New MLO Activation System

[Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)]

Hi ALL,

Every software can be cracked.
---------------------------------------------
Unfortunately. And as a developer I know this fact. However we made a
"reasonable" effort so it won't be easy to do.

One of the issues we tried to resolve is how to prevent a situation
when a stolen and published Activation Code would work on EVERY
computer with every new MLO version (1). We really do not want this
happen.

How it works right now.
-----------------------------------
Each Activation Code we issue for MLO has encoded information on which
computer it can work. This is why we need a License Request sent to us
first (which contains an ID of your computer) and then this ID is
encoded to your Activation Code which will then work only on this
computer (to say sophisticated thing with simple words :-) )

What is annoying?
---------------------------
You need new Activation Code for every new computer (which is provided
FREE).
We tried to simplify this process by creating automatic Activation
System but it is still annoying for users. What if I work on a dozen
of computers and need to have MLO on a thumb drive? I need to send
License Request to the Activation System all the time when I need new
Activation Code for new computer. Really annoying.
What if I reinstall my computer and forgot e-mail I used when
registering (Activation System needs your e-mail to send code to it)?
This increases the support requests.

How it will work starting from MLO 1.8.0 final?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
So where is the compromise? How to address issue (1) and do not
disturb users (and support :-) ) very much? Here is another solution
we propose.

Your credit card has an expiration date, right? You need to change it
periodically due to security reasons.

MLO activation system will take the same model. Your Activation Code
will work on ANY computer (like credit card works in any cash machine)
but it will have an expiration date. You will need to replace your
Activation Code with new one every 5 months.

Will it be still annoying?
-----------------------------------
If your computer is connected to the Internet then NO!
Once started MLO will detect that your Activation Code is about to
expire (30 days in advance) and will send you a new code
automatically!

If your computer is not connected to the Internet then MLO will still
warn you that your Activation Code is about to expire. You will need
to access online computer within next 30 days and get new code which
will work on any computer for another 5 months.
You do not need to remember the e-mail you used when registering since
MLO will place it to your Activation Code and will use it to resend
Activation Codes. There is also an easy way to change this e-mail if
needed.

How will I work with MLO using my thumb drive now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once registered MLO will create a file with your activation
information: mlo.keym. Just place this file to a folder where mlo.exe
is located. Now MLO will work on any computer for next 5 months. Just
replace this file with new one to prolong this period.

MLO PocketPC Activation Code will not have an expiration date.

Thanks,
Andrey.

[Steve Wynn]

Hi Andrey,

If somebody posted the Activation Key file to the Internet, or somebody's
computer was hacked and the key file retrieved and posted. Wouldn't that
mean that literally anybody would be able to use MLO for at least 5/6
months? If somebody continually posted the key file, wouldn't MLO be less
secure than it is now considering it would work on any computer? Surely if
they just disable MLO from accessing the Internet via a Firewall, they stop
the automatic license update and just search for another updated keyfile.

I understand you may be able to trace the keyfile origins etc, but won't the
damage have been done if it gets into the public domain as such. If
hackers/crackers know there is a keyfile won't they be able to search/scan
for that file and possibly retrieve it from an unsecured computer?

I think periodic updates to the license are a good idea, but I can just see
the key file ending up on the Internet somewhere. I am not saying somebody
will intentionally do this, but any one of us could be hacked. Perhaps you
install it on a computer, forget, and then some other person finds it and
posts it.

With the current system a hacker/cracker needs to break the security first
of all, then either create some sort of a loader to workaround the security
or create a key generator to create the license code. To me that seems a lot
more effort than just searching for a current key file.

I don't mind the changes, I am just a little concerned. Couldn't you take
the credit card idea a step further and have the activation key file, plus a
unique user assigned pin code? So you need the keyfile plus the code to work
on any computer. Not just the keyfile. If that was a encrypted registry
setting of some sort, if you put the keyfile on a new computer where that
entry doesn't exist it asks for the code. Once that code is entered and
stored, it works for all future current keyfiles. That way with needing both
the keyfile and the code, you add a secondary safeguard. Just an idea.

