Greedy software developers.

[jamesbe2759]

:evil: Without scanning several months of postings for simular comments, I am going to state my perceived problem with today's pocket PC and Palm software. How many end-users find the software registration process far more complicated than the actual program. If developers were half as concerned about the quality of their software and a little less about squeezing every dime from the consumers then most of us would be better off.

MOST of the software available at Handango/Pocket Gear/Palm Gear is nothing but JUNK and probably 1 in 10 programs deserve a place in your device's memory. Yet developers expect to sell this junk for $10 - $30 without a trial version and a registration process worse than a new home loan application. :bad-words:

[Jon Westfall]

As a former software vendor, I couldn't agree with you more. Registrations & the business of them (i.e. trying to make sure someone doesn't rip your software off) often takes up more time than it should for a developer. After one of my applications was cracked and a serial posted online (which didn't work as the serial was generate one 1 machine but my reg. process was machine specific), I realized that there was nothing I could do to stop the truly determined theives, so I just focused more on the software.

That being said, some of what I've found on pocket gear include people sprucing up a SDK demo and adding in some outrageous registration scheme to sell the whole mess for $10, or gloating about how great their software is without providing a demo. I won't buy anything I haven't tried in advance, or know is from a reputable vendor.


P.S. - as a humerous aside, the program of mine that was cracked was designed to let religious-minded people pray while waiting for their computer to do something (this was back in the days of 28.8 connections and 20 min. to download email). If cracking a religious program doesn't get you on a deity's bad side, i don't know what does. The cracker, in a final humerous aside put in his nfo file that my software was crap, which i guess is why he picked it to crack (unsuccessfully) into. My only thought was "If it's crap, why do I have over 20 - 30 downloads a day").

[Talldog]

How many end-users find the software registration process far more complicated than the actual program. If developers were half as concerned about the quality of their software and a little less about squeezing every dime from the consumers then most of us would be better off.
OTOH, developers wouldn't have to put so much effort into that stuff if there weren't so many people who think it's perfectly acceptable to steal software.

I don't really understand your complaint. Yes, a lot of the software out there is crap, but if there's no trial, don't buy it. If there's a trial and the software is crap, don't buy it. Every piece of software on my iPAQ is registered, and I've yet to find any program where the registration was difficult or complicated.

[jamesbe2759]

:soapbox: Like you, Talldog, every piece of shareware on my device is registered and I'm willing to guess that 95% of all people using shareware pay for it. I seem to have problems with registration keys that don't work or are emailed 24-48 hrs after I pay. Then there are the registration keys for $5.00 programs that are 20 characters long.

[Talldog]

I'm willing to guess that 95% of all people using shareware pay for it.
If you're talking about shareware that is enabled with a registration code, I'd agree (in other words, 95% aren't looking for cracked versions). If you're talking about full function programs where the author depends on people voluntarily paying for it, I'd bet that at least 75% DON'T pay for it.

...or are emailed 24-48 hrs after I pay.
OK, we can agree on this point. When you register software online, you should get a code immediately. I have had that happen a couple of times, where it's been a day (or longer) before I got the code, and I've been pretty frosted.

[darrylb]

As one who (has just started to) develops software, I absolutely agree. I specifically decided not to have a registration process for my software. My opinion is - if the user pays for it, they can use it.

I also think that if you price the product low enough, it is less beneficial to crack it. If a dishonest person wants to spend four hours cracking a $10 program, who wasted their time?

Finally, the more security you put into a product (from a license protection perspective) the more tempting it is for someone to crack it. I also think that adding security will not prevent cracks, it just makes it harder (and more public when the crack is posted on the net).

Having said all that - I know why people do try to protect their stuff. I just wish that people who used the software always paid for the software....

[jkendrick]

I never buy software without a trial so I don't get burned by software that doesn't do what I need it to do. From that viewpoint I don't understand your complaint.

As for the registration process it can never be completely painless but I can't recall one I've run into yet that I would consider onerous in any way.

This topic goes hand in hand with the viewpoint I've seen expressed over and over that most people feel PocketPC software should be much cheaper than regular computer software. I don't understand that viewpoint at all. If a program is needed and works like you want then pay for it and get on with your business. I've paid as much as $50 for a program that does what I need and obviously had a lot of work put into it. I don't have a problem paying for software that contributes to my use and experience on the PPC platform.

[disconnected]

On the whole, I've been very pleased with the PPC software I've bought.

Most of it has had trial versions, and on the few occasions when I've had registration problems, the developers were very quick to respond. There have been a couple of notable exceptions, and these were both with larger companies for whom PPC software isn't a large part of their business. Almost everything I've bought has also had free upgrades.

I've also been pleasantly surprised by how quickly most of the developers responded when I've had any other questions or problems with the software, or even suggestions for enhancements. This is a nice change from almost any other type of product that I buy.

[JvanEkris]

I also think that if you price the product low enough, it is less beneficial to crack it. If a dishonest person wants to spend four hours cracking a $10 program, who wasted their time?

Having said all that - I know why people do try to protect their stuff. I just wish that people who used the software always paid for the software....The best protection schema that i ever met was a EUAL that said "don't do anything naughty", and a product that costed me $10,-. You just buy the product. Even if it was cracked and could be found everywhere on the internet, i would buy it. The contribution of such a small sum of money to a hungry developper makes me feel good about the product :).

