SHAREWARE DOESN'T WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hubert
Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
the registered version.
Do you really believe that?
When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
What makes you believe anybody else will?
Future
On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 08:02:26 GMT, hcr...@gte.net (Hubert) wrote:
>Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
>the registered version.
>
>Do you really believe that?
Well, considering all the checks I've gotten in the mail, it's hard
NOT to believe it, unless someone slipped some LSD into my coffee and
I just imagined the extra income.
>When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
Admittedly, I've only registered one shareware program (MOD4WIN), a
few years back.
>What makes you believe anybody else will?
The checks that come in the mail every once in a while.
--
Spam Avoidance: You can Email me at "future at oz dot net". My web page is at:
http://www.oz.net/~future/. Programmers: Avoid reading the backs of shampoo
bottles, "Lather. Rinse. Repeat." can cause serious problems. :-)
Doren Rosenthal
Hubert (hcr...@gte.net) wrote:
: Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
: the registered version.
Yes, I can tell you first hand that they will because they send me money
for my utilities every day.
: Do you really believe that?
My bank believes it. My wife believes it. I'm still skeptical, but I've
been at it since 1990 and so far so good.
: When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
I don't pay for many shareware programs because I don't use that many
myself, but I do spend a little. The program must offer something I need
and give me something when I pay that I don't get for free. Just removing
the nag screen for example dosn't excite me very much.
: What makes you believe anybody else will?
The advantage shareware offers authors is "exposure". There are things you
can do to encourage people to pay you, but authors of comercial or
shareware programs all have that same problem. If you let people try your
software before they buy it, and make it available as shareware, you will
have more people trying it.
If your software is VERY good, the more people that try it before they buy
the better. If your software isn't very good, print a nice box telling how
great it is, run ads and put it on store shelves.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
Awarded "Best Shareware of 1997" by Boot-It
NEW! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!!
Regi$ter Online!
In article <6fd284$92g$1...@gte1.gte.net>, hcr...@gte.net says...
>
>Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
>the registered version.
>
>
>
From a shareware registration service point of view, we see different. VERY
different. The most successful shareware programs are those of quality, that are
NOT program replicates of what is already on the pc system, are supported, and
are constantly undergoing improvements.
Over a grand a month proves you wrong.
-Patrick Miller
--
Regi$ter Online!'s 1-900 and CC Shareware Registration Service
http://www.registerline.com | mailto:sup...@registerline.com
Jonas Stewart
Hubert wrote in message <6fd284$92g$1...@gte1.gte.net>...
>Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
>the registered version.
>
Yep. The key is "good program"
>Do you really believe that?
>
Yep. Then again, I believe that Alien beings live in the nostrils of giant,
Atlantian ant eaters!
>When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
>
I don't remember the date, but it was a credit card purchase and more
like 5000 cents. ;) But most importantly, it was a tool I wanted, and the
only way I was going to be able to use it was to pay for it. Hence the
point of shareware, if it's something you find that you want, and to get it
you need to pay for it...you buy it.
To make shareware work, you really have to have a damn good product. If you
make crappy stuff, you get an empty PO Box. If you make good, desirable
stuff, you get happy and paying customers. It's really that simple.
>What makes you believe anybody else will?
Well hmm, I dunno. Just intuition I guess! hehe
It doesn't happen overnight, but it does happen and it does take a lot of
persitance. If you are trying to create your own shareware you might want
to:
1. Do your research to see if people want what your planning on making.
2. Bust your butt to make a best product you can
3. Don't get discuraged and be patient.
Jonas Stewart
Silver Creek Entertainment
www.silvercrk.com
These are the apparent opinions of a rabid poodle and are not NECESSARILY
the options of Silver Creek Entertainment. Thank you.
Borje Hagsten
Hubert wrote:
>
> Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
> the registered version.
>
Yep, they do. Honest people with some brain to think with do this all
the time. You see, when you register, you thereby also tell the author
of the program that it is worth something to someone. This ecourages
him/her to keep up the good work, developing the program to something
even better than it currently is.
If you don't pay for the stuff you use, then how will the author know
you or someone else like it? Maybe he/she just quits working with it
after a while, because he/she never got anything out of all those hours
of work. Just think about it - would you work for free yourself?
Also, if many prople pay for the program, the author can invest in
better stuff and make something really good out of it. This always comes
to the users advantage, because once you have bought a user-license for
a shareware-program, you most of the time get small upgrades for free
and bigger upgrades for a discounted price. Many times you also get
bugfixes, additional information and other news sent to you directly
from the author, plus the fact that you usually can contact the author
directly with suggestions and/or ideas and maybe even get some functions
you need added to the program instantly.
Aside from all this, I think it feels good to pay for something I use,
especially when I know that someone, probably just as poor as me, has
spend hundreds, maybe thousands of hours of his/her free time in
creating the stuff.
> When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
Actually only a couple of months ago, registering some programming
stuff. I have registered more than 10 shareware-app's over the years and
I have always gotten more out of it than I thought I would when I payed
for it, through free upgrades, valuable information, examples and
instant bugfixes when that was needed, etc. All this for 20-30 dollars -
compare with Microsoft's prices and I think even you can see that paying
for shareware really is worth the price.. :)
> What makes you believe anybody else will?
Because people do it all the time, that's the simple answer to this
stupid question. You see, people are generally seen quite honest about
paying for the stuff they use. Join the club, be wise and pay for the
stuff yourself. I bet you'll be surprised when you see how much value
you get for your money and how good you will feel inside afterwards.. :)
Borje
------------------------------------------------------------
From: Borje Hagsten E-mail: hag...@algonet.se
Internet: http://www.algonet.se/~hagsten
Developer of TOLKEN97 v3.2, language-translator, texteditor,
dictionary and vocabulary-test, all in one good application.
Member of the Association of Shareware Professionals (ASP)
ASP-address: http://www.asp-shareware.org/
------------------------------------------------------------
TarHeel
Hubert <hcr...@gte.net> wrote in article <6fd284$92g$1...@gte1.gte.net>...
> Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
> the registered version.
>
> Do you really believe that?
>
> When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
>
> What makes you believe anybody else will?
>
This topic has been debated many times through out the years. I'm
not saying it shouldn't be debated again because times are changing
and more people are entering into the field daily.
My personal belief is that there is a percentage of people out there
that will register, but this percentage is dropping rapidly. Hell, I just
heard on the news this morning where a guy found a bag of money
containing $70,000 on street curb. The name of the bank that lost
the money was on the side of the bag. The guy promply returned the
bag of money to the bank and received a reward for doing so. The
amount of the reward was $20! The point is, there are a few honest
people still out there. I'm sure this guy won't be again but that is
another topic, grin.
Back to topic. A computer is not a computer without shareware tools.
Users that use only commercial software are recent computer buyers
that has no concept on what their computer is capable of.
Something is needed to make shareware more attractive then just
a great product. I remember when the ASP was starting and I believe
this was their main goal. In the beginning their method was highly
successful, but now times are changing and shareware marketing must
change as well. (Please no ASP debate).
Damn, while writing this I came up with a great idea! I'll need some
time to think it out better before sharing it, sorry. Still I would like
to discuss this possibility with several shareware authors privately. I'm
interesting in talking to only authors who are one man companys.
Please email me at ( tar...@premier1.net ). My ISP is still having
mail problems at times so if it bounces, keep trying. Please include
a short program description, web page address if you have one, and
a fairly realistic registration count.
It should be interesting if not fun, and who knows it might work well.
Terry
Jim Dompier
> the registered version.
>
> Do you really believe that?
Yes, its happened to me. I made over 30 grand in 18 months from a utility
I wrote a couple years ago.
> When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
I do it regularly actually. When ever I need software for something, the
first thing I do is look for shareware. I have MANY registered pieces of
shareware on my systems.
> What makes you believe anybody else will?
>
Refer to first question.
People aren't going to hunt you down and throw money at you. You have to
work at it and it helps to have a little marketing savvy.
I take it, your software isn't doing so well?
--
Jim Dompier
**remove the seven and the obvious to reply**
Nathan Hawks
software (who has produced every game they've ever made on a
shareware basis, including the Quake series, and is
currently making boocoo dollarz). Try telling that to Jasc,
Inc., producers of Paint Shop Pro, probably one of the top
ten best selling paint programs available.. available as
shareware in a fully featured version. Try telling that to
C|NET, who makes at least hundreds of thousands of dollars a
year selling advertising on their shareware.com site.
I can figure that the person who originally wrote this is
probably a very frustrated coder who's trying to make his
way in the shareware world, but hasn't seen a single dollar
yet. In that case, I say.. BUCK UP, (WO)MAN! Shareware can
and does work, if you've got a good product. Try to
remember that Bill Gates got his start by hacking a modified
version of PC-DOS with a buddy in his garage, that tends to
put things into perspective.
Nathan Hawks
Radioactive Web Design
http://www.isotopia.com/
nat...@isotopia.com
Enginuity
Hubert wrote:
>
> Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
> the registered version.
You're stereotyping shareware as low-quality software. Shareware is a
marketting method. When Microsoft sends out 60-trial versions of
Microsoft Publisher, don't you see that this too is shareware, it's
just called something different! Many so-called shareware programs
today aren't strictly "honor system" but enforce payment (including
ours).
>
> Do you really believe that?
Yes
>
> When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
A few months ago
>
> What makes you believe anybody else will?
They send checks / credit card numbers to me...
Enginuity LLC
publishers of RollOver (yes, it's "shareware")
http://www.enginuity.com
Borje Hagsten
Hubert wrote:
>
> Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
> the registered version.
>
Yep, they do. Honest people with some brain to think with do this all
the time. You see, when you register, you thereby also tell the author
of the program that it is worth something to someone. This ecourages
him/her to keep up the good work, developing the program to something
even better than it currently is.
If you don't pay for the stuff you use, then how will the author know
you or someone else like it? Maybe he/she just quits working with it
after a while, because he/she never got anything out of all those hours
of work. Just think about it - would you work for free yourself?
Also, if many prople pay for the program, the author can invest in
better stuff and make something really good out of it. This always comes
to the users advantage, because once you have bought a user-license for
a shareware-program, you most of the time get small upgrades for free
and bigger upgrades for a discounted price. Many times you also get
bugfixes, additional information and other news sent to you directly
from the author, plus the fact that you usually can contact the author
directly with suggestions and/or ideas and maybe even get some functions
you need added to the program instantly.
Aside from all this, I think it feels good to pay for something I use,
especially when I know that someone, probably just as poor as me, has
spend hundreds, maybe thousands of hours of his/her free time in
creating the stuff.
> When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
Actually only a couple of months ago, registering some programming
stuff. I have registered more than 10 shareware-app's over the years and
I have always gotten more out of it than I thought I would when I payed
for it, through free upgrades, valuable information, examples and
instant bugfixes when that was needed, etc. All this for 20-30 dollars -
compare with Microsoft's prices and I think even you can see that paying
for shareware really is worth the price.. :)
> What makes you believe anybody else will?
Because people do it all the time, that's the simple answer to this
Dave Webber
Hubert wrote in message <6fd284$92g$1...@gte1.gte.net>...
>Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
>the registered version.
>...
What a strange message. Lots of people earn money by writing good programs,
distributing demonstration copies via internet, and providing a good service
the customers who buy them. It's a matter of fact, not an article of faith.
Dave
Dave Webber
Author of MOZART the Music Processor for Windows
(Details on http://www.mozart.co.uk )
Philip Jones
>Hubert wrote:
>>
>> Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
>> the registered version.
Yep. That's how it works all right. I've written a program that has made
more than a few grand over the past five years (new version just released,
and expecting a LOT more), and that's completely on the side - I do also
have a normal life as a medical student!
>> Do you really believe that?
Of course - holding the cheques in my hand makes it a lot easier of course!
:)
Seriously though - there's a lot of competition in the shareware industry.
However, for my app, which converts units, there are so many crappy programs
that people will pay for something that is high quality. My users belong to
several countries' governments, universities, and most of all - professional
engineers. They are more than willing to pay a fair price for a useful
program.
That is truly the key. You can just throw together an app, and expect
thousands of dollars to roll in - it's a tough marketing job, but the
rewards are definitely there.
Regards,
--
Philip Jones
Author of OmniCon 98
Accurate, powerful, and extensible unit conversion for Windows
http://www.execulink.com/~pjones
pjo...@execulink.com
GMusson003
>From: Nathan Hawks <nat...@isotopia.com>
>Try to remember that Bill Gates got his start by hacking a
>modified version of PC-DOS with a buddy in his garage, that
> tends to put things into perspective.<
It might IF it were even close to being true. You've gotten
Gates mixed up with Jobs and Wozniak (and even then the
garage thing is more romantic hyberbole than truth.)
