Hardware ID
E, De Canck
like the serial # of the main hard disk of my system (C-drive) )?
I need this information to use it in a VB-program.
Tanks for replying me
.
Larry Linson
Microsoft "Activation Scheme" for Office XP, don't plan on selling your
software to me, or to many others around here. We don't buy "hardware
handcuffed software".
"E, De Canck" <dr...@freegates.be> wrote in message
news:newscache$x0u5fg$bz7$1...@news.freegates.be...
Bram van Empelen
Private Declare Function GetVolumeInformation& Lib "kernel32" Alias
"GetVolumeInformationA" _
(ByVal lpRootPathName As String, ByVal pVolumeNameBuffer As String, _
ByVal nVolumeNameSize As Long, lpVolumeSerialNumber As Long, _
lpMaximumComponentLength As Long, lpFileSystemFlags As Long, _
ByVal lpFileSystemNameBuffer As String, ByVal nFileSystemNameSize As
Long)
Bram van Empelen.
"Larry Linson" <larry....@ntpcug.org> schreef in bericht
news:cJAX6.1381$%o6.5...@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net...
Barry
one machine license. Not that it really matters, I am sure there are
already cracks in XP, there is no way to stop people from stealing
your software, even if your Microsoft.
Howard Kaikow
--
Please post your response to the newsgroup.
http://www.standards.com/ipusers/standards; Word macros, including
converting from WordBasic to VBA; Technical writing and reviewing; Standards
------------------------------------------------
"Bram van Empelen" <b.v.e...@multiweb.nl> wrote in message
news:9gn58i$ssm$1...@news1.xs4all.nl...
Larry Linson
a new machine -- you are at the mercy of the lowest-paid Microsoftie at the
other end of the telephone line to believe you when you try to convince
him/her that you are legitimate. And, of course, the people they _know_ are
violating license are corporate licensees whose version of the software
doesn't require the burdensome activation. Office, however, has always been,
and Office XP still is, a product that allows two installs, one for your
fixed machine and a second for your laptop. There's no problem with those
first two, but there is the hassle of having to go through the
mini-registration process.
And, I haven't seen a reference to a crack for Office XP, only Windows XP,
though I don't doubt there is one, already, and am certain that there _will
be_ one that gets widely spread around, leaving Microsoft as I've said
before, _worse off_: no more protection but a lot of irritated customers
(some of whom might go from license-abiding to less-than-license-abiding,
since they already had to "become outlaws" to avoid the hassle).
"Barry" <bar...@somtel.com> wrote in message
news:19c206ca.01061...@posting.google.com...
Doug Nadel
>Not sure why anyone would be upset, it is after all suppose to be a
>one machine license. Not that it really matters, I am sure there are
>already cracks in XP, there is no way to stop people from stealing
>your software, even if your Microsoft.
I just moved my hard drive, which was bought in a Compaq Athlon box, to a new Pentium
based motherboard after the compaq mobo got fried. No reinstall, just moved to a new box
(a few drivers changed for the mobo). Had this been XP, I would then have to grovel to MS
to get my software working again and then be subject to the whims of some MS bean counter
who was appointed the de facto judge of my trustworthiness. No Thanks!
I frequently add, swap and remove hardware, including disks, cards and on this occasion,
the motherboard - same hard drive - same software - same potential stupid problems with
MS. No violation of the 'one machine' rule on the software I purchased, but a stupid
overly restrictive pain in the ass license "enforcer" would make my tinkering unbearable.
Rick Rothstein
point of view.
Perhaps you are too young to remember, but in the "early" days of the PC, software makers
regularly did non-standard things to their floppy disks to protect them. (One favorite was
to laser beam a hole at a set position on the disk and they look for, react to, and step
around the error. This stopped the disk copier and bit copiers from making a duplicate.
Now after a while, the floppy becomes unreadable (spilled coffee on it, placed your
kitchen magnet down on it, whatever), so you go back to the company for a replacement.
That became a hassle as you traded bad disks for good ones (could take several weeks, you
didn't have access to the software). And that assumes the company still existed. If not,
you got to watch yourself chuck the good money you spent on the software into the garbage.
(Now, I'm not saying Microsoft is going under, but you never know <g>.)