Regards

Steve

[David Jade]

I understand your need to have license keys and activation. However as
a user I would not pleased about having to re-activate software that I
purchased unless it is completely automatic and requires no
intervention from me as the user if I am connected to the internet. I
hope this is what you mean by "send you a new code automatically!"

However if you mean that I will get sent a new code which I then must
use to re-activate MLO that I'm not going to be very happy. As a user
I shouldn't have to see a dialog about activation more than once when
I initially activate.

And while it seems that you and your company are having great success
and unlikely to disapear anytime soon, what will happen if something
happened and there was no way to renew the license key down the road?
I would not be thrilled to have software that I depended on that was
effectively time-bombed.

david

[D K]

>>And while it seems that you and your company are having great success and unlikely to disapear anytime soon, what will happen if something happened and there was no way to renew the license key down the road? I would not be thrilled to have software that I depended on that was
effectively time-bombed.<<

I can't agree with David more. I too understand your concerns. I used to have a sofware company (D&A Software). It longer exists. I still use ECCO (Netmanage bought the rights, but does not support or upgrade it any longer). I would be afraid to depend on something that was "timebombed" as David put it. At least ECCO still works (11 years later).

Dara

[Steve Wynn]

I think David does make a very good point, the software in itself will be
timebombed. Which may not be an issue now but could, as he mentions, be a
problem in the future.

That also got me thinking about the current security method being tied to a
Computer ID, again that could be problematic if something unlikely did
happen in the future. The software is tied to one machine, if you changed
that machine and could not get a new license you wouldn't be able to use it.

So in essence I like the idea of being able to use it on multiple machines,
in other words the keyfile idea. Although I think it needs to be more secure
than just a keyfile. I am not so sure about the 5 month renewal, I wonder if
it may be better to release new keyfiles as per each major release. So in
other words a keyfile would work for 1.8.x but not for 1.9.x, or perhaps
even a new keyfile as per each minor release. If that was the case and
something did happen, you could still use the latest level on any machine.
As long as you had a copy of the software and the keyfile.

I think I would certainly prefer it to be somehow tied to a release of
software, rather than time based expiry.

Regards

Steve

[japchap]

Hi guys - This is my first posting on the MLO group (as I recall :o )
-
good to join the discussion. I've been using MLO 1.7.2 now for three
months or so, and I really enjoy the simplicity and flexibility of
this application. I'm also really surprised about how there are
so many vocal users of this application, and how the author
is getting his feet wet so to speak by joining the fray and not only
listening to but actively responding to user's opinions. This really
is
a rarity in the software business as I see it, especially for someone
who's used to working with apps from the biggies like Microsoft and
Adobe.

As far as the online activation thing goes, I can see the author's
plight in wanting to curb piracy and registration abuse.
Steve's idea about inputting the PIN doesn't seem like a bad idea,
although there is the question of what you would do if you
forgot your pasword. Also, for me, I used MLO primarily on a
standalone laptop during my commute to work every morning,
so this machine doesn't get connected to the internet very much.
MLO in and of itself seems well-suited for situations like this -
it works well as a standalone app that can do most everything without
requiring a web connection.

For this reason, if there is some kind of periodic "reactivation"
process,
I would prefer that it be an offline system, so that I wouldn't have
to go to the trouble of connecting to the web every 4-5 months
or whenever activation is required. (A somewhat silly but plausible
scenario: what if I am the team leader of an archaeological
excavation in the middle of the Saharan desert, and I need to
use MLO to organize my tasks for the duration of the project?
Perhaps I could have access to a power source to recharge my
laptop batteries, but no access to an Internet connection for
months at a time. If MLO tells me that it is locking me out every five
months unless I update my information, where does that leave me?)

Food for thought...

Jeff

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-

> Once registered MLO will create a file with your activation
> information: mlo.keym. Just place this file to a folder where mlo.exe
> is located. Now MLO will work on any computer for next 5 months. Just
> replace this file with new one to prolong this period.
>
> MLO PocketPC Activation Code will not have an expiration date.
>
> Thanks,

> Andrey.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Bob Pankratz]

One complete different thought.

