I've never had an activation issue with Stardock, Microsoft or anyone else, so it does not bother me if they implement it. In fact, given the time and effort that goes into sofware creation, as opposed to the time it takes to install it, I believe developers have every right to include activation in their products.

Maybe Stardock should team up with Microsoft and teach them a thing or two about implimenting an activation process that is unobtrusive and user-friendly.

I've not found MS' activation process to be obtrusive or unfriendly. For the most part, I've just clicked on the activation link after installation and voila, it's done, instantly. The one and only time I had to call MS to reactivate my copy of XP (after 4 or 5 clean installs due to bugs and etc), it did not take 48 hours. I was given a new product code then and there over the phone, and within minutes I was up and running again, no problemo.

Activation has become a fact of computing life and we have to live with it! Crikey, it's usually a couple of mouse clicks and/or entering a product key, maybe a phone call sometimes. How painful is that....it's not like we gotta walk a mile over hot coals to get it done!

Maybe more time should be spent using the programs than researching and posting to forums and talking to people and reading heaps of things than worrying about how the program is activated. Do something creative with the programs like they were meant to be used and leave it at that. The rest of that stuff is all philosophical bulls***ing, a waste of time, and will accomplish nothing. Go ahead and say it might accomplish something if enough people say something, but that's as realistic as no wars, hunger, prejudice, and world peace.

Boss. I really agree with you that programs should be used creatively to full potential. However, alot of the stuff you will find on most forums are gong to be interpeted by someone as you most eloquently put, as 'philosophical bullsh***ing'. I think opinions DO count on issues and can achieve much and feel obliged to think about both sides of an issue.

By 'researching, posting to forums,talking to people and reading up on issues' people become more aware of issues and empowered into making their own opinions...whatever they may be. If you consider all that 'stuff' as BS so be it. Taking this discussion to the nihilistic level of wars, hunger, prejudice and world peace could be construed as your own brand of 'philisophical BS'.

Peace on Earth   

BTW.. I came across this interesting and thought-provoking article some time ago 'Piracy and Unconventional Wisdom'. link: 

 http://www.codeproject.com/gen/design/UnconventialWisdom.asp?df=100&forumid=58772&exp=0&select=1196103

Hopefully my last posting on this issue. I respect others options on this thread, but what I can't understand are the people who are negative towards people who disagree with activation.

I have also seen more on this forum compared to others of people being more closed minded of other's feelings then other forums. If I posted this thread on Daz's forums, which I have, I would get people calmly replying to it for the most part. I always seem to but heads here. People are always no strongly worded here and always burning people at the stake for people that don't believe as Stardock does or them.

Cybermessiah, I agree with you whole-heartedly. There is just a point where users need to stand-up and say enough is enough. People like freedom, like Daz customers. Freedom to use their software licenses as they want (legally). If people agree to activation, then what's next? The more you let them (software companies) tie your hands, then the more they are going to control you.

Oh, BTW, I have confirmed that Apple doesn't have activation in OS X. So, at least one other company agrees with "us" anti-activation people.

On another note, Starkers, what happens when you lose your internet connection and have no phone line? It has happen to me, opps no software I guess.

Also with Stardock's policy, I have to have a internet connection at some point to install the software. What if I don't want to rely on the internet to use my software? (And my phone for that matter.) If I buy software, I would like for it to be useable and installable from a box, with no outside connection required. I don't require the company to inform me when they spend my money that they got from the sale do I? Why should I let then know when I installed the software. (Okay, maybe that isn't exactly the same thing, but the concept is there.)

On another note, Starkers, what happens when you lose your internet connection and have no phone line? It has happen to me, opps no software I guess.

If you don't have a phone or internet, maybe spending $600 on a piece of software isn't a priority. Windowblinds checks activation at installation. If I didn't have internet I wouldn't have purchased it anyways. There is no big deal here.

Also with Stardock's policy, I have to have a internet connection at some point to install the software. What if I don't want to rely on the internet to use my software?

That's really your personal choice. Stardock checks at installation to make sure I have a valid copy, oh the world is ending.

Oh, BTW, I have confirmed that Apple doesn't have activation in OS X. So, at least one other company agrees with "us" anti-activation people.

What? Why would Apple need activation? OSX only works on Apple hardware. You can't just go out and buy Apple parts and put together your own Mac. (Well, maybe you could, but I haven't heard of anyone doing it.) Windows, and other software for Windows has a much larger problem with piracy than the selective OSX.

