Slashdot Mirror
Symantec Hit by Product Activation Glitch
An anonymous reader writes "According to this article, Symantec has hit a snag in their product activation scheme. On a certain machine, the software machine would always ask for the activation when the computer is started or restarted, despite the fact that they have thoroughly tested the scheme." According to the article, Symantec has finally managed to replicate the problem, and those hit by the bug are asked to contact Symantec's support channels. However, there's no mention of a fix yet.
This is showing evidence in favour that activation schemes are just plain bad business. E.g. the potential money you save by hindering piracy minus the lost sales due to pissed off customers => positive or negative?
This message was brought to you by the Manham Canning CanManer Tom St Denis.
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
How many times do we need to see stuff like this?
Product activation only irritates legitimate buyers of software and all it does to software piracy is encourage hacking or mass duplication of enterprise edition CDs.
When you have legit customers using 'pirate' discs because the product activation features annoy them (or completely prevent them from using the software at all) you've just backed the slowest horse in the customer satisfaction race.
It's not like M$ didn't have the same snags over two years ago with XP. Product activation schemes are just another flavor of compatibility problem that the software/hardware industries have been having since the first geek stuck the first expansion card into bus slot. Try as they might, coders always miss SOMETHING and no matter how many hardware and software configurations are tested prior to release, there will always be more combinations than they can test.
Film at 11.
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
Unfortunately, I've seen plenty of cases of viruses under Linux. My machine has been repeatedly scanned by other machines that are infected with a trojan that exists only under Linux. And don't forget the most insidious security threat - the rootkit. A number of my friends have had their machines rooted, probably for months, and don't even suspect anything. Oh, and there's plenty of poorly written software such as sendmail that aids in the rooting of machines. And some of this is in the default install of most distros.
Doesn't have virus problems? Whatever.
Hi, folks. I'm Seth Finklestein.
As most of you know, concerns about privacy on the Internet have been growing. More than 45% of users now run a personal firewall. Of those, more than 80% are "very concerned" when a seemingly non-Internet-related application such as a disk diagnosis tool starts sending packets across the firewall.
The fact of the matter is, people will steal Symantec's products if they want to. It's just like in the movie and music industries: people have the right to download whatever they want, and the right to choose whether the content creators deserve compensation. It's very sad that Symantec doesn't trust its users who have made the conscious decision to send them money.
For that reason, I will continue to liberate Symantec's products off of KaZaA Plus, and I urge all of my followers to do the same.
I'm not Seth Finkelstein. I still speak the truth.
Product Activation on products as important as antivirus apps is bad IMO. When average users are confronted with this, its easy for them to get frustrated with, and what happenes when average users get frustrated with software? They dont use it.
As with all stories about virri, here is the link to a FREE Antivirus app.
Obvious jab at Windows and the three-a-day reboot plan aside, this is just dumb. In fact, the whole situation is just dumb. Why does it seem that Symantec/Norton <insert product here> consistently makes a bad situation much, much worse?
Feh.
I have to assume that there are very many intelligent programmers at these companies. They have to know that everything they do can and will be cracked by pirates and that the cracks will be publicly available and easily accessible.
Is this just another case of managerial idiocy--the programmer grunts can't explain to the bosses that it is a futile misguided effort?
Or are the programmers just not really trying? Are they just going along with it because it's their job, rather than actually trying to make a quality product? (which, as it turns out, really isn't their job)
The crack I used works just fine! :)
Actually, none of the last 10 stories are about Microsoft.
My theory: You're a moron.
This is exactly why I bought a copy of McAffee's. I didn't want to have to deal with product activation on windows with something that could protect my data. I think of product activation in this case as getting mugged in a street and having a cop stand by while your getting mugged cause you didn't give him the product key for the taxes you spent.
Although I heard from a relative that they got billed by McAffee's even after they told them to cancel their subscription for virus updates. I was told they were basiclly ignored by the company. So if you have to run windows be very careful what you get when your dealing with anti-virus packages.
It's sad really, all of this adds the the nightmare of maintaining a windows system. My linux box has none of these problems and was 10x easier to install then Windows XP. (Mandrake 9.1)
~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
I've had to re-activate I don't know how many XP boxes. Office had a bought a while back and would always need activation.
Heck, even my Linux and OS X boxes keep asking for activation!
Login:
Nice troll. It'd be better if you knew the difference between a virus and a trojan.
hahahahaha
so funny
Remember back in the day, when copy protected 5 1/4" floppies were all the rage? The software would lock up and freak out. And within a couple of days somebody would post a program to copy the disk without the protection to your local BBS. Sometimes just copying the floppy would make the software more stable. Remember dongles (some companies STILL use them)?! Remember the dongle remover programs that tricked the program into thinking there was a dongle there when there wasn't?
Copy protection rarely stops piracy, and usually screws with the customer. Online activation is just the newest wave. Even M$ can't get it right. Has anyone met somebody who really really likes online activation?