Just support U3 Flash Drives and only U3 Flash Drives. There's a software component on a U3 drive that allows for anchoring software the the Drive. The only down side is you would have to have the flash drive in the computer to use MLO.

[J-Mac]

I guess I don't understand why this is such a difficult issue.
Believe me, I have a monster PC, with a lot of memory and storage, and
of course I fill it with a LOT of software! Very few applications
that I use have this much difficulty with registration.

Andrey - what makes MLO so much more difficult than other apps
regarding registration/activation issues? I have some extremely
expensive software on this machine and I can't think of another
program - except Microsoft with their infamous WGA crap - that has
such a registration/activation model. Even Adobe and Nuance (formerly
Scansoft) require only one-time activation per machine installed on.
Also, while software pirating is certainly a big issue, I don't
currently see a big market at this time for MLO. Most pirated
programs are usually geared another way than relatively small personal
productivity applications like MLO - In other words, the kind of
people who commonly use MLO are not the kind who frequently use serial
cracks and the like. Unless I am greatly mistaken. Besides, whatever
you use to timebomb MLO can most likely be overcome by any hacker
worth his/her salt.

@Bob Pankratz: A lot of users are not very fond of U3 just yet. If
installed improperly the flash drive's software can cause some
annoying and hard-to-diagnose problems on the PC it connects to. Many
have gone back to plain old USB 2.0 drives. I'm sure that will change
once folks get used to it, but do you really think that with the trend
being more portability for applications, that making MLO unavailable
on a USB 1.1 or 2.0 flash drive is wise?

Thanks,

Jim

[Philb]

Come to think of it, I guess the current implementation today is time
bombed. We tend to buy new computers these days every 3-5 years on
average. If the MLO organization should go out of business (I
sincerely hope this is very unlikely!!!), then when it comes time to
upgrade machines, (unless I'm missing something from Andrey's post at
the top), eventually users would no longer be able to use the code.
ECCO is testament to useful software sticking around and continuing to
be used long after development ceased. I'd hate to have to say goodbye
to MLO when I bought a new computer and go look for something else. I
would certainly say MLO could be another ECCO in terms of longevity.
Of course, should Andrey cease development he might well choose at
that point to put the application in the public domain, or provide
permanent codes that would be portable onto new hardware.

On Feb 4, 12:57 am, "J-Mac" <jcmcgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Besides, whatever
> you use to timebomb MLO can most likely be overcome by any hacker
> worth his/her salt.

> Thanks,
>
> Jim
>

[D K]

>>Come to think of it, I guess the current implementation today is time bombed. We tend to buy new computers these days every 3-5 years on average.<<

You are RIGHT. Actually a little scarry since, on average, I update computers every 12 months on average.

DARA
- While a laptop "can" go with you, a Windows Mobile 5 PPC/Phone will . . .

[Jon Ballinger]

On 03/02/07, Andrey Tkachuk (MLO) <for...@mylifeorganized.net> wrote:
>
> Hi ALL,
>
>
> Every software can be cracked.

This is quite scary to me. Being a developer myself I do understand
why you are attempting to beat the pirates, so to speak, but being a
user this firmly removes MLO from the realm of purchased software and
puts it into the realm of leased software in my mind.

No matter how you code this, the upshot is our "purchases" of MLO are
only as good as your company is. If your company goes down, or MLO
gets purchased by some other company, or you get bored of it, or, god
forbid, you should have an accident what provisions are there that the
activation system will continue? None. Therefore MLO is no longer a
purchase but a lease.

It would have been better in my mind to simply tie the codes to the
users, validate it once and then let it survive in perpetuity. Cancel
codes that surface on the internet and use a three strikes and you're
out policy on people coming back going "Why isn't my code working any
more?" (or a variation that pleases you). Eventually people will stop
sharing/losing/whatever they are doing with their codes as they get
the message. If you are sure that someone is sharing it you can
cancel their license due to breach of clauses in your license for
instance.

Hackers *will* crack your software. It's what they do, it's what they
live for and it's what gives them enjoyment. Coming up with an
elaborate scheme to protect it will get cracked all the quicker as
it's a challenge. With your proposed scheme I can easily see the
vector they will use to crack it, and it's quite a simple one.