On another note, Starkers, what happens when you lose your internet connection and have no phone line? It has happen to me, opps no software I guess.

Other than perhaps a temporary disruption once in a blue moon, I always have phone and internet connections, so activation is not a problem for me. And IF I had a short period of downtime, it's not the fault of Stardock, MS and it would only represent a temporary delay, not a permanent disabling of my software....it's not that big of an inconvenience, really.

Also, I do not see any negativity or burning at the stake here....generally it's just people saying that activation isn't an issue for them, or expressing their opinion that software companies have the right to take intellectual property protection measures. And even if some were to more strongly argue the point, didn't you invite them to debate your views by posting your thread here?

I suppose Forums and Blogs would be pretty boring places without people feeling the need to whine about things. Oh, that reminds me....about the ratings here........

This is an interesting discussion.

But consider this: The only reason we can afford to sell WindowBlinds for only $20 is because we have activation.

Stardock activation is not designed to foil casual pirates nor is it some sort of digital rights management system (i.e. we don't care if you put it on your home, work and laptop PC).  It's designed for the long-term pirate who doesn't want to keep having to go look for a cracked copy every time ther'es an update and $20 is worth it to not have to deal with the hassle.

If we were selling a $500 program we probably wouldn't bother with activation either because our system wouldn't really work at that point. Avoiding having to pay $500 is probably worth hassle to most pirates. By contrast, $20 is the price of 6 gallons of gas. For someone with a job, the time it takes to find a torrent, download it, and hope it works (Because a lot of them don't or have problems) costs them more in time than $20.

WindowBlinds 5 sales (first version with activation) are three times higher than the sales of WindowBlinds 4.  So it does work.

Without activation, WindowBlinds 5 would have been $24.95 instead of $19.95.

Also with Stardock's policy, I have to have a internet connection at some point to install the software. What if I don't want to rely on the internet to use my software? (And my phone for that matter.) If I buy software, I would like for it to be useable and installable from a box, with no outside connection required. I don't require the company to inform me when they spend my money that they got from the sale do I? Why should I let then know when I installed the software. (Okay, maybe that isn't exactly the same thing, but the concept is there.)

Considering the only way to purchase WindowBlinds presently is on the Internet, this is kind of a moot point. You don't need to have a net connection to activate.  If you activate off-line, it will give you instructions on how to activate it without that computer ever being on the Internet.

I would pay $25 not to have activation. I've had 3 problems with Stardock programs, the last time I just stopped using that program, the first two times I sent a email to Stardock and got them resolved but I didn't bother the next time as I seldom used that particular program. Makes one reluctant to update despite having a subscription. Photoshop CS2 will insist on reactivation over the slightest change (on my system anyway). And I agree with the comment about what if the company disappears or is bought out. It has happened. Regardless of whether it works seamlessly or not, it just irks me. If WB had activation when I first looked at it, I probably wouldn't have bought it. But now I am so used to it and hate using a machine without it, I guess I'll just have to put up with it.

Software activation don't seem a lot different to electonic banking to me....you stick your (digitally signed to you) card in the slot to get money out, but still you've got to key in your pin number to activate the card before it will let you proceed.....

Motor vehicles began with crank handles which were wound up to start them....they then progressed to starter buttons and eventually to ignition keys specific to each vehicle. So, in this day and age of rampant theft, we have to not only unlock our cars to get in, we have to put a key in the ignition to start it as well (a greater inconvenience than when cars first emerged) but I don't hear anyone complaining about having to mess with two locks to drive away their car/truck....that its harder to steal than the old T Model.

It's the natural progression of things to improve security features, and given that theft and piracy are of a great cost to the community (manufacturers and consumers alike), it's seen as in the common good to implement more sophisticated anti theft/piracy measures. There's no point in blaming the companies, they're trying to protect the businesses that ultimately serve you, the buying public. Alternatively, look to the thieves and pirates, but instead of just complaining, turning a blind eye and saying nothing, do something!!!!!

I had a neighbour who invited me in to see his computer setup, and when he bragged about having several cracked copies of various programs, including some from Stardock, I hit the roof and informed the authorities. Don't know exactly what they did to him, but he no longer has the programs or the internet....is back to running Windows 95 because even his copy of XP was pirated. If more people made it their business to report crimes such as these, then perhaps we'll see companies easing back on activation measures, etc.