PDA

View Full Version : Re: About the 'Personal Edition'



Chip Casanave
1-Jan-2007, 09:49 PM
Mark - notes below...

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Rutherford [mailto:mark@maunzelectronics.com]
Posted At: Friday, December 29, 2006 12:10 PM
Posted To: product-direction
Conversation: About the 'Personal Edition'
Subject: Re: About the 'Personal Edition'


Ok, I guess that I am still not getting it all.
I am in the dark as to how one would deploy a 'free' application vs. a
'commercial' application.

Seems like it is still the same process.

[CLC] it +is+ the same process. There are new license entitlements; the
deployment process remains unchanged - you use the same Client Engine
installation. I accept that you and others would like to see
improvements in the deployment process but don't let that get in the way
of the fact that you +can+ deploy free apps. Quoting from the License
Agreement for VDF Personal "...license includes a distributable,
three-user Personal Client Engine for use with Your Application
Software. You may distribute a Personal Client Engine with compiled
Application Software You create solely for the personal, private,
non-commercial use of third parties."

David explained in his posting why this process is grossly horrid, and
how to fix it - which is a *GREAT* suggestion, IMO.

[CLC] David offered some very good suggestions. Again though, the form
of the installation (like it or not) does not affect entitlements
granted in the License Agreement.

Stephen Meeley once said here, on these newsgroups that DAW does things
the same way Microsoft does, so with regards to the runtime, no you do
not.
So, his statement, which your basically saying is false... means
nothing?
Seems like you guys have internal communications problems over there.
But, it is your product after all. :)

[CLC] We do many things like Microsoft; we also (very consciously) do
not do many things like Microsoft. Frankly, I do not find a statement
like yours above to be helpful or constructive.

About the obviously corrupt license when you install VDF - are you guys
going to fix that, or will you keep distributing product with an invalid
license?

[CLC] Stephen has responded to this item.

And, about the packet sniffer - IANAL - but.. the Samba guys have been
keeping ahead of micro$oft for years, and years.....
So, I am sure my sniffing is legal, but I really do not care, to be
honest.
(I am not a lawyer, tho!)

I *still* cannot find any disclosure of any data being sent in any way,
shape, or form and I removed the registrations and re-registered it and
it does not in any way notify me of any data transmission.

[CLC] There is no data transmitted when entering the registration code
received from DAW. Registration is different from activation. For
details on activation, see:
http://www.visualdataflex.com/personal.asp?pageid=875. And, repeating
from my prior replies...
> [CLC#2] The one-time activation process is the +only+ time that any
> information is sent from the computer. The disclosure is in the
> activation dialogue.
- and -
> [CLC#2] No information is transmitted during the installation.


So, it either does and does not tell you, or it isn't sending a damned
thing to anyone and this is simply not true.
I will do it at home with my firewall at max log and see if anything is
being transmitted to any networks owned or operated by DAW.
(no, not packet sniffing, just logging packets origins/destinations)

Like I said, I don't care that it is being sent, as long as I am told it
is being sent, and what is being sent.

Know those little boxes that Windows throws up when an application
crashes?
Note that they tell you what they are sending?
Notice they even let you look at what they are sending?
Why? Lawsuits........

My wife was a victim of identity theft a few years ago, so I am
extremely paranoid about this sort of nonsense.
Sorry, but the world we live in is not black and white.


Chip Casanave wrote:
> Mark -
>
> First off - it appears that I lost some of the notes/comments in my
> reply to you below - I'd inserted further links to the website and
other
> comments that are not present in the posted reply (keyboard
dyslexia?).
> So here are the links...
>
> The page that describes VDF Personal is:
> http://www.visualdataflex.com/personal.asp?pageid=840
>
> The full, get-your-spectacles-out License Agreement for Personal can
be
> found at: http://www.visualdataflex.com/personal.asp?pageid=841 --
> paragraph 1. contains the essentials.
>
> Other notes below as [CLC#2]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Rutherford [mailto:mark@freequest.net]
> Posted At: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:13 PM
> Posted To: product-direction
> Conversation: About the 'Personal Edition'
> Subject: Re: About the 'Personal Edition'
>
>
> Hi chip,
>
> I just looked around on the Visual Dataflex site, saw no mention of a
> client license or anything that one would distribute with freeware
> applications.
>
> (BTW, I personally do not do any for Windows, but VDF might open that
> realm for me - hence my interest in it)
>
> So, I check the FTP site and I see nothing there about any special
> version of the runtime - unless......
> When I distribute said application I have to bundle your installer
> inside of mine and run the client the same way it is done now, but
using
> the key that was sent to me?
> [CLC#2] The information is on the web (not FTP) site. The same Client
> installer is used.
>
> This seems to be the point where most people get aggravated with DAW -
> Basically, the runtime and why developers seem to be told to keep out,
> if not almost threatened with litigation to leave it alone.
>
> Is that the case? I look on the FTP site and I see a 9mb file there
that
> is the runtime as I would expect using with a regular application.
>
> Last but not least, where is the disclosure that DAW was sending
> *anything* at all from peoples' computers?
> Even if it was just to increment a counter... where is the disclosure?
> [CLC#2] The one-time activation process is the +only+ time that any
> information is sent from the computer. The disclosure is in the
> activation dialogue.
>
> I cannot find this in the help file, and I ran the installer again and
I
> can find no mention of this 'hidden' feature of transmitting data to
you
> guys in any way/shape or form in the license displayed when I install.
> [CLC#2] No information is transmitted during the installation.
>
> HOWEVER.... the license displayed is .... well..... look at the
> displayed image - the text is, well, damaged. :) Anyhow, I personally
do
> not care that you do it, but others might.
> I strongly suggest you disclose this... FAST.
>
> In the meantime I formally request that I personally am allowed to run
> my own packet sniffer and examine this data, since you so kindly state
> that something is being sent, I want to verify this for myself but I
> don't want you hitting me up for trying to circumvent anything.
> [CLC#2] I'm not sufficiently familiar with the legalities of packet
> sniffers that I can take a position on it here and now. If this is
> really important to you, I can look into it further.
>
> If this was disclosed and I missed it, no problem.... the license is
not
> displaying properly so if that was where this was disclosed, you may
> formally smack me upside the head :)
> [CLC#2] Step a little closer Mark.... <g>
>
> But, since I cannot find this in the license - it is being done
> *without* my consent.. (even tho I would likely consent to it.. only
> because it's you guys - if it was XYZ software, HELL NO I would cancel
> the install)
>
> To me, that is shaky. This goes down like a submarine with a screen
> doors, IMHO.
>
> Thanks for the reply tho, it has cleared some things up for me.
> [CLC#2] Glad to hear that...
>
>
> Chip Casanave wrote:
>> Hi Mark - thank you for your questions.
>>
>> First, let me set the stage by saying that while Data Access is eager

