Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!clyde.concordia.ca!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!pro-beagle.cts.com!mmunz
From: mmunz@pro-beagle.cts.com (Mark Munz)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Lack of games for the GS
Message-ID: <18567.chatter.infoapple@pro-beagle>
Date: 1 Mar 90 16:07:27 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 32

In-Reply-To: message from cs122dc@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu


>I have to agree with you, to some extent not allowing people 
>to place programs on hard drives is a pain, but you have to look 
>at it from a marketing standpoint.  If you don't protect the 
>program, SOMEONE is going to copy it (and not just for the sake 
>of having a back-up either).  For every copy of AppleWorks out 
>there that was sold legitimately, how many illegal copies do 
>you think there are? (and at around $200 a crack, that's a lot 
>a lot of profit loss).  Aside from that, I don't see where copy 
>protection truly affects a program's overall performance, except 
>during disk activity.

First.. do you actually think that copy-protecting a piece of software
will keep it from getting copied? Almost every single type of Copy
Protection scheme that's been used has been broken.

Second.. what about the customer. I'd been really p'd if, after buying
a $200 program (AppleWorks), I found it was copy protected. This is
especially the case for productivity software.  Beagle Bros puts 
trust in the customer. We won't waste (and I do consider copy protection
a waste of efforts) our time trying to keep you from copying and all
h1UMQ=5IBM"="=JMr=Q:%Y]e6kA%M9j|
Third.. Copy protection does affect overall performance -- because it
causes the user so much hassle that he ends up using something else, or
because he can't put software on a larger medium to increase performance.

For those interested -- I have made it my own personal policy that I
will never buy (or use -- since I'm not a pirate) copy protected software.

Mark Munz