crippled, it does not explicitly >say so, and it does not give the author's address or ask for money. LZ 1.01 >did. So, my question is: What's going on here? Thanks in advance. > LZ 2.0 doesn't officially exist, at least as far as the author, Jonathon Forbes is concerned. LZ is still very much a shareware product, with the unregistered version only being capable of handling 60K files or smaller. LZ 2.0 is very much similar to VirusX6.0, someone has gone in, made a few changes and claimed the product as theirs. =============================================================== Daryl Turner Internet: umturne4@ccu.umanitoba.ca Urrrrrggghhhh!, What a RRRRRUSH! -Road Warrior Hawk, The Legion of Doom
chucks@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Erik Funkenbusch) (03/11/91)
jma@beach.cis.ufl.edu (John 'Vlad' Adams) writes: >LZ 2.0 is a pirated copy of LZ 1.0. The current highest version >of LZ to *registered* owners is 1.03. All versions of LZ since >1.0 which are not registered are gonig to be crippled. >$10 for the shareware registration fee is *quite* reasonable, >especially with the speed that LZ compress and uncompresses at. Well, Johnathan Forbes and I had a long drawn out discussion on this. I blew up at him, he got defensive, etc.. basically i felt that there was NO way for me to fully test LZ 1.0 when it is crippleware for me to determine if it met my needs or not. since i had seen FAR too many buggy products from Johnathan himself. I pointed out terrible corrupting bugs in LZ .91 that trashed a friends hard drive and created bad archives under 030 Machines with data Caches on. and he refused to believe they exhist. in my book, any programmer that refuses to believe a bug report has sealed his doom. I wasn't about to purchase LZ 1.0 until i knew these bugs were gone. he accused me of not wanting to pay for shareware and other nasties. He finally admited that maybe the crippleware was a bad idea, and that further revisions wouldn't have it. but then again, maybe he changed his mind (again).. I just don't have any respect for the many anymore. > >So, LZ 2.0 needs to be deleted from ab20. >-- >John M. Adams --****-- Professional Student /// >Internet: jma@reef.cis.ufl.edu Genie: vlad /// Only the Amiga >Sysop of The Beachside, Amiga BBS, Paragon 2.0858 \\V// Makes it Possible >Fido Net 1:3612/557. 904-492-2305 (Florida) \X/ UUCP: {amdahl!tcnet, crash}!orbit!pnet51!chucks ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!chucks@nosc.mil INET: chucks@pnet51.orb.mn.org
hb136@leah.albany.edu (Herb Brown) (03/12/91)
In article <1991Mar10.091654.29680@ccu.umanitoba.ca> umturne4@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Daryl Turner) writes: > >LZ 2.0 doesn't officially exist, at least as far as the author, Jonathon >Forbes is concerned. LZ is still very much a shareware product, with >the unregistered version only being capable of handling 60K files or >smaller. LZ 2.0 is very much similar to VirusX6.0, someone has gone >in, made a few changes and claimed the product as theirs. > >=============================================================== >Daryl Turner >Internet: umturne4@ccu.umanitoba.ca >Urrrrrggghhhh!, What a RRRRRUSH! -Road Warrior Hawk, The Legion of Doom Version 2.0 of LZ may be found on ff465. Is this different from the pgm you are referring to? Herb
sacc@jove.cs.pdx.edu (Melinda Saccareccia) (03/13/91)
>LZ 2.0 doesn't officially exist, at least as far as the author, Jonathon >Forbes is concerned. LZ is still very much a shareware product, with >the unregistered version only being capable of handling 60K files or >smaller. LZ 2.0 is very much similar to VirusX6.0, someone has gone >in, made a few changes and claimed the product as theirs. The problem with this explanation is that LZ 2.0 really does extract faster.