Gates' first "product" was BASIC.
George
st...@tropheus.demon.co.uk
On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 08:02:26 GMT, hcr...@gte.net (Hubert) wrote:
>Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
>the registered version.
>
That's how it works.
>Do you really believe that?
Yes, I believe it - as a shareware author I know it!
>
>When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
>
Last week, $59 to be exact. It was for a package that I could easily
have written myself but it would have taken me a lot more than $59
worth of time. Get the point?
Steve
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Wolstenholme: Neural Network Software
Neural-Planner NeuroDiet EasyNN
http://www.tropheus.demon.co.uk
Stephen Chrzanowski
Before I start, playing with a DEAD SERIOUS HAND, a few thoughts that
I've had about all this shareware stuff. I just want to say that I
honestly never have registered a peice of shareware. NOT because I
thought it was a dumb program (Sometimes the program I want *IS* a very
good game or utility) NOT because I didn't have the resources (Until a
few weeks ago, I didn't have a job, and didn't find it fair to run to
mom and dad for $20 for a game/util that was probably gonna end up on
the shelf anyways) but most of the time, I've heard horor stories that
someone would pay the $20 fee for the program in question, the author
takes the cheque, and then leaves town, while the person waits by the
mail box patiently. It's happened with a few BBS applications (When
BBS's were MASSIVE news!) I'm just afraid of getting ripped off! So, I
either settle for the shareware version if it doesn't have a time frame,
or I practice my hacking skills (Cracked only one out of fifty programs,
and that ONE was a half-a$$ work around, that STILL nailed me by locking
up the system! >:I) **OR** I attempt to write my own application that
does SOMETHING like what the original program did. I get deep enough
into it, but, then back off, cuz I either lose interest, or something
else pops up. :) I do also really feel a little bad when I attempt
that cracking stuff. Mostly it's just cuz I've either got nothing else
to do, or, I want to force myself to learn a little bit of ASM. Either
way it was a bad habbit, and I've gotten rid of all my ASM editors.
(Still got disk editors.. Who knows when I might need a couple more
billion dollars in SC2000.. :)
Now reading the past post here, that Hubert wrote, I get the distinct
impression that he's one that doesn't pay for the registrations, but
for particularly different reasons. Am I the only one that thinks that
Hubert here is discouraged that shareware isn't always a quick buck, so
he doesn't attempt to write his own programs for market (If he's a
programmer at all, I don't know) or if he finds other ways around the
payment to get what he wants? Or, am I completly off the mark???
I also, techincally, am blind to how much you shareware authors make,
and tell ya the truth, I really don't need to know. I prefer working at
my `DAY JOB` cuz that way I'm monitored, and know when I've gotta pick
up the slack a little.
I've also got a question for the software authors... Do you give out
free software to your best friends??? If so.. I live at 123 Lotus Ave,
here in Timbucktoo. Come over, and we'll share a brewsky! :)
Borje Hagsten wrote:
>
> Hubert wrote:
> >
> > Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
> > the registered version.
> >
> > Do you really believe that?
>
> Yep, they do. Honest people with some brain to think with do this all
> the time. You see, when you register, you thereby also tell the author
> of the program that it is worth something to someone. This ecourages
> him/her to keep up the good work, developing the program to something
> even better than it currently is.
[SNIP]
> Aside from all this, I think it feels good to pay for something I use,
> especially when I know that someone, probably just as poor as me, has
> spend hundreds, maybe thousands of hours of his/her free time in
> creating the stuff.
>
> > When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
>
Stephen Chrzanowski
> > What makes you believe anybody else will?
>
hehehe.. I like that credit card thing.. <EVIL GRIN> JK
I'm overwhelemed by the reply this one person gets, and gosh darned it,
I'm surprised as anything, that they're all getting basically on the
same train of thought! Usually when we start discussing something like
`THE BENNIFITS OF A ZIP DRIVE` you get thirty different people telling
you 35 different stories! (YOU do the math! :)
Like I said. I'm overwhelemed.. the NEXT time I find a shareware app
that I find I can't live without, I'm running to this NG and try to
figure if that person really does exist! :) (Well.. MAYBE not run
here.. but at least run to the computer.. :)
Borje Hagsten
Nathan Hawks wrote:
> and does work, if you've got a good product. Try to
> remember that Bill Gates got his start by hacking a modified
> version of PC-DOS with a buddy in his garage, that tends to
> put things into perspective.
Wasn't it some "clever" little Basic interpreter he started out with
(BIOS)? I once started reading his book, but fell asleep after 5 boring
pages, so I never got to that part of "his" history. Well, whatever it
was, I still like the perpespective.. :)
Regi$ter Online!
In article <351C4D7C...@geocities.com>, _pont...@geocities.com says...
I've heard horor stories that
>someone would pay the $20 fee for the program in question, the author
>takes the cheque, and then leaves town, while the person waits by the
>mail box patiently. It's happened with a few BBS applications (When
>BBS's were MASSIVE news!) I'm just afraid of getting ripped off!
These types of stories are almost as bad as virus scams posted all over the net.
Very rarely do software developers deliver by postal mail. In the case of extremely
large programs, registration codes are released through e-mail to unlock the
software you already have on your system.
A common sense approach for someone with your fears would be to simply drop
an e-mail to the developer in question before sending your fee. Or even developing a
short-term relationship with the developer to measure his responsiveness and
professionalism.
Andrew McKay
>Nathan Hawks wrote:
>> and does work, if you've got a good product. Try to
>> remember that Bill Gates got his start by hacking a modified
>> version of PC-DOS with a buddy in his garage, that tends to
>> put things into perspective.
I know for sure it was William Hewlett and David Packard of Hewlett
Packard fame that started out in the garage at the bottom of Packard's
garden in California (been there, seen this national monument).
I wasn't aware that Bill Gates had a similar experience, though I do
appreciate that he did start up with another guy.
Hmm, interesting. There's been a lot of talk recently about shareware
authors who are working in their garage and doing quite well. Should I
move all this gear out of my nice warm study into the garage if I want
to be extraordinarily successful? :)
Hey, NT runs a heck of a lot better with 64 megs installed doesn't it?
Just increased it from 32 megs last night, and the disk light isn't
flashing anywhere near as much!
Andrew
--- http://www.kazmax.com
Software Solutions for Sports Administrators
ASP Member
Andrew McKay
>Like I said. I'm overwhelemed.. the NEXT time I find a shareware app
>that I find I can't live without, I'm running to this NG and try to
>figure if that person really does exist! :) (Well.. MAYBE not run
>here.. but at least run to the computer.. :)
Um, by all means come on in here, but wouldn't it be simpler to send
the guy an Email as well?
Just a thought....
Doren Rosenthal
: In article <351C4D7C...@geocities.com>, _pont...@geocities.com says...
:
: I've heard horor stories that
: >someone would pay the $20 fee for the program in question, the author
: >takes the cheque, and then leaves town, while the person waits by the
: >mail box patiently.
That's just silly! If someone has gone to all the effort to write and
distribute a software program, filling the order by sending out a diskette
is the easy part. A diskette and the mailer don't cost very much to send
out at all. The work is in writing, promoteing and distributing the
software..... Not filling the order.
If someone sends registration payments to a shareware author and dosn't
hear back, there's usualy one of two reasons for it.
1) The shareware author has moved or gone out of bussiness.
2) The letter got lost in the mail etc.
Andrew McKay
On 28 Mar 1998 05:07:56 GMT, sup...@registerline.com (Regi$ter
Online!) wrote:
>A common sense approach for someone with your fears would be to simply drop
>an e-mail to the developer in question before sending your fee. Or even developing a
>short-term relationship with the developer to measure his responsiveness and
>professionalism.
A very good approach I might add. Over the last few years I have been
less than delighted with the responses of a small number of shareware
authors, who took the money and couldn't even manage a "thank you" (of
any description) by way of response. I just hate those people, they
give the shareware market a less than desirable reputation I guess.
Most shareware authors are good guys (gals?) though. Frankly it's
usually my policy to try and contact the author(s) by Email before I
commit money, if they don't hit the ball back with a reassuring style,
they don't see the colour of my money. Hell, I will definitely
register the software if they seem okay - but I'm usually much less
motivated about the end of the eval period if they seem without
interest in their own product.
That's the way we treat our customers (and would-be customers). Each
and every enquiry, query, suggestion or whatever gets a solid
response. Even when that response is no, they get a measurable
response which doesn't get regurgitated from some auto-response
mechanism (unless they happen to hit the spam filter, in which case
they'd be better off not using hotmail.com as an Email address....).
No promises, half-truths or anything - tell it the way it is, and if
there's something I know could be more suitable I'm not afraid to tell
them where to go find it. This works.
Philip Jones
Stephen Chrzanowski <_pont...@geocities.com> wrote in message
<351C4D7C...@geocities.com>...
>the shelf anyways) but most of the time, I've heard horor stories that
>someone would pay the $20 fee for the program in question, the author
>takes the cheque, and then leaves town, while the person waits by the
>mail box patiently. It's happened with a few BBS applications (When
>BBS's were MASSIVE news!) I'm just afraid of getting ripped off! So, I
This can happen, but it's very unlikely. One of the best innovations is the
ability for shareware authors, such as myself, to sign up with a 3rd party
who handles all of our orders. This adds a lot of legitimacy to the process,
and can give more confidence to a prospective buyer.
However, all it takes is a simple e-mail to the author to see if he's still
kicking around before you send off your cheque! Not too hard!
Doren Rosenthal
Andrew McKay (M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Most shareware authors are good guys (gals?) though. Frankly it's
: usually my policy to try and contact the author(s) by Email before I
: commit money,
That's always a good idea. Often the author has added improvements new
versions or replaced the product with something else altogether.
From an authors standpoint I'm happy when people contact me about an old
product they've found on a magazine or book CD of a few years ago. It
gives me a chance to let them know about all the great things I've added
and often results in a sale of a larger package or site license as well.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
NEW! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!!
darksoft
In article <6fio5v$5si$1...@zinger.callamer.com>, do...@slonet.org says...> : I've heard horor stories that
> : >someone would pay the $20 fee for the program in question, the author
> : >takes the cheque, and then leaves town, while the person waits by the
> : >mail box patiently.
>
> distribute a software program, filling the order by sending out a diskette
> is the easy part. A diskette and the mailer don't cost very much to send
> out at all. The work is in writing, promoteing and distributing the
> software..... Not filling the order.
>
> If someone sends registration payments to a shareware author and dosn't
> hear back, there's usualy one of two reasons for it.
>
> 1) The shareware author has moved or gone out of bussiness.
>
> 2) The letter got lost in the mail etc.
Or as he said, he takes the money and runs. I've seen it happen quite a
bit. Not everyone is as honest as we'd like to believe, Doren. There are
assholes out there that do exactly that.
Joel
Doren Rosenthal
darksoft (dark...@gte.net) wrote:
Doren: >
: > That's just silly! If someone has gone to all the effort to write and
: > distribute a software program, filling the order by sending out a diskette
: > is the easy part. A diskette and the mailer don't cost very much to send
: > out at all. The work is in writing, promoteing and distributing the
: > software..... Not filling the order.
: >
: > If someone sends registration payments to a shareware author and dosn't
: > hear back, there's usualy one of two reasons for it.
: >
: > 1) The shareware author has moved or gone out of bussiness.
: >
: > 2) The letter got lost in the mail etc.
: Or as he said, he takes the money and runs. I've seen it happen quite a
: bit.
I just can't see how this happens with shareware. You've already got the
full working software and you already know what you've got. To fill the
order all the guy does is send you a serial number and a diskette. If
you're worried, pay with a credit card and if you don't get a response,
the bank will back out the charges from the merchants account.
: Not everyone is as honest as we'd like to believe, Doren. There are
: assholes out there that do exactly that.
:
: Joel
Please don't get me started on the ASP guys again! I paid them my money
and I'm still waiting for them to deliver what they promised. To be fair,
I did get a refund of my '97 dues. However I've found the ASP to be the
exception. Most people involved with shareware would never tolerate the BS
ASP guys have been pulling on their members for years.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
NEW! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix. and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!!
Kathy I. Morgan
Andrew McKay <M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk> wrote:
(talking about horror stories of authors who take the money and fail to
deliver)
> Over the last few years I have been
> less than delighted with the responses of a small number of shareware
> authors, who took the money and couldn't even manage a "thank you" (of
> any description) by way of response. I just hate those people, they
> give the shareware market a less than desirable reputation I guess.
>
> Most shareware authors are good guys (gals?) though. Frankly it's
> usually my policy to try and contact the author(s) by Email before I
> commit money, if they don't hit the ball back with a reassuring style,
> they don't see the colour of my money.
