Some strange things are happening in my #Seattle . Yesterday, when I clicked the File Open button it closed the IDE, but the File|Open on the menu was fine. Now even that closes the IDE.
Some strange things are happening in my #Seattle . Yesterday, when I clicked the File Open button it closed the IDE, but the File|Open on the menu was fine. Now even that closes the IDE.
I've filed this under Code Rants as there isn't a General Rants section.
I've filed this under Code Rants as there isn't a General Rants section.
I think you have been the victim of a false positive of the copy protection. That one is changing some of these actions to close the IDE afaik.
ReplyDeleteStefan Glienke I disagree simply because - as far as I know - in all cases that has happened, some form of notification was being displayed. I don't think that is Russ's case.
ReplyDeleteAndrea Raimondi And I know cases where exactly that happened - the IDE closed without any indication why. Now what?
ReplyDeleteAndrea Raimondi There is nothing to disagree with Stefan Glienke because you think of a different copy protection behavior.
ReplyDeleteYou do mean the behavior where the IDE thinks that it was tampered and it opens a browser with the tamper page and does shutdown the IDE.
Another behavior is that tool buttons do not work as expected and that could mean they do just nothing, because the action got lost. In that case the tamper page does not get opened.
In the XE5 times I have published the package as source in the EMBT forums (thread "QC 121676" in embarcadero.public.attachments on January 20, 2014) for Dalija Prasnikar and to prove that someone else talks bullshit about the reason for the failure. IIRC this tool button copy protection update was introduced with D2010.
According to Marco Cantù the protection works and these issues are always down to problems with the user's machine. The official Emba line is that they won't change.
ReplyDeleteDavid Heffernan How convenient. If the user machine "problems" can so easily upset the apple cart, then a polite summary of the protection might be that it is badly designed.
ReplyDeleteMarco Cantù's comments were in this thread: https://plus.google.com/+FredAhrens/posts/fr7aRx2up7K He doesn't rule out there being a bug in the "protection", but believes that there is not. And he could be right!
ReplyDeleteMaybe the specifications were just really shitty?
ReplyDeleteThis is definitely this stupid copy protection...
ReplyDeleteWell, obviously I cannot speak to the quality of the design, but it does seem to me that the number of negative reports here from capable people is a significant indicator.
ReplyDeleteat least it asks if I want to save my work - which is something I suppose
ReplyDeleteKnown problem. Happened to me on XE8 a couple of weeks ago.
ReplyDeletehttp://support.codegear.com/article/44075
In my case it was libmysql.dll in the bin folder.
This was the unregistered dll issue - I had the Open SSL dlls in the bin folder, but they have been there for a while.Anyway, getting rid of them seems to have solved the issue.
ReplyDeleteIf it is a 'protection' thing then there should be a message shouldn't there? Just looks like a bug to me
Russell Weetch Yes - it's definitely a bug. Given that it has been known about for some time now it's worrying that it hasn't been fixed :-(
ReplyDeleteIt is the copy protection, that do not allow other files than the ones installed by Delphi installer.
ReplyDeleteCesar Romero that maybe the case but it just seems a really stupid way of handling it. Switching actions? No message? What were they on when they coded that ?
ReplyDeleteRussell Weetch I've wondered about that for too long.
ReplyDeleteAs I mentioned in the other thread David Heffernan linked, this could be an effect of copy protection, the lack of a message is done on purpose (debatable, I know), it is generally caused by unsigned DLLs in the bin folder or the Windows system folders. We are evaluating a significant change in the copy protection "side-effects" to remove the problems happening to legitimate customers... without giving up on fighting piracy. Nothing is set in stone.
ReplyDeleteMarco Cantù What I have in my windows directories is my businesses and none of yours.
ReplyDeleteMarco Cantù I would've thought that really was a no brainer... I mean, really? Do you really need to discuss that?
ReplyDeleteAsbjørn Heid Absolutely correct. Unless you use that to hack our product, which is illegal and it is also our business.
ReplyDeleteMarco Cantù If core kernel files are unsigned, fair enough. But from what I read it sounds like any unsigned file may trigger this. And that is just BS, as you can perfectly fine just not load arbitrary DLLs from locations that aren't "yours".
ReplyDeleteMarco Cantù I know this has been discussed over an over again. But I guess some things should be repeated more than once.
ReplyDeleteFirst, basic function of copy protection is to prevent casual copying and abusing. That can be easily done by activation scheme you have and tracking that license key is no activated zillion times in short period of time.
All software can be cracked one way or another. You cannot possibly prevent people that WANT to use cracked software to do so.
So impressions people get from using your software when copy protection kicks in:
Legit user that does not know that bugs are result of copy protection:
1. Delphi save button does not work - "Why my files haven't been saved?", "This IDE is buggy as hell"
2. File - Open & Exit switched - "WTF just happened, this is really the buggiest thing ever"
3. Delphi exits without saving and shows license validation error - "Are they nuts? I have legit license, why my work has not been saved, "
General sentiment: bugs galore, hates using Delphi, craps about it whenever he/she can because of endless frustrations. Wonder on what he/she spends money when even the simplest thing don't work properly.
Legit user that does know bugs are result of copy protection:
"Just get rid of that damn buggy copy protection once and for all. Can't you see that it really hurts your legitimate users, and users of cracked versions could not care less"
User of cracked version (If by any chance his cracked version suffers from same bugs legit versions do):
"This thing is buggy as hell, no way I would ever pay for it"
You are never going to sell more licenses because you introduce bugs or shutdown Delphi when you suspect that license is not valid. At best people will continue using it because they have to, but they will not enjoy working with it and will not recommend it to others.
Money is made by having satisfied customers not angry ones.
"How exactly does a product with a historically expensive price tag become so incredibly common, not just in language, but in usage? How does Photoshop become the standard even with so many cheaper alternatives out there? The answer is, in part, piracy." http://lifehacker.com/how-piracy-benefits-companies-even-if-they-dont-admit-1649353452
ReplyDelete/sub - only just picked up that this thread had touched onto this subject too :-)
ReplyDeleteDalija Prasnikar "At best people will continue using it because they have to, but they will not enjoy working with it and will not recommend it to others." Exactly my point, I've been using Pascal, on and off, since Turbo Pascal 2.0 for CP/M, and Delphi since its first version. Hence there's no point for me to change now, but I strongly advise against it when asked about my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI am using Delphi 7. The Open button is connected with OpenFile and the Close button is connected with Terminate. A very stable design!
ReplyDelete/sub
ReplyDelete