Drudge Report....


Dunny .. writing back to /Program Files/..../myapp on Windows Vista and Windows 7 should fail (depends on security settings and registry, but I think thats the default nowadays.) You're only able to write back to the users 'homedir' (ie: to be multi-user safe. If you set to single-user type modes I think itmight unrestrict it, but I've not fiddled much .. I just follow the guidelines and avoid having to deal with crap from people :) (It was a nightmare for me when MS started pushing these changes down, and added access-privs to even read registry .. when leveraging DLLS that were installed as Admin, as a app installed as non-Admin, suddenly you can't see registry entries anymore, can't access the DLL, and can't write back to your old data-paths.. the pain!)

Anyway, I didn't follow your whole thread.. as you say 'tl;dr' :)

jeff
 
Gruso said:
As long as the launcher provides a facility to create a shortcut icon for non-PND binaries, then it's not really an issue. It's how things have always been done around here; you'd download a zip from the archive, extract it to SD, then create a Gmenu link to the .GPE file. Contempt for users would be Dunny forbidding people from PND packaging his releases, but he said he's ok with that happening. Real contempt would be expecting users to launch from a terminal, but I don't think we're talking about that here.

If we want to reap the full benefits of an open platform we have to respect the choices of the devs who give us free software. If you lay down the law and decree that all devs must follow one rule for the benefit of users, you're just boxing those devs in and taking away their choices. IMO if 80-90% of releases make use of the PND system, it's a good great result for the guys who designed it and the people who use it.

As usual, Gruso speaks sense. I may be set in my ways - I started developing a long time ago when home computers protected their OS by use of a ROM rather than imposing restrictions. If people trashed the system variables then that was just bad luck; a learning experience. I developed for the Amiga, where when I wanted maximum hardware assistance the OS just damned well got out of my way and everything I needed to work with was exposed. I didn't see people screwing up their systems except in instances of school-boy error.

Granted, I don't develop for multi-user systems and I don't suppose the Pandora will be one of those for me either. I do understand that networks in the workplace need protection, but you shouldn't be running leisure software in those circumstances - hell, you shouldn't provide a hard-disk in that situation. At home, the PC should do what the user asks it to. No more, no less.

And as Gruso points out, anyone can make a PND for my apps - if that's what they want to do, then I'm not going to stand in their way. I can't stop the OS from enforcing security, but I'll not impose restrictions myself.

I've written my own small OS - it runs very much like the old systems from the 80s. It has no memory protection for apps, and has no restrictions on the use of hardware, including the hard drive. It has a BASIC interpreter as a front-end, instantly available at startup, just like the old Speccy/C64/BBC. If I want to hit the metal, I can - indeed, to get the best performance, it's best to do so. I can overwrite the paging tables if I so desire, and remap the interrupt handlers to run user-generated code. I can even dive into the OS itself and overwite portions. It's great fun to play around with and write software for. Just like these things used to be :)

D.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
skeezix said:
Dunny .. writing back to /Program Files/..../myapp on Windows Vista and Windows 7 should fail (depends on security settings and registry, but I think thats the default nowadays.) You're only able to write back to the users 'homedir' (ie: to be multi-user safe. If you set to single-user type modes I think itmight unrestrict it, but I've not fiddled much .. I just follow the guidelines and avoid having to deal with crap from people :) (It was a nightmare for me when MS started pushing these changes down, and added access-privs to even read registry .. when leveraging DLLS that were installed as Admin, as a app installed as non-Admin, suddenly you can't see registry entries anymore, can't access the DLL, and can't write back to your old data-paths.. the pain!)

