Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!van-bc! From: lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: RE: games & multitasking Message-ID: <1696@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca> Date: 5 Jun 90 21:45:49 GMT Lines: 39 Return-Path: To: van-bc!rnews In <398658@neabbs.UUCP>, rrs@neabbs.UUCP (RONALD VAN EIJCK) writes: > > I am using dongle protection for my programs, the advantages are: > 1: People can make backups. This is the only good thing about a dongle. > 2: It's impossible to use two copies of the program at the same time It also interferes with multitasking if the dongle conflicts with another dongled program or if the other program requires that port. > 3: It's more difficult to break hardware. It's very easy to break hardware by pluggin in/unplugging an active circuit. ake a look at the schematics one day, paying particular attention to where these things attach to the chips (8520, Paula, etc.). > 4: If someone breaks the hardware only a limited number of copies will be made > The only disadvantage is that if a lot of programs use them the users get mad. The main disadvantages are far more than you perceive. To top it all off, dongles are perhaps one of the easiest forms of protection to break, so you end up in the same boat as those who use disk based copy protection; pissing off the legitimate owners for little gain except your false sense of security. Bottom line.. I won't buy products that are protected, but if I had to make a choice between a dongle and any other form of protection, including disk copy protection, I would NOT choose the dongle. -larry -- The raytracer of justice recurses slowly, but it renders exceedingly fine. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+