IMHO, the best way to fight piracy is to have a great product that's reasonably priced. And the purchase price buys you support and updates. Each CD key can only register once for a support/update password, so those who pirate the software don't get support. And catching a pirated key/support p assword combination is as easy as running your HTTP logs through an analysis program.
No vendor will ever completely stamp out piracy, the best they can hope to do is making purchasing the product as attractive as possible.
It will always be negative. Always. Those who support copy protection tend to be in two camps - those who believe copy protection actually works (also known as the group who have their head so far up their arse that they can count their own teeth) and those who admit that copy protection doesn't prevent the pros copying the product, but it does prevent "casual piracy". The former group obviously has a connection with the planet more tenuous than that held by someone on an LSD trip so they can be ignored. The latter group sounds reasonable, until you realise that, on the whole, "casual piracy" isn't Joe Sixpack giving his mate a copy of the original CD, it's Joe Sixpack giving his mate a copy of the cracked CD. So It doesn't even have that much effect on so-called casual piracy either. So you piss off your customer base for a tiny reduction in copying, while the number of cracked versions in the wild will probably increase because the customers that actually want to use the product, but don't want to put up with the activation, will use the cracked version.
It is utter, complete and total stupidity.
The only explanations I can come up with for companues that actually waste their time on this crap is that the decision makers don't even know what these computer things are, they need their collective braincell examining or it's related to insurance premium reduction.
Screw Symantec. What they are trying to do is to make you and me - and people like us - who own multiple machines at home, buy a copy for each computer we own. They actually think that we would shell out $500 or $1000 in multiple licenses, when in fact, the most amount any home consumer would pay for any software title is $100. And expect to install it on all their machines.
Are we cheating them? NO! Because FAIR USE allows you to run this software on as many machines as you want, just not at the same time.
But, these companies and their anti-piracy nonsense are enemies of FAIR USE, and would curtail YOUR RIGHTS in a greedy push to capture the marketplace not by innovation, but by fascism and via control of the government to alter YOUR RIGHTS to suit them.
Symantec could always ask the warez community for a 'fix'. *grin*
also known as the group who have their head so far up their arse that they can count their own teeth
I don't understand this. Care to elaborate?
Here is my product activation story, I frist posted this on my blog but I wanted to contribute it here too.
I had to reinstall one of the machines in the Web Cafe that I own. Since all the computers have the exact same hardware, the easiest way was to pull the hard drive from one of the PCs to the one that is acting as a file and print server.
Because of several reasons that I really don't want to explain right now, all the machines are running Windows XP Pro (yes, I did try using Linux first, no, the clients didn't want to use it.)
So I have all my licenses in order ( the BSA can come here and kiss my ass) and activated.
I swapped the hard drives, and of course, I knew I would had to activate Windows again. No problem right?
yeah, right
A message came up saying that I had exceeded the number of installations valid for my CD Key or something like that.
"Crap, now what? I paid for All these licenses!"
So I called the 1-800 number on the screen and tried to navigate the voice menu (I hate those). The system hanged on me twice before I could speak to a real person.
"What seems to be the problem"
I described to her the problem and I had to dictate her a 30 digit number that was on screen. After a while, she gave me another 30 digit number to type.
After we were finished I asked her If I would have to call every single time I needed to reinstall Windows. She said that she didn't knew.
If I have to call Microsoft every single time I need to reinstall MY machines, I am going to be very, very pissed.
With product activation, Microsoft is treating their customers, me in this case, like criminals. I could have downloaded a crack from the Net, but no, instead I spend 10,000 pesos (almost 1,000 dollars) in Microsoft software and I get treated like a criminal and waste my time calling them for permission to reinstall my machines.
This sucks.
As soon as I think my clients could start using a Linux desktop just by sitting in front of it and not needing any training, all Microsoft software is out from here.
Product activation sucks. The people who want to use software illegaly with product activation will find a way (cracks, serials, etc) and the only ones getting the finger are the honest paying costumers.
adl
My boring ramblings
Obviously this n00b doesn't know you can't talk bad about *x (including Apple) without getting modded down.
Product activation doesn't faze the pirates, all it does is enrage legitimate buyers and drive them to competitors (or to pseudo-piracy themselves).
Last week I started setting up two new G5s for a client. They use QuarkXPress, the 6.0 version of which has adopted product activation (I've been steering all my clients to Adobe InDesign, but this particular one was willing but unable to switch for some reason). Any Mac people reading this who historically know how bad Quark is can see where this is going. Three times, I retyped the two codes on the sheet that came with the upgrade CD to activate the software, and I'm punching the damn things in correctly-- what do I get? "Invalid serial number." So I have to call these fucktards to get this shit activated, which I'm not doing until I have the second machine running, so I won't have to call a second time if that one fails as well. And after I clone the build to the second G5, I'll have to uninstall the Macromedia shit they got and reinstall and activate it, because that has activation as well. What a colossal waste of time.