Anyway, I didn't follow your whole thread.. as you say 'tl;dr' :)

jeff

I think you're probably right - I only run as a single-user with admin privileges, and that's probably how the vast majority of my users do it too. However as I said, I've yet to receive any requests for multi-user functionality, so either it's not needed or it just works anyway :)

D.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dunny -- you won't make a pnd-file yourself? why wouldn't you, to make everones life easy? ie: It should be as much as adding one line to a makefile, or if you dont' want to use supplied scripts, adding just a few lines .. trivial for OSX, Unix/Linux, Windows (etc and so on.) ITs easy to do, and makes user life easy.. so why not? (IF theres anything in the way, let me know and I'll see about remedying it.. its entirely possibly I/we have overlooked something. If its just philisophical, then well, what can you do ;) Its why they'll have to pry my cold dead fingers away from Emacs, so I can't really argue against it ;)

jeff

I shoudl check, but really, we've all got better things to do with out skint spare time. But perhaps MS added a union-style trick, where writebacks to %APPDIR% got back to a %USERDIR% or something. *shrug* I've had no end of trouble on my business apps, but then they're also often being used in corp-environments with extra layers of protection/hastle. Possibly its a "Pro" or "Business" edition issue, and not for "Home"? Certainly XP didn't care and the majority of win32 users are on XP still, and certainly in the past, so maybe thats it, too. Regardless, I'm glad you have not had to suffer as much as I have on that count :)
 
Dunny said:
I mean, I've added thousands of new features to my apps users' requests, fixed numerous issues and no email goes un-answered. I think that shows that I care about people who use my software - I feel that telling people "yes, you can" rather than "you're stupid and irresponsible for even wanting to do that" generates much more user happiness.
The problem here is that you are explicitly saying: "You're stupid for not putting the application binary in a writable path."
The option that gives the user the most freedom is to simply make it an option whether to store the files in whichever path the OS prefers or in the application directory. Use sane defaults (I'd go with the app path under Windows and the system default under Linux and OS X if you support it) and everyone's happy.

Note that the whole "portable application" thing is much less prevalent on Unix-based OSes.

Performing non-sensical actions just to get them to run? How non-sensical is unpacking an archive to a folder chosen by the user, and then expecting them to double-click an icon? How non-sensical is it for a user to expect the data he's created to be in the folder he put it in? Or in the folder that the application resides in?
Depends on the platform. Under Windows it's acceptable if old-fashioned. Unter Linux it's highly unusual and less than ideal because it breaks the multi-user paradigm. Under OS X it wouldn't fly at all because apps have to specify a proper path to be able to write a file in the first place – the current working dir for GUI apps is set to /, which of course isn't world-writable; writing to the app dir is just as much work as writing to where you're supposed to.

The nonsensical thing is to have data I don't need or want to modify (the game binary) in a path intended for data I want to modify (my home directory). This is fairly unintuitive for someone accustomed to Unix where each directory has its own specific meaning. I know that most Pandora users will most likely come from a Windows background but still, from a Unix perspective it's not intuitive.

"Sorry, but if you want to find your files, you'll have to head into the users folder, then into your username's folder, then into appdata, then the local folder in there, and then finally it may be in the virtualstore folder, under a folder named after the app that created the file."

Christ, is that really better?

"Yeah, your data is in the same folder as you installed the app to, in a subfolder called 'Data'. Have fun."
Well, unless Windows has transparently put the files into VirtualStore, in which case users still need to look there. Plus, under Linux you just say "your files are under ~/.APPNAME/. Have fun" instead of "your files are under wherever you unpacked the app to and there under the Data folder unless you've been running it from a non-writable location, in which case they're somewhere in the SD card's ApplicationData directory. If you've been running it from a .PND archive you might need to mount the archive if you want to find the Data folder, that might be easier."

It's not that I don't care about the way the OS works - I don't care for forcing users to jump through hoops just to get a simple thing done, and I don't care for the stupidity of people who assume that they know what my users want better than they do. If they want to store their data in the user documents hierarchy, they are free to do so. They are free to store it any damned place they please.
Again, using the home directory actually makes things easier for the users since they don't need to guess where the files were stored to depending on whether they're running the app from a writable folder, a non-writable folder or a third-party .PND archive.
And, unlike Windows, Linux doesn't use arcane subfolders of subfolders to store application data – it's just a hidden directory in the user's home directory, which usually is the only directory of any concern to them.
Even OS X makes it easier than Windows does: There you can just stuff everything into ~/Library/Application Support/APPNAME. Even though there are other directories for specific things like preferences, nobody minds if you just use Application Support for everything.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tom` said:
Yeah, but you can't resell them - IMO that's a pretty fundamental freedom, and it's one that the various content industries are trying their hardest to eradicate.

