It's great that way it is and all activiation does in the end is punish legal users.

I have Adobe products and Windowblinds. It has never "punished" me once.

Wait until you need to install or reinstall your software and have no internet connection or phone line. (I have) and then want to use you software. Plus what happens if the original company goes out of business or sells the software off. This have happen many times. What happens to the activation not supported by the new owners of the software?

I am told that e-frontier, the makers of Poser, tried activation in Poser 5 and it failed. Customers hated it. There we issues with making it work with the program also, but customers didn't like the lost of freedom. Now with Poser 6 the activation has been disabled. And Poser is over $300 for a license. How can Daz and e-frontier trust their customers not to give out their legal licenses and Stardock can't.

BTW, Daz has a similar process for account management and downloads and Stardock. Well kind of, Daz has the user login to their account, request a download reset and then redownload their software. It limits the amount of resets to I think 5 a month and so many downloads per reset. But how many times in a month would you need to down a program like Carrara? It's over 800 MB in size!

I'm against activation simply because it doesn't seem to work. There are indeed working, cracked versions of Stardock applications all over the net. There are illegal versions of all sorts of software. In fact, there probably isn't any software that needs activation that isn't cracked, or crackable. Serial numbers can be reproduced and generated.

Maybe I'm wrong, and activation and serial numbers prevent theft. But on various bittorrent sites, Windowblinds and other Stardock software are almost always at the top of the lists. (Congrats?)

Simply put, deal with it or don't buy the products. They aren't going to change what they believe is right for their software, and if their business isn't falling off from requiring activation, that's the way it will be.

LittleHalfPint - My wife and I are ODNT subscribers; we've installed various bits and bobs of Object Desktop on our two main computers, and there's never been so much as a peep out of the software about activation difficulties. We've upgraded, downgraded, formatted (I killed my desktop one day about a month ago, just don't ask ), reinstalled...you name it, we've done it. There's never been an issue. Not a single one. And I know that we'll never experience one; Brad and others have, in various forums, described in very general terms how activation isn't aimed at my wife and me and our two little computers as such. (Naturally, they didn't give away the "secret recipe," but enough hints have been dropped on Poweruser.tv podcasts and such that I know that Wifey and I aren't going to have to worry about this every being a problem.) These folks have software to support and to build. They've got better things to do than to peek over their customers' shoulders. I tend to think of it this way: Activation isn't there to stop me from using the software as I see fit, but to try to stop someone who might otherwise have paid for the same software from pirating it.

Adamness - Point taken. The thing is that activation, just as it isn't aimed at my wife and me, probably also isn't aimed at your 1337 h4x0r pirate who bends copy protection to his will with a wave of his hand. That's just not the impression I've taken away from Brad in his comments on activation software in Stardock's stuff. It seems more like it's aimed at somebody who might get fed up with having to beat the cycle over and over again as a product is updated and new cracks have to come out to break the updated software. (Let's not forget this whole debacle. WWW Link)

At the end of the day, I suppose whether or not activation "works" depends on if the good folks at Stardock think that the costs of maintaining activation servers/updating activation software are significantly offset by the gains made by making paying customers out of people who pirate but can/would otherwise buy the software. Given that activation doesn't seem to be going anywhere, it must be making something of a difference. Just something to chew over....
(That is a pretty dubious distinction they have there, isn't it? )

Daz got back to me... I am glad at least one company agrees with a consumer's view.

"While we can never truly predict the future, I highly doubt that activation will be something that we will ever require. Activation tends to make more work both for the customer, and for the company, and we would prefer to use our resources to bring you more quality 3D content and programs."

This from a company producing quality professional grade 3D rendering software. Which is highly wanted in the world and also not the cheapest.

-DAZ Productions

And Poser is over $300 for a license. How can Daz and e-frontier trust their customers not to give out their legal licenses and Stardock can't.

They don't. They just couldn't come up with a seamless and transparent way to do it, and had to drop it because so many legitimate customers apparently had problems with it.

With Stardock software, the only time there is anything for you to do at all is if you install on a non-connected machine, or as with GC2, update from a non-activation build to an activation build by a means other than SDC. Otherwise SDC handles the entire process in the background and you never even know about it.

Ive talked to many people about this issue and read heaps of stuff at in lots of forums.
The fact is that if a company wishes to include an activation process in their software, it is their right to do so.

It does seem that ultimately from the company advocating activation, there is the realization that it doesnt significantly really cut back on piracy, rather it serves as a deterent to piracy due to the hassle of as (Citizen)RaHarakhte puts it....beating the cycle over and over again.

However, from the much of what Ive read and people Ive talked to about this...this in itelf (except for the rarest of occassions) isnt really an issue. There is a hacking and cracking community out there that devotes its time and energy to circumventing activation and you can be guranteed that a patch/crack or hack will be produced that sucessfully works as good as the legitimate procedure.

