How I'm spending my money

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Iliah, May 8, 2005.

  1. Iliah

    Iliah

    Jan 29, 2005
    nowhere
    Purchasing PS CS2 I'm supposed to pay for protection software that is included into the program. It is supposed to protect me from folks pirating the product and suggesting low prices for their design and editing. This protection does not work - 1 minute of Google reveals cracks for activation.

    I was amazed to find free cracks for Gretag ProfileMaker that costed me $5000; and some even more pricey products.

    Sorry for the grumbling, folks.
     
  2. cwilt

    cwilt

    Apr 24, 2005
    Denver, CO
    Write it and they will crack it.

    Resistance is futile. :x
     
  3. Iliah

    Iliah

    Jan 29, 2005
    nowhere
    Question is - why I'm paying them for protection that does not work at all?
     
  4. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Iliah,

    I agree 100%. Thanks for bringing it up.
     
  5. Well the average user doesn't know where to find the programs. Without the program, the crack is useless.
     
  6. Iliah

    Iliah

    Jan 29, 2005
    nowhere
    Crackers send the program with crack; in case of PS - it is a link to dl trial copy from Adobe site.

    Average user? I'm less then average user of internet.
     
  7. I felt bad paying so much for Photoshop. Now I feel better. Sorry it's at your expense.

    Grumbling totally OK with me.

    Regards,

    Mike
     
  8. Iliah

    Iliah

    Jan 29, 2005
    nowhere
    Mike, you said "do not read" :)
     
  9. You should try computer games. The copy protection is so horrible some people can't install the game OR the game plays poorly BECAUSE if it yet the hackers have the crack and play the game within hours of release.

    I actually download game cracks so my son and I can play games without the CD-ROM in the drive since the copy protection causes the drive to sometimes go crazy (the copy protected game is essentially difficult to read by some computers).
     
  10. Iliah

    Iliah

    Jan 29, 2005
    nowhere
    Joe, I know nothing about games. But weak protection of professional software is a threat to me and my customers.
     
  11. Iliah,

    That's pretty ironic, no? Thomas Knoll makes a fuss about Nikon's "encryption" of WB info. Every hacker worth their 2 cents could've hacked that "encryption" -- and Adobe didn't even need to hack it themselves as David Coffin did it already and published the hack freely (via dcraw). Nobody's getting sued over the hack. But when you buy something from Adobe that you as a professional end-user actually want to protect your work, that protection is too weak to be of real use.

    BTW, folks, don't for a minute believe that real encryption can be easily hacked if done right and intentionally so. When done right, it requires some serious brute force method to crack real encryption. Have you ever heard of the 56-bit RSA RC5 encryption secret key challenge that resulted in a worldwide project to try to hack using brute force method from ~8 years ago? I actually had a couple of my own PCs participate in the project for a while. Don't know how long it eventually took a worldwide community of desktop computers and workstations to finally crack, but it was definitely more than a whole year -- it took about one year to cycle through ~1/2(?) the keys looking for the one key needed to crack it. We're talking about hundreds of thousands of computers running around the clock. And that was only w/ 56-bit key -- nowadays, you can have 128-bit key, which means 2^72x or ~4.7 thousand x billion x billion times that previous~72 million x billion combinations.

    http://www.sigpc.net/v1/n22.htm

    Basically, if done right, the encryption should be essentially impenetrable. In cases where encryption is cracked, it's generally because it was done very sloppily *or* did not use a sufficiently good method -- for instance, the above mentioned 128-bit RSA is actually available for commercial use and used widely on the web nowadays. And FYI, it took a while even for the relatively weak DES encryption found in the DVD format to be cracked, and in that case, it was cracked mainly because one licensee of the DVD format did a sloppy job of it -- they left their key unprotected in their code -- so that the key was discovered by the kid who wrote DCSS.

    BTW, in case everyone hasn't caught on, IMHO, I suspect Iliah is grumbling at least in part over Adobe's hypocrisy and sloppiness while they made a big fuss over what Nikon did w/ their WB info. OR maybe I'm just reading too much into his post. :D

    _Man_
     
  12. Iliah

    Iliah

    Jan 29, 2005
    nowhere
    As a matter of fact, no.

    My issues are -

    money waisted on protection;

    professional market prices going down;

    low quality work dominating the market, setting new standard;

    discrediting of profession;

    tightened time frames for production ( because of increased competition, low prices, and lower qualification task force);

    possible outsourcing of the work to countries where copyrights for software are not an issue, while labour is cheaper;

    possible questions from my colleagues - why you spend all that money on software instead of purchasing new equipment (we need new shredder urgently!!!), paying bonuses and getting better insurance :)
     
  13. Probably off topic but I recently bought a wonderful Fujitsu automatic double-sided sheet feeding scanner for articles, bills and catalog pages. Included in the package was a license for a full version of Adobe acrobat, with serial number and all.

    Well since installing it on my non-imaging machine it now takes 30 seconds to load any PDF or change a page. So I went to remove it from my PC through Control Panel. It asked me to install the CD (strange), then locked up. Now when I try to run Ad or Remove Program through Control Panel I get an error: Another oddity, Adobe Acrobat doesn't show up on my programs menu.

    Windows cannot access the specified device, path or file. And yes, I am logged in with administrator priveliges.

    Maybe it's co-incidence but this Adobe is becoming an irritant.

    Rich
     
  14. Adobe has so many stupid patents on image editing software, they should really be sued for holding an unfair monopoly on the business. Adobe was once cool, but now they rank up there with other non-inovative companies such as Micro$oft, EA, Sony, etc.
     
  15. Well over 500 lines deleted in the registry, a pass through with Registry Mechanic (15 Adobe errors fixed, thank you very much) and deleting every adobe acrobat folder in Program Files...then installing adobe acrobat reader 5.0 and it now takes 1/2 second to read a PDF again.

    I swear, if N.C. addressed only a few more issues (or if RML was ready for prime time....and documented) I'd never have to use PS again. No trash intended Illiah..without documentation I'm lost. I subscribe to your beta forum and am drooling over what you've added.

    I appreciate your technical posts as well; please keep them coming.

    Rich
     
  16. Iliah

    Iliah

    Jan 29, 2005
    nowhere
    Dear Rich,

    RML started as a tool for ourselves and partially - to make a point. We criticized NC heavily for blown-out highlights, moire, noise, - and we were asked: "can you do any better"? To start the project was the only possible answer.

    We hoped that our samples will force Nikon Capture Team to reconsider some methods they were using, and implement better ones.

    Since that does not happened we continued our development and now RML has its own life, we have our obligations to the users, and we will certainly turn it into highly usable raw converter.

    Phase I is already pretty much tightened, we have very few error reports on it. Speed is increased greatly, and LightTable Factory simplifies workflow.

    On a side note, one of the problems Nikon IMHO is experiencing is that cameras are much more capable then Capture. Weak AA filters Nikon is using are fully justified if conversion is done properly. No moire, no artifacts of other kinds. Otherwise we are spending money on good lenses only to sacrifice their resolution during conversion.
     
Loading...