The problem with attempting to beat piracy is simply this: once the
software is on someone's PC, you have lost control of it. Nothing
that you do will prevent piracy of MLO other than to simply stop it.

All you can do is make it annoying for the pirates. Release often and
release functionality that make it worth peoples while to be legit.
Use relatively simple protection methods but switch them around each
release, move code inline and into different areas of the application.
This way the user has a simple system of activation or whatever, but
the way their codes are utilised in the app are different each
release. This forces the pirates to look at the application a lot
trying to figure out what is being done this time but eventually they
realise that none of the methods are tricky, and that they are
spending a lot of time on it as you are continually updating and it's
not really a good use of their time.

Certainly not as fun a use of their time as cracking the "unbeatable"
super flashbang kaboom uber protection system 2007.

Concentrate on making things better/easier/more useful for the
legitimate users and don't spend quite so much time trying in vain to
prevent piracy.

--
Jon Ballinger

[Luciano Passuello]

I agree 100% with everything Jon said.
Nothing to add, really - just wanted to support this really well-thought
post.

Regards.
Luciano.

[Bob Hughes]

Well said, Jon!

I am a registered user of MLO, but this new proposed activation system will
lead me to look elsewhere for other software and I will not recommend MLO to
anyone anymore.

I have never agreed with "time-bombed" or leased software, and it is not
what I agreed to when I paid for MLO.

Bob Hughes

-----Original Message-----
From: myLifeO...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:myLifeO...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jon Ballinger

Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 10:30 AM
To: myLifeO...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MLO] Re: New MLO Activation System

[Mark Levison]

Andrey - Like many others I find this scheme inelegant and cumbersome,
once I've installed MLO legitimately on a machine I shouldn't have to
renew the license. Instead of cooking your own scheme why not google:
software licensing systems? I took a quick look and got hundreds of
hits presumably one of them will provide a workable and more elegant
solution.

I would do some more digging but I'm tired and have newborn (6 days
old). As a result I don't have much spare time right now.

Finally do your really think this is a problem for you? Why not have
every machine report what key its using - if you find one key that is
being reported by hundreds of machines then followup with its owner.
But honestly do you think this is a real problem? How many sales have
you lost to piracy so far.

Cheers
Mark
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blog: http://www.notesfromatooluser.com/

[Jogesh Doshi]

Allow me to depart from the seriousness of this thread by congratulating
Mark on the addition to his family. Been there about 12 months ago, and you
don't look very pretty coming out of the daily-nights and nightly-days :)
Cheers

JD

[XO.XO...@gmail.com]

Could not have written a better response myself. 100% agree.

[Hello World]

do I really have to put MLO on my recurrence task?

[Trustme]

I agree with someone above who recommended the U3-solution. This is a
great concept for people who work on various machines and want to
carry their applications in their pockets.

Volkmar

[A Mueller]

I am coming to the end of my trial period and about to make my
decision to purchase or not. I was convinced to purchase the license,
but now am reconsidering. I, also, do not want timebombed software or
to be required to resubmit licencing information.

btw: Congratulations to Mark!!!

> > do I really have to put MLO on my recurrence task?- Hide quoted text -

[Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)]

Thanks to everybody for your thoughts. The posts here made me think of
this problem one more time. I would like to comment some posts here
and close this thread for now.

There are two main topics I would like to highlight:
1) The new Activation System will be SIMPLER for MLO users than
existing one. It is one step forward in the way to simplify current
MLO Activation System. The new system already implemented as described
in the initial post and will be released soon.
2) I will see how it works and if there are any problems for users I
will consider simplifying it even more. It will be easy to do (just
changing of one #define in the source code is needed). I am open to
discuss this issue in the future after the test run.

Now some comments:

[Steve Wynn ]

>If somebody posted the Activation Key file to the Internet,
>or somebody's computer was hacked and the key file retrieved
>and posted. Wouldn't that mean that literally anybody would
>be able to use MLO for at least 5/6
>months?

