Board index » delphi » Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?


2003-10-04 02:38:51 AM
delphi164
Is there any information on the activation/registration schemes that are/will be
employed by new Borland products. Delphi 7 had a registration system, that for
me didn't even work out of the box (blank form), so what will we have this time?
Already, in JBuilder 9, has a clumsy system of copying files in the root of your
user profile (nice and user friendly)
What system was used by C#Builder and will Delphi for .net have a user
unfriendly activation/registration system?
 
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

"Ronald McDonald" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
Quote


What system was used by C#Builder and will Delphi for .net have a user
unfriendly activation/registration system?

C# used the same as Delphi 7 and I'd expect future versions
of Delphi will continue to use the same scheme.
Quote

 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

"Jeff Overcash (TeamB)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote

"Ronald McDonald" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
>
>
>What system was used by C#Builder and will Delphi for .net have a user
>unfriendly activation/registration system?
>

C# used the same as Delphi 7 and I'd expect future versions
of Delphi will continue to use the same scheme.

Well, sort of. C# Builder won't run until you choose to register. Delphi 7 will
run if you haven't registered.
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

So effectively, this is similar to Microsoft Product Activation - refusing to
function if you don't register?
Which customers did Borland speak to regarding the inclusion this particular
"feature"?
You don't even have to activate VS.NET. Microsoft at least realise that you're
going to need to install your development environment on a number of different
target operating systems and configurations for debugging purposes. A
registration/activation procedure is an unnecessary, inconvenient and pointless
anti-piracy measure.
Furthermore, who on earth would want to pirate C#Builder? Aren't Borland
deluding themselves here?
"Tim Sommers" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
"Jeff Overcash (TeamB)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:3f7dc410$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>
>"Ronald McDonald" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
>>
>>
>>What system was used by C#Builder and will Delphi for .net have a user
>>unfriendly activation/registration system?
>>
>
>C# used the same as Delphi 7 and I'd expect future versions
>of Delphi will continue to use the same scheme.
>

Well, sort of. C# Builder won't run until you choose to register. Delphi 7 will
run if you haven't registered.


 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

"Tim Sommers" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
Quote
"Jeff Overcash (TeamB)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
news:3f7dc410$XXXX@XXXXX.COM...
>
>"Ronald McDonald" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
>>
>>
>>What system was used by C#Builder and will Delphi for .net have a user
>>unfriendly activation/registration system?
>>
>
>C# used the same as Delphi 7 and I'd expect future versions
>of Delphi will continue to use the same scheme.
>

Well, sort of. C# Builder won't run until you choose to register. Delphi 7 will
run if you haven't registered.


Its the same activation/registration system. The lockout period is different. The last 4 releases of major product (JBuidler, C#Builder, CBX, IB 7.1) all have a 0 days grace period. I and many other TeamB members have been complaining
about this for months. The system though is identical to what
is in D7.
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

"Jeff Overcash (TeamB)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in
Quote
Its the same activation/registration system. The lockout period is
different. The last 4 releases of major product (JBuidler, C#Builder,
CBX, IB 7.1) all have a 0 days grace period. I and many other TeamB
members have been complaining about this for months. The system
though is identical to what is in D7.
I don't have a copy of Delphi7 so didn't realise there was a grace period
involved. After how long does Delphi 7 expire?
In any case, 0 days grace is unnacceptable. It took us over a week to re-
register our copies of Cbuilder6 last month after we upgraded hardware. My
nightmare scenario of re-installing on a notebook without email from a
dirty pitlane halfway round the world now looks unsupported [something we
have had to do in the past too]
I know it is too late to change this, but if Borland insist on treating
their customers as criminals they simply haven't caught yet, don't be
surprised if they start acting like them.
AlisdairM
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

AlisdairM writes:
Quote

"Jeff Overcash (TeamB)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in
news:3f7dec3d$XXXX@XXXXX.COM:

>Its the same activation/registration system. The lockout period is
>different. The last 4 releases of major product (JBuidler, C#Builder,
>CBX, IB 7.1) all have a 0 days grace period. I and many other TeamB
>members have been complaining about this for months. The system
>though is identical to what is in D7.

I don't have a copy of Delphi7 so didn't realise there was a grace period
involved. After how long does Delphi 7 expire?

D7's is an unlimited grace period. But the registration and everything involved
is the same as the other products I mentioned.
Quote
In any case, 0 days grace is unnacceptable. It took us over a week to re-
register our copies of Cbuilder6 last month after we upgraded hardware. My
nightmare scenario of re-installing on a notebook without email from a
dirty pitlane halfway round the world now looks unsupported [something we
have had to do in the past too]

I'm against a 0 grace period and have been vocal with Borland about this (so has
most of TeamB).
Quote
I know it is too late to change this, but if Borland insist on treating
their customers as criminals they simply haven't caught yet, don't be
surprised if they start acting like them.