>> to grow our market by offering a free version of Visual DataFlex, the

>> product is very fundementally commercial software. VDF Personal is
>> not a half-hearted attempt at a being freeware; it is a very serious
>> attempt to grow our commercial software business by allowing people
to
>
>> use the product without cost when their use is non-commercial. We
>> hope that the use of VDF Perwsonal builds interest and experience in
>> new users to the extent that when commercial needs arise, Personal
>> users will choose commercial versions of Visual DataFlex for their
> projects and products.
>> We have published a lot of information about Visual DataFlex Personal

>> on www.VisualDataFlex.com. I am going to use clips from there to
>> answer some of your questions with the objective that you get an
>> answer. If the clip doesn't answer or clarify your question,
>> hopefully through interaction here we can find the right form of
>> expression and improve the website to make it more effective in
>> delivering a clear message about VDF Personal from the git-go.
>>
>> My comments below are set off by [CLC].
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chip Casanave / DAW
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Rutherford [mailto:mark@maunzelectronics.com]
>> Posted At: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:57 AM Posted To:
>> product-direction
>> Conversation: About the 'Personal Edition'
>> Subject: About the 'Personal Edition'
>>
>>
>> I have a lot of questions about this new 'Personal Edition' and
>> hopefully we will get someone from DAW to chime in here (hopefully..)
>>
>> I see the personal edition as a step in the right direction, however
I
>
>> am baffled by some things...
>>
>> First, the direction that this is going?
>> The personal edition is not really geared towards anyone that wants
to
>
>> create freeware applications because... it needs a runtime that has
to
>
>> be registered, etc etc.
>>
>> [CLC] Developers using VDF Personal can distribute freeware. Client
>> Licenses (CL) distributed with such freeware do not require
>> registration; they do require activation on each system on which the
>> application/CL is installed. Activation captures no personal
>> information from the system upon which the CL is installed - its sole

>> purpose is to provide us with a guage about the effectiveness of the
>> Personal license program. The activation process increments a counter

>> we keep for each VDF Personal Studio license - nothing more.
>>
>> Just on this issue alone... Delphi, Visual Studio Express and such
>> totally kill this product.
>> I do have the personal edition, and it is fine for me, personally -
>> but anything I do freeware I cannot redistribute.
>> So, it is not so personal, or free.
>>
>> [CLC] Unless I'm missing something, it is Personal, and it is free,
>> including the distribution of freeware. If activation is a stopper,
>> then VDF Personal won't work for you.
>>
>> The next realm is the webapp part.
>> It has limited numbers of connections.....
>> So, at first glance... again, PHP and friends kill this portion.
>>
>> So, was the 'Personal Edition' created in order to try to get into
the
>
>> enthusiast market of people like me that end up buying Visual Studio?
>> To be honest, I don't get it....
>> It cannot compete because I will end up with Delphi or Visual studio
>> in the end, anyway. (Both of which I have bought...)
>>
>> If there was an edition that did not impose the sanctions that this
>> does, or the severe limitations, it might generate some buzz with the

>> freeware guys that -DO- buy these products.
>>
>> The ways that *I* see to fix this:
>> 1. The # of connections to the webapp server has to be raised a lot
>> higher for people that make free websites to use this.
>> Currently PHP/MySQL has this market won over because there are no
such
>
>> restrictions.
>>
>> 2. The runtime has to be allowed to be distributed with a free
>> application, and has to be handled in the background in the
> installation
>> someplace.
>> Microsoft allows this, so does Borland, etc..
>>
>> I know that DAW cannot influence the runtime to end up on end users'
>> machines like Microsoft can with .NET - but if it was a hassle free
>> installation like .NET that would be a plus.
>>
>> So, In the end what is the direction that DAW is going with this
>> product?
>> Currently it appears to only cater to current developers.
>>
>> I would call this the 'VDF Personal - yet crippled Edition', since
the
>
>> freeware guys are completely cut out of the pie.
>>
>> If this is not the intended target, ok.
>> But calling it a 'Personal Edition' kinda implies that it is allowed.
>>
>>
>> Basically what I am saying is that there are too many hoops and
layers
>
>> for a freeware application developer to jump thru.
>>
>> I have told some developers I know that use Delphi, or Visual Studio,

>> etc to try this out, and these are some of the things that came back
>> to me.
>> The current product cannot possibly draw Delphi/Visual Studio guys to

>> use it.
>>
>> So, comments from DAW? Anyone else?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>