And all of these companies make it such a fucking hassle to get a multi-user install code, that when I do a build destined for multiple machines I just have clients buy single-user licenses so they're covered, and I install the shit with warezed site-license codes. Why doesn't every company simply offer a web page where one can go, punch in all of their single-user codes for a given product, and in return get a single code good for that number of licenses? I don't have time to sit on hold with the Volume Licensing Department, I have work to do! And Quark, those fucking bastards CHARGE you to consolidate licenses, so I just used warezed multi-user codes for them, too, as long as my clients have enough single licenses to cover themselves. You can take my Office v.X Volume License Edition install CD when you pry it from my cold, dead hands-- no more typing in those stupid fucking codes from MS, either.
Oh, and speaking of MS, last week I had to add 5 CALs to a client's Terminal Server. Microsoft e-mailed us two "proof of purchase" type codes, and we had to go to a web site and punch them in to get the actual install code. But did that work? Noooo, I ended up having to call them to get the fucking code. All this jumping through hoops, I ended up billing the client for an HOUR, just to punch in a fucking 25-character license code. It's ridiculous.
As you can see, these anti-piracy features do nothing but waste my billable time (and ultimately my clients' money), and force legitmate users to turn to cracks and hacks and codez to get things done in an efficient manner.
It would be a perfect fit for Symantec to get acquired by CA. They're both perfect examples of companies selling mediocre crap and providing lousy customer service for said crap. I don't think Symantec tests *anything* before they ship it. Why hire a QA department? Our customers are our QA!
With that in mind, Computer Associates should buy them and integrate the stinking pile of Symantec sh^h^hproducts into their own fetid pool of merchandise.
Easy: a trojan is a piece of rubber that you strip over your ...
piece ... to prevent viruses from spreading.
... is what project it is talking about.
Time to fill in the facts, it would seem.
You know... I'd really like to know just how they think a customer's gonna be able to pull that off.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
It Serves Symantec right.. too bad for them. If they are successful in getting it to work they will see their virus product become the most unpopular instead of one of the most popular. What Symantec doesn't realize is that Peter Norton made the product great... back when it was Norton Antivirus he actually would release his product to the Pirate BBS's for the hackerz to beat up on.. we were his QA. Not to mention that we made him famous. Seems awful strange that all these companies forget what made them great, not to mention rich.. the pirates and warez groups. Even Billy Gates pirated, phone phreaked and other such activities.. that's how this whole business got started.
However, there's no mention of a fix yet.
And when there is a fix it will only be available to users who have properly registered and activated their copy of the program.
-- MarkusQ
I've seen the same problem with public access terminals in a library. About half were linux, and the users would only use them if they had to (i.e., all the windows machines were in use).
Maybe, if you charge for use, you could try the following: start with a few linux machines, and charge less for using them -- and hang a little sign saying, "These machines use linux, they cost less because linux is free and windows is expensive". Make them as similar to windows as possible, with similar desktops and behaviors.
People might be willing to put up with something new if it will save them money. Just my $0.02.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
got to be such a PITA!
My company standardised on Office 2000 at a cost of > $300 per seat (10 seats). The original activation was sooo easy; we have an "always-on" Internet connection, the software connected to Microsoft's site and we were off to the races in about 30 seconds after installing.
As computers will do, several went belly up and I had to replace them. One needed nothing more than a bigger hard disk, but required re-authorization. In the meantime (less than 6 mos), MS had released Office XP. Wouldn't you know that activation was no longer so easy! The software kept coming up with "server not responding" and I was forced to call to get an authorization code. This activity included an extra copy that we bought that had never been activated! So much for their promises of being easy to authorize.
After a couple of 20 minute (mostly on hold) sessions to get authorization numbers, I tracked down a cracked copy of Office. I still keep the original licenses in a locked cabinet in case we are ever audited by the software gestapo, but I re-install off of the cracked copy to avoid the authorization. I personally think this is a forced upgrade policy.
We can no longer buy Office 2000. What do you think I'm going to do when we need a new copy of Office? Microsoft has forced me to pirate their software!
(posted as AC for obvious reasons)
>I run Solaris, BSD, and ocassionally Linux. I've yet to get hit with a virus, worm, or spyware.
:p
Thats because I hacked your box three months ago and cleaned it up for you.
Very informative post, showed me a number of free alternative to Ghost et al. Moderators these days. May you rot in metamod hell!
I only wonder why the hostname is tinyurl... I wouldn't exactly call this piece of equipment "tiny"...
Any lock no matter if its software or physical can eventually be defeated. Actually that applies to any security measure, if it was designed by a human; it can be defeated by one.
All a lock does is keep honest people honest. It will never keep out a determined attacker.
Troll! I call bullshit!
a trojan that exists only under Linux
and which one would that be? [pause] Uhhuh, thought so!
A number of my friends have had their machines rooted
Uhhuh, bullshit again! You have no friends!