Most probably the stolen code already worked for ~1 month. Then ~1
more month needed so that the code becomes popular on crack site. So
more realistic situation is that with stolen code they can use MLO
only for next 2-3 months what is close to the trial period :). And
then there should be new project started by this person "Find new key
for MLO". I am not interested in customers which can afford such
effort because they will not buy MLO anyway.

Thanks Steve for your security ideas. Yes the current implementation
was more secure then new one. But I had to simplify it in response to
users' complains. I do not want to add more work for users just to
fight with pirates. I just selected the reasonable balance I see for
now.

[David Jade ]

>I understand your need to have license keys and activation.
>However as a user I would not pleased about having to
>re-activate software that I purchased unless it is
>completely automatic and requires no intervention from me
>as the user if I am connected to the internet. I hope this

>is what you mean by "send you a new code automatically!"

It is as automatic as possible. Once in 5 months MLO will ask you to
copy/paste the new code which will be sent to your e-mail by MLO
automatically.

I tested and it took me 5 sec. to do. Even if you can not do it now
you will have another 30(!) days to perform this simple action.

>And while it seems that you and your company are having
>great success and unlikely to disapear anytime soon,
>what will happen if something happened and there was
>no way to renew the license key down the road?

There are several options we can perform should we decide to
discontinue MLO (why should we? :)
1) Release version without Activation System with expiration
(it is very easy to do and we might decide to do it in 1-2 years
anyway)
2) Release MLO to open source.

[japchap]

>I would prefer that it be an offline system, so that I wouldn't have
>to go to the trouble of connecting to the web every 4-5 months
>or whenever activation is required.

How to activate to offline computers:
1) Go to any online computer and visit:
http://www.mylifeorganized.net/support/activator.htm
2) Take the activation information sent to your e-mail and put it to
any number of offline computer or to a flash drive.

>A somewhat silly but plausible
>scenario: what if I am the team
>leader of an archaeological
>excavation

Valid scenario, thanks! The current activation tied to the computer ID
will still work with new activation system. However I doubt these days
anyone who needs MLO has difficulties accessing Internet for more then
3-4 months :)

[Bob Pankratz]
>Just support U3 Flash Drives...

>The only down side is you would have to have the flash
>drive in the computer to use MLO.

Sorry Bob, but this is exactly what I do not like. MLO has to be as
portable as possible and work without any additional conditions on any
computer.

[Philb]

>Of course, should Andrey cease development he might
>well choose at that point to put the application in
>the public domain, or provide permanent codes that
>would be portable onto new hardware.

Exactly! I will consider permanent codes in the future even if I
continue developing MLO.
I already decided to use *permanent* codes for MLO-Pocket PC edition.
It will be released in 1.8.0

[Jon Ballinger]
Thanks for your thoughtful post!

>Use relatively simple protection methods but
>switch them around each release, move code
>inline and into different areas of the application.

Yes you are right and the protection inside is very simple.
Unfortunately this method does not prevent situation (1) described in
the initial post.
It will work only if I require new Activation Codes for each now
release. I will consider this also.

>Concentrate on making things better/easier/more
>useful for the legitimate users and don't spend
>quite so much time trying in vain to prevent piracy.

This is exactly what I am trying to do. If I see that the balance I
chosen is not right I will change it.
Thanks again for your post.

[Mark Levison]

>I would do some more digging but I'm tired and have
>newborn (6 days old).

Congratulations Mark! As a young farther myself (I have 4 year old
son) I understand how happy you are! :)

>How many sales have you lost to piracy so far.

Yes this is a good question to think about. Thanks.

[Hello World ]

>do I really have to put MLO on my recurrence task?

It will do it itself.

Thanks,
Andrey.

[Jim Krist]

Andrey,

Thanks for letting us know your reaction to our discussion of your
plans for MLO. I wholeheartedly support your desire / need to protect
your intellectual property. But before you close this thread, I ask
you to consider my to your response.

I require a permanent authorization code for any version of MLO that I
purchase. I am unsettled by the need to reauthorize MLO every five
months. It isn't the amount of time it takes. Without a permanent
authorization, my continued use of my current MLO would depend on your
continuing to send reauthorization messages to me, from now into the
indefinite future.

