VisorCentral.com - Unlicensed programs/warez/cracks - have you ever used them on your PDA?

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page

VisorCentral.com (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/index.php)
- Off Topic (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=6)
-- Unlicensed programs/warez/cracks - have you ever used them on your PDA? (http://discussion.visorcentral.com/vcforum/showthread.php?threadid=40603)

Posted by silverado on 11-03-2003 06:25 PM:

I think the Purple person (X, Y and Z) is trying to discredit this board by claiming and seeking support for the claim that its users engage in illegal software stealing and distribution.

Being a software professional, I abhor the practice. However, the motives behind such a "poll" are sinister, IMO.

Posted by purpleZ on 11-03-2003 06:52 PM:

Re: Re: Re: I took the poll ...

quote:
Originally posted by tjd414

You make valid points, but I beg to differ on a few of your comments (is America a great country or what! )

1. Software companies not inviting competition is why we have so many problems. Take M$ for example. They wanted the browser market and they just beat down Netscape to get it. What the lack of competition leads to is one company dominating the market and getting to charge whatever it wants as far as price goes. AmiPro was heads and shoulders above Word, but it was crushed by Microsoft telling manufacturers that they had to put MS Office on their boxes ... this is not in the spirit of what is fair competition, IMHO. Now M$ wants to buy Google ... another great idea going to the biggest company to increase their domination.

2. Piracy will always be with us. Reasonable prices on software will encourage sales and discourage piracy. If more people could afford what they want, then alot of this would go away. Another example is ACT for Palm OS. It is a clone of Agendus ... looks the same (except for color) and works the same. Agendus is half the cost. Which one do you think will be pirated the most?

3. I can go to the library, check out a book, magazine, whatever ... stroll over to the copier and make copies ... that's how easy it could be. My DVD player records off the dish ... easy to do. The point of free software is that if you want to sell it, you can ... me, I'd buy it from you if it was good. I don't have the time and don't want to spend the effort to taking the code and building my own. As to people copying the code, changing it a little and selling it as their own ... hey, it'll happen. But the other side of the coin is service ... some companies have good service and others don't. Support is what keeps people coming back to the company and paying for upgrades.

4. Thanks for agreeing with me on toll roads and college professors! It just ain't true with the pharm cos, though. You can't tell me that the cost of research/trials/lawsuits/marketing justifies the higher cost of the product over the timeframe of a 17 year patent. Besides, why should drug companies market to the public when a prescription has to be filled out by a doctor? Isn't this putting the cart before the horse? Their profits are huge, so in no way will I beleive that all the money goes back into R&D.

All that being said, piracy will continue and steps to combat will be developed and the companies in the end will have tons more people buying rather than pirating their software. Great thread though ...

1) In a free society, I don't see how you can force the biggest companies to not use their advantage over smaller companies unless they do something illegal. And remember, Netscape's downfall wasn't entirely due to Microsoft. Sometimes a good product will survive despite having to compete with bigger companies. Opera and Paint Shop Pro are two examples. More often, smaller companies get squeezed out (like HandEra or Corel), but again this may not entirely be the doing of the bigger companies. Yes, it would be nice to see anyone selling a quality app succeed, but that's not realistic expectation in a capitalist market.

2) In theory, "reasonable prices on software will encourage sales and discourage piracy". Given human nature, I don't know if that would be true. I'd like to think so, but seeing how rampant piracy is in the Palm OS platform - despite applications being relatively inexpensive - this may be unlikely. (Imagine a program as useful, well-designed and well-supported as DateBk5 selling for only $24.95. How can anyone claim it's overpriced?) Given the value of many apps, I think Palm app pricing is actually more than fair. The problem is that users have been conditioned to expect everything to be free. Most of us expect to be paid for our work - so should Palm developers.

3) You may be physically able to copy books, etc., but isn't there usually a disclaimer stating you're not allowed to make unauthorized copies?
I don't think it's realistic to expect developers to code an app, have it slightly altered by a competitor, and say they can use support to maintain their customer base. If company X down the street sells basically the same thing for one tenth the cost, who do you think consumers will buy from? The pharmaceutical industry is a perfect example with generic versions of drugs.

4) You really have no idea what you're talking about with the drug companies. (Trust me, I'm a...) These companies spend BILLIONS on research and most of their drugs never even make it to market. The few they sell have to pay for all the things I mentioned as well as... profits! Remember, these aren't non-profit organizations. They're companies no different from IBM, Apple, Microsoft or the bakery down the street. They exist to make money. By the way, if you only knew how much drug companies spend on marketing, you'd be shocked.