It has been 0 days for every product released in the past year AFAIK. To date I
haven't heard anything about a backlash about this policy. I was anticipating
one though.
Quote
AlisdairM
--
Jeff Overcash (TeamB)
(Please do not email me directly unless asked. Thank You)
If there is somebody up there could they throw me down a line. Just a
little helping hand just a little understanding. Just some answers to the
questions that surround me now. If there's somebody up there could
they throw me down a line. (Fish)
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

AlisdairM writes:
Quote

"Jeff Overcash (TeamB)" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote in
news:XXXX@XXXXX.COM:

>It has been 0 days for every product released in the past year AFAIK.
>To date I haven't heard anything about a backlash about this policy.
>I was anticipating one though.

OTOH, What major products have shipped in the last year?
JBuilder, IB 7.1, C#Builder, CBuilderX.
Quote

If I understand correctly, JBuilder has been on defined grace-periods for
some time. Last C++Builder was Feb 2002, and Delphi7 summer 2002.

The last JBuilder was the first with 0 days.
Quote
I haven't had a chance to keep up with C#Builder, but if those customers
swallowed it we could be proven wrong :?(
However, I'd expect to see much more vocal comment when Octance ships,
and likewise from CBX customers, unless the current paranoia for both
products means there's no-one upgrading to complain ;?)

AlisdairM
--
Jeff Overcash (TeamB)
(Please do not email me directly unless asked. Thank You)
If there is somebody up there could they throw me down a line. Just a
little helping hand just a little understanding. Just some answers to the
questions that surround me now. If there's somebody up there could
they throw me down a line. (Fish)
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

AlisdairM writes:
Quote
I'm not going to malign a tool I haven't used
Thank you, Alisdair. This is a really refreshing thing to see in
light of some of the comments I have seen about C#Builder from people who
have clearly never used the tool.
-Craig
--
Craig Stuntz [TeamB] . Vertex Systems Corp. . Columbus, OH
Delphi/InterBase Weblog : delphi.weblogs.com
Please read and follow Borland's rules for the user of their
news server: info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

"Ronald McDonald" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>wrote...
Quote
So effectively, this is similar to Microsoft Product Activation - refusing
to
function if you don't register?

Which customers did Borland speak to regarding the inclusion this particular
"feature"?
If I remember correctly (and I apologize for spreading FUD if not) - it is not
a customer decision, it is Management. Management is absolutly sold on the
concept of activation, registration, prove you paid for it, no free lunch. If
you don't like it, you need to corral CXO level managers and persuade them why
it's bad for sales. All indications are it hasn't affected sales at all,
since statements about Delphi 7 out*selling* all previous versions have been
made.
--
-Brion
Team JEDI, 2001 Spirit of Delphi Award Winners
www.delphi-jedi.org
Fresno Area Delphi Users Group
groups.yahoo.com/group/FresnoDelphi
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 13:35:58 -0400, "Jeff Overcash (TeamB)"
<XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes:
Quote
I'm against a 0 grace period and have been vocal with Borland about this (so has
most of TeamB).
I'm really bothered by learning of this.
Like many who frequent these forums, I sort of think of TeamB as an
informal representative body of Borland developers. I know this is not
a big part of TeamB's role but nevertheless due to TeamB's greater
access to Borland staff and management as well as their stature in the
customer community I think they have a de facto representative role.
My concern is that if Borland management does not listen to TeamB then
what hope do I have for them to listen to me? After all, I am one of
those many thousands of independent developers who depend almost
wholely on Borland tools to give me an edge. I have no organized voice
with Borland. Expressing my concerns in these forums is about all that
I can do. But here in these forums I see TeamB often reflect my
opinion so I think my position on issues is usually being presented by
them. Now I hear that Borland does not pay attention to even that.
Very upsetting.
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

Doug Chamberlin writes:
Quote

My concern is that if Borland management does not listen to TeamB then
what hope do I have for them to listen to me?
Actually they do listen (and believe me, we speak), but that doesn't mean
they are necessarily going to agree or act on our recommendations in any
given case. It actually should be clear they listen to the rest of their
customers too, an indication of this is their attempt to clarify the last
open letter in order to quell at least some of the fears and
misunderstandings.
I don't believe Borland is really any worse than most companies for this. No
matter what they do they are never going to please all customers all the
time. For every customer made happy by some decision, there's a chance
another customer will be dissappointed. Obviously the goal is to end up with
more of the former than the latter but its always difficult.
--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can
stand by itself." - Thomas Jefferson
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