Software copy-protection is like CD copy protection: its just not going to work: Anything you do to try and restrict software someone will find a way around it simply because every system out there is based on the same line of code:
if(product activated){run product} else {don't}
what ever method they use it all boils down to just running the program or not running it, at the most there will be afew extras that keep checking or individual modules activating, and the most complex might involve running some parts on a dongle but all these can essentially be bypassed. This is why microsoft is so keen to get TCPA off the ground because they know full well that they and most of their windows-developer friends' business models will colapse unless they can totally restrict the platform and have anyones ass if they try and bypass it.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Secondly, rootkit is only a problem for systems where the passwords travel unencrypted over the network. Most people with a clue do not do this anymore... passwords can easily be encrypted when transmitted as part of the login process. Even then, only the real dough-heads actually log in as root.
Thirdly, compile the Linux kernel with Exec Shield enabled, and "poorly written software" ceases to be a security threat (the software will simply seg fault and crash -- an inconvenience at worst, much less of a concern than the security threat of the possibility of root access through a buffer overflow exploit).
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
i haven't seen many seen many stori about virri - please provide referenci.
To all our beta testers out there!
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
considering accessing the Internet by any means on a computer running on any OS (Windozes or Linux or Mac) hasn't reached it's peak yet. How easy is it to just get connected? Hey, it's not just about good ol' US of A we're talking about here... how about the rest of the "World"?
Alright, before you guys start raining balls of fire on me, consider this: How much would it take to setup a computer (PC/Mac/whatever) to establish an Internet connection? From scratch: an OS has to be installed, NIC/modem need to be configured, acquire an account with the local ISP, then authenticate the account to login (except Cable of course).
Even if an Average Joe would be able to get a pre-built Dell/HP/Compaq/whatever box from a local store, it would require them to have an ISP account or, at the very least, a Cable connection. Even then, how many people on the whole freakin' planet has access to Cable???
The day that an "average-non-tech-savvy" user can connect to the Net just by "plugging the cable into the wall" like a TV or a telephone, means the day Product Activation would work the way the "Major Software Developers" would want it to work. The more fuss one has to go through to connect to the Net, the more likely any Product Activation scheme would fail at some point. If getting from point A to point B takes too many steps, for seamless Product Activation, one point of failure is just one too many.
Just my 2cents.
Symantec should realize their market, and for those who paid, expect to be able to use their product.
Luckily they don't have this yet on the macintosh side...
The interesting thing to me is that the big benefit of the current crop of antivirus programs, like NAV, is that they have this constant feed of updates to stay (nearly) up with the virus arms race. Symantec charges extra for that, and I think they should. I paid the fee gladly and they've keep viruses off my Winders machines purdy gewd.
So the real business model, like the one I rely on at my company, is recuring revenue. That's where the gold is because its multiplicitive with SKU sales. Mmm Mmm good!
End of the day, what Symantec should want people to pass around copies of NAV, but make it so it's only really effective if they keep it up to date through a subscription. I think in this case the subscription is warranted because NAV actually does have to do a substantial amount of work on a continuous basis. You are paying them to be your front lines in an ongoing battle and they, like many of the others, do a good job.
AOL got the model right when they put threw AOL disks out of airplanes for all those years just to get the subs. That model would work for antiviral software and many other things as well.
David Whatley
Maybe, if you charge for use (this is commonplace in Belgium), you could try the following: start with a few window'ed stalls, and charge less for using them -- and hang a little sign saying, "These stalls have windows, they cost less because they bring more customers to our pub, especially if you are a good looking young lady". Make them as similar to the other stalls as possible, with similar seats and paper rolls.
People might be willing to put up with something new if it will save them money. Just my $0.02 Belgian franc.
Symantec has a LONG history of releasing buggy software. That's why I don't buy anything from Symantec.
with people like him, it's no wonder major software developers want to come up with Product Activation schemes and the likes. But as it turns out, all it did was manage to help this guy up there (and other like-minded jack-@$$es) get his ego inflated exponentially for all to see. Sheesh...
People complain about Microsoft's flaws, but M$ is lightyears ahead of Symantec when it comes to testing.
I've had two bad experiences with Symantec's "let the end-users test it!" policy. The first was when Win XP first came out. Norton Antivirus (certified for XP) caused chronic swap file corruption. It was particularly amusing because NAV was included with the computer (a Compaq laptop).
A few months later, I (stupidly) tried to install NAV on another computer. It got stuck in an endless loop of demanding that I activate the product, then saying that activation failed. I tried uninstalling then reinstalling, but no joy.
Symantec's response was that one of my NAV registry settings must be bad, and since NAV's uninstaller didn't delete all of NAV's droppings, the solution was for me to manually go through my registry and clean every last trace of NAV, a time-consuming process. Of course, it didn't help.
I switched back to McAfee's VirusScan, and won't touch anything Symantec again. My company is now Symantec-free as well, as are my friends and family who ask for (and take) my advice.
So, why complain when crappy software companies join the activation bandwagon?
Ditch them. Support their efforts by avoiding them by any means necessary until they start making good software or dry up and die, whichever comes first.
Symantec is nothing compared to the d day.. the day microsoft releases that longhorn bull crap. I bet that'll piss off the rest of the people who were thinking about whether to ditch xp or not.
Software activation is AWESOME. At least for us, "teh open-sore hax0rs" of evil openness.