Now, why did I just relate all of that to you? Well, the consumers revolted against this;
they stopped buying software from companies that used such protection practices and went
to their competitors. Soon, these companies that did use copy protection methods stopped
when they realized it was hurting them (their sales were suffering) and they knew it. As a
result, there was a long, long period of copy-protection-free software. Did some people
steal their software? Sure, but they made up for it on volume sales to the honest people
(there will always be thieves). Now, Microsoft is attempting to reinstitute a form of the
"good old days". Personally, I think they are doomed to the same failure that those
companies of yesteryear experienced. I've already sunk a couple of bucks into Corel (the
owners of the WordPerfect Office Suite) as I expect their sales to go up real soon now.
Personally, I will not purchase the Office XP upgrade; I'll make do with Office2000. It
has served me well up to now and I don't see why it can't keep meeting my needs for some
time into the future. And when it can no longer meet my needs, I will look into the
WordPerfect Suite. I don't think I'm alone here. I'm a little disappointed to hear about
WindowsXP as I didn't realize they were doing it here too. (I wonder how this will work
with computers purchased from Dell, Gateway, or small vendors such as at computer shows?)
Oh, and I have one question for Microsoft. Their stated reason for implementing this
cumbersome registration procedure is to stop the loss from software theft. They say they
are doing this for us because they have to pass that loss in sales to those of us who
legitimately purchase their software. Well, my question to Microsoft is... if you are so
sure this new registration procedure is going to work, why didn't the OfficeXP software
come out at a lower cost? If it really will work as a deterrent to software theft, then
you can anticipate not losing money to it and so you don't have to pass that cost on to
us. So why is your software more expensive this year than last? Is it because you don't
think the process will actually work? If that is the case, then why did you choose to piss
us all off this way? Or is this simply a plain and simple price gouging technique to rake
in more and more billions for the company and the hell with all of us out here? (Okay,
that was more than one question, but you get the idea <g>.)
Rick
"Barry" <bar...@somtel.com> wrote in message
news:19c206ca.01061...@posting.google.com...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
N Lawton
What if my client has paid me a large sum of money to write an
application for a very limited distribution only for use by client companies
(agencies) which must deal with my client for this service. Part of the deal
is that my client's agents get the software for free provided the business
generated comes back to my client. The agency then gets a commission from
the deal. The same software in the hands of agents for competitors would
effectively work against my client, whom has paid for the development of the
software. It is intended that the terms of use will point out these
conditions.
Would this not be a case where this sort of protection could justifiably
be employed?
If not, how about - my client requires it so I will if I know what's
good for me. I'll do it.
"Rick Rothstein" <rick_ne...@email.com> wrote in message
news:3b304e91$1...@Newsfeeds.com...
J French
the damage.
Give your software an Installation routine that checks the diskette
and takes the serial number of the hard drive and possibly a few more
bits of information and stores those on the hard disk. Preferably in
an INI file - locked with a CRC
If the system is 'unlicensed' than make it ask for the installation
disk.
The other thing you could do is look at dongles.
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 23:10:41 +1200, "N Lawton" <la...@ihug.co.nz>
wrote:
Rick Rothstein
railing about. Your client is using the software you develop for their own internal
(agencies') use.
That is different than Microsoft saying I have this product I would like you to buy from
me; and for the privilege of my letting you buy it from me (I know, it's technically
license, but practically, it's buy <g>), I'm going to make you jump through an annoying
hoop, check out your personal computer to see what's in it, trust me not to send that data
to myself without you knowing it, trust that I'll always be here to reactivate the
software in the future, trust me to not put even more onerous conditions on you in the
future, etc., etc., etc.
I'm sorry, but they have no right to know how often or when I make significant changes in
my hardware setups, or how often I buy new computers, or any other condition that requires
me to call them and tell them when I made some change in my system of such magnitude that
they deem it necessary for me to tell them about it and "beg" them for a new reactivation
number. Think about it, when you call them in the future and tell them you bought a new
computer, do you really think they will just give you a new activation number and that
will be that? You better believe that some telephone clerk will write into your file the
reason they gave you that number -- your personal purchasing habits, whether it be
component upgrades or new systems, *will* be tracked!!!! Personally, this is information I
do not wish them to have; and for them to make me have to give it to them for the
*privilege* of being able to use their software is unconscionable!!!