I hope people see that piracy has its consequences and it's not as simple as just getting that app that Sprint (or company X) is denying them.

"The Handspring email app was my birthright!"

Posted by purpleZ on 11-03-2003 07:05 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by silverado
I think the Purple person (X, Y and Z) is trying to discredit this board by claiming and seeking support for the claim that its users engage in illegal software stealing and distribution.

Being a software professional, I abhor the practice. However, the motives behind such a "poll" are sinister, IMO.

I'm afraid there's no "conspiracy theory" here. The people at this site are regular people that are no different than those you'll find in any large group. If you took a similar poll in a Palm or CLIE or PPC, or PSION or Symbian (if they actually had any apps

) site, I expect you'd see identical numbers. Ignoring the issue is an easy thing to do. Ever wonder why you never see any in-depth stories or discussions about an activity that probably more than half of all PDA users have engaged in?

Posted by purpleZ on 11-03-2003 07:11 PM:

Duplicate post.

Posted by wahooka on 11-03-2003 07:23 PM:

heres a question to ask.

if the program is a novelty to the user, does anyone lose?

for example they get a pirated copy of a program and sometimes they use it. but in real life, the person would never buy it. he only has it cause he got it for free, and its not a needed program. since they really would never spend their money to buy the program, the fact that they have it doesn't hurt anyone cause the developer wouldn't have gotten money anyway.

know what i mean? obviously this is not true in all cases, but certainly in some. warez is kinda a novelty to many

Posted by speedracer5 on 11-03-2003 07:30 PM:

I don't think anyone here can debate the illegality of warez. I seen morality mentioned here pertaining to warez. A large portion falls in the eye of the beholder to some degree. I buy the apps that I use. As far as the Handspring mail app is concerned, I would use it (if I had it) At this point I dont think any e-mail app will use the photo database, so I would use the HS mail app UNTIL something did. I own VersaMail, so I would use that for everything but pictures (even though I haven't bothered to install VersaMail yet). Hopefully VersaMail will add support for it.

I will go on to say that yes, some people use warez. Does it make them a bad person, probably not. It is a law they chose to break. At this point, I would rather have them using warez than getting in their car drunk or road raging on the highway. They may be breaking the law, but at least they aren't increasing the odds of physical harm to someone. In a perfect world, everyone would pay for what they use. Last time I checked, it wasn't perfect.

Speed

Posted by tjd414 on 11-03-2003 07:32 PM:

Perhaps I really wasn't that clear in my comments ...

I didn't mean to imply that companies should invite competition, per se. But to cripple the choice in the market because you are the biggest company on the block smacks of what we don't want in the marketplace ... monopolies ... actual, or due to their size and weight, for all intents and purposes serve as a monopolies. MS is the bully, Apple tries and Linux is pushing hard. If Linux wasn't "free," MS would have crushed them years ago, just to keep a competitor out of the market.

I agree with you on DateBk5 ... it's a great program and based on users on this forum I am undergoing the trial. But I will buy it, not copy from somewhere, when the time comes.

So, you've never copied an article (or printed it out from the net) to use? There are probably disclaimers ... but if it is a bad thing ... take the copiers out of the libraries. From a cost and time standpoint it would be illogical to copy a whole book or magazine ... in the end why not just buy it, the cost is going to be the same. As for the idea of taking the code, improving on it and selling it ... well, that's the whole idea behind Linux. Red Hat took the code, improved on it and now they sell their products. If someone else takes it and improves on it and sells it for less than RH, then RH will have to respond ... either by improving their product or reducing the price they charge. As far as generic drugs go, well, the company had the market to themselves for 17 years ... and they usually are the ones that make the generics or have an agreement for manufacture anyway.

I don't understand the (Trust me, I'm a...) comment you made. I know folks in the drug industry and even after all R&D costs for all their drugs are paid back, the profits are huge. They are laughing all the way to the bank. When someone is sick, and their medicine costs $1,000 per month, we really need to examine the prices charged ...

No, I wouldn't be shocked about how much they spend on advertising ... it's an obscene amount. But my question remains ... why are they advertising to the public (Ask your doctor about the xxxxx pill)? Shouldn't they just advertise to medical professionals? Hey, here's an idea, the money they save on advertising could go to reducing the R&D costs and/or cost of the medicine ... nah, it would go to ... more profits.