Tell me, what is wrong with customers getting sick and tired of jumping through hoops to use a product after paying their hard-earned money for it? Would you do the same thing if it were your car? Would you like to call Ford everytime you serviced your Ford POS?
We're not nitpicking. If software companies insist on making programs that make me pull my hair out, I have a perfect right to bitch and complain, plus I have the right to use a different program AND tell everybody else about it. That's capitalism. Get used to it.
Symantec's stated reason to going to product activation is that NAV is one of the most pirated pieces of software out there.
Many of the pirates advertise their warez via spam.
Symantec is a member of the Business Software Alliance.
Symantec has an email reporting address specifically to foward spam advertising their products to.
Question: why doesn't Symantec have the BSA kick down the doors of these spammers, and haul them off to jail (the spammers are actually violating several laws, unlike most of the people the BSA currently goes after.)
My take: Symantec makes money off people "upgrading" their pirated versions to legit versions. Symantec beleives they will make even more money going to product activation. Symantec does not really care about piracy per se.
www.eFax.com are spammers
On Symantec's website under their Norton SystemWorks 2004 Pro feature list it mentions this:
"NEW! Includes product activation procedure to ensure authenticity."
Just what I've always wanted -- huzzah! This by the way makes it to spot 2 on their feature list. Less marketoid bullshit please... Thanks.
"Remember dongles (some companies STILL use them)?! Remember the dongle remover programs that tricked the program into thinking there was a dongle there when there wasn't?"
Dongles don't exist to stop Joe Sixpack pirating expensive software, they exist to stop corporate users pirating expensive software. Smart companies know that Joe 6P isn't going to hand over $2000 for their software that they use at home for non-profit work, but they do know that corporations will pay if it's worth buying.
However, without a dongle, Joe Co-Worker may come to you and ask to borrow your CD and install the software on their machine, and it will run. With a dongle, Joe will have two choices: either steal your dongle or download a crack from the web. Most employees who'd happily borrow a CD and install an extra copy of software that the corporation hadn't paid for will not go so far as to steal a dongle or even take the obviously illegal step of downloading a crack so they can run the software without paying for another dongle.
So provided it prevents corporate users from running extra copies of the software, it probably prevents 90% of losses from software piracy.
The worst part is not the extra hazzle activation causes, but that it may lock you out from your own intellectual property. And when I say property I don't mean the program you have licenced, but the documents you have created using it.
What do you do if the company you have licenced your software from goes out of business, and you need to reinstall the software on a new computer? What do you do if they no longer support the product? What if communicatios with the company is broken due to war or other circumstances out of your control?
God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
You need the corporate version of Windows XP Professional. It does not require activation. (Moderators, don't moderate this as a troll. It's true, there is a corporate version that does not require activation.)
If things continue, think where they will go: 800 digits to do activation! If you make a mistake, the EULA says MS can come around with whips.
It doesn't work to have proprietary software. It is becoming more of a way to deliver hostility to honest people than a way to deliver a useful product.
Install Mandrake Linux. You boot from the CD. It asks you three questions (if you are connected to a network), and everything works. It's stable.
Advantages of Free, Open Source Software:
There are no tricks to get you to spend more. There's no one to be your enemy part of the time. When you try to get tech support, you can find people who are helpful, not arrogant, as in the case of Microsoft and Symantec. Open Office works very well and is less quirky than Microsoft Office. You don't need to worry about licenses and possible lawsuits if you install too many copies. There is no vulnerability of the week. There is no company representative lying about competing software. There are no closed file formats. There are no sneaky EULAs that change during security fixes, so that you must agree to a different contract after you have already made the decision to own the product. There are no security fixes that change the settings of your software, so that the new settings are less secure. (MS in case you haven't seen that one; it's Multiple Scuzziness.) With Open Source, you don't have to be business partners with people whom you would avoid if you saw them at a party.
On the other hand, proprietary software can be character building if you survive. You can make a scientific sociological study of how some people, when they get power, torture other people. And, when you arrive at the Pearly Gates, Saint Peter will say, "Proprietary software user? You've already been to Hell. Go directly into Heaven."
In 8 years I have yet to be hit with a virus. It makes me wonder how useful _personally_ (for me) owning Norton AV is. I know, it is like saying "I've never been in an accident. Why have more than the legal minimum on car insurance?" But, unlike car insurance, if I get hit with a virus, I can go out and instantly buy NAV and repair the problem.
As a result I won't be upgrading to NAV 2004. They can keep their buggy product activation. Especially since I have NAV 2003 with the crack that makes the subscribtion last till 2041.
The only explanations I can come up with for companues that actually waste their time on this crap is that the decision makers don't even know what these computer things are
No, it is comfortable, highly-paid executives trying to force oldthink onto a new problem. Product activation is destined to fail simply because it punishes the legitimate user.
I chose W2K a year ago rather than the fancier and "newer" XP for exactly this reason (me not being bright enough/have the time to run Linux), since I add hardware to my machine fairly often and didn't want the additional hassle.