Maybe I've just been lucky, but I've registered numerous shareware
programs and only once failed to get a response--that was the time I
mailed the check and the letter was undeliverable; the check came back
to me and I have no idea where I should send it.
A few times, I've mailed the money and got back a brief email with
registration code, which is certainly acceptable to me. More often, I
get regular news of upgrades and hints that more than double the value
of a product that I felt was already worth what I was paying.
kathy
Andrew McKay
On 28 Mar 1998 20:21:50 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>Please don't get me started on the ASP guys again! I paid them my money
>and I'm still waiting for them to deliver what they promised. To be fair,
>I did get a refund of my '97 dues. However I've found the ASP to be the
>exception. Most people involved with shareware would never tolerate the BS
>ASP guys have been pulling on their members for years.
Your last few posts have been superb. I'm sad that you have to switch
back to native modewith this one. Let's please not get back to making
everyone else's life a misery.
On a separate topic entirely, how does this new TimeBomb defuse
software that's doing the rounds stack up with your new software? I
notice it's got some rave reviews from PC magazine or something like
that.
If anyone's interested in what this millenium fixing product can do
and they haven't seen it yet, I now have a link to it on my (new) web
site. Check out the "Other Products" page. I have no connection to the
software in question, and don't know much about it - but apparently it
fixes a PC with a knadgered bios or something like that.
Andrew McKay
On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 11:30:55 -0800, dark...@gte.net (darksoft) wrote:
>Or as he said, he takes the money and runs. I've seen it happen quite a
>bit. Not everyone is as honest as we'd like to believe, Doren. There are
>assholes out there that do exactly that.
Maybe I've been lucky in this respect - I've registered lots of
shareware over a period of time, and whilst the support from some of
them is somewhat questionable (i.e. not up to the standard I would
have hoped), I've never had a problem in receiving what I paid for.
Scott Kane - MSA
Joel,
>Or as he said, he takes the money and runs. I've seen it happen quite a
>bit. Not everyone is as honest as we'd like to believe, Doren. There are
>assholes out there that do exactly that.
Yes, but they don't just frequent the shareware industry do they? "Time
Share" and Real Estate, Modelling Agencies, Law, Accounting, Teaching -
you'd be hard pressed to name an industry where some mongrel can't see a
chance to extract money on false pretences.
Scott Kane
MicroNexus Software Australia
Arthur Barnett
On Thu, 26 Mar 1998 08:02:26 GMT, hcr...@gte.net (Hubert) wrote:
>Supposedly, you create a good program, and people will pay you to get
>the registered version.
>
>Do you really believe that?
>
>When was the last time you sent a RED CENT to a shareware author?
>
>What makes you believe anybody else will?
I regularly purchas and use shareware. In fact I am using Forte Agent
to read your message.
Arthur Barnett
Michael Raustad
Doren Rosenthal wrote in message <6fjm4u$jv$1...@zinger.callamer.com>...
>>Please don't get me started on the ASP guys again!
Yes, PLEASE don't get him started! He only get's this way when he is
low on Rolaids. It will pass, but not for long (He can't help it, he
loves the ASP!). For more details, read the automated,
periodic-posting in this NG from Timo.
Best regards,
Mike
--
M & R Technologies, Inc.
Web Site: http://www.mrtec.com
Home of Financial Freedom Billing & Inventory PRO.
Member ASP.
Dave Webber
Stephen Chrzanowski <_pont...@geocities.com> wrote in message
<351C4D7C...@geocities.com>...
>...... I've heard horor stories that
>someone would pay the $20 fee for the program in question, the author
>takes the cheque, and then leaves town, while the person waits by the
>mail box patiently. It's happened with a few BBS applications (When
>BBS's were MASSIVE news!) I'm just afraid of getting ripped off!
>......
There are a number of ways to check that software is being distributed by
reputable people. E-mailing them and forming your own judgement is just
one of them. A good one - as others have said.
If the software carries the ASP (Association of Shareware Professionals)
logo, then you can check with the ASP to see if the author is a member in
good standing and, if so, you have the ASP ombudsman service to fall back
on: if you can't get a fair deal out of the author then the ASP will help
you out.
If you buy the software from a reputable order taking agent (like PsL for
example) then you'll find that these people have a strict contract, that the
authors they act for actually deliver. No author would last long on
PsL's books who didn't actually deliver. (I mention PsL because they act
for me and I know their terms; I'm sure it is equally true of other
registration agents.)
Finally, to contradict one of your replies, in my experience it is not at
all uncommon for shareware to be sent out through the mail on disks. This
has the advantage that anyone buying it gets the very latest version with
all the latest bug fixes - whether or not they have internet access and can
get bug fixes from a web site. But this is not at all unreliable. Very
occasionally it fails to arrive, or arrives corrupted. But in this case I
just send out a replacement, - as do other authrs I know who use this
method. I have just had an order from an unusually "wild" country where,
I'm told, a very large fraction of the post is stolen before it arrives: in
this case I'm sending a second copy electroniically. This is not usually
necessary.
No, if someone is in business selling shareware, and has gone to the trouble
to write a good program, set up a web site, put sales agents in place, join
the ASP, respond to your e-mail enquiries - any or all of these things -
then it is not worth his while to have dissatisfied customers.
I'm sure there are people do operate scams, but it really shouldn't be too
difficult these days to tell the difference between such people and
reputable small software houses.
darksoft
In article <351d7970...@127.0.0.1>, M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk says...
> >bit. Not everyone is as honest as we'd like to believe, Doren. There are
> >assholes out there that do exactly that.
>
> shareware over a period of time, and whilst the support from some of
> them is somewhat questionable (i.e. not up to the standard I would
> have hoped), I've never had a problem in receiving what I paid for.
Usually that's the case, but I'm said to say I do know of a couple people
that have done sorry things like this before. I've been as lucky as you
with my shareware registrations, but that doesn't mean that there aren't
a few scumbags out there.
Joel
Doren Rosenthal
Dave Webber (da...@musical.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: If the software carries the ASP (Association of Shareware Professionals)
: logo, then you can check with the ASP to see if the author is a member in
: good standing and, if so, you have the ASP ombudsman service to fall back
: on: if you can't get a fair deal out of the author then the ASP will help
: you out.
Total and 100% BULLSHIT Dave. I'm still waiting to hear from them!
The ASP board and some others have posted here that an un-named user had
some mysterious complaint about my software and I've demanded to see that
complaint many times as you know. I've never been shown the complaint.
As a responsible shareware author I can not afford such poor customer
support and have demanded to see this mysterious compliant many times so I
can follow up on it. The ASP has not responed. Users should bring
complaints directly to the author first.... I can tell you first hand that
the ASP ombudsman did not work in the best interest of users or authors
like myself.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
FORMER ASP Member
Doren Rosenthal
Andrew McKay (M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Your last few posts have been superb.
Why, thank you Andrew. Nice of you to say so.
: I'm sad that you have to switch
: back to native modewith this one. Let's please not get back to making
: everyone else's life a misery.
Get use to it Andrew. Unless I see some movement in a posative direction
from the ASP (and I haven't), I will continue to tell people about my
first hand experiance as an ASP member.
: On a separate topic entirely, how does this new TimeBomb defuse
: software that's doing the rounds stack up with your new software?
That's for others to say. My new "Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock
Battery Monitor" is the same quality engineered software my users have
come to expect from Rosenthal Engineering..... AND IT'S FREE!!!!
: I have no connection to the
: software in question, and don't know much about it - but apparently it
: fixes a PC with a knadgered bios or something like that.
:
: Andrew
The problem isn't in the BIOS, it's in the fact that when the original
PC-AT was designed they used a Motorola CMOS Clock chip so it could run
from a battery when the system power was off. The clock chip advances the
days, months, years ok even with the power off.... but not the century.
It's a simple fix if you understand how the hardware, BIOS and CMOS memory
all works, and yeas a new BIOS with fix it, but there's no need to replace
the BIOS, just add my program which will do the same thing on ANY PC with
the problem..... and it's FREE!!!!!! Just for trying my utilities.
Doren Rosenthal
Andrew McKay (M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: On a separate topic entirely, how does this new TimeBomb defuse
: software that's doing the rounds stack up with your new software? I
: notice it's got some rave reviews from PC magazine or something like
: that.
This is a problem we shareware authors prepetuate for ourselves. Somehow
if it's shareware, even we equate it to CRAP! I went to the TimeBomb site
and their demo only shows you screen shots.
To try their product, it will cost you $59.95 for one system.
You will direct users to my compedators product, and not even try my
shareware product becuase you trust them, more than you trust me. Both
products monkey directly with the system CMOS, so trust is an important
factor here. I wouldn't trust just every clown to monkey with the CMOS of
my computer either.
: If anyone's interested in what this millenium fixing product can do
: and they haven't seen it yet, I now have a link to it on my (new) web
: site. Check out the "Other Products" page. I have no connection to the
: software in question, and don't know much about it - but apparently it
: fixes a PC with a knadgered bios or something like that.
:
: Andrew
Users are also welcome to my FREE "Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix and CMOS
Battery Monitor" from my www url. I'm so confident that you'll find my
utilities to be superior, I encourage people to "Try-Before-Buy".
Please compare the screen shots they offer with the actual product I
offer. Notice that their software asks the user for information about
their system, where as mine will test an evaluate each system and
(correctly) display the BIOS and operating system information on it's own.
Be sure to test any year 2000 PC fix by setting the system date and time
to Dec. 31, 1999 at 11:58 pm and then POWER OFF the system and wait a
couple of min. Then turn the system back on an check the date.
Mine also tests and reports a number of other important functions at each
start up, including the condition of the CMOS/Clock battery.
AND!!!!!! Mine is FREE!!!! Just for trying my utilities.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities" http://slonet.org/~doren/
Andrew McKay
On 29 Mar 1998 15:45:00 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>Total and 100% BULLSHIT Dave. I'm still waiting to hear from them!
>
>The ASP board and some others have posted here that an un-named user had
>some mysterious complaint about my software and I've demanded to see that
>complaint many times as you know. I've never been shown the complaint.
<Groan> He's off again. The latest tablets aren't working. Perhaps
they aren't meant to be swallowed after all? :(
Andrew McKay
On 29 Mar 1998 16:05:00 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>: Your last few posts have been superb.
>
>Why, thank you Andrew. Nice of you to say so.
See, I'm not always bitchy about you despite what you might think :).
>Get use to it Andrew. Unless I see some movement in a posative direction
>from the ASP (and I haven't), I will continue to tell people about my
>first hand experiance as an ASP member.
Oh, do move on Doren. You and the ASP fell apart a year ago was it?
You and the ASP have a completely different view of the Universe.
You've spent too long with your telescope trained on Uranus is the
main problem :).
>That's for others to say. My new "Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock
>Battery Monitor" is the same quality engineered software my users have
>come to expect from Rosenthal Engineering..... AND IT'S FREE!!!!
Tempted to say, does it come with a virus attached.....
>It's a simple fix if you understand how the hardware, BIOS and CMOS memory
>all works, and yeas a new BIOS with fix it, but there's no need to replace
>the BIOS, just add my program which will do the same thing on ANY PC with
>the problem..... and it's FREE!!!!!! Just for trying my utilities.
....oh, I see it does :).
Pity. I could do with something like this for a PC I've got here with
an older motherboard. Never mind.
Dave Webber
Doren Rosenthal wrote in message <6flq9s$t1s$1...@zinger.callamer.com>...
>Dave Webber (da...@musical.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>
>: If the software carries the ASP (Association of Shareware Professionals)
>: logo, then you can check with the ASP to see if the author is a member in
>: good standing and, if so, you have the ASP ombudsman service to fall back
>: on: if you can't get a fair deal out of the author then the ASP will help
>: you out.
>
>Total and 100% BULLSHIT Dave. I'm still waiting to hear from them!
No, it's the simple truth, and I'll thank you to remain civil.
>..... I've never been shown the complaint.
The complaint, as you've heard a thousand times, is that your software is
distributed containing a live virus. You won't hear anything else because
that is all there is.
The ASP is at http://www.asp-shareware.org and strives to promote
professional shareware. If authors are concerned to show that they are
running reputable software houses, then I can recommend nothing better than
joining. You'll find the ASP discussion groups, relaxed, helpful and always
polite.
Dave Webber
ASP member.
Terry Swiers
Doren Rosenthal wrote in message <6fnaei$c7d$1...@zinger.callamer.com>...
>I'm sure that's exactly what's going on. They roll the date ahead when
>they install the software, then back to cheat the time limits. That's why
>my software always checks that it's not running on a date that's before
>the installation date. If it is, it upchucks an error message.
I also check the actual system date against the build date of the package.
If it's older than the build date of the software, I know that the clock is
incorrect. I simply display a message indicating that they need to set the
system date correctly before they can run my package.
Simple and works really well. It's not surprising that I get a lot of
registrations shortly after a new release when the build date goes current.
:-)
Terry Swiers
Millennium Software, LLC
http://www.1000years.com
Kathy I. Morgan
Doren Rosenthal <do...@slonet.org> wrote:
> Be sure to test any year 2000 PC fix by setting the system date and time
> to Dec. 31, 1999 at 11:58 pm and then POWER OFF the system and wait a
> couple of min. Then turn the system back on an check the date.
I'm not normally a PC user, but there are PC's in our office. What will
normally happen after this procedure, if the Y2K fix didn't do its job?
That is, will the PC even boot (but maybe show date 1900??) Or will it
simply refuse to start up?
Also, for the sake of my curiosity, are there shareware programs
available (or even publicly available databases) that can test the
various programs on a hard drive to see if they are compatible with
dates after 1999? For example, say I'd been using a customer database
that includes a year file. It may be that the database is displaying a
4-digit year in the field, but if it stores only a 2-digit year code,
I'm going to be in trouble once 2000 rolls in.
Kathy
Borje Hagsten
Doren Rosenthal wrote:
> Get use to it Andrew. Unless I see some movement in a posative direction
> from the ASP (and I haven't), I will continue to tell people about my
> first hand experiance as an ASP member.
So we have noticed :)
> It's a simple fix if you understand how the hardware, BIOS and CMOS memory
> all works, and yeas a new BIOS with fix it, but there's no need to replace
> the BIOS, just add my program which will do the same thing on ANY PC with
> the problem..... and it's FREE!!!!!! Just for trying my utilities.
Clever move, Doren. You could probably sell many thousands of copies of
the new "Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix" and yet you give it away. Some would
call this crazy, I call i genious, since you probably will sell a lot
more of complete packages this way. :)
There's a lot to learn from this, that many of you maybe didn't notice,
fellows. To give something away for free, usually generates a
substantial increase in the sales of your other products..
By the way, has anyone else also noticed that many people already have
set their computer-time to past year 2000? I get quite a lot of mail
here and many of them are dated year 2017, etc. Haven't seen it before,
but it has turned up plenty of them the last couple of weeks. Could it
be that these people are trying to fool the timelimits of shareware or
different demos of commercial software, or what? Just wondering...
Borje
------------------------------------------------------------
From: Borje Hagsten E-mail: hag...@algonet.se
Internet: http://www.algonet.se/~hagsten
Developer of TOLKEN97 v3.2, language-translator, texteditor,
dictionary and vocabulary-test, all in one good application.
Happy Member of the Association of Shareware Professionals (ASP)
------------------------------------------------------------
Timo Salmi
In article <891209651.4604.0...@news.demon.co.uk>,
Dave Webber <da...@musical.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:joining. You'll find the ASP discussion groups, relaxed, helpful and always
:polite.
And, the users not familiar with those newsgroups, you can find them
e.g. via pointing your browser to http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/news.html
(BTW, originally the subject was obviously thrown here as a troll.
Posted anonymously, and with one of the most common baits.)
All the best, Timo
....................................................................
Prof. Timo Salmi Co-moderator of news:comp.archives.msdos.announce
Moderating at ftp:// & http://garbo.uwasa.fi/ archives 193.166.120.5
Department of Accounting and Business Finance ; University of Vaasa
mailto:t...@uwasa.fi <http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/> ; FIN-65101, Finland
Spam foiling in effect. My email filter autoresponder will return a
required email password to users not yet in the privileges database.
Doren Rosenthal
Andrew McKay (M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: >That's for others to say. My new "Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock
: >Battery Monitor" is the same quality engineered software my users have
: >come to expect from Rosenthal Engineering..... AND IT'S FREE!!!!
:
: Tempted to say, does it come with a virus attached.....
No this program functions by virtue of a VOO-DOO curse and witch-craft, so
it obviously isn't acceptable by ASP standards....... Too bad!
: >It's a simple fix if you understand how the hardware, BIOS and CMOS memory
: >all works, and yes a new BIOS will fix it, but there's no need to replace
: >the BIOS, just add my program which will do the same thing on ANY PC with
: >the problem..... and it's FREE!!!!!! Just for trying my utilities.
:
: ....oh, I see it does :).
:
: Pity. I could do with something like this for a PC I've got here with
: an older motherboard. Never mind.
:
: Andrew
: ASP Member
Well if you want to support the ASP black-list, and not use my program
that's up to you Andrew. I guess that's just one less download I'll have.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
Awarded "Best Shareware of 1997" by Boot-It
New! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!!!
Doren Rosenthal
Borje Hagsten (hag...@algonet.se) wrote:
Doren: >
: > It's a simple fix if you understand how the hardware, BIOS and CMOS memory
: > all works, and yeas a new BIOS with fix it, but there's no need to replace
: > the BIOS, just add my program which will do the same thing on ANY PC with
: > the problem..... and it's FREE!!!!!! Just for trying my utilities.
:
: Clever move, Doren.
Thanks Borje.
: You could probably sell many thousands of copies of
: the new "Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix" and yet you give it away. Some would
: call this crazy, I call i genious, since you probably will sell a lot
: more of complete packages this way. :)
Yes, that's my plan. You see my main (shareware) product is my utilities,
and this R-Y2kFix is just another utility. If I give it away free, people
will find my main product. Try-before-buy first requires people to "TRY",
so I give them a reason to "try" by giving some of my utilities away for
free.
Any Y2k product has a short life, but I expect to be offering my utilities
for a long time. When people see how much better my Y2K fix is than
anything else available.... and mine is FREE, they take my the rest of my
utilities seriously. No sercret, that translates directly into sales and
real money.
: There's a lot to learn from this, that many of you maybe didn't notice,
: fellows. To give something away for free, usually generates a
: substantial increase in the sales of your other products..
Yep! Just take a look at my download numbers!
: By the way, has anyone else also noticed that many people already have
: set their computer-time to past year 2000?
People are always monkeying with their date stamps to cheat shareware time
limits.
: Could it
: be that these people are trying to fool the timelimits of shareware or
: different demos of commercial software, or what? Just wondering...
:
: Borje
I'm sure that's exactly what's going on. They roll the date ahead when
they install the software, then back to cheat the time limits. That's why
my software always checks that it's not running on a date that's before
the installation date. If it is, it upchucks an error message.
Doren..........
Dave Webber
Timo Salmi wrote in message <6fmtj7$p...@majakka.uwasa.fi>...
>In article <891209651.4604.0...@news.demon.co.uk>,
>(BTW, originally the subject was obviously thrown here as a troll.
>Posted anonymously, and with one of the most common baits.)
Yes, I thought so too, but it is interesting (if disappointing) to hear from
follow-ups how often users have been let down by shareware authors. It is
one of the problems, that we authors face, to overcome people's (sometimes
reasonable) doubts about sending their money half way across the world to
buy something from a place they've never heard of. If we can learn how
better to reassure people, and give a reasonable level of guarantee, then
the thread will have served a valid purpose.
Borje Hagsten
Dave Webber wrote:
> Yes, I thought so too, but it is interesting (if disappointing) to hear from
> follow-ups how often users have been let down by shareware authors. It is
> one of the problems, that we authors face, to overcome people's (sometimes
> reasonable) doubts about sending their money half way across the world to
> buy something from a place they've never heard of. If we can learn how
> better to reassure people, and give a reasonable level of guarantee, then
> the thread will have served a valid purpose.
Being one of those "halfway_around_the_world" guys, I can say that
places that handles purchases, like KAGI, Albert's Ambry, PsL, Register
Online!, etc. are heaven-sent for us "foreigners", since they can act as
an extended arm, in order to reach far beyond and country-borders.
Through them, I have gotten registrations from almost every part of the
world now, reaching from Greenland down to south New Zeeland through
these places. Some people send cash money too, but something like 8 out
of 10 uses places like these for their purchase.
With todays technology, one important issue is to respond to all
incoming e-mail as soon as possible. To give an instant answer is
impressive and even if you don't have the time to give people a full
answer, just sending them a note that you have recieved their mail and
will give a full answer within a couple of hours is enough to keep them
happy.
I have managed to generate quite a lot of sales this way, since people
have felt they are important to me and they are impressed with the fact
that they got an answer to their question - from the other side of the
world - sometimes within a couple of minutes, up to a couple of hours,
from they sent it.
In shorter terms: If you want to sell shareware, be "hungry" for
costumers and serve them well. It's just like dealing with any other
kind of sales, you must make the costumer feel he/she is just as
important as he/she actually is to you and your future in the business..
:)
Borje
------------------------------------------------------------
From: Borje Hagsten E-mail: hag...@algonet.se
Internet: http://www.algonet.se/~hagsten
Developer of TOLKEN97 v3.2, language-translator, texteditor,
dictionary and vocabulary-test, all in one good application.
Member of the Association of Shareware Professionals (ASP)
ASP-address: http://www.asp-shareware.org/
------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Kane - MSA
Oddly enough, when I ask shareware authors what they are doing in relation
to Y2K compliancy in their apps they usually reply "nothing" or no reply at
all - except those working with accounting and/or database software. It is
sad to see programmers, at this stage of the Y2K game, making the same
mistakes.
Scott Kane
MicroNexus Software Australia
Doren Rosenthal wrote in message <6fnaei$c7d$1...@zinger.callamer.com>...
Dave Webber
Borje Hagsten wrote in message <351F83...@algonet.se>...
>Being one of those "halfway_around_the_world" guys, I can say that
>places that handles purchases, like KAGI, Albert's Ambry, PsL, Register
>Online!, etc. are heaven-sent for us "foreigners", since they can act as
>an extended arm, in order to reach far beyond and country-borders.
I agree entirely.
>Through them, I have gotten registrations from almost every part of the
>world now, reaching from Greenland down to south New Zeeland through
>these places....
My two latest "new" countries for registrations are Kazakhstan and Lesotho.
Both of those came through agents.
>With todays technology, one important issue is to respond to all
>incoming e-mail as soon as possible.
I agree, and there you and I have an advantage Borje. Given that the
largest number from any single country comes from the USA, and they're 5 to
7 hours later than us, we can possibly even reply before they sent the
enquiry :-)
>In shorter terms: If you want to sell shareware, be "hungry" for
>costumers and serve them well...
Absolutely - but the trick, as you say, is to convince people that you're
going to give service *before* they buy the program, and then not to let
them down afterwards.
On the support question I am beginning to identify that shareware businesses
go through various phases. I now have so many people who have bought MOZART
that, even though only a tiny fraction ask for support in any given month,
it is starting to build up to significant work. So I need to diversify my
support channels. With this in mind, I have started a chat area on my web
site so that, hopefully users will support each other to some extent,
leaving me to answer the tricky questions!
The questions I particularly want to answer are "why doesn't it do this..."
and the way I want to answer it is "Well here's the new super version with
knobs on, which *does* do this..." but that requires me to have time to
develop the knobs. So I hope the chat page takes off.
Doren Rosenthal
Dave Webber (da...@musical.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: I agree, and there you and I have an advantage Borje. Given that the
: largest number from any single country comes from the USA, and they're 5 to
: 7 hours later than us, we can possibly even reply before they sent the
: enquiry :-)
That's a neat trick!
Doren.....
Techno Toys
> Oddly enough, when I ask shareware authors what they are doing in relation
> to Y2K compliancy in their apps they usually reply "nothing" or no reply at
> all - except those working with accounting and/or database software. It is
> sad to see programmers, at this stage of the Y2K game, making the same
> mistakes.
But the mistake is not relevant in most systems! Only those programs in which
the year is stored in a two-digit text format are going to have a problem.
Anyone writing in C or C++, for example, is probably using the standard
library functions, which won't roll over until 2039. Of course, this is the
same problem, just delayed 39 years.
Just the same - I think I'll check my stuff sometime this week :')
--
Jim Johnson
Metaphoric Software
-------------------
Makers of Techno Toys
Software for Electronic Music
http://www.technotoys.com
in...@technotoys.com
Doren Rosenthal
Scott Kane - MSA (m...@micronexus.net) wrote:
: Oddly enough, when I ask shareware authors what they are doing in relation
: to Y2K compliancy in their apps they usually reply "nothing" or no reply at
: all - except those working with accounting and/or database software. It is
: sad to see programmers, at this stage of the Y2K game, making the same
: mistakes.
: Scott Kane
: MicroNexus Software Australia
The problem isn't in the software as much as in the hardware of the users
system. It's that PCs have all evolved from that early PC-AT in 1985 when
IBM selected a Motorola CMOS clock chip. To be compatible, the all PC have
been based on that early model. The Motorola CMOS clock know how to
advance seconds, min., hours, days, months years.... but not centuries.
Newer systems compensate for the problem with a hardwired program (the
BIOS) but most PCs have the problem. Just advance the date to Dec. 31,
1999 at 11:58 PM, and power off the system for a couple of min. When you
turn it back on, check the date. It will likely read Jan. 4, 1980.
The operating system and most programming lagnuages have no problem
dealing with the year 2000 problem. Few shareware authors write in COBOL
for banks and insurance companies, so the only real problem we have is the
users own PC hardware.
As shareware authors we can very easily bring the users system into full
compliance because I'm offering my "Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and
CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor" FREE! Yes FREE!!!
I've offered it to any shareware author who wants to point their users
to my www url. It brings their users system (and there-fore the
shareware running on it) into full year 2000 compliance.
I also made that offer to the ASP (as I did for my R-Format), but I've yet
hear anything back from them.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
Awarded "Best Shareware of 1997" by Boot-It
NEW!! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!!
Doren Rosenthal
Kathy I. Morgan (kmo...@polarnet.com) wrote:
: Doren Rosenthal <do...@slonet.org> wrote:
:
: > Be sure to test any year 2000 PC fix by setting the system date and time
: > couple of min. Then turn the system back on an check the date.
:
: I'm not normally a PC user, but there are PC's in our office. What will
: normally happen after this procedure, if the Y2K fix didn't do its job?
If your working in an office on a network, be sure to unplug the network
cable. My R-Y2kFix was beta tested on 4500+ systems, so you shouldn't have
a problem.
: That is, will the PC even boot (but maybe show date 1900??) Or will it
: simply refuse to start up?
With my R-Y2kFix installed, your system will boot and be fully year
2000 compliant. The correct date will display and it even understands
about leap years (yes 2000 is a leap year).
: Also, for the sake of my curiosity, are there shareware programs
: available (or even publicly available databases) that can test the
: various programs on a hard drive to see if they are compatible with
: dates after 1999? For example, say I'd been using a customer database
: that includes a year file. It may be that the database is displaying a
: 4-digit year in the field, but if it stores only a 2-digit year code,
: I'm going to be in trouble once 2000 rolls in.
:
: Kathy
You'll want to read my DOC file Kathy, it's a little technical, but to
boil it down....
There are two clocks in the PC. One is a virtual clock done in software
that counts the 18.2 Hz timer interupt when the system is powered
up and running. When you turn off your system, the virutual clock dies and
it must be reset when the system is powered up.
In 1985 IBM added a REAL TIME clock that could run from a battery even
when the system was powered off. That early AT used an off the shelf
motorola clock/memory chip and all AT class PCs to this day are based on
that original clock. It can keep track of seconds. min, hours, days,
months, years.... but NOT CENTURIES!
The real time clock is hardware, and it's the one with the problem, the
virtual clock is done in software and it works just fine, but it reads the
hardware real time clock to set the correct time and date each time you
power up the system. Remember the virtual clock can't run when the system
is off, only the real time clock runs from that little battery.
Your software has two ways to read the date and time. It reads it through
the operating system, or through the BIOS (int 1Ah). Few programmers
(other than guys like me) worry about how the system reports the date and
time. Obviously you can read the real time clock when it's running and the
system is powered off. No the BIOS can't read it either, the BIOS is just
like any other program, it's just hard wired into a read only memory.
Your software read virtual clock, and the virtual clock will correctly
report date and times from 1980-2099. So as long as my R-Y2kFix is
installed your, software should be fine through 2099. Contact me then if
you still have a problem and I'll give you a FREE upgrade (I'll only be a
153 years old then).
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
NEW!! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!!
Doren Rosenthal
Techno Toys (in...@technotoys.com) wrote:
: But the mistake is not relevant in most systems! Only those programs in which
: Anyone writing in C or C++, for example, is probably using the standard
: library functions, which won't roll over until 2039. Of course, this is the
: same problem, just delayed 39 years.
C and C++ will be reading the virtual clock and that clock has a range
from 1980 - 2099 so you should be ok. The problem shareware authors need
to be concerned about mostly involves the users hardware not rolling over
correctly at boot up.
Even if your software only reads the date for a time limit, that could be
a problem.
: : Just the same - I think I'll check my stuff sometime this week :') :
: --
: Jim Johnson
Not all system will have the problem. almost all 386 and 486 systems built
before 1995 will have it. It's easy to test.
Set the date to Dec. 31, 1999 11:58 PM.
Turn off the system and with POWER OFF, wait 2 min.
Turn the power back on and read the date.
Many systems your users will be running will read Jan 4, 1980. Bring
your users system (and avoid
the problem), simply direct them to my FREE utility from my www url.
Andrew McKay
On 30 Mar 1998 05:04:48 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>No this program functions by virtue of a VOO-DOO curse and witch-craft, so
>it obviously isn't acceptable by ASP standards....... Too bad!
And I suppose you've got all those little dolls named after ASP
members, and you stick pins in them?
>Well if you want to support the ASP black-list, and not use my program
>that's up to you Andrew. I guess that's just one less download I'll have.
There's no ASP black-list Doren, and you know it. No-one has ever
claimed that the quality (or otherwise) of your software is bad, good,
or indifferent. It's the simple question of having a virus being
distributed with the ASP's good name on it that was always the issue,
and still is.
Andrew
--- http://www.kazmax.com
Software Solutions for Sports Administrators
ASP Member
And remember, my name isn't Mac!
Andrew McKay
On Sun, 29 Mar 1998 01:18:18 -0800, dark...@gte.net (darksoft) wrote:
>Usually that's the case, but I'm said to say I do know of a couple people
>that have done sorry things like this before. I've been as lucky as you
>with my shareware registrations, but that doesn't mean that there aren't
>a few scumbags out there.
Well I would not condone the behaviour of those people. They don't
deserve to be in the shareware business that's for sure.
But don't forget that the other side of the coin is rather worse.
There are hundreds and thousands of people who don't actively support
the shareware concept, by never registering the products they use.
Tony Bryer
In article <6fo64d$228$1...@news.eaa.com.au>, Scott Kane - MSA wrote:
> when I ask shareware authors what they are doing in relation
> to Y2K compliancy in their apps they usually reply "nothing"
>
page on my web site. Anyone who now sends a questionnaire gets an
offprint of the web pages - I am not prepared to answer questions about
the software that I will be shipping in 2000; I'm still working on the
stuff promised for 1997!
Tony Bryer www.sda.co.uk
Tony Bryer
In article <891269038.24212.0...@news.demon.co.uk>, Dave
> and they're 5 to 7 hours later than us, we can possibly even reply >
before they sent the enquiry :-)
>
On the contrary. This guy in Boston emails you with a query the moment
he gets into the office ... and you don't respond till after lunch <g>
I met up with some friends from New Zealand at the weekend and took
great pleasure in pointing out to them that if the Year 2000 doomsters
are to be believed their world will collapse twelve hours before us.
T.
Mike E. Fullerton
do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>Techno Toys (in...@technotoys.com) wrote:
>: But the mistake is not relevant in most systems! Only those programs in which
>: the year is stored in a two-digit text format are going to have a problem.
>: Anyone writing in C or C++, for example, is probably using the standard
>: library functions, which won't roll over until 2039. Of course, this is the
>: same problem, just delayed 39 years.
>
>C and C++ will be reading the virtual clock and that clock has a range
>from 1980 - 2099 so you should be ok. The problem shareware authors need
>to be concerned about mostly involves the users hardware not rolling over
>correctly at boot up.
>
>Even if your software only reads the date for a time limit, that could be
>a problem.
Sorry, I don't buy this. THE problem shareware programmers must be
concerned with is forcing all user date entries to use 4 digit years.
They must also use only 4 digit years in all internal manipulations
using dates. In my Delphi apps which rely on dates, at startup I
check the ShortDateFormat global variable and if it is set to 2 digit
years I change it to 4.
____________________
Delphi, Visual Basic, Access, Unix Links
http://www.cyber-matrix.com
Andrew McKay
On 30 Mar 1998 16:43:45 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>installed your, software should be fine through 2099. Contact me then if
>you still have a problem and I'll give you a FREE upgrade (I'll only be a
>153 years old then).
.....and probably still moaning his r's off about being thrown out of
the ASP for distributing computer virii! ;)
Andrew McKay
On 29 Mar 1998 17:13:30 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>You will direct users to my compedators product, and not even try my
>shareware product becuase you trust them, more than you trust me. Both
You are 100% right in your accusation. I happen to work alongside the
chap who owns the web site you refer to, whereas I have never met you.
Any particular reason I should trust someone who actively promotes the
distribution of computer virii as a way to make a living over someone
that I sit alongside?
Whilst we are discussing the subject of trust, do you recall the many
times you have ignored the question about your motives when you
crawled to the ASP compliance committee chair-person pleading for a
letter to help your shareware efforts? You know, the letter that you
insist on waving about time after time?
Now, did you tell this person who tried to do you a favour that what
you really wanted the letter for was to throw in the face of the ASP
BoD who were threatening to remove your membership for distributing
computer virii with the ASP logo on?
And you still want to be trusted do you?
And with regards to the competitors product, may I point out to
everyone here that (as I understand the situation) under UK law
company directors may be prosecuted if their business causes hardship
(as in death or injury perhaps?) to others as a result of a Y2K
problem that they allowed to happen?
With this "competitive" product my understanding is that it provides
by default a full-compliance document that is satisfactory proof to
the authorities that the director(s) have taken adequate precautions
to protect against such a problem. Insurance companies apparently
accept this document. This software is authenticated by PC Labs
(correct me if I'm wrong) and is above reproach in this respect. Has
your product been so tested, and does it have an authenticity
certificate?
I dare say that this is the same general section of the law whereby an
employee's work contract can be terminated immediately if they
knowingly download a virus onto their work system. Now I'm sure you
wouldn't want that to happen would you? After all, your wonderful
package doesn't have a virus in it does it?
And why, if your product is so brilliant, must it be the case that in
order to get hold of it they have to download a bunch of other stuff,
virus generator and all? I believe one major difference between us is
that I trust my users enough to give them a reasonable choice. In your
case all you want to do is stuff all your products down their throat
presumably hoping that they'll register at least one of them!
Doren Rosenthal
Mike E. Fullerton (ful...@SpamKiller-Remove.colteng.com) wrote:
: >C and C++ will be reading the virtual clock and that clock has a range
: >from 1980 - 2099 so you should be ok. The problem shareware authors need
: >to be concerned about mostly involves the users hardware not rolling over
: >correctly at boot up.
: >
: >Even if your software only reads the date for a time limit, that could be
: >a problem.
:
: Sorry, I don't buy this. THE problem shareware programmers must be
: concerned with is forcing all user date entries to use 4 digit years.
: They must also use only 4 digit years in all internal manipulations
: using dates. In my Delphi apps which rely on dates, at startup I
: check the ShortDateFormat global variable and if it is set to 2 digit
: years I change it to 4.
You can do that, but your system stores the date in two places. The CMOS
real time clock (which you DON'T want to monkey with on your own) and can
be read using the BIOS INT 1A, and the operating system. In CMOS it's
stored as BCD, but Delphi isn't going to get that number directly.
Delphi and other high level languages will get the date from the operating
system. The year will be stored as a word.
From the BIOS, it's stored as two BCD bytes.
How you do it within your own program is up to you, but the PC will only
return dates from Jan 1, 1980 through 2099. Anything outside that range
with not be a vaild number.
That's why when the year 2000 comes along and the CMOS clock rolls the
year over (but NOT the century) the CMOS internaly (you need to measure it
with a scope) will read Jan. 1, 1900. The operating (and BIOS) figure that
date is undefined because it is outside the range (1980 - 2099) and sets
the date to Jan 4, 1980.
Theres a more tecnical explanation and a simple test you can conduct in
the DOC file of my R-Y2KFix.
Doren Rosenthal
Mike E. Fullerton (ful...@SpamKiller-Remove.colteng.com) wrote:
: Sorry, I don't buy this. THE problem shareware programmers must be
: concerned with is forcing all user date entries to use 4 digit years.
: They must also use only 4 digit years in all internal manipulations
: using dates. In my Delphi apps which rely on dates, at startup I
: check the ShortDateFormat global variable and if it is set to 2 digit
: years I change it to 4.
Within your own program, you can have as many digits for the date as you
like. Use roman numerals, four digits or whatever. The problem is the PC
hardware only supports dates from 1980-2099.
Just try to set your system date outside that range and see what happens.
And the year 2000 problem effects MOST systems because they are all based
no the Motorola CMOS clock chip which dosn't have any way to increment the
century when the system is powered off.
No matter how many digits you use for the date withing your program, when
the system comes up it will tell your program it's Jan 4, 1980 unless you
deal with the HARDWARE problem.
Try the test yourself, it's quite simple. Set the date to Dec. 31, 1999 at
11:58 Pm. Power off the system and wait a couple of min. Power the system
back on and chect the date. Most systems built before 1996 will report
Jan. 4, 1980 no matter how many digits you use within your program.
As shareware authors, we have very little control over the year 2000
problems in our users hardware. I solved that problem for my own shareware
utilities with my R-Y2kFix. I'm offering it to any other shareware
author AND THEIR USERS who can make use of it FREE! It solves the year
2000 problem on ANY PC 100%.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
NEW!! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!!
Inge Vabekk
>NEW!! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!
FREE. Nice. And could you also please tell us how to download
the program from your site?
I found no way to do it.
--
inge ((( iva...@eunet.nospam ))) -- remove spam....
Scott Kane - MSA
Hi Mike,
I agree 100% with you and do exactly the same thing. Except I tell them
what I am doing and offer a choice. If they won't do it then they are told
the date functions are "compromised" whenever the app is run.
Scott Kane
MicroNexus Software Australia
Mike E. Fullerton wrote in message <35210739...@news.TAC.NET>...
>do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>
>>Techno Toys (in...@technotoys.com) wrote:
>>: But the mistake is not relevant in most systems! Only those programs in
which
>>: the year is stored in a two-digit text format are going to have a
problem.
>>: Anyone writing in C or C++, for example, is probably using the standard
>>: library functions, which won't roll over until 2039. Of course, this is
the
>>: same problem, just delayed 39 years.
>>
>>C and C++ will be reading the virtual clock and that clock has a range
>>from 1980 - 2099 so you should be ok. The problem shareware authors need
>>to be concerned about mostly involves the users hardware not rolling over
>>correctly at boot up.
>>
>>Even if your software only reads the date for a time limit, that could be
>>a problem.
>
>Sorry, I don't buy this. THE problem shareware programmers must be
>concerned with is forcing all user date entries to use 4 digit years.
>They must also use only 4 digit years in all internal manipulations
>using dates. In my Delphi apps which rely on dates, at startup I
>check the ShortDateFormat global variable and if it is set to 2 digit
>years I change it to 4.
>
>
Doren Rosenthal
ASP Member Andrew McKay (M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Whilst we are discussing the subject of trust, do you recall the many
: times you have ignored the question about your motives when you
: crawled to the ASP compliance committee chair-person pleading for a
: letter to help your shareware efforts?
1) No member of the ASP board would look at my software. Even George
Campbell refused to even drive accross town to see what I had to offer.
2) I couldn't get a response from the ASP board and was given 15 days to
pull my software from the market after having offered it since 1990 and
building a considerable user base.
3) I wanted a letter to clear up the matter of compliance and I could
not find any ASP rule I had violated. The compliance committee was set up
to test and verify compliance with the rules. So I went to the official
ASP compliance committe and aske for them to examine the software and if
there was a problem, tell me so I can fix it. If not give me a letter to
that effect and clear up any missunderstandings.... also it helps my
sales!
4) I use that letter still to address any fears users may still have from
guys like you Andrew who promote "Virus Hysteria". It helps my sales.
: You know, the letter that you
: insist on waving about time after time?
Oh You mean the letter I've appended to this post?
: Now, did you tell this person who tried to do you a favour that what
: you really wanted the letter for was to throw in the face of the ASP
: BoD who were threatening to remove your membership for distributing
: computer virii with the ASP logo on?
I don't give a rats ass about the ASP board Andrew. Those clowns are your
problems now Andrew. The letter (but mostly my public display of it)
should raise a few questions. I had hoped there were at least a few ASP
members with integraty to follow up on the matter. Their silence says more
about the ASP than any of my posts.
: And you still want to be trusted do you?
Your trust????? That's your own bussiness. My users trust? I think I've
earned that even in spite of the ASP black-list.
Doren Rosenthal
http://slonet.org/~doren/
-------------------------------------------------------------
Date: November 22, 1996
From: Brad Kaenel, Chairman, ASP Author Standards Committee
To: Shareware Consumer
Subject: Rosenthal Virus Simulator
At the request of the author, Doren Rosenthal, I submit to you this
letter of clarification concerning the purpose and usage of the
Rosenthal Virus Simulator software suite (VirSim).
I have examined VirSim and found it to be exactly what it claims: a set
of tools for testing the effectiveness of so-called "anti-virus" utilities.
VirSim allows you to create safe, benign viruses that can be instructed
to "infect" your computer in harmless (and reversible) ways.
Doren Rosenthal is a member in good-standing of the Association
of Shareware Professionals (ASP), an organization that maintains strict
"non-destructive, non-intrusive" usability rules for its authors' software.
VirSim complies with these rules.
It is not the policy of the ASP to endorse the specific functionality
of an application, nor to recommend its suitability for any particular
purpose. However, we do pledge that our authors make every effort to
produce software that is well-written, well-supported, and absolutely
safe to install and evaluate on your computer.
Brad Kaenel,
Chairman, ASP Author Standards Committee
Doren Rosenthal
:
: >installed your, software should be fine through 2099. Contact me then if
: >you still have a problem and I'll give you a FREE upgrade (I'll only be a
: >153 years old then).
:
: .....and probably still moaning his r's off about being thrown out of
: the ASP for distributing computer virii! ;)
:
: Andrew
Oh give it a rest Andrew. I know you ASP members spend all your efforts
telling everyone what they can write, and who they can offer it to... But
I'm not intimidated, and I'm no longer an ASP member, so I'm free to offer
my software without any need of your appoval.
Doren.....
NEW!! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!!!
Doren Rosenthal
Andrew McKay (M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: And with regards to the competitors product, may I point out to
: everyone here that (as I understand the situation) under UK law
: company directors may be prosecuted if their business causes hardship
: (as in death or injury perhaps?) to others as a result of a Y2K
: problem that they allowed to happen?
"Death or injury"???? Sorry, If my software causes your death, I'll offer
you an update, *FREE* with my compliments.
Other than that, you'll want to read the license agreement in the DOC
files of my software Andrew. Death and dismembermant only applies to the
software I put out on the official ASP CD Rom anyway.
: With this "competitive" product my understanding is that it provides
: by default a full-compliance document that is satisfactory proof to
: the authorities that the director(s) have taken adequate precautions
: to protect against such a problem. Insurance companies apparently
: accept this document.
Ahhhhhh!!!!! Now you can see how I can offer this 100% free to private
users. It's those corporate guys who pay the bills... and get a letter.
: This software is authenticated by PC Labs
: (correct me if I'm wrong) and is above reproach in this respect.
Well I can't tell you if you're right or wrong unless I saw the signature
on the bottom of the letter. Here in the US there are government
regulations as to who is competent to preform such tests and sign such a
letter. For example, an enineer might add his PE or EIT license letters to
such a document.
: Has
: your product been so tested, and does it have an authenticity
: certificate?
Glad you asked! Anyone who needs (and pays) for such a letter will find my
signature on file with the California State Board of Registered
Professional Engineers. So if you need a letter and are willing to pay for
the software, I'm happy to help you. Otherwise, my software is FREE!!! to
private users.
: I dare say that this is the same general section of the law whereby an
: employee's work contract can be terminated immediately if they
: knowingly download a virus onto their work system. Now I'm sure you
: wouldn't want that to happen would you? After all, your wonderful
: package doesn't have a virus in it does it?
More ASP virus hysteria Andrew. Obviously you have fallen for the ASP
black-list BS and have yet to bother to look at the program yourself. This
hasn't ever been a problem for users and I've offered the program since
1990. Check my download counts someday Andrew. This whole issue has only
been a problem for ASP members like yourself, never my users. I don't need
to be a member of a trade organization if their entire efforts are
directed at telling authors what the can write and who they can offer it
to and promoting hysteria about the saftey of my products.
: And why, if your product is so brilliant, must it be the case that in
: order to get hold of it they have to download a bunch of other stuff,
: virus generator and all?
Well thanks, yes that is the brillance of my plan. You see I give away the
very best year 2000 fix anyone is offering FREE! It introduses my other
utilities and those I do get paid for. Brilliant? I don't know, but I hope
at least clever. It's try-before-buy, so I want people to "TRY" what I
have to offer. I belive in the shareware concept, just not the ASP BS.
: I believe one major difference between us is
: that I trust my users enough to give them a reasonable choice. In your
: case all you want to do is stuff all your products down their throat
: presumably hoping that they'll register at least one of them!
Why yes Andrew! We both offer our users a choice. I want my users to try
my software, and it's my hope some will buy it. You ASP guys want to tell
the rest of us what we can offer and who we can offer it to. So yes I want
users to try my software and if that's a problem for you ASP guys... too
bad!
Doren Rosenthal
FORMER ASP member
http://slonet.org/~doren/
Phill Hellewell
Doren Rosenthal wrote in message <6foi41$hqv$1...@zinger.callamer.com>...
>Kathy I. Morgan (kmo...@polarnet.com) wrote:
>: Doren Rosenthal <do...@slonet.org> wrote:
>:
>: > Be sure to test any year 2000 PC fix by setting the system date and
time
>: > to Dec. 31, 1999 at 11:58 pm and then POWER OFF the system and wait a
>: > couple of min. Then turn the system back on an check the date.
>:
I did the test and my PC passed....... <g>
Thank you for this usefull bit of information. We have been in the process
of checking all of our PCs and various other electronically controlled
machinery where I work. We have been checking roll over from 31/12/1999 and
from 28/02/2000, but were blissfully unaware of the issue you have
mentioned.
So, I should have a good time at work tomorrow!
I will also discuss use of your Y2k program with our IT people, but I
suspect that as a section they are a bit anti shareware (rather short
sighted I know).
Best Regards
Phill Hellewell
Mike E. Fullerton
do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>Mike E. Fullerton (ful...@SpamKiller-Remove.colteng.com) wrote:
>
>: >C and C++ will be reading the virtual clock and that clock has a range
>: >from 1980 - 2099 so you should be ok. The problem shareware authors need
>: >to be concerned about mostly involves the users hardware not rolling over
>: >correctly at boot up.
>:
>: Sorry, I don't buy this. THE problem shareware programmers must be
>: concerned with is forcing all user date entries to use 4 digit years.
>: They must also use only 4 digit years in all internal manipulations
>: using dates. In my Delphi apps which rely on dates, at startup I
>: check the ShortDateFormat global variable and if it is set to 2 digit
>: years I change it to 4.
[...]
>
>How you do it within your own program is up to you, but the PC will only
>return dates from Jan 1, 1980 through 2099. Anything outside that range
>with not be a vaild number.
>
>That's why when the year 2000 comes along and the CMOS clock rolls the
>year over (but NOT the century) the CMOS internaly (you need to measure it
>with a scope) will read Jan. 1, 1900. The operating (and BIOS) figure that
>date is undefined because it is outside the range (1980 - 2099) and sets
>the date to Jan 4, 1980.
That is not true. Only older Bioses have this problem. How many of
these machines will still be used in Y2K? The machine I am posting on
is almost two years old and is fine, I checked. Also on our network
the PC clock is automatically set to the "Netware clock" when you log
in. Thus I think few larger companies will be affected by this bios
problem.
At any rate this is not a shareware programmer's problem. The
shareware programmer's problem is to produce Y2K compliant code not to
patch obsolete hardware. [Though it would not be a bad thing to go
the extra mile.]
You are attempting to "sell" your program as a Y2K panacea which it is
definately not. How is your program going to handle someone today
entering a retirement date in 2010 or in 2010, a birthdate in 1967?
Andrew McKay
On 2 Apr 1998 15:24:27 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>Oh give it a rest Andrew.
I'll be happy to. Now, how's about showing some leadership and leading
by example then?
>I know you ASP members spend all your efforts
>telling everyone what they can write, and who they can offer it to... But
>I'm not intimidated, and I'm no longer an ASP member, so I'm free to offer
>my software without any need of your appoval.
Please allow me to inject some truth into your statements here.
(1) The ASP does not tell anyone what they can write.
(2) The ASP does not tell anyone who they can offer it to.
And please allow me to add the bits you left off of your message while
I'm about it:
(3) You left the ASP after being offered a choice of options. You
chose that you were going to leave.
(4) You had a bust-up with the ASP because you wanted to distribute a
product containing a virus - with the ASP's mark on it. The ASP and
its membership did not want to be associated with any product that
carried any virus.
(5) You could have remained a member if you had acted responsibly by
removing the offending product from the product list that was
associated with the ASP.
(6) You went and whined to the ASP compliance committee chair about
needing a letter to help support your efforts. You did not tell that
person that you really wanted this letter to beat up the ASP with.
Please don't let the truth get left out of your messages here Doren.
We'll only be forced to add it back in again.
Philip Jones
>: .....and probably still moaning his r's off about being thrown out of
>: the ASP for distributing computer virii! ;)
>:
>: Andrew
>
>telling everyone what they can write, and who they can offer it to... But
>I'm not intimidated, and I'm no longer an ASP member, so I'm free to offer
>my software without any need of your appoval.
>
I have been reading this and other threads with some interest and some
amusement.
I have one question - shouldn't the question as to whether or not Doren's
VirSim program can actually cause damage to a user's system be answerable as
Yes or No? From the ASP standards committee letter that I read, it would
seem they agree with Doren as to the pathogenicity of this "virus".
Doren, is your program capable of EVER damaging a system - even if the user
is ignorant, and/or makes a mistake? If not, I don't see any reason at all
to keep your software from any of the major archives...
Perhaps people on both sides could address this issue.
Regards,
--
Philip Jones
Author of OmniCon 98
Accurate, powerful, and extensible unit conversion for Windows
5-Star Editor's Choice Award from ZDNet
http://www.execulink.com/~pjones
pjo...@execulink.com
Al Harberg
I'm confused, Doren, and I hope you can help me. I looked at your advice - -
-
> Try the test yourself, it's quite simple. Set the date to Dec. 31, 1999 at
> 11:58 Pm. Power off the system and wait a couple of min. Power the system
> back on and chect the date. Most systems built before 1996 will report
> Jan. 4, 1980 no matter how many digits you use within your program.
My 386 came up with a date of Jan. 4, 1980. So, I went to DOS and typed DATE
<enter>
and changed the 1980 date to 2000. Then I powered down and, a few minutes
later, powered up again. The date was still set "correctly" to the year 2000.
So when the "real" year 2000 comes along in 21 months, can't I just wake up
that morning, turn on my 386, go to DOS, type DATE <enter>, and type in the
correct date? Doesn't that totallly solve my year-2000 problem? Why would I
need to download your program and install it and contact you for a
registration key to solve the problem? Is there a piece of the equation that
I'm missing?
Thank you for your help.
-- Al
--
Al Harberg, president, DP Directory, Inc.
Marketing Solutions for Computer Developers
phone: 860-659-1065 email: a...@dpdirectory.com
web site: http://www.dpdirectory.com
Doren Rosenthal
Phill Hellewell (ph...@pm-software.com) wrote:
:
: Doren Rosenthal wrote in message <6foi41$hqv$1...@zinger.callamer.com>...
: >Kathy I. Morgan (kmo...@polarnet.com) wrote:
: >: Doren Rosenthal <do...@slonet.org> wrote:
: >:
: >: > Be sure to test any year 2000 PC fix by setting the system date and
: time
: >: > couple of min. Then turn the system back on an check the date.
: Thank you for this usefull bit of information. We have been in the process
: of checking all of our PCs and various other electronically controlled
: machinery where I work. We have been checking roll over from 31/12/1999 and
: from 28/02/2000, but were blissfully unaware of the issue you have
: mentioned.
:
: So, I should have a good time at work tomorrow!
: I will also discuss use of your Y2k program with our IT people, but I
: suspect that as a section they are a bit anti shareware (rather short
: sighted I know).
That's ok, I'm also anti-shareware! That's why I now offer my software as
a fully functional evaluation version of my comercial product. Sounds
better than "shareware" don't you agree?
You're right! Putting the word "SHAREWARE" on a quality product is the
"kiss of death". (Worse is the ASP LOGO! Ugh!). Please don't mention the
word "shareware" to your IT people, and I won't mention it on my www url
if you direct them there.
Doren Rosenthal
Andrew McKay
On 2 Apr 1998 16:40:44 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>Why yes Andrew! We both offer our users a choice. I want my users to try
>my software, and it's my hope some will buy it. You ASP guys want to tell
>the rest of us what we can offer and who we can offer it to. So yes I want
>users to try my software and if that's a problem for you ASP guys... too
>bad!
You are a sad case Doren. No-one is telling you to do anything (other
than to perhaps put a sock in it ;)). You want to force your
downloaders to take the kitchen sink and all? Fine, you go right
ahead, I'm not telling you not to. The ASP isn't telling you not to.
No-one is telling you not to. I asked (and perhaps suggested?) whether
you had considered splitting your downloadables to give users a choice
of what they wanted - and as usual the Rosenthal whinge about having
fallen out with a superb organisation of really helpful people went
into auto-pilot. Don't confuse not being able to get on with other
people and respecting their wishes with being told you can't do
something. The ONLY thing you were told is that you could NOT
distribute a virus-ridden product with the ASP logo on it. No
suggestion in there about not being able to offer the software, it's
just that the ASP did not want their name associated with virus
distribution. What's so difficult about that?
I'm glad your state have certified you BTW. Somebody ought to.
Andrew McKay
On 2 Apr 1998 16:40:44 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>"Death or injury"???? Sorry, If my software causes your death, I'll offer
>you an update, *FREE* with my compliments.
Get a life Doren. You must know very well that PC's are used within
medical establishments, old people's homes, and so on. In those sorts
of places it is a possibility that a date suddenly reverting to 1900
could cause mayhem.
Doren Rosenthal
Mike E. Fullerton (ful...@SpamKiller-Remove.colteng.com) wrote:
: THE problem shareware programmers must be
: concerned with is forcing all user date entries to use 4 digit years.
Please let me expand on THE problem here as it relates to shareware.
We shareware autors mostly deal with IBM type PCs. That means we get the
short end of whatever problems were designed into that box when IBM
selected the Motorola clock chip back in 1985 for that first 80286 AT.
You'll hear all sorts of Y2k (year 2000) problems with everything from
vending machines to the bank of England (by the way I'm one of the guys
who designed disk drives at Burroughs in 1970 used by the Bank of
England). Those arn't our problems as shareware authors though, but they
do make headlines.
There are two Y2k problems we shareware authors need to address for our
users.
1) Our own software needs to work with dates from 1980 - 2099. That's the
easy part because the operating system even on the oldest PC can do that
just fine.
2) The hardware on many PCs goes nuts when the new century rolls over. I
don't care how many digits are used in the shareware program, if the PC
thinks it's Jan. 4, 1980 instead of Jan. 1, 2000..... That's a problem!
The first problem is just one any competent programmer can deal with
within their own program. Use four digits and test your software by
rolling the date forward.
The second problem is the major one because it's a problem with
hardware on MOST PCs in use today. Especialy PCs built before 1996.
I'm offering ANY shareware author my R-Y2kFix utility available FREE to
their users. That way if your shareware will work into the year 2000+, it
will be fully year 2000 compliant even on older systems.... No excuses
needed!
You ASP authors are welcome to that FREE offer as well, but the last FREE
offer of my R-Format I sent to be published in ASPects was rejected by the
ASP board as part of their black-listing policy..... so contact me in
private if you're afraid to speak up in public.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
Timo Salmi
In article <6g0rof$n...@falcon.ccs.uwo.ca>,
Philip Jones <pjo...@julian.uwo.ca> wrote:
:>: Andrew
:>Doren.....
:is ignorant, and/or makes a mistake? If not, I don't see any reason at all
:to keep your software from any of the major archives...
:Perhaps people on both sides could address this issue.
Besides the other aspects, there is the potential legality problem.
Please see below, especially the last paragraph. (You asked, and
I'll assume that this is not a troll, but that there really are new
readers to this unending topic.)
Doren Rosenthal's postings against Garbo archives, the Garbo view
Q: What is your answer to the claims which are posted by Mr.
Rosenthal in the alt.comp.shareware.* and alt.comp.virus newsgroups
against the Association of Shareware Professionals (ASP) and the
Garbo shareware/freeware/PD archives at the University of Vaasa,
Finland?
A1: The claims against ASP are not for me to answer. The postings
mispresenting the Garbo shareware archive's policies are the subject
of this FAQ.
A2: Mr. Doren Rosenthal is a fixture in the alt.comp.shareware* and
alt.comp.virus newsgroups not only because of his fine shareware,
but unfortunately also because of his crusade-mode postings, which
ignore all the customary honesty of civilized communication. His
crusade-mode postings mostly are against the Association of
Shareware Professionals (ASP), but occasionally also against program
archive sites like Garbo at the University of Vaasa, Finland. I
would prefer to refer the gentle readers to a repository like the
Dejanews news archives for the sequence of the events. However, Mr.
Rosenthal has repeatedly posted disinformation about the policies of
our archives and on occasion also posted foul-language abuse against
yours truly. Therefore, I feel that in order to provide, especially
the potential newcomers with the genuine facts of the case I must
return to this highly unpleasant subject and summarize what happened
at Garbo.
1) Mr. Rosenthal offered in 1997 his utility collection to the Garbo
shareware archives at the University of Vaasa, Finland. (Garbo
archives is a fairly well-known shareware, freeware and public
domain archive, which is mirrored world-wide by 27 independent
sites. The number of downloads from the main archive alone ranges
from about 5000 to 10000 a day.)
2) I accepted it. Because of our resource problems at Garbo I failed
to notice the virus "simulator" included in the package. Garbo's
policy (which has been around long before) does not allow viruses
nor other controversial material.
3) The problem was brought to my attention by a third party (FProt
author Fridrik Skulason) who did not wish his utilities to be on a
same server as a virus "simulator". He (F.S.) asked me to delete his
own utility. Instead I deleted Rosenthal utilities from Garbo. The
decision was mine and mine alone. Not because of who asked, but
because of Garbo's own policies!
4) I offered Mr. Rosenthal the opportunity to resubmit his package
without the virus part.
5) Mr. Rosenthal declined and subsequently included Garbo and yours
truly in a distortion campaign. He soon also stooped to obnoxious
language against Fridrik Skulason and yours truly (his language,
among other things, involved our anatomies). After he started the
outright personal abuse, the whole issue of Rosenthal utilities
became moot as far as Garbo is concerned. Mr. Rosenthal is no longer
welcome at our archives, ever, because I do not consider him a
gentleman.
6) As a related, but separate incident, Mr. Rosenthal presented
hostile fabrications about my actions on the net in connection of
the late discussion about creating moderated comp-level shareware
discussion newsgroups (which incidentally failed). From my point of
view Mr. Rosenthal's postings had all the hallmarks of a calculated,
personal vendetta.
7) Mr. Rosenthal has cyclically repeated his various disinformation
campaigns on the usenet news, mainly in the alt.comp.virus and
alt.comp.shareware* newsgroups. Unsuspecting new readers fall for
the disinformation for a spell, until the situation is clarified at
a considerable cost of time and effort. I can't afford the time of a
customized countering of Mr. Rosenthal's every disinformation cycle.
Therefore I have resorted to this automated posting.
Mr. Rosenthal's campaign postings, while distortive and occasionally
offensive, only violate common decency, not the charter of the
alt.comp.shareware* or alt.comp.virus newsgroups. However, they now
take too much attention away from the serious subject matter of
these newsgroups, since the newcomers do not know the score and do
not have the trouble killfiled.
Disagreements, alas even harsh ones, are very common on the Usenet
news. However, this case has been quite extraordinary because
contrary to the ordinary disagreements there are no two opposing
parties of a rational dispute in this one. This has turned out to be
a one-directional smear campaign by Mr. Rosenthal where he ignores,
sidesteps, mispresents or quotes out of context all the relevant
facts which do not suit his campaign against anyone who refuses to
endorse or carry his virus "simulator". This is all the more pity,
because on other, unrelated subjects Mr. Rosenthal can often be a
genuine shareware discussion contributor.
I did not come to think about it at the time, but there is a very
sinister aspect to Mr. Rosenthal's insistence of trying to force us
to carry his virus "simulator" by repeatedly claiming in colorful
language that not accepting it to our archives is censorship[sic] by
our university. It has been pointed out to me that some countries,
including Finland(!), have, are passing or are considering
legislation which make virus distribution illegal. Succumbing to Mr.
Rosenthal's persistent campaign could have caused me and my
university real, tangible grief.
All the best, Timo
....................................................................
Prof. Timo Salmi Co-moderator of news:comp.archives.msdos.announce
Moderating at ftp:// & http://garbo.uwasa.fi/ archives 193.166.120.5
Department of Accounting and Business Finance ; University of Vaasa
mailto:t...@uwasa.fi <http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/> ; FIN-65101, Finland
Spam foiling in effect. My email filter autoresponder will return a
required email password to users not yet in the privileges database.