IBM has tons of competitors (Dell, Gateway, Toshiba, Sony, HP and the list goes on) and they all make money ... what about Microsoft? It's not a reliable comparison.

But the bottom line is that I agree with your stance ... RIAA has chosen a way to deal with piracy ... a little draconian, IMHO, but it is ther choice.

I don't understand this comment though, "The Handspring email app was my birthright!" Could you explain it to me ... small words, please ... I've been up too long trying to get this project done!

__________________
Today's Oxymoron: 12oz Pound Cake

Posted by purpleZ on 11-03-2003 07:35 PM:

Re: Re: Re: I took the poll ...

Sorry about the duplicate post. (Internet Explorer getting unstable again.)

Never press the "back" button on your browser at Treocentral...

Posted by purpleZ on 11-03-2003 08:32 PM:

Re: Re: Re: I took the poll ...

quote:
Originally posted by bmacfarland

I thought the subsidiziding is done by higher costs of software and not by more stringent licensing. That's what they always say at least. If that's not the case, they need to simply raise the price of software and change it's licensing to not be by device.

I'm going to address a specific point, which is not relevant to me. First for full disclosure I use Eudora for e-mail. It's decent and free and all I really need. Second, Handspring bills the Treo largely as an e-mail device (it's on the of three communications in the "Treo" name). They include an e-mail application in the emulator software that developers are developing around. So anyone thinking of writing new e-mail software gets discouraged that they won't make any money with a free built-in alternative -- see old Netscape/Opera vs. I.E. Then in the 11th hour we find we do not get a mail application and are asked to pay for one. I'm sorry, but that's either implicit bad advertisement in the worse case scenario or just bad business in the best case scenario. I'm not saying that they should provide great applications, but they should minimally provide applications that e-mail, browse web, make phone calls, standard Palm organizer, play mp3s, and take pictures. You might also say SMS or IM should be basic software included. These seem to be features of the Treo communicator. Handspring has come through with pretty much all of the above (though mp3s requiring registration which is fine), except for e-mail for one network. I don't see why my contract signed with Sprint 9 months ago has any bearing on the software included with the device.

I think companies explain higher software costs as being due to income loss from piracy. For a solution, which should come first: companies reduce prices and piracy decreases or piracy decreases and companies reduce prices? Or would the latter ever follow the former (in both scenarios)? I wonder if there's any legitimate research into this (in economic theory)?

Yes, I agree that Sprint not including a decent email app is pathetic. But it's nowhere as bad as them hiding users' minute usage totals. Not many people will be savvy enough to figure out how to get around that one. At least most people can easily find a free email app. Thanks to the people who posted workarounds (Comet, TAKEphoONE and Cell Plan Tracker) in another thread.

Posted by purpleZ on 11-03-2003 09:21 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by ardint
Regarding pharmaceutical companies, I have a close family member who works in the Regulatory Affairs department for a major company.

She has told me that on occasion she has a difficult time coming to terms with how much her company charges for drugs compared to how much it costs to produce it. Of course, their are R&D expenses, but that cannot justify the kind of markup she described to me.

Bottom line: when it comes to drug companies there is in fact a VERY large profit margin there. The suits however, try to make it seem smaller, by factoring in the cost of advertising. However, I don't know of anyone who has asked their doctor about a drug because they saw an ad. To me, that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard of.

I don't know what company your relative works for, but she apparently doesn't understand the full picture.

If you only knew how funny your last two sentences are. Show your post to your doctor and I guarantee he/she will start laughing. I guarantee it.

Posted by purpleZ on 11-03-2003 09:32 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by wahooka
heres a question to ask.

if the program is a novelty to the user, does anyone lose?

for example they get a pirated copy of a program and sometimes they use it. but in real life, the person would never buy it. he only has it cause he got it for free, and its not a needed program. since they really would never spend their money to buy the program, the fact that they have it doesn't hurt anyone cause the developer wouldn't have gotten money anyway.

know what i mean? obviously this is not true in all cases, but certainly in some. warez is kinda a novelty to many

This is the specious argument always put forth to rationalize piracy.

By the way, if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Posted by purpleX on 11-03-2003 10:01 PM:

Care to show you you rach such conclusion?

Why don't we compare those pharmas to other industries. Some even have far higher risk, longer and more expensive R&D, semiconductor being one example. Compare TSMC/intel vs. Genentech or even better compare Merc to GE/3M. I seriously doubt pharmas have the same research depth and manufacturing infrastructure risk as semiconductor for eg..