Anyway, that is my opinion -- anyone else care to agree or disagree? Oh! And any comments
on the "money grab" issue I mentioned in my first post? Am I wrong to take Microsoft at
their word and expect the money they say has been added to the price of their products (in
the past to account for the software theft) be taken out of that cost now that they have a
"secure" system in place to prevent such theft?
Rick
"N Lawton" <la...@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message news:9gskh7$6as$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
Larry Linson
"Rick Rothstein" wrote
> Anyway, that is my opinion -- anyone else care to agree or disagree? Oh!
And any comments
> on the "money grab" issue I mentioned in my first post? Am I wrong to
take Microsoft at
> their word and expect the money they say has been added to the price of
their products (in
> the past to account for the software theft) be taken out of that cost now
that they have a
> "secure" system in place to prevent such theft?
Did they actually say they were going to pass savings on to customers? I am
of the very definite opinion that software, including Microsoft's, is priced
at "what the market will bear". That's why I was able to purchase an
authentic (and recent if not current) Lotus Smart Suite Millenium Edition at
a computer sale event for $23 -- that's what the market will bear for it.
And, for $23, it ain't a bad Office suite! That's less, I think, than Sun
charges for manufacture and shipping on CD of their free Star Office.
Rick Rothstein
off-hand, but it pointed out that software costs are higher than necessary because they
have to pass the loss due to theft on to those buying the product (or words to that
effect).
This kind of reminds me of the era (was it really in the 80's) when interest rates in the
US sky-rocketed to double-digit numbers (high teens). The credit card companies explained
that they had to raise their borrowing rates to because of the higher cost of money. When
the interest rates finally came down, what did the credit card companies do about their
elevated rates. Nothing! Suddenly, their rates were no longer bound to the economy. Their
original excuse was nothing but lip service; it definitely wasn't a sincere reason.
The similarity here is... an excuse has been given that will *not*, will *never*, result
in lower prices for consumers, only obnoxiously higher profits for the company. It really
pisses me off that people will stand for this. If enough people made noise over this issue
(or the credit card company example in the past), the company *would* take notice. Right
now, they can do as they please because they don't perceive any threat of repercussions
for doing so.
Rick
"Larry Linson" <larry....@ntpcug.org> wrote in message
news:l1pY6.425$qz2.1...@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
J French
running a fraud.
Did you hear the one about them fining vendors who have a higher than
average incidence of fraud ? I have a wonderful letter from
Barclaycard (VISA) stating that they could not stop a (fraudulent)
series of debits as 'I had given a permanent mandate to debit' to the
so called vendor.
They backed down as soon as I replied on headed notepaper explaining
my business - which oddly enough deals with credit card clearing.
As for MS - what really narks me is their multi level pricing - and
the fact that their UK sales people are complete morons.
Larry Linson
will read into them something that they do not say. Sure, they say "prices
are higher because" but they cleverly do _not_ say "we'll pass [all | part |
none] of the savings on to you". But, I have a pretty good idea which would
be the correct optional word there. <G>
"Rick Rothstein" <rick_ne...@email.com> wrote in message
news:3b32344c$1...@Newsfeeds.com...
Barry
protect their investment, none of which ever worked. I my self used a
hardware dependent device for a while it didn't slow down the cracks
on my software. It was just a pain for me, although never heard to
much of a compliant from customers and I would always supply a new key
if a client had a problem. I lament the old days, when you listed in
a couple of places like Data Sources, you had a chance to actually
talk to a potential customer, it was much more personal.
My point is, if he wants to try different protection systems, there
are so many, none of them work, he needs to have his own experience.
The problem is the machine has to eventually read the code, if the
system can read it, a hacker can read it. I personally like the idea
that Microsoft is going to piss off a bunch of people and some will
not upgrade and some will go to another vendor, but as we speak I am
sure the streets of Hong Kong are a wash in Office XP pirated copies.
It is my opinion that Microsoft to a large degree is responsible for
not the pirates but of the attitude that software is worth nothing,
bundling leaves the impression with people that software is free,
which of course it isn't, just bundled in such a way that people
perceive it as free. Now this if fine for Microsoft for operating
systems, but when it comes to paying $500 plus for an office suite,
Microsoft is in the same position as the rest of us, where the
consumer just can't see that its worth much, after all they got all
this other software "free". More and more people are learning that
even if its not really free, they can make it free, by stealing it
with the help of a few jerks that think themselves clever, its a lot
harder to develop and market a piece of software than to gen a key.