Here's a free clue, from the article:
Some of the 1.2 million customers that have installed software maker Symantec's latest Norton PC security package have been unable to use the software because of new antipiracy technology, the company confirmed Thursday.
Ok, so 1.2mil is decent install base.
But...
"We thoroughly tested the technology," Smith said. "We ran extensive tests worldwide. You had well over 250,000 customers complete activation, and we didn't have any complaints about this."
So, 1/5'th of your install base did ok, and the rest did not?
Ok, yes I've taken this out of context, but even a second reading *still* seems to imply that 4 out of 5 dentist^H^H^H^H^H^H customers think product activation sucks.
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
The real way to make pirating harder is to develop a stealth worm that is integrated in the software and when a cracker tries to alter a bit, it will activate the worm and corrupt the software being hacked. This is how it should be done!
Free Software does not have to waste its resources writing futile mechanisms to prevent "unauthorized copying".
Free Software does not require that programmers choose between hacking together half-usable components with their program, or paying a lot of money to buy binary-only components that probably suffer from the same problems. Instead, Free Software lets programmers share the work and use any piece of code from the entire set of existing Free Software.
Non-Free software is a waste of resources that could be utilized doing meaningful things.
Use only Free Software, and put an end to wasteful activities that harm individual's freedom in the name of a providing an incentive to create software that just barely competes at all.
The bosses boss says "we want this" and that's what they're going to get. Nevermind that it's stupid, useless, and a waste of time and money. A newsflash: position does not imply competence.
When you're a programmer, you don't get paid for quality. You get paid for sitting 7.5 h at the desk pounding out code within the given time limits and adhering to the relevant processes to make it all seem good on paper.
Mods, do your job and mod this Linux zealot into the ground.
You're incorrect in a lot of your claims. I've come to expect that from a site dominated by Linux zealots such as yourself.
Actually, it's this trojan that I was referring to. What pisses me off about Linux users is they can't possibly admit that there's problems with their operating system. I was on the receiving end of lots and lots of scans caused by this exact trojan. Linux is not invincible from viruses and trojans.
Second, if you had a clue, you'd know there's lots of potential sources of rootkits, including exploits and security holes in software running on Linux. Rarely have I seen a box rooted due to a packet sniffer picking up passwords. You show exactly how clueless you are by saying rootkits are only a problem because of using unencrypted passwords over a network, when there's obvious other sources of being exploited.
Linux isn't above the problems other operating systems have, and to think it is is nothing short of extremely foolish. It's clueless users such as you that make me hate the Linux community. It's getting better, but Linux is still plenty vulnerable, as is the software written for it.
Back under your bridge, troll.
It's really aggrivating how companies think they can just go ahead and require to people to activate software. It has to be the most annoying "anti-warez" plan yet. Activation Patches/Cracks work wonders in these situation. No, I'm not talkin about pirating or warez either, so anti-pirating zealots, don't get on the soapbox just yet! I've purchased computers w/ Windows XP Pro licenses and when I need to reformat I use the Activation Patches. I purchased the software, I don't feel I should have to contact them to fingerprint my hardware each time I decide to reformat.
I've been running a pirated copy of Windows since it was released because I must reload my machine regularly (usually once a month) and I dealing with the product activation.
:/
Meanwhile, my legitimate copy of Windows XP Pro is still shrinkwrapped on my bottom shelf, but at least I own a license I guess
This is only one more proof that copy protection (a.k.a., digital rights management, a.k.a., product activation, a.k.a., anti-piracy, et cetera, ad nauseum) does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stop people from making illegitimate copies of software or other information, while doing ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING to inconvenience legitimate users.
Not only did you fail to link to Avast, but you also used an incorrect pluralization of virus, and spelled it wrong to boot!
Consequently, YOU FAIL IT. HAND.
i just wanted to interject that cable isn't exactly out of the woods when it comes to ease.
Example: i just signed up to Comcast for cable internet (used to be with charter before i moved, which by the way is AWESOME when it comes to making it easy for the customer wanting cable internet). I was forced to "activate" my account through the net. This allows only the computer with my matching MAC address to be the only one able to access the net. Anyway, i activated, and then plugged in my router (didn't work with it used inline for activation).
So what do i get when i plug it in??? a pop-up saying that another computer is already using my account with a different MAC address! (the F&*king router!) Anyway, this is a perfectly legit usage of their fair usage policy.
Conclusion, Comcast sucks.
Another conclusion: Once something "slightly" better comes along for broadband, i'm switching. Comcast lost another customer cause they made it more than a hassle for me to even use their service.
I actually work for Symantec's customer service and we've been taking quite a few calls for this. It kind of sucks when there's nothing we can do about it. But I don't have any real inside information on when they're getting a fix for this. But I hope it's soon. It's a pretty bizarre problem and doesn't seem to happen to everyone.
1. Called 1-800-745-6055. They said to call the download dept. at 1-866-285-6460
2. Called the download department. Their menu didn't sound anything like a download dept. After calling several times and figuring out the number to press to talk to a live human, I was told to call their subscription key dept. at 1-800-441-7234.