Perhaps, but that right costs you more money. Dragon age was $30 on steam, while it was $50 + Tax + Shipping for a DVD.

My opinion is that losing that right saves me money and hassle.

Okay, so you buy it for $56 taxed and shipped, play it, and now you want to sell it. You find some sucker that pays $35 for it, and now you're out $21 and don't have the game.

On Steam I pay $30 USD for it ($32 CAD) and I get to keep it forever. (lets be reasonable here - at least a decade. Nothing lasts forever)

When you lay it out like this, it's almost like you're the one paying $21 to borrow/rent it, and I'm the one actually buying it to keep - for not much more. :lol:

See - it's so close to the line you can look at it both ways!

Tom` said:
Your 1) is subjective, so I'll ignore it here other than to say I don't agree, and probably a lot of other people don't either.
Yeah, it is, but I tossed it in there anyway because it's one of the first FPS's I enjoyed. :lol:

Tom` said:
As for 2), well... anything can happen, and I'd rather not cede control to some corporation anyway. (Keep in mind the examples set by Yahoo, Fictionwise, and Adobe, who have already shut down DRM servers making paid-for content unavailable, and Microsoft, who plans to at the end of 2011. A company doesn't have to go bankrupt to just decide their DRM authentication stuff is obsolete.)

Your mistake is placing your trust in one of those companies that are out to make as much money as possible for their shareholders.

They're all publicly traded, right? Valve isn't. They're also a game company that strives to release games as cheaply as possible with as much fun packed in as is possible. TF2 for $10 is a steal, but if EA or Blizzard was releasing it, it'd be $60 + $40 in DLC, or just a flat $5/mo forever.

Tom` said:
3) Are you really saying "well, I don't mind DRM because I can always break it if I need to?" That may be an acceptable argument for the use of Steam in particular, but it's nonsensical as a reason to accept DRM.
If the company goes under or shuts off their DRM servers, they are breaking/ending their agreement to you. It becomes legal to break the DRM, even in places like the US. :)

But no - my argument was Steam DRM isn't invasive/intrusive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
j6cubic said:
On the Pandora we have the choice between "one-click install" (.PND) and "more work than most from-source installs" (obtaining everything from the .zip, becoming root, moving all files into the appropriate directories, giving them appropriate permissions).
The best thing about the package management system for Pandora is that I won't be needing it. I will definitely give it a try, and if it's solid and functional I may end up using it. So it's a nice bonus and it's great to see that some thought is being put into it. Keep the discussion going.

I'm a former Slackware user and the "manual" installing process doesn't put me off, in fact I kind of like it. But there are so many potential approaches in infrastructuring your system that I don't have any specific preferences, I just go with what feels the best in each case (the feeling of being in control is a necessity). There's only so many apps you will be needing and using anyway, so I personally don't mind putting some work and consideration into making my device fully functional.


j6cubic said:
The Pandora is, to quote openpandora.org, "The most powerful gaming handheld there is". The Wikipedia article for "Handheld (gaming)" redirects to "Handheld game console" and this is consistent with the way I've seen "handheld" used in a gaming context. I do think that if OpenPandora Ltd. says the Pandora is a handheld console we can assume it's intended to be one.
You don't need to sweat in order to make such a simple point. We get you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
skeezix said:
Dragon Age is actualyl $50CDN in the Steam store, but your argument in-abstract is an interesting one.

jeff
Almost all games on Steam have launch sales or pre-order discounts.

Ex:
-DragonAge had a sale for $30 USD on launch.
-Borderlands was $30USD during "Black Friday"
-L4D2 was $35 if you pre-ordered a pack with your friends.