About six months ago, I burnt out my computer is a power surge and had t replace the motherboard, various hard drive and ram. Having upgraded to new hardware I proceeded to reinstall my XP Pro only to face a failed activation (using a legitimate XP Pro CD). Not that the pain of having to rebuild was enough, but obtaining a replacement liscence key through Microsoft support was...well do I have to say?!

Anyway, all in all, with much panic, confusion and effort from myself it took me 48 hours to get my legitimate XP Pro up and running. A co-worker, on hearing my testimonial, just laughed at me and told me I should have use a pirated copy and a patch...So I did a test.
On my old laptop, I wiped everything and proceeded to use his pirated CD to see just how it went. Guess what? In 45 minutes I had XP Pro up and running, activated to the same level as my 48 hour legitimate ordeal.

Moral viewpoints aside here, I, as a legit user, through the activation process was given more of a runabout and experienced alot more stress in my installation of the software incorporating anti-piracy deterents than the pirate who knows how to properly circumvent this software...to whom the deterent is directed.

The main issue from complaing legitimate users of software requiring activation on various sites is exactly this. At the end of the day, the consumer is really only concerned about the ease and effort required to get to where they want to be, and from that experience, I was left wondering.....Is it easier and less stressfull to be a software pirate than a legitimate user?

Before I sound too much like an episode frome Sex and the City, I need to say that I believe firmly in the legitimate use of software for supporting the further development of the software and for the fact that I dont want to burn in Hell after I die.

I have never had a problem with most activation processes, but the problem I have had in the past , and some in-depth investigatiion of the 'crack-scene', have shown me that pirating can be generally an effiecient, less costly and a 'becoming more user-friendly' way of installing software than the processes experienced by a legitimate consumer.

I am sure that there are those who rest on the higher moral standards (I tend to be one of those people) concerning this issue, but in looking around myself at the current state of affairs in the world, I just find myself questioning how valid are these moral issues when it comes down to what people seem to be caring about these days....the easy fix.

I am constantly told that software activation 'protects' ME as a legitimate user. I dont know how it does this...it's just something I go through thesedays in the software I purchase...assuming that it is 'protecting' me until I hit a snag. There definately seems to be an efficient,well co-ordinated community out there that circumvents not only the cost to purchasing software, but also the painful proceedure that may (occassionaly) arise from legitimate purchase.

I wonder if there is there comes point to where these legitimate procedures may annoy, disturb or alienate the legitimate user as to actually making them more aware of and favororable to an 'alternative' that these processes are designed to deter? This certainly seems to be the issue being widely discussed these days.

I am constantly told that software activation 'protects' ME as a legitimate user. I dont know how it does this.

It's simple.

The legitimate Activation process protects you from the potential of costly litigation and criminal charges associated with property theft.

It may seem to be a case of semantics, but Stardock's use of Product Activation is not to 'maximise earnings' it's to 'minimise loss'.  There IS a difference....

The legitimate Activation process protects you from the potential of costly litigation and criminal charges associated with property theft.

Be that as it may Jafo, the "potential" litigation and criminal charges meant ratz-ass when I was experiencing the very "real" agonies of legitimate activation from Microsoft.  

I am sure that there are definately people who have experienced these "potential" elements from involving themselves in pirated software, but in my research, those are a minimal percentage of a large number of people sucessfully operating pirated software and getting away with it...and generally sticking their finger to the 'potential' threat of litigation...without repucussion...and knowing it.

It seems to me, that there are a huge amount of people out there who would, quite confidently from their own experiences, view your comment as a mere laughable scare-tactic, and not as an acctual deterent in their 'real world'......

I am in no way endorsing piracy or property theft as I personally think it is disadventageous on other levels, but we live in a world where the general person is mainly concerned with what is the easiest and least costly way to obtaiin their goals....where the possibility of repucussions for their actions means didly-squat.

The gist of my previous comment was that the current measures being taken by some companies and in their enforcement of anti-piracy procedures seems to have had little impact on the piracy scene and may indeed, through some inconvenience to the legitimate user, push that user to be more aware of the 'alternative' out there.   

PS. I am not complaining about any Stardock activation...it has always proceeded quicky and effortlessly for me and , as long as that is the case, I really dont care between the semantics of 'maxamising earning' or 'minimalising loss'.....which I would believe to be the attitude of most consumers out there.

cybermessiah ....you were wondering how Activation protects you....I simply answered...

Thanks Jafo. Maybe Stardock should team up with Microsoft and teach them a thing or two about implimenting an activation process that is unobtrusive and user-friendly.  

Maybe more time should be spent using the programs than researching and posting to forums and talking to people and reading heaps of things than worrying about how the program is activated. Do something creative with the programs like they were meant to be used and leave it at that. The rest of that stuff is all philosophical bulls***ing, a waste of time, and will accomplish nothing. Go ahead and say it might accomplish something if enough people say something, but that's as realistic as no wars, hunger, prejudice, and world peace.

I've only ever had one drama with Windows Activation....in my spare time I rebirth second-hand systems that a friend resells. [just for the fun of blowing up computers other than my own, yrag].