Forever is a long, long time. Neither you, me or anyone can predict
what they will be doing in five months.

MLO has become my *essential* planning and management tool. I'd
really like to think that, come what may, the current software will
continue to work. Without a permanent authorization, I'll have to
continually be scouting for a replacement. And I have lots of other
things to do. Take my task outline. Please.

Respectfully, with best regards,

Jim (jtkrist)

On Feb 8, 10:13 am, "Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)"

[Bob Hughes]

I wholeheartedly agree with your response, Jim.

Bob Hughes

-----Original Message-----
From: myLifeO...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:myLifeO...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim Krist
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 9:39 AM
To: MyLifeOrganized
Subject: [MLO] Re: New MLO Activation System

[Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)]

Please let me know your thoughts on this idea:

1) You will have permanent activation code but this code will work
*only* for the current MLO release.
2) If there is new release you will have to request new code using
Online Activation System.

Example:
You purchased MLO and received Activation Code for MLO version 1.7.x.
This code will always work with this version.
When 1.8.x version is released you will have to update your activation
code (i.e. request Online activation system so send you new code on
your registration e-mail).

This way it works almost like expiration model I described above. The
only difference is that I decide (with new release) when all users
have to upgrade their Activation Codes. The issue (1) described in the
initial post will be partially addressed. Partially, because stolen
code will still work with corresponded version forever. But I think I
can accept it.

Andrey.

To Bob Hughes: Will you continue to recommend MLO to others if I
decide to implement this idea? :)

[Bob Hughes]

Hi Andrey,

This implementation sounds great to me!

I would wholeheartedly recommend MLO to others with this activation system.

Thanks!
Bob

-----Original Message-----
From: myLifeO...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:myLifeO...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:08 AM
To: MyLifeOrganized
Subject: [MLO] Re: New MLO Activation System

[LarryK]

I have been watching this thread with some concern as a recent
purchaser. I think the latest proposal for a one-time per version
activation is a great solution.

Larry

[Jon Ballinger]

On 08/02/07, Andrey Tkachuk (MLO) <for...@mylifeorganized.net> wrote:
>
> Please let me know your thoughts on this idea:
>
> 1) You will have permanent activation code but this code will work
> *only* for the current MLO release.
> 2) If there is new release you will have to request new code using
> Online Activation System.

This is fine by me.

--
Jon Ballinger

[Luciano Passuello]

I also like it.

[David Jade]

This implementation also sounds good to me.

david

[Ron Stockfleth]

This also sounds like a reasonable solution to me as well.

Ron

> -----Original Message-----
> From: myLifeO...@googlegroups.com
> [mailto:myLifeO...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of David Jade
> Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 2:23 PM
> To: MyLifeOrganized
> Subject: [MLO] Re: New MLO Activation System
>
>

[Jim Krist]

Works for me.

Thank you Andrey.

On Feb 8, 2:07 pm, "Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)" <for...@myLifeOrganized.net>
wrote:

[J-Mac]

I would support that for major releases, Andrey. Eg, 2.X, 3.X, etc.
But not for minor "point" releases, as you suggest.

And as for recommending MLO, I have been doing so all over the PPC
community, but unfortunately I have stopped until I see what the final
activation scheme is.

Jim

On Feb 8, 2:07 pm, "Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)" <for...@myLifeOrganized.net>
wrote:

[Kelvin]

Andrey,

Looks like it's a good compromise.

Love MLO, but PPC version still need a bit of work (will post more on
MLO PPC forum).

Kelvin

[Jon Ballinger]

On 09/02/07, J-Mac <jcmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would support that for major releases, Andrey. Eg, 2.X, 3.X, etc.
> But not for minor "point" releases, as you suggest.

Any reason? Maybe I'm missing something but if the activation is built
into the application, downloading and installing a point release then
clicking "Activate" from within the application doesn't seem too much
of a hardship to me as long as there is some way to retrieve the
activation code from the app (help -> about) or something so that
reinstalls are painless.

I'm not seeing a timebomb downside to this which was the main reason
for concern for most people. If MLO stops being developed for any
reason, you wouldn't have any more point releases and therefore no
more activations needed.

