Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Re: Heatseeker
Message-ID: <16484@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 22 Jun 91 05:40:28 GMT
References: <910621184230.584787@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL> <1991Jun22.023810.26366@mcs.anl.gov>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 46

In article <1991Jun22.023810.26366@mcs.anl.gov> curtis@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Jeffrey Curtis ) writes:
>In article <910621184230.584787@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL> TMPLee@DOCKMASTER.NCSC.MIL writes:
>>For one, I wouldn't touch this offer with a ten foot pole -- it sounds
>>like the perfect scenario for introducing and propagating a virus: ...

I have to say that the same thought occurred to me upon reading the offer.
It is nice to hear attestations that your utility program is not a means
of spreading a "virus"; however, the blurb for it did exhibit many of the
characteristics that one has come to associate with software that spreads
such viruses.  TMPLee may be more sensitive to this than most, given that
he has an account on one of NCSC's computers.  He has reason to be wary.

>I refuse to supply source code because any programmer who does so
>on such a good piece of software is nothing but an idiot.  Supplying source
>code in a program distribution violates every Trade Secret law in existence

No, it wouldn't violate any law.  I would, however, preclude you from
successfully claiming trade secret status for the code, unless you had
made it available only under appropriate licensing.

>So the program sounds too good to be true.  So what?

So one should exhibit due caution.  The offer might be legitimate or it
might not; there may be a "virus" or there might not.  Without additional
information, one would have to assess the risk as higher than usual for
Apple II software, given the nature of the program and its "too good to
be true" advertising.

>You refuse to believe that I'm daring enough to use technology that no
>one else in the Apple // community has the guts to use?

That is quite a claim.  Why does it take "guts" to use that technology?
Having a better idea is one thing; having more courage is something else.

>The monopoly of companies such as Central Point who have enormous financial
>backing to control and corner the utility market leave no room for small-time
>programmers like myself.  Why else would I be offering something that is the
>best for FREE?

Guessing your motivations would be fruitless.  Central Point Software,
however, has no monopoly on the Apple II utility market.  (They don't
even seem to do much maintenance for their existing Copy II+ product.)
There are several other Apple II disk utilities, or varying quality.
What CPS does have an advantage in is their marketing ability.

Note that "shareware" has been remarkably unsuccessful economically.