These are generally 'returned' systems for upgrading some office somewhere...typically P4/1.6's...though the trouble one was an IBM P4/3.0 [quite a nice black desktop machine clearly with little use [clean as]].  They came with product stickers [XP Pro] but wiped harddrives, so it 'should' be a simple process to reload and re-activate.....

....not when you try to read the labels...and the printing is crappy...and an '8' looks like a 'B' or the other way round....or not ...

...by the time I got it every which way but right I was cordially invited to phone Microsoft for assistance.....

....and THAT would have been fine and dandy if only the guy calling out the 'string' didn't repeat the same number set twice and me end up having to explain "no, it's not Office Xp, it's XP Pro"...etc.  [ya just can't get good help].

Ultimately it was sorted....even had the MS-woman-with-the-Indian-accent in stitches saying "enjoy your system" and me replying "I have already"....

I've never had an activation issue with Stardock, Microsoft or anyone else, so it does not bother me if they implement it. In fact, given the time and effort that goes into sofware creation, as opposed to the time it takes to install it, I believe developers have every right to include activation in their products.

Maybe Stardock should team up with Microsoft and teach them a thing or two about implimenting an activation process that is unobtrusive and user-friendly.

I've not found MS' activation process to be obtrusive or unfriendly. For the most part, I've just clicked on the activation link after installation and voila, it's done, instantly. The one and only time I had to call MS to reactivate my copy of XP (after 4 or 5 clean installs due to bugs and etc), it did not take 48 hours. I was given a new product code then and there over the phone, and within minutes I was up and running again, no problemo.

Activation has become a fact of computing life and we have to live with it! Crikey, it's usually a couple of mouse clicks and/or entering a product key, maybe a phone call sometimes. How painful is that....it's not like we gotta walk a mile over hot coals to get it done!

Maybe more time should be spent using the programs than researching and posting to forums and talking to people and reading heaps of things than worrying about how the program is activated. Do something creative with the programs like they were meant to be used and leave it at that. The rest of that stuff is all philosophical bulls***ing, a waste of time, and will accomplish nothing. Go ahead and say it might accomplish something if enough people say something, but that's as realistic as no wars, hunger, prejudice, and world peace.

Boss. I really agree with you that programs should be used creatively to full potential. However, alot of the stuff you will find on most forums are gong to be interpeted by someone as you most eloquently put, as 'philosophical bullsh***ing'. I think opinions DO count on issues and can achieve much and feel obliged to think about both sides of an issue.

By 'researching, posting to forums,talking to people and reading up on issues' people become more aware of issues and empowered into making their own opinions...whatever they may be. If you consider all that 'stuff' as BS so be it. Taking this discussion to the nihilistic level of wars, hunger, prejudice and world peace could be construed as your own brand of 'philisophical BS'.

Peace on Earth   

BTW.. I came across this interesting and thought-provoking article some time ago 'Piracy and Unconventional Wisdom'. link: 

 http://www.codeproject.com/gen/design/UnconventialWisdom.asp?df=100&forumid=58772&exp=0&select=1196103

Hopefully my last posting on this issue. I respect others options on this thread, but what I can't understand are the people who are negative towards people who disagree with activation.

I have also seen more on this forum compared to others of people being more closed minded of other's feelings then other forums. If I posted this thread on Daz's forums, which I have, I would get people calmly replying to it for the most part. I always seem to but heads here. People are always no strongly worded here and always burning people at the stake for people that don't believe as Stardock does or them.

Cybermessiah, I agree with you whole-heartedly. There is just a point where users need to stand-up and say enough is enough. People like freedom, like Daz customers. Freedom to use their software licenses as they want (legally). If people agree to activation, then what's next? The more you let them (software companies) tie your hands, then the more they are going to control you.

Oh, BTW, I have confirmed that Apple doesn't have activation in OS X. So, at least one other company agrees with "us" anti-activation people.

On another note, Starkers, what happens when you lose your internet connection and have no phone line? It has happen to me, opps no software I guess.

Also with Stardock's policy, I have to have a internet connection at some point to install the software. What if I don't want to rely on the internet to use my software? (And my phone for that matter.) If I buy software, I would like for it to be useable and installable from a box, with no outside connection required. I don't require the company to inform me when they spend my money that they got from the sale do I? Why should I let then know when I installed the software. (Okay, maybe that isn't exactly the same thing, but the concept is there.)

On another note, Starkers, what happens when you lose your internet connection and have no phone line? It has happen to me, opps no software I guess.

If you don't have a phone or internet, maybe spending $600 on a piece of software isn't a priority. Windowblinds checks activation at installation. If I didn't have internet I wouldn't have purchased it anyways. There is no big deal here.

Also with Stardock's policy, I have to have a internet connection at some point to install the software. What if I don't want to rely on the internet to use my software?

That's really your personal choice. Stardock checks at installation to make sure I have a valid copy, oh the world is ending.