3. Called the subscription key department. Had to again figure out how to talk to a human. Finally I did and they forwarded me to an "activation support specialist".
4. Specialist tells me to call the download dept. as specialist only has access to physical CD keys, not the downloaded keys.
5. Called the Download Department. They told me to call the subscription key department. I told them I already did and I'm getting sick of the run around. They put me on hold. Finally said there is no way they can reset my key but they will either ship me a new CD out or let me download a new copy. They tell me it will take 10 days.
I have not received the new CD yet but I did get an email saying it was shipped out. So we will see if this fixes the problem.
//m
It's the Seth FAKELSTEIN troll. You bit! The real Seth Finkelstein didn't write that.
I love reading this on the day the cracked versions of the mentioned products are released...
1. Legitimate customers have their serials stolen (happens to people that "install" backdoors) and don't understand why the program is shitty.
2. Someone who has a legal copy, but can't find the serial just pops in one (I know I've done that) and don't realize that the program is shitty for that reason.
3. You code mistakenly indentifies it as being pirated (ok if you do a manual addition of hacked serials you find, that's maybe not that likely.. but for automated schemes, CD checks, hardware config checks, it is).
4. The negative publicity your software gets over such errors. (One dissatisfied customers usually talks 10x as much about it as a happy customer).
Of course, if I suspect those problems to be less serious than the problem they solve (people not registering).. but it's not like it's perfect.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
While I agree with you that this mostly just annoys legit customers.
I do know of some people who finally went out and bought winXP because their cracked copy couldn't install the service pack which they needed for USB 2.0 support.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
...which included a flaky PITA "activation" system in TurboTax last year. They got bad reviews from the likes of Walter Mossberg, lost a significant chunk of business to H&R Block's TaxCut, pulled it from the product, and went to the expense of running full page ads in The Wall Street Journal and USA Today in which product manager Tom Allanson "personally apologized" for doing it.
I hope Symantec will find out that company that actually has competition can get away with treating their customers poorly.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Let's try that again...
Symantec should talk to Intuit, which included a flaky PITA "activation" system in TurboTax last year. They got bad reviews from the likes of Walter Mossberg. They lost a significant chunk of business to H&R Block's TaxCut. They are dropping product activation from next year's product, and went to the expense of running full page ads in The Wall Street Journal and USA Today in which product manager Tom Allanson "personally apologized" for the debacle.
I hope Symantec will find out that no company that actually has competition can get away with treating their customers poorly.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
So you're saying virus authors need to add product activation. That way when users get frustrated with the activation they won't run the virus.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
Look, Symantec does product activation to try and combat the estimated $500+ million in piracy of the Norton product line every year.
You can use the other open source alternatives if you want, but you won't get the immediate response that Symantec provides when large worms and virus outbreaks take place, nor will you get the other customer support provided by Symantec.
Software bugs happen, and it's impossible to test for every possibility (hardware configuration, etc). Just bear with them and let them fix it.
You're an idiot. That's like saying "A needle in the eye is neither good nor bad, it just depends on whether you notice it or not."
It's a waste of time to point out that you're nothing more than a stupid troll, but then again, I've biten. So I guess that IHBT, IHL, HAND.
Does that thrill you? Do you get some kind of weird satisfaction at seeing people bite on your obvious and pathetic attempts at controversy? Even your troll brethren seem to think that you're a waste of time.
You're not fooling anyone.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have captured the enemy! Time for a public execution! ;) Just kidding.
I do not purchase software that requires activation.
first reply: It will always be negative. Always.
Will it always be negative? I agree that, if there is a reasonable alternative (think Turbo Tax, and all the other tax software alternatives), it will definitely be negative. However, in the event that there is no reasonable alternative (whether real or perceived, remember, perception is reality), like, say, Windows XP, Office or Adobe Photoshop, will sales be negatively affected by activation? I mean, yeah yeah Linux/MacOSX/Gimp r0x0rs (and I for one would be a self proclaimed Linux/MacOX fanboy), but seriously - has Microsoft reported fewer sales of Windows XP due to activation? For Office? I know that Adobe's latest Photoshop with the activation is new (I don't think the prior version had activation, though I welcome corrections here), so we won't see for a bit if they experience reduced sales due solely to activation. Now, in the context of this article, I do believe that Norton will receive some backlash since there are several known alternatives. But, I think Microsoft and Adobe are safe, for now.
thats why most modern home "routers" (pat devices) have mac address cloning....
If your router is a linux box, then lookup ifconfig's options (or the docs for the sysconfig ifup entries on how to set a mac address automatically on ditros like redhat)
--
Time is on my side
take any pictures of McAfee on your loading docks.
The alternative to MS Windows is an older Windows versions (it is too much trouble to upgrade). Also, increasingly, MacOS X and Linux. There are also alternatives to Photoshop, such as, for example, Photoimpact. It's true that the immediate impact might be low, but in the long-term it's a bad idea to piss off your customers...
