|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Ray:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>You said it straight. I hope, but don't
expect, Equis to pay attention.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Copy protection schemes are much less secure
(relatively speaking) than unbreakable ciphers. The 'unbreakable' trapdoor codes
were broken, within a few months of their announcement, by 2 researchers using
an Apple 2e ( at that time the 386 was on the market). As programs like CopyPC
and CopyCat showed, copy protection schemes for floppies are useless. This also
applies to CDs. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Lionel Issen<BR><A
href="mailto:lissen@xxxxxxxxx";>lissen@xxxxxxxxx</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:rphodge@xxxxxxxxxxx"; title=rphodge@xxxxxxxxxxx>Raymond
Hodge</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, March 12, 2000 7:23
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: MS 7.0 EOD Upgrade Screen.
New Features?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Yes thank you, I remember the copy protection schemes of the
80s. They were totally useless in stopping dishonest people from making
illegal copies. As I recall, apps, which were only useful for getting around
those schemes, were as hot a business back then as virus apps and security
apps appear to be now. Remember CopyIIPC? They even had a special board you
could put in your machine to run the protected disks through to undo the
protection scheme.<BR><BR>The whole thing was a bad joke. All those silly
schemes did was manage to inconvenience and anger those of us foolish enough
to be honest and buy and run the copy protected versions.<BR><BR>Dishonest
people are going to get around what ever scheme they apply to this problem -
other than continual and vigorous law enforcement. That's why we have Cops
(God bless them). To prosecute people who break the law. <BR><BR>Don't make
your customers angry because people in Asia (as you say) are stealing from
you. Get our politicians to negotiate the Asian politicians into passing laws
that stops those activities, and then get them to enforce them. Isn't that why
we pay and put up with politicians?<BR><BR>IMO, CD verification is another
dumb idea that wastes the users time, the programmers time (which would be
much better spent cleaning out bugs and making this app more robust) and in
the end likely won't even do what it is intended to do. <BR><BR>MetaStock has
been a source of much income for me. I want only the best for them. I've
always bought every upgrade - whatever - even if I didn't need it - just to
try and contribute to their profits. I just don't want to see them continuing
down the CompuTrac road (ignoring customers, know it all, ever more corporate)
to oblivion.<BR><BR>IMO, they improved the Reuters download thing
considerably. That proves that they have it in them. But they won't fix a
broken wheel that doesn't squeak. And it doesn't help to pretend that the
emperor has a lovely suite of clothes on when he's actually buck naked (and
ugly).<BR><BR>Thanks for reminding me,<BR>Ray<BR><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE cite type="cite">*I think Equis is doing this to prevent people,
who didn't buy v6.52 EOD, from receiving the upgrade price. I assume
this is also why they require you verify you have the MetaStock CD.
Apparently, Equis (or Reuters) is concerned about illegal copying. I
can't really blame them. There's a LOT of illegal copying taking place
in the Eastern European block nations, in Russia, and particularly in
Asia. MicroSoft recently sued a company in China but the Chinese court
ruled in favor of the company saying there was "no proof" any copying
occurred. Right. If this activity continues, expect American
software companies to take more drastic measures to protect
themselves. This will include setting up "regions" similar to the DVD
video market. They may even revive the copy protection schemes which
were used during the 80's. <BR><BR>D.M. </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Sun Mar 12 22:16:47 2000
Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2])
by purebytes.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA16820
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 12 Mar 2000 21:32:53 -0800
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA25583
for metastock-outgoing; Mon, 13 Mar 2000 13:45:04 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA25580
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 13 Mar 2000 13:45:01 -0700
From: TONE9739@xxxxxxx
Received: from imo21.mx.aol.com (imo21.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.65])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA05046
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sun, 12 Mar 2000 22:16:57 -0700 (MST)
Received: from TONE9739@xxxxxxx
by imo21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v25.3.) id u.bb.199545f (3985)
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 13 Mar 2000 00:00:36 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <bb.199545f.25fdcff4@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 00:00:36 EST
Subject: Re: latest family e-mail
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 67
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
no worth the time replying to such notes
|