Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!rutgers!uwvax!tank!nucsrl!gore
From: gore@eecs.nwu.edu (Jacob Gore)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: Re: NeXT's BIG 3.5" mistake.
Message-ID: <12670004@eecs.nwu.edu>
Date: 24 Oct 88 15:20:22 GMT
References: <4192@pitt.UUCP>
Organization: Northwestern U, Evanston IL, USA
Lines: 31

/ comp.sys.next / chavez@Portia.Stanford.EDU (Ramon Chavez) / Oct 24, 1988 /
>... The operator would
>ask the student to type a magic cookie to the program, which would then
>generate a number based on the machine's unique Ethernet ID.  Finally,
>the operator would tell the student to type a special number, which would
>turn the application into a full-fledged, full-function, authorized copy.
>
>The scheme has several advantages: ... (2) developers
>would actually get paid for every active copy ...

Oh no, they wouldn't.  They would get paid for every DORMANT copy, since it
will tie the software down to a workstation.

There've been a lot of postings here that visualized a lab of NeXT machines
where a student can just walk up to any workstation, insert their own
optifloppy, and use it.  If software is tied down to an Ethernet address,
either the student has to carry their own CPU card also (since that's where
the Ethernet port is) (hmmm.... interesting ARP implications here :-), or
EVERY workstation has to be licensed for all possible software.

So, you get exactly the same situation that is prevalent now in the
networked world: software vendors charging you per seat, whether that seat
is occupied or not.  (For example, the company that puts "The Network Is
the Computer" on every glossy they produce, then proceeds to multiply all
their software prices -- purchase as well as maintenance -- by the number
of "terminals" on that "computer".)

Yuck!!!!

Jacob Gore				Gore@EECS.NWU.Edu
Northwestern Univ., EECS Dept.		{oddjob,gargoyle,att}!nucsrl!gore