Pharmacheutical doesn't even come close to chemical/petroleum companies when it comes to research and development cost, let alone semiconductor. Their product doesn't compare to technical complicity of what 3M is making, let alone what TSMC/GE/Intel are making. The process of making drug once structure is known is not much more complicated than making exotic candy compared to the making of your treo 600 from scratch, let alone GE's nuclear power plan or jet engine. I am pretty sure researching viagra cost less than researching a new light source for 90nm process. And guess who is paying the huge cost in early theoritical research in biomed? Not pharmacheutical company I can tell you that.

Deregulate phramaceutical and change the relationship between the pharmas, government regulatory bodies, and customer, You'll be paying Cipro cheaper than M&M candy when next terrorist scare come along.

If a tablet cost more than a whole cellphone or a gallon of high grade pesticide, something is definitely not right, because the patient will die of poverty first before the disease get him.

Posted by purpleY on 11-03-2003 10:29 PM:

OMFG, what is the world coming to, now I find myself agreeing with purpleX. Great, the apocalypse is upon us, at least I got a few weeks with my precious Treo 600.

I have to point out that purpleX, purpleY (me), and purpleZ are different people. Don't group us all together as some big conspiracy or something. That would be the most f'ed up conspiracy ever; ie all arguing and no conspiring.

Can't we all just agree to hate the pharmaceuticals?

Posted by purpleZ on 11-03-2003 10:36 PM:

Re: Perhaps I really wasn't that clear in my comments ...

quote:
Originally posted by tjd414
I didn't mean to imply that companies should invite competition, per se. But to cripple the choice in the market because you are the biggest company on the block smacks of what we don't want in the marketplace ... monopolies ... actual, or due to their size and weight, for all intents and purposes serve as a monopolies. MS is the bully, Apple tries and Linux is pushing hard. If Linux wasn't "free," MS would have crushed them years ago, just to keep a competitor out of the market.

I agree with you on DateBk5 ... it's a great program and based on users on this forum I am undergoing the trial. But I will buy it, not copy from somewhere, when the time comes.

So, you've never copied an article (or printed it out from the net) to use? There are probably disclaimers ... but if it is a bad thing ... take the copiers out of the libraries. From a cost and time standpoint it would be illogical to copy a whole book or magazine ... in the end why not just buy it, the cost is going to be the same. As for the idea of taking the code, improving on it and selling it ... well, that's the whole idea behind Linux. Red Hat took the code, improved on it and now they sell their products. If someone else takes it and improves on it and sells it for less than RH, then RH will have to respond ... either by improving their product or reducing the price they charge. As far as generic drugs go, well, the company had the market to themselves for 17 years ... and they usually are the ones that make the generics or have an agreement for manufacture anyway.

I don't understand the (Trust me, I'm a...) comment you made. I know folks in the drug industry and even after all R&D costs for all their drugs are paid back, the profits are huge. They are laughing all the way to the bank. When someone is sick, and their medicine costs $1,000 per month, we really need to examine the prices charged ...

No, I wouldn't be shocked about how much they spend on advertising ... it's an obscene amount. But my question remains ... why are they advertising to the public (Ask your doctor about the xxxxx pill)? Shouldn't they just advertise to medical professionals? Hey, here's an idea, the money they save on advertising could go to reducing the R&D costs and/or cost of the medicine ... nah, it would go to ... more profits.

IBM has tons of competitors (Dell, Gateway, Toshiba, Sony, HP and the list goes on) and they all make money ... what about Microsoft? It's not a reliable comparison.

But the bottom line is that I agree with your stance ... RIAA has chosen a way to deal with piracy ... a little draconian, IMHO, but it is ther choice.

I don't understand this comment though, "The Handspring email app was my birthright!" Could you explain it to me ... small words, please ... I've been up too long trying to get this project done!

If Microsoft wasn't around, Apple would be "the bully". There's no room for altruism in business. The only way to change the situation is to come up with a better/cheaper product than whatever is currently dominant. That's what the Linux dreamers are hoping for now. (And probably will be hoping for a long time yet to come.)

DateBk5 was just an example - the best I could come up with - about how unreasonable piracy can be. It's a fantastic, complex app (one of the main reasons I've stayed with PalmOS), has a responsive, enthusiastic developer supporting it, updates are provided free to registered owners and costs only $25. On top of this, the profits from its sale go to a charity. Despite this, the DateBk5 developer has been victimized by piracy since the app was originally released. If an app like this is pirated, it's amazing any developer can make a buck in this kind of environment.