--
Jon Ballinger

[Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)]

What a great community we have! :) There will be no time bomb in MLO
activation system starting from 1.8.0 RC-1

The Release Candidate-1 (initially scheduled for today) is postponed
so that I remove expiration, change messages and test it.

Thanks,
Andrey.

[J-Mac]

Jon,

As I see it - probably with a bit of old-fashioned pessimism (Why does
that word always look misspelled??) - any time you have to re-activate
is a potential problem. For something of a "proof of concept", just
read about Adobe's activation woes three years ago, or Intuit's
TurboTax issues two or three years ago. Both are still recovering
from those botch-ups. Granted, those examples are extreme ones, but
they do give some preview of what can go wrong. (Of course I was
bitten by both! Story of my life, it seems!) Again, I see each new
activation as a potential problem, and would prefer to only have to
have that risk with each major release - those I'll be paying for
anyway - , rather than as often as Andrey can make it happen, for
releases that are supposedly included in our paid-up license.

Why on earth risk problems only for loyal, paying customers in his
attempts to thwart only non-paying thieves? Also, I still think it is
an example of locks only keeping out honest persons. For one, I don't
see such a large pirating market for this type of application, though
I may be wrong there. Secondly, if the thieves really want MLO,
they'll take it anyway. Again, maybe I'm just too pessimistic. :)

Jim

On Feb 9, 1:44 am, "Jon Ballinger" <jon.ballin...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Steve Wynn]

Hi,

I certainly like this idea because I think it really covers all bases,
safeguards the users if something unforeseen does happen. Personally like
Jim, I would prefer to see a new activation code as per each major release
and not per each minor release. But then as a compromise I would certainly
prefer this method than a time based expiry.

The only question I have is how will Beta's work in the future? Obviously
when something is on Beta test new releases can pop up on a very frequent
basis, until problems are ironed out. Will new Beta's require activation or
will they continue to use the existing codes until they are at the final
release stage?

Regards

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: myLifeO...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:myLifeO...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 19:08
To: MyLifeOrganized
Subject: [MLO] Re: New MLO Activation System

[Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)]

Betas will keep previous activation. Only final releases might (or
might not) require new Activation Code.

[A Mueller]

Andrey,

Just to clarify. This means that a user can upgrade from 1.7.1 to
1.7.5 without getting a new activation code but will need to get a new
code to go to 1.8.x. This seems like a good compromise and support
this system.

Andrew Mueller

On Feb 8, 11:07 am, "Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)"

[Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)]

Mueller: Correct.

> > decide to implement this idea? :)- Hide quoted text -

[Nicola]

I would prefer option 1.

If MLO becomes timebombed then I will simply stop using it - I have 30
days to decide whether I am going to buy it.

Making MLO timbombed will result in a sale lost - how many lost sales
will you prevent by this action? How many of those pirates would buy
the software if they could not hack it?

What would happen if you fell under a bus tomorrow? Would we still be
bale to re-activate our software if the local law enforcemtn people
decided that you were selling kiddie porn and confiscated your
computer equipment? (probably not the most likely scenario! But is
has happened that a writer got her stuff "siezed" - and all her back
up disks etc because her boyfriend was accused. Later the case was
dropped and her stuff returned - but that took over 9 months! All this
happened because of an "anonymous tip" - no substance to any of the
accusations, it was a case of someone being malicious. But the damage
was done, the publisher decided not to publish her book after all - in
this scenario what would happen to all your users who now need a new
key?)

This is a bit disjointed - but I am a bit busy right now - more
thoughts later.

Nicola

On Feb 8, 7:07 pm, "Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)" <for...@myLifeOrganized.net>
wrote:

[Nicola]

Ok please ignore most of what I said - having only just discovered
that there was another page of comments to this thread!

Learning both MLO nad google groups!

and having re-read the above - learning to type as well!

Nicola

[Philb]

Andrey,

It sounds reasonable to me. This mirrors the strategy used by several
other applications I have registered.

On Feb 8, 2:07 pm, "Andrey Tkachuk (MLO)" <for...@myLifeOrganized.net>
wrote: