Are 30-day evaluation apps ethical?
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. -
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. -
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine?
Don't you implicitely give them that right by installing trial software?
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.Ethical absolutely, however, this might not be your actual question :) It is "a little bit against" the "Kepe the user in control" paradigm, but on a totally acceptable level. After all, Microsoft never intended this to be a "give the user a choice about every file installed on the system", and the "on uninstall, if you are unsure about a registry key, leave it alone" rule can be stretched a little towards "registry keys you forgot about", tadaa. My Windows folder has a little over 13000 files. So 30 extra files won't really hurt. I am using similar techniques in one place, and in a way it helps the customer remain honest. What would you prefer: (1) User calling: "this evaluation expired, but we didn't really have the time to use it. Could we maybe get another chance?" (2) User calling with a problem, and you have to explain that you can't help him because his licence has expired.
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighist -
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc.
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine?
By the same measure, *every* piece of software with an installer is unethical because it touches the registry and adds entries that remain even after uninstall (for example, a registry value containing the name of the company is a common practice). You have to be careful talking about ethics, especially in software. I think one has to keep intent in mind when considering ethical questions. The intent of shareware developers is not to harm anyone, but only to make a living. And since their resulting action causes no real harm to anyone or anything, I cannot consider that unethical.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Islamic Domination: Coming to a Jewish state near you! The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.The difference... You knew the terms when you installed it. Rootkits rarely tell you in an obvious way, "Hey, we're going to inject our code into your OS and cripple your DRM related fun." Sony is a mud-lake of pig-spawn and I will never trust any product from them ever again.
If we all used the Plain English compiler every post in the lounge would be a programming question.:cool:
Welcome to CP in your language. Post the unicode version in My CP Blog [ ^ ] now.People who don't understand how awesome Firefox is have never used CPhog. The act of using CPhog alone doesn't make Firefox cool. It opens your eyes to the possibilities and then you start looking for other things like CPhog and your eyes are suddenly open to all sorts of useful things all through Firefox. - (Self Quote)
-
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc.
Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine?
By the same measure, *every* piece of software with an installer is unethical because it touches the registry and adds entries that remain even after uninstall (for example, a registry value containing the name of the company is a common practice). You have to be careful talking about ethics, especially in software. I think one has to keep intent in mind when considering ethical questions. The intent of shareware developers is not to harm anyone, but only to make a living. And since their resulting action causes no real harm to anyone or anything, I cannot consider that unethical.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit. I'm currently blogging about: Islamic Domination: Coming to a Jewish state near you! The apostle Paul, modernly speaking: Epistles of Paul Judah Himango
I agree. You can't blame a developer who is trying to make a living for protecting their intellectual property. We all know without this protection there will be abuse.
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.I remember back in the day... DOS - I knew what every file on my PC was for. Supreme confidence ruled the day. I was a god. :cool: Win3.x - I knew what most every file did. I could visually parse my INI files in seconds. While not a god, I was still pretty god-like. ;P Win9.x/NT/2K/XP - I remember snooping around after my first Win95 install. Terror prevailed. WTF were all these files? What's a registry? Oh shit!!! I was now a puppy. :omg: I've given up even trying. :| "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done." - Peter Ustinov
-
I remember back in the day... DOS - I knew what every file on my PC was for. Supreme confidence ruled the day. I was a god. :cool: Win3.x - I knew what most every file did. I could visually parse my INI files in seconds. While not a god, I was still pretty god-like. ;P Win9.x/NT/2K/XP - I remember snooping around after my first Win95 install. Terror prevailed. WTF were all these files? What's a registry? Oh shit!!! I was now a puppy. :omg: I've given up even trying. :| "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done." - Peter Ustinov
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
DOS - I knew what every file on my PC was for. Supreme confidence ruled the day. I was a god.
Those were the days...uninstalling an app was a simple as deleting it's folder and it was completely gone forever! Hooray!
Wjousts wrote:
uninstalling an app was a simple as deleting it's folder and it was completely gone forever!
Yep... except those of us who also needed to clean any "shrapnel" left behind in the AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS files before we could sleep at night. :-O After that first Win95 install, I still remember feeling like I'd completely lost control of my PC. :~ "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done." - Peter Ustinov
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.By installing any software, you make a tacit agreement for that software to modify your system. By installing trial software, you make a tacit agreement to not use the software outside the trial period. It is entirely proper and fiscally responsible for a company to enforce this to a reasonable degree. I think a line can be drawn at passive techniques, such as hidden keys, versus active techniques, such as rootkits. Even with passive techniques a company should keep the footprint as small as possible. Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.We have a 30 day eval application and I considered just this when I designed how it works. It's a business app and the expiration is stored in the database. If the user uninstalls they completely uninstall nothing is left behind. If they choose to fresh download, install again then they are starting with a fresh database so it's not perfect, but I don't feel good about hiding something on a users' computer. Bottom line is it's really just usefull as a reminder to people to purchase who are ultimately interested in using the software. All systems should be considered this way because there are certain people who will go to great lengths to not pay for software and they always will, no system will stop them ultimately and it's diminishing returns the more time you spend trying to prevent it. Leaving anything on a computer permanently and intentionally hiding that fact so the user can't know it to me is un-ethical. But to call it hidden software is a bit of sensastionalism don't you think? Usually it's just a registry key or something along those lines, it's not like it's an active program or any kind of program at all and I think you well know that so why state it in those terms?
-
I remember back in the day... DOS - I knew what every file on my PC was for. Supreme confidence ruled the day. I was a god. :cool: Win3.x - I knew what most every file did. I could visually parse my INI files in seconds. While not a god, I was still pretty god-like. ;P Win9.x/NT/2K/XP - I remember snooping around after my first Win95 install. Terror prevailed. WTF were all these files? What's a registry? Oh shit!!! I was now a puppy. :omg: I've given up even trying. :| "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done." - Peter Ustinov
-
I remember a hell of a lot of high end software that did all sorts of odd things for copy protection mostly making unreadable or writable sectors on disks but all sorts of things much worse than we see today.
John Cardinal wrote:
...all sorts of things much worse than we see today.
Really?! Maybe I was just lucky but I don't remember much of anything like that. Of course, we were pretty vanilla (AutoCad, dBase, WordPerfect). "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done." - Peter Ustinov
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine?
a stray file or registry entry is not "software". Cleek | Image Toolkits | Thumbnail maker
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.Have you seen or tried Altiris' Software Virtualisation Solution[^]? It's very cool, and could possibly be used to capture all those rogue entries/files... Help you tidy up afterwards...? Jon
-
Wjousts wrote:
uninstalling an app was a simple as deleting it's folder and it was completely gone forever!
Yep... except those of us who also needed to clean any "shrapnel" left behind in the AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS files before we could sleep at night. :-O After that first Win95 install, I still remember feeling like I'd completely lost control of my PC. :~ "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done." - Peter Ustinov
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Yep... except those of us who also needed to clean any "shrapnel" left behind in the AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS files before we could sleep at night.
A fair point. I'd almost forgotten about my autoexec.bat and config.sys. Then there was the fun of having to alter the autoexec.bat and config.sys yourself just to get a program to run because your mouse driver was using to much of the first 640K of memory. Oh the memories....
-
I remember back in the day... DOS - I knew what every file on my PC was for. Supreme confidence ruled the day. I was a god. :cool: Win3.x - I knew what most every file did. I could visually parse my INI files in seconds. While not a god, I was still pretty god-like. ;P Win9.x/NT/2K/XP - I remember snooping around after my first Win95 install. Terror prevailed. WTF were all these files? What's a registry? Oh shit!!! I was now a puppy. :omg: I've given up even trying. :| "If the world should blow itself up, the last audible voice would be that of an expert saying it can't be done." - Peter Ustinov
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Win9.x/NT/2K/XP - I remember snooping around after my first Win95 install. Terror prevailed. WTF were all these files? What's a registry? Oh sh*t!!! I was now a puppy.
When win 95 was launched, I remmember installing it on my friends machine as his machine was suppose to be the fastest of our lots at that particular time(a 486 100 Mhz with 32 mb ram, 550 mb hdd which was a luxury then). His brother used to program in Turbo C++ and when he came home and saw that the machine directly booted to windows, he didnt like the idea of that and just went on and deleted that windows folder and you know what would happen when you do that, we spent a hell a lot of time figuring what to do and at last just formatted the hard disk and put back MS Dos 6.0 if I am rite. It was only after 6 more months that we installed win95 and we started to use it.
Tarakeshwar MCP, CCIE Q(R&S) Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. !sgub evah t'nseod margorP sihT ?sgub naem ayaddahW
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.Rootkits, for some in-depth information about this aim your browser at www.sysinternals.com where there is a tutorial and downloadable software (free) to test your system for the rootkit. The program is called "Rootkit Revealer". Also while you are at that web site, download some of their other Freebies including RegMon (a registry monitor), Filemon (a file monitor) and so on. They are most excellent.
-
There are several (hundreds of thousands) shareware/trialware applications that stop working after 30 days (or 15 or 21 or whatever). Uninstalling/reinstalling these apps will not get them to work again. The authors obviously have used some little tricks - like adding subtle entries to the registry, creating hidden files with names that do not attract suspicion etc. I understand why they do it, and I have even written a class that facilitates doing this (it's on CP too - though it's not remotely an effective solution). If you have installed/uninstalled a 100 of these apps, it means that there are a 100 of these 30-day-expiry detectors installed on your machine - without your explicit permission. How different would this be from a rootkit or from spyware? It's non-intrusive for sure, but it slows down your system (a bulkier registry for one thing), might create trash files in your windows and windows system folders (again an annoyance). So are these techniques ethical? Just because I installed an app, does that give that app's authors the right to install hidden software on my machine? Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications.I did it with generic named files in the system directory. If they don't get used again, they won't have any huge effect on the PC, I wouldn't think. Although I guess it depends on how the file system works, they could well slow down the file system looking for files it needs ? Anyhow, it's more ethical than stealing software, and the only chance these companies have to survive. If you don't get the chance to use it for 30 days, you're not likely to decide you need it, or that it's any good. And you know what they are doing when you download a 30 day trial. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++