The pharmaceutical industry is a very complicated question that I won't attempt to explain further here. I will let you know that drug companies now advertise directly to patients... because it works. They have shown that it is more cost effective to target patients directly than trying to influence doctors because patients are more easily manipulated. Drug companies have studies showing that a high percentage of doctors find it easier to simply write patients a prescription for whatever drug they come in demanding (because of e. g. a newspaper ad) than spend the time explaining to the patient why that drug might not be the best choice for them. Sad, but true. That's why most countries outside the U.S. have tight restrictions on how drug companies can advertise.

The RIAA is another issue, but again, if consumers expect that everything should be free, who do they think is going to provide the content?

The "The Handspring email app was my birthright!" quote was a weak attempt at sarcasm, but that's how some of the posters here almost seem to view Sprint's failure to include the app.

Ok, that's enough ranting for one day (year?). The only major issue we didn't cover was nuclear weapons - maybe in another thread?

I thank the moderators here for their recent posts making it clear that warez will not be permitted on Treocentral. Now let's all get back to talking about Treos!

Posted by Rob600 on 11-03-2003 10:37 PM:

I might point out that depending on the EULA, you can install some programs in multiple places...as long as you only run it on one at a time.

I know this was the case with Microsoft a few years ago, not sure anymore.

Point is, EULA's don't always tie a piece of software to a single computer...sometimes they tie them to a single person.

-Rob

Posted by Doug Hillman on 11-03-2003 11:11 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by purpleZ

This is the specious argument always put forth to rationalize piracy.

By the way, if a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

I don't think it effectivly rationalizes piracy. Not, at least, to anyone but the foolish.

But it is true, none the less.

I've used pirated software in the past. I'm using some now. If I wasn't using a pirated version of these programs, I'd be using something else. I wouldn't have bought it.

This doesn't make it any more legal or morally acceptable. But it DOES drive a stake through the SPA's argument about how much money the casual pirate costs software companies. Their whole stance is built on a incorrect assumption that the pirates would have purchased the software if they were unable to pirate it.

This is closer to true in a corporate setting, but just doesn't fit the home/casual user.

__________________
If you can't be a good example then try to be a horrible reminder.

Posted by purpleZ on 11-03-2003 11:11 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by purpleX
A confused tale, suggestive of tabes dorsalis

My younger triplet brother, as our father used to say: 'Tis better to be thought the fool and remain silent, than speak and remove all doubt.

i.e. Don't embarass yourself (and bring shame to our family) by talking about things you know obviously nothing about. Return to Hunan province, LittleX. It is time for you to pay for your transgressions against the Treocentral, Palminfocenter and Brighthand villagers.

Posted by wahooka on 11-03-2003 11:21 PM:

just as a side note...

all the purple x y z people....

what is your deal? you're obsessed with piracy. stop being so friggin annoying

btw it's queer how you guys have the same name, if you're really different people

Posted by speedracer5 on 11-04-2003 12:06 AM:

Just wait for the rest of the purple alphabet people to show up....

Posted by snerdy on 11-04-2003 12:40 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by wahooka
all the purple x y z people...

Hey, it's a PurpleJerk.

On (the now Off-Topic) topic: piracy is bad. So is corporate greed. Wow, what exciting, controversial opinions.

What is more interesting is the shades of gray between those two (boring) extremes. It is, most likely, impossible to untangle exactly how much sharing "intellectual property" hurts or aids the people who earn their living making that material.

It is certainly true that sometimes people wind up buying a CD that they originally listened to as a copy received from a friend. It is equally true that the same situation has, at other times, resulted in one less sale for the people who made the CD.

So what are we gonna do? We're gonna do nothing.

We will continue to engage these products with which we are interested. If that means copying a web browser from Palm's Tungsten handhelds over to the Treo600 to see how it works, we'll do that. If engaging these products means buying the latest, most exciting thing, we'll do that too. Due to this activity or not, some of the people who make these products will make more money and others will make less. Meanwhile the whole capitalist maket will continue lumbering its blind way forward into the unknown. Whee!

It'll work out just fine.

Also: you can take your three-pronged poll and shove it up your... oh, it's probably already there. Nevermind.

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:27 PM.

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
Show 20 posts from this thread on one page