Michael Raustad
Doren Rosenthal ranted in message...
<6g1gun$qri$1...@zinger.callamer.com>...
>>You ASP authors are welcome to that FREE offer as
>>well, but the last FREE offer of my R-Format I sent
>>to be published in ASPects was rejected by the ASP
>>board as part of their black-listing policy..... so
>>contact me in private if you're afraid to speak up
>>in public.
I'm happy to speak up. Don't submit it to ASP unless your a member.
Since you were kicked out, your submissions are rejected. The
"black-list" you speak of, is something you earned yourself with other
sites, as ASP does not have such a list. Sites are pulling your
software because of your lies and attitude, nothing more. For a 51
year old man, you act like an 11 year old child. When promoting your
products, you should do so based on the merits of your code, not using
a letter from the ASP you obtained under false pretenses. Very
unprofessional...
Mike
---
M & R Technologies, Inc.
Web Site: http://www.mrtec.com
Home of Financial Freedom Billing & Inventory PRO.
Member ASP. Spam foiling in effect. Remove 's' from email address.
Unknown
Sighhhhhhhhhh.
Another interesting thread shot to hell. Time to mark "kill" in Agent.
Doren Rosenthal
Andrew McKay (M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: On 2 Apr 1998 16:40:44 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
: You are a sad case Doren. No-one is telling you to do anything (other
: than to perhaps put a sock in it ;)). You want to force your
: downloaders to take the kitchen sink and all? Fine, you go right
: ahead, I'm not telling you not to.
Yes Andrew. Here's how it works. I put out a whole bunch of little
programs. Each user finds the one they feel has value, but instead of me
advertising and promoting a zillion little programs, I now offer one
package. Far easier for me, and far better EXPOSURE for all my products.
As my software is all very tight hand coded assembly, the whole package
only takes up 450k. So at todays modem speeds, I see no advantage to
promoting a bunch of little programs instead of one package.
The proof is in the MONEY Andrew. My average sale when my programs were
promoted individualy was $20 + S/H. Now my average sale is for my
utilities package which is $60 + S/H. AND I HAVE MORE SALES!
Before if I got one program on a magzine CD etc. I got no mention of my
other software. By the way, Virus Simulator is a lost leader, so when CDs
run the old ASP version (as Bug Spray CD) just did. I get very few
registrations. A lost leader, is a marketing tool to introduce users to
other software that I hope they buy.
My new Year 2000 Fix is such a lost leader. I put it out FREE so I get
exposure for my other utilities. It wouldn't make sense to offer that
program all by itself free, if its function is to introduce my other
products to users. They get it FREE just for trying my utilities.
I do this for the MONEY. Make more sense now Andrew?
Doren......
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm) http://slonet.org/~doren/
NEW!!! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!
Gary Elfring
"Philip Jones" <pjo...@julian.uwo.ca> wrote:
>I have one question - shouldn't the question as to whether or not Doren's
>VirSim program can actually cause damage to a user's system be answerable as
>Yes or No? From the ASP standards committee letter that I read, it would
>seem they agree with Doren as to the pathogenicity of this "virus".
>
That question has no bearing on this situation. The ASP's policy is
that it does not distribute viruses. Doren placed a virus on the ASP
CD-ROM, which was sold at retail. Would you buy a CD at the store that
contained a virus, regardless of the guarantee? What about the general
public? The ASP is a professional trade association, not a launching
board for Doren's bizarre marketing methods.
Note that to submit the virus to the ASP CD, Doren had to agree to the
standard distribution conditions imposed by the ASP's retail contract
for the CD: 1) product does not contain a virus, 2) the product does
not contain any encryption code that would make it illegal to export,
3) the product does not contain adult material.
Doren had the choice of removing the virus (it wasn't there when he
joined the ASP), or leaving the ASP. Doren chose to leave the ASP.
http://www.elfring.com
Bar Codes, MICR, Signatures, plus online ordering of popular TrueType fonts and clip art.
Our Scipt & Calligraphy Font Set was awarded "Best Shareware of 1997"
Doren Rosenthal
Timo Salmi (t...@majakka.uwasa.fi) wrote:
: It has been pointed out to me that some countries,
: including Finland(!), have, are passing or are considering
: legislation which make virus distribution illegal. Succumbing to Mr.
: Rosenthal's persistent campaign could have caused me and my
: university real, tangible grief.
Pointed out by WHO????? This is TOTAL BS!!!
I ship my software troughout the FREE world, Finland included. This is
just another red herring. Anyone wo feels my software is illegal is
welcome to present their case to the proper autorities, I'm an easy guy to
find.
Doren Rosenthal
Rosenthal Engineering
P.O. Box 1650
San Luis Obispo, CA USA 93406
Doren Rosenthal
Andrew McKay (M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: On 2 Apr 1998 16:40:44 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
:
: >you an update, *FREE* with my compliments.
:
: Get a life Doren. You must know very well that PC's are used within
: medical establishments, old people's homes, and so on. In those sorts
: of places it is a possibility that a date suddenly reverting to 1900
: could cause mayhem.
:
: Andrew
If you're doctor uses a Micro$oft Windows based product to run your pace
maker Andrew, just bend over and kiss your ass goodbye right now!
However if any shareware author wants can use my Year 2000 Fix to bring
their products (and their users PCs), into compliance for the year 2000,
I'm offering it FREE!
I'm also offering my R-Format FREE to authors to prepare the diskettes
they distribute. It's VERY slick!
(EVEN ASP MEMBERS ARE WELCOME TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS FREE OFFER)
Doren Rosenthal
Doren Rosenthal
Tom Simondi () wrote:
: Sighhhhhhhhhh.
:
: Another interesting thread shot to hell. Time to mark "kill" in Agent.
We'll all miss your lack of contribution to this thread Tom. Bye!
Doren......
Doren Rosenthal
Gary Elfring (in...@nospam.elfring.com) wrote:
: "Philip Jones" <pjo...@julian.uwo.ca> wrote:
:
: >I have one question - shouldn't the question as to whether or not Doren's
: >VirSim program can actually cause damage to a user's system be answerable as
: >Yes or No?
That's an easy answer that anyone can simply verify for themselves Phill.
NO!!! And believe me these guys ave been trying every bizzar method a
bunch of programmers can come up with to prove me wrong. It's been out
almost two years now and my download counts are quite high, but NEVER a
report of ANY problems.
: >From the ASP standards committee letter that I read, it would
: >seem they agree with Doren as to the pathogenicity of this "virus".
The compliance committee tested the program. The ASP board refused to look
at it. Their objections are based on hysteria, myth, conjecture. They want
to be the high priests of shareware, and object on the same grounds
applied to VOO-DOO, witch-craft, demonic possetion.
Their claim as nothing to do with anything you can demonstarte with the
program, just that my program is in itself "Evil".
Try it yourself Phill, people that do can draw their own concluisions
simple enough. Only a total MORON would feel this program did someting the
user wasn't aware of and gave their informed concent. (No Andrew I'm not
calling you a "Total" moron, because you never looked at the program.
You're just supporting the high priests of shareware on faith alone.)
Anyone is welcome to simply look at the program for themselves, as so many
people have done since I came out with my Virus Simulator back in 1990.
The current version on my www url is identical to the version on the
official ASP CD Rom from Aug. '96 through Feb. '97 as VIRSIM30.ZIP
Doren Rosenthal
Doren Rosenthal
Andrew McKay (M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: On 30 Mar 1998 16:43:45 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
:
: the ASP for distributing computer virii! ;)
:
: Andrew
Not at all Andrew. Just moaning that I was stupid enough to ever bring my
software to the ASP and trust them with the success of my bussiness in the
first place. It's my hope by making this public, that other authors can
learn from both my success and my mistakes.
For me, joining the ASP was clearly a mistake, and quite harmfull to my
bussiness. I still offer my software, and it's doing better than ever, so
I'll count that as a success.
Doren Rosenthal
Author of "The Rosenthal Utilities (tm)" http://slonet.org/~doren/
Awarded "Best Sareware of 1997" by Boot-It
NEW!! Rosenthal Year 2000 Fix, and CMOS/Clock Battery Monitor. FREE!!
Al Harberg
Doren Rosenthal wrote:
> For me, joining the ASP was clearly a mistake, and quite harmfull to my
> bussiness. I still offer my software, and it's doing better than ever, so
> I'll count that as a success.
I just visited ZD's shareware archives and did a search on "Rosenthal." They
have four of your programs listed. I read all four descriptions. Three of
the four have "ASP-approved" as part of your program description. How can you
say such horrible things on this newsgroup about the ASP, and use the ASP's
name to promote your shareware on ZD-net?
st...@tropheus.demon.co.uk
>Perhaps people on both sides could address this issue.
Where have you been? The vast majority of us have no interest at all
in the subject and it has already been churned over about a billion
times. It's just more kill filter fodder!
Steve
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Wolstenholme: Neural Network Software
Neural-Planner NeuroDiet EasyNN
http://www.tropheus.demon.co.uk
Andrew McKay
On 3 Apr 1998 15:25:14 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>I do this for the MONEY. Make more sense now Andrew?
Not really. Believe me, I understand your primary motive, and with
that I have no problem at all. But my original suggestion was perhaps
whether you might have considered removing the virus product from the
list, as many people find it somewhat offensive (I am trying to use my
words in the nicest possible way, before you assume that I'm trying to
be sarcastic :)).
You don't want to do that, that's fine. I just wondered is all. :)
Andrew McKay
On 3 Apr 1998 15:37:20 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>If you're doctor uses a Micro$oft Windows based product to run your pace
>maker Andrew, just bend over and kiss your ass goodbye right now!
Since when was year 2000 a Windows-only problem?
I had this strange feeling that the Y2K problem affected the PC,
finito.
ManOWar
Go eat shit and die somewhere, Andrew. You are such a bore!
On Fri, 03 Apr 1998 18:18:14 GMT, M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk (Andrew
McKay) wrote:
ManOWar
Go eat shit and die somewhere, Andrew. You are such a bore!
On Fri, 03 Apr 1998 18:16:48 GMT, M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk (Andrew
McKay) wrote:
Jorj Strumolo
Tom Simondi writes:
TS> Another interesting thread shot to hell.
> Time to mark "kill" in Agent.
It's times like this I really wish my reader could be a bit
more selective in its filtering. I can kill subject words or
phrases, I can kill From:, I can even kill To: (since it uses
the Reference line to reconstruct one for newsgroups), but I
*can't* kill based on message-text contents, which I think I'd
have to be able to do to pull out the few still-worthwhile parts
of threads that have otherwise been overrun by idiocy. A pity
that the whole thread has to be killed instead.
Thomas W. Clay
Actually, it effects mainly legacy mainframe systems. It is difficult to
modify programs when the source code no longer exists.
Thomas W. Clay
tc...@xmission.com
p.s. Pacemakers don't use dates.
Andrew McKay wrote in message <352527a2...@127.0.0.1>...
Scott Kane - MSA
Doren,
>My new Year 2000 Fix is such a lost leader. I put it out FREE so I get
>exposure for my other utilities. It wouldn't make sense to offer that
>program all by itself free, if its function is to introduce my other
>products to users. They get it FREE just for trying my utilities.
It is a "Loss Leader", not a "Lost Leader" (at least I hope it isn't :-] )
Cheers
Scott Kane
MicroNexus Software Australia
Gary Elfring
do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
>NO!!! And believe me these guys ave been trying every bizzar method a
>bunch of programmers can come up with to prove me wrong. It's been out
>almost two years now and my download counts are quite high, but NEVER a
>report of ANY problems.
>
That question has no bearing on this situation. The ASP's policy is
that it does not distribute viruses. Doren placed a virus on the ASP
CD-ROM, which was sold at retail. Would you manufacture a CD that
contained a virus, and sell it at retail, regardless of the guarantee?
Shaun Flisakowski
In article <352527a2...@127.0.0.1>,
Andrew McKay <M...@kazmax.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:On 3 Apr 1998 15:37:20 GMT, do...@slonet.org (Doren Rosenthal) wrote:
:
:>If you're doctor uses a Micro$oft Windows based product to run your pace
:>maker Andrew, just bend over and kiss your ass goodbye right now!
:
:Since when was year 2000 a Windows-only problem?
I assume Doren was referring to Windows being crap in general;
it gives a whole new meaning to "the blue screen of death".
--
Shaun flisakow AT cs.wisc.edu
http://www.kagi.com/flisakow - Windows Games, and Unix Freeware.
"In your heart you know its flat."
-Flat Earth Society