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
Of course, if people start to take a peak at MacOS X, *Linux, *BSD - GOOD! Actually, I hope the next version of Windows is so laden with activation/DRM/whatever hassles (and one cannot receive support on "old" activationless products), that everyone gets up in anger, shakes their collective angry fists, and shout "Damn you, GATES!!!!!!!" and goes on to download/buy alternatives. But, that's way too far in the future. My crystal ball's usually very cloudy with future events past 24 hours, so I don't know - but, my guts tell me that this won't be the case, and that most people will just roll over and take it. Yeah, I'm a bit pessimistic about my fellow (wo)man.
Now, as far as Photoimpact vs Photoshop is concerned, I'll have to admit that my opinions on these 2 products are irrelevant, since I'm not a graphics twidget. Heh - when have irrelevant opinions stopped me from spouting off in the past :) A few Googles later, it would appear to software reviewers with Photoshop experience (which is the target audience for Photoimpact - this is the target audience that they will have to convice to switch over if they want to succeed) surmise that Photoimpact would be a very good choice for someone who wants some high end features at a very good price. However, it appears that Photoshop's big advantage in this arena would be in it's ease of use (remember, whether this is true or not, perception is reality for these people) and I think most people will stick with Photoshop in the near future even with this activation crap rolled in - but, I really hope I'm wrong and that people vote with their dollars for Photoimpact. Again - I'm just a pessimist when it comes to my fellow (wo)man.
I suspect so. It's such a PITA to deal with product activations, especially if you're setting up a brand new network of a few PC's and the internet connection has not been installed yet!!! ARGH. Really, does this reduce piracy? Even if it did, would it serve the long term interests of the software firm? The folks who pirate, probably aren't going to be buying the software if (mythical) unpiratable software is released.
it might come as a surprise to you and all the computer savy crowd of /. but there are people out there who has no idea what piracy is; yet, they still need nav and thus go out to purchase it ( typically, suggested by the geek next door ). this probably happens less often in us and europe but in other countries, especially in developing countries, i have seen people selling cracked versions of nav in an ugly, brown box for about the same price as the original boxed version, calling it the oem version. and, no, i am sure it's not a legitimate practice symantec is conducting in such countries because i was asked to install one such copy myself, just to find a dir called "crack" buried deep within an "install" dir ( yes, yes, i was also the geek next door many years ago ). so, there is actually some need to let the consumer know that his/her copy is truly authentic; especially for such basic software that is probably needed by anyone with some sort of internet connection
if you think about it, it's the same deal as buying a rolex knock up and thinking it's original. the sad part is, of course, i am not sure if symantec's implementation of product activation is the answer to that; in fact, any sort of product activation might not be the answer
disclaimer: this post is based on an experience dating way back to 1998. may be people are overall more computer savy nowadays and thus the original idea might not be true anymore
-- null
Which is one of the main reasons that OSI projects are gaining ground year after year.
Data locked into a proprietary format does nothing for the end-user, but everything for the vendor because of the network effect.
Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
~~~
We're running Architectural Desktop on about twenty workstations. ADT uses C-Dilla to ensure that you're not doing anything dodgy, like we have the time to bother. Every week one workstation falls over and says the authorisation code is invalid and forces that machine to be re-registered REALLY quickly. Two days or so punch in another code before it refuses to load.
:(
Because all our serial numbers have been registered multiple times because of this very problem, we have to send e-mails to Autodesk directly with an explanation as to why we should get another registration code. Feel like you're a crook yet? If you're lucky you'll get an answer that day. So make sure you add that reason otherwise it may take a while to get that machine running again!
They offered a patch on their website that supposedly fixes the problem but it changes absolutely nothing.
Screw Norton, I wouldn't have their crap anymore. I use Trend. Trend Catches those stinking viruses and trojans without taking over my system completely and making it dam near un-usable as Northan always did. Trend catches stuff Norton used to let through. Norton Anti-Virus is crap. This is just one more reason to dump their stuff and get something that works on your MS box.
If you don't like what I write don't be a CS and mod it down. Refute it.
Yea I can't spell. So what is your point?
I guess that's +1 for Symantec...
posted anonymously for obvious reasons
So I have to call these fucktards
It's pretty fucking obvious that using a kick-ass amount of fucking foul-ass fucktard language is a sure-ass way to sound like a fucking retard.
Perhaps if you were to moderate your wording slightly, somebody might take you more seriously? Even when you rant, you limit the impact of your expression by using excessively foul language.
The "F" word should be used (by you) once a month, tops. When you use that word, those who know you should be shaking in their boots - 'cause they know you are seriosly PISSED.
I've found that using foreign or archaic foul words works quite well. Examples? Bloody. (Bloody might not work in England) Piffle, There are plenty.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
You left out MANGOO BOTTLING.
Bend over.
Remember production activation is basicaly immoral, boycot products who use it, and let them know that you are not going to be slave to their schemes for ever. Buy a product you will always be able to use.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
You're not fooling anyone.
Who said I was trying?
"Sufferin' succotash."
Touche.