Author: Justin Foo
Date: 09:15:49 11/03/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 29, 2005 at 00:05:20, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 28, 2005 at 20:51:30, Roger Brown wrote: > >>On October 28, 2005 at 18:49:21, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On October 28, 2005 at 18:21:37, Jake Sisko wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Is Fruit 2.2 copy protection scheme the trend of the Future? I hear that there >>>>is not one cracked version of the program. Perhaps Other companies will adopt >>>>the same practices of Fruit to ensure that programmers actually get paid for >>>>there work? Seems like a good ideal to me! >>> >>>1)How do you know that there are not cracked version of fruit? >>>I think that you never can know something like that and you may know only the >>>opposite. >>>The best that you can say is that you did not find a cracked version of fruit. >>> >>>2)I thought first that it is a good idea but I changed my mind about it after >>>reading a lot of complaints in this forum and after understanding that there is >>>probably no copy protection that cannot be cracked by crackers and I think that >>>the fact that the copy proterction of fruit cannot be cracked by most people(and >>>maybe by most crackers) does not help much because one cracker may share fruit >>>with a lot of people. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >> >>Hello Uri, >> >>Do you read your posts BEFORE you post them? > >Usually I read it together with writing it but I often read the post before I >click post. > >I am going to read this post twice before posting. > >> >>I promised to leave your rather strange posts alone but you are saying a number >>of things here that are making me curious. >> >>(a) Why are you inferring that the poster was searching for cracked versions of >>Fruit? > >This was not my intention to claim that his intention was to use fruit >illegally. > >I agree that my choice of words was not the best. > >My sentence was: >"The best that you can say is that you did not find a cracked version of fruit." > >It was better to write. >"The best that you can say is that you do not know about people who use a >cracked version of Fruit". > >> >>(b) I cannot understand how the fact that some thief somewhere is working on >>cracking Fruit makes the copy protection of Fruit a bad idea. > >The question is simply if the copy protection helps Fabien to sell more copies. >I read that some people claimed that they are not going to buy fruit because of >the copy protection. >Let denote their number X(no copy protection give X customers). > >It is clear that some people will not buy fruit and copy it instead of buying it >in case of no copy protection. >Let denote their number Y. > >The copy protection can help Fabien only if Y>X > >The question if it is possible to crack fruit is relevant to the value of Y so >it relevant for the question if Y>X. > >Note that I did not complain about the copy protection and I only expressed >opinion that it may be better for fabien not to use that copy protection(my >opinion was different in the time that fruit was announced and I changed it). > > >> >>(c) One might infer that your statement about the likely procedures of hackers >>could be restated (using your own logic of course) as: >> >>One cannot say that hackers may do or not do this or that, one can only say that >>one has received cracked programs in this or that way. > > > >The problem is that I read here in the past that every system of copy protection >can be cracked. > >If someone find some copy protection that in theory cannot be cracked in a >reasonable time then it will be a different story but I am afraid that with the >computers of today it is impossible. > >Uri In theory, as long as disassembling is possible, anything can be cracked. It just takes smart crackers (and perhaps more time) to counter the smart anti-cracking techniques. If Fruit hasn't been cracked yet, it probably uses some industrial strength program for software protection. Search any reversing (which I hope is legal) forum and you're bound to find people posting for help to illegally "unpack" executables. Justin
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.