They also have periodic 50-80% sales. I've picked up many $20 games ($30 in stores) discounted to $5 or less.

Edit: Steam has a lot of 1-day sales. 24 hours and they're gone. Have to watch it constantly for great discounts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
fiori -- note that traditional desktop OSes (unix included) likes to install stuff _into_ the filesystem; one of the main reasons we came up with PND-files was due to the fact that on handhelds, the majority of your storage will be on SD, which is removable and optional. ie: NAND is not hard to fill up, especially given as its probably got your firmware in it. (You could reverse it and boot your OS from SD and keep all your NAND for storage, and then do make-installs on SD and actually get by okay, but few people have thought of this I think ;)

jeff
 
fiori_musicali said:
You don't need to sweat in order to make such a simple point. We get you.
I sweat (that is the correct past tense form, right?) over all of my points in that post. And now allow me to reitareate this several times, each time with more foam on my mouth. ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kramy said:
If the company goes under or shuts off their DRM servers, they are breaking/ending their agreement to you. It becomes legal to break the DRM, even in places like the US. :)
Let's quote the MSN Music (because it was the first one I ran into) license:
2. CONTENT USAGE RULES
Your use of the Service including your use of the files downloaded through the Service is subject to the Content Usage Rules as posted at http://music.msn.com/music/help/UsageRules. The Content Usage Rules are incorporated into, and made a part of, this Agreement. You may not use the files downloaded from the Service in any manner that violates the Content Usage Rules. Microsoft may modify the Content Usage Rules as such rules relate to your future purchases from the Service at any time. You may not modify or disable any technology that is designed to enforce the Content Usage Rules or protects the files downloaded through the Service.
now from the content usage section:
The delivery of a Download does not transfer to you any commercial or promotional use rights in the Download.
...
You agree that you will not attempt to, or encourage or assist any other person to, circumvent or modify any software required for use of the Download Service or any of the Content Usage Rules.
and finally the termination clause:
12. MICROSOFT'S TERMINATION OF SERVICE
Microsoft may terminate or suspend your access to the Service at any time, with or without cause, with or without notice. Termination of your access to the Service by Microsoft will not alter your obligation to pay all charges made to your Billing Account prior to such termination.
Now what does all this legal mumbo-jumbo mean? It means that they can do whatever they want in terms of closing down and you're still not allowed to break the DRM because the license is not contractually broken but still active. This means you have 2 options:
1) You may choose to break off your agreement with them and thus not be allowed to hear your music any more.
2) You may stick to the agreement till the day you die and be unable to listen to your music.

No, it's not legal to break DRM just because the server has gone down.

EDIT: Before the shitstorm starts, notice how Microsoft does not say they will break off the contract with you, but will rather "suspend your access to the service". This of course means the contract is still legally binding.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Close the thread now. Getting into DMCA is akin to summoning Hitler.. the thread is dead. IT is also not remotely on topic, please for the love of Dobbs.. someone please think of the children!

jeff
 
hitlerj.jpg
 
what if the prices in the app store start getting ridiculous and out of hand? what if to get the newest emulator version and there wont be another (just speculating) the emulator is now $99.99? or the old "im sorry about the last emulator version you bought from me that wasnt ready for release for $39.99 but heres the new version you can buy and it fixes all the bugs and crashes from the previous version". do we have a risk of getting ripped off? are the prices going to rise all the time? what if it just gets to the point of being stupid?
 
Everything you speculated is true, just as it is for Apple's app store. Every app author will be required to charge at least $10/download during the first month of app store service, and the minimum price will rise by 10% each month. The minimum price is scheduled to be $98.50 two years after the Pandora app store opens. No emulators will be given away or latest versions made accessible for a donation, and Craig and co will take legal action against any authors of software who don't adhere to the store's rules. When Pandora 2 is released, current-gen Pandoras will be banned from accessing the site, and all apps will be required to verify their license/registration every 12 hours or refuse to run. The introduction of a convenient platform for selling software and/or accepting donations will be the downfall of the scene.
 
Back
Top