Jaap

[ppcinfo]

From a developer's perspective, I can say that protection schemes are necessary to prevent software from being bootlegged. Considering the time and energy it takes to develop a "good" useful application, I as a developer don't want my hard work to be stolen on a warez site. I develop software for a living, so you can certainly understand that I'm not being "greedy" when I put in mechanisms to prevent dishonest people from stealing my hard-earned money.

Of course, some people may think that developers should give away software for free or charge a very minimal amount, but in my case that would be like me asking you provide whatever service your fulltime job is for free for everyone. I don't know about you, but I have a family to feed!

Having said that, there are numerous ways to protect one's software from being stolen. Most developers use a registration number that will activate a software title when entered. Although this registration number can certainly be posted on newsgroups or given away to other people, I think that most people would think twice about doing so when they purchased the software and have that reg number associated with their name.

The next level of protection of generating a reg number based on the Pocket PC device's "owner name" is effective, but can be a pain for both the customer and developer to maintain. Other similar methods are also difficult to administer, but ensures that the developer's software isn't used without being purchased. I don't like this method because it is so cumbesome for everyone, so I stick with simplier methods and live with some people bootlegging my software.

The bottom line is, protection schemes are necessary for developers to protect their livelihood. As a consumer, if you don't like what a developer is doing for a protection method, or you don't like the price he or she is charging, or you think the product is "junk", then don't buy the product. Nothing more clearly sends a message to a developer that you don't like what he or she is offering, and that person will have to make changes or go out of business.

Just my two cents as a developer.

ppcinfo

[wocket]

I always try before I buy. Some of the software I have bought though requires you to use the owner information on your ppc.

Whenever I changed my ppc the owner info I used was slightly different which messed things up a bit between a couple of apps.

All the software that I have bought I have had really good support from the developer and in some cases the developer has really gone that bit extra.

[HailFire]

I am a developer too, but I see both sides of the argument. Personally, I wouldn't be where I am today if I hadn't downloaded cracked versions of 3DSMax and Visuals Tools and a million other programs when I was in grade school. Warez only hurts the developer if it is distributed to people who otherwise would have paid for it. In fact, now that I'm older, I buy programs that I used to download for free. I feel that the lack of security was a sort of educational investment, allowing young people like myself to learn the tools of the trade from their home computers, and most of them grow up to pay back the debt.

However, entertainment software is another matter altogether. Games are entertainment, and entertainment is a luxury. I think that those who steal games are selfish and cheap.

I know my logic seems a bit twisted, but I think it's true. If a four-year undergraduate program from Harvard could be downloaded over the Internet, wouldn't it be worthwhile to allow everyone to have it? I mean, actual students could have a degree to say they paid, but at least everyone else gets educated. However, you'd still have to charge to view the Ivy-League football games because that's entertainment (although I don't who'd pay to see them).

[Warrior]

I would buy more software if it were priced more competetively. Most of what I've tried is not worth what they are asking. PPC software should be no more than $15.00. It's called capitalism. Make a good product, price it cheap enough and more people will buy it. My two cents...

[jamesbe2759]

If every software developer had your ethics/attitude then we wouldn't be having these discussions.

However, not everyone who writes code can be classified a software developer so we have a ton of JUNK for sale at Handango/etc. And there are the code writers who try to sell their JUNK by ommiting the trial version knowing that anyone trying it would not buy it. I for one will not spend my hard earned money on JUNK whether it's software, hardware, fishing rod, gun, or a candy bar. Anyone who tries to pedal their junk to the public is a crook and they know exactly what they are doing.

The bottom line is, percentage wise, there are more crooked software developers then there are end users. Everyone I know, including myself, pays for the software we use and I'm willing to bet that 95% of all end users do the same (most people are basically honest). All we ask for is a decent product for our money WITHOUT over-kill registration requirements.

[Talldog]

Everyone I know, including myself, pays for the software we use and I'm willing to bet that 95% of all end users do the same (most people are basically honest). All we ask for is a decent product for our money WITHOUT over-kill registration requirements.
I don't think that shareware history bears this out. When the concept first started around 15 or so years ago, most developers at the time didn't put anything except a startup nag screen into their code. And you know what? Nobody paid for it. Why? Because they didn't have to, that's why. I remember participating in a lot of CompuServe discussions (yeah, back in the day) with guys whose apps were getting thousands of downloads, and almost no registrations. That's why you have registration codes; because before you had them, most people stole the software.

[Andrew]

I pretty much agree with what most of the others have said in this thread, if there isnt a demo version, I will not buy the software unless I either get a convinving demo from someone who has bought it, or at least three independant reviewers give it a 'high score'.
Otherwise Im much more inclined to buy software after trying a demo.
The registration process though, for some developers definitely needs to be worked on, for example Cirond, who I have bought pocket winc from, have yet to send me a serial, more than a week later.
Developers if youre reading this, please provide demos, and if you have an online registration process, give us our reg code within 24 hours, especially as Im trusting you with my credit card info. I have no way of knowing if you havent simply taken my money and vanished!

Andrew