Wayne,
By now, however, it should be obvious to ANY informed person that the latter
IS the case, and not the former.
Of course every customer can not expect that their views SOLELY will be
addressed, but when the vast majority of the folks posting state with almost
invariable unity ( of statements ) that what Borland is proceeding on is a
course contrary to what their current customer base wishes and/or requires,
it's pretty obvious that they're not listening to you. If they're really
listening to any of their customers at all.
Unfortunately, due to certain circumstances, I can not and won't speak
specifically. But, I can refute the statement you made, on the basis of the
actual ACTIONS that Borland has already publicly taken. If they change
direction, or whether they press ahead with what they HAVE stated thus far
( regardless of how nubulous those statements might be at the moment ). We
at least have SOME waypoint stated thus far, and that is what folks are
talking about. If Borland chooses to go .NET or whether it chooses a more
cross-platform direction, it is simply and plainly clear that Borland has
changed the waypoint everyone ( or at least the vast majority of
"everyone" ) has been thinking the direction of that waypoint, should be. Or
at least, if they're still have intentions of heading in similar directions,
they haven't given the rest of the crew knowledge of it.
If Borland is indeed listening to TeamB, it hasn't really demonstrated it
too clearly. If Borland is indeed listening to most of it is PRESENT
customers, in my opinion ( and quite a few others, I might add ), it still
hasn't stated with clarity, what their final intent is. Letters
notwithstanding, it is clear by now, that present customers patience is
wearing thin. Borland needs to respond, and respond sooner, not later. I've
stated in other newsgroups, some of what it needs to respond to, clearly,
and directly. Whether that leads to more questions or not, greatly depends
on how those questions are answered. At this moment, there's probably less
speculation on how the California gubernatorial race will pan out, than how
this issue of VCL's ( and CLX's ) future will.
"Wayne Niddery [TeamB]" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Doug Chamberlin writes:
>
>My concern is that if Borland management does not listen to TeamB then
>what hope do I have for them to listen to me?

Actually they do listen (and believe me, we speak), but that doesn't mean
they are necessarily going to agree or act on our recommendations in any
given case. It actually should be clear they listen to the rest of their
customers too, an indication of this is their attempt to clarify the last
open letter in order to quell at least some of the fears and
misunderstandings.

I don't believe Borland is really any worse than most companies for this.
No
matter what they do they are never going to please all customers all the
time. For every customer made happy by some decision, there's a chance
another customer will be dissappointed. Obviously the goal is to end up
with
more of the former than the latter but its always difficult.

--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can
stand by itself." - Thomas Jefferson


 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

Marcelo R. Lopez, Jr. writes:
Quote

By now, however, it should be obvious to ANY informed person that the
latter IS the case, and not the former.
Of course every customer can not expect that their views SOLELY will be
addressed, but when the vast majority of the folks posting state with
almost invariable unity ( of statements ) that what Borland is
proceeding on is a course contrary to what their current customer
base wishes and/or requires, it is pretty obvious that they're not
listening to you. If they're really listening to any of their
customers at all.
I really have to disagree with this opinion. While there is currently
confusion and upset with the issue of clarity on the future of Win32
development (which has now been clarified to assure everyone there'll be *at
least* an update for Win32), the basic direction isn't even in question as
far as I can tell on these groups or anywhere else. Even the vast majority
of those who have no plans for .Net in the forseeable future understand that
Borland - and Delphi - *must* go there and most understand that it must also
be a priority. So I do not see what it is that is "contrary to what their
current customer base wishes and/or requires".
--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can
stand by itself." - Thomas Jefferson
 

Re:Future Borland Products: What (stupid) activation schemes must we look forward to?

It looks like many customers are complaining about this:
news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39116962,00.htm
I hope Borland starts listening to it is paying customers.
"Wayne Niddery [TeamB]" <XXXX@XXXXX.COM>writes
Quote
Doug Chamberlin writes:
>
>My concern is that if Borland management does not listen to TeamB then
>what hope do I have for them to listen to me?

Actually they do listen (and believe me, we speak), but that doesn't mean
they are necessarily going to agree or act on our recommendations in any
given case. It actually should be clear they listen to the rest of their
customers too, an indication of this is their attempt to clarify the last
open letter in order to quell at least some of the fears and
misunderstandings.

I don't believe Borland is really any worse than most companies for this. No
matter what they do they are never going to please all customers all the
time. For every customer made happy by some decision, there's a chance
another customer will be dissappointed. Obviously the goal is to end up with
more of the former than the latter but its always difficult.

--
Wayne Niddery - Logic Fundamentals, Inc. (www.logicfundamentals.com)
RADBooks: www.logicfundamentals.com/RADBooks.html
"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can
stand by itself." - Thomas Jefferson