My last two products had cracks before I had my first reg. I am
trying a different executable for the demo, I send out a completely
different version that can be registered. So when that one shows up
with a crack, I know exactly where it came from and I will prosecute.
Does this endear you to the people you want to impress, your
customers, threatening them to prosecute them, probably not.
I still love the design work, hate the marketing, but I am sure that I
could have made 10 times the money if I had opened a pizza parlor 31
years ago instead of going into the software business.
Larry Linson
or stores in a chain) that opened up around here 10 years ago went belly-up
long ago. Most of the folk I know who were developing software around here
10 years ago are still developing software. Some have made more money at it
than others, though.
"Barry" <bar...@somtel.com> wrote in message
news:19c206ca.01062...@posting.google.com...
> I still love the design work, hate the marketing, but I am sure that I
> could have made 10 times the money if I had opened a pizza parlor 31
> years ago instead of going into the software business.
Oh, the pirates will, no doubt, copy a "corporate licensee" copy of Office
XP, which doesn't have the same onerous activation scheme -- no crack
required. I read in one of the trade magazines that some "insider" sent out
a release copy of that even before the release date and it showed up on some
warez site. Those aren't usually up long before they're taken down, but they
tend to show up again somewhere else, and then somewhere else again, and . .
.
J French
it is more a matter of 'protecting' his client.
This sort of thing is more like checking passengers tickets before
they board an aircraft.
Personally I would love to see MS broken into six pieces - 2 operating
systems, 2 languages and 2 Applications.
It beats me (well not really) why US Antitrust law has not already
forced this.
mike
Handcuffing the software to One harddrive serial number is not the issue at hand
here.
The problem comes form the fact that when you wish to reinstall your software,
like many of us do every seocnd month, you have to spend an hour on the phone
reading a 50 digit key to the MS agent then retrieve a 42 digit key to put back
in your machine before you can even use your software again.
If you handcuff the software to work only on one harddrive you will still havce
your license at hand at these times and need not bother calling back for it
again.
If you on the other hand replace your harddrive, or trash the old one as I have
done with a few now, you are at the position where you have to obtain a new key.
Any decent software producer with a reasonable amount of selfesteam would not
fuzz about a client needing to fix a hardware issue once or twice... however if
the same software ID code gets out of hand several times, I think its only fair
to have a block somehwere.
After all.. we are talking about our livelyhood here right????
sa...@omegatechware.hypermart.net
decided to enlighten us with :
>I would like to put my tidbit into this.
>
>Handcuffing the software to One harddrive serial number is not the issue at hand
>here.
>
>The problem comes form the fact that when you wish to reinstall your software,
>like many of us do every seocnd month, you have to spend an hour on the phone
>reading a 50 digit key to the MS agent then retrieve a 42 digit key to put back
>in your machine before you can even use your software again.
>
>If you handcuff the software to work only on one harddrive you will still havce
>your license at hand at these times and need not bother calling back for it
>again.
>
>If you on the other hand replace your harddrive, or trash the old one as I have
>done with a few now, you are at the position where you have to obtain a new key.
>
>Any decent software producer with a reasonable amount of selfesteam would not
>fuzz about a client needing to fix a hardware issue once or twice... however if
>the same software ID code gets out of hand several times, I think its only fair
>to have a block somehwere.
>
>After all.. we are talking about our livelyhood here right????
The project I am working on is only going to be bundled with custom
machines (and I mean custom! Brushed-aluminum cases, etc), and if the
purchaser wants to take the machine apart, or reinstall, they will
void their warranty. Maintenance of these systems is strictly supposed
to be done by a licensed tech. In this case, I plan on relying on as
many hardware-specific parameters as possible to limit illegal
distribution. HD serial number, MAC address, Processor serial, system
metrics (RAM, HD capacity, etc ...). They will all be hashed together
into a checksum, which will be hardcoded into each compile. Since we
aren't talking about hundreds of sales, this is possible, and
feasible.
For any application that isn't so hardware-dependent, this would be
overkill. The law of diminishing returns definitely applies where
computer security is concerned.
Just my tuppence, of course.
J.
Jeremiah D. Seitz
Porch karaoke king and the guy who runs with 8< scissors >8
Omega Techware
http://omegatechware.hypermart.net