Online Activation in Version 3.47 - Sandboxie

Everything you use is a crutch. If the OS itself were completely healthy with all appendages in working order, you would not need 3rd party tools or fancy schemes. Since it is not healthy, we must all use one crutch or another. Some are aluminum, some are wood, some are titanium, but all are crutches none-the-less. lol, some are electric wheelchairs, some are walkers, some are canes, and I think one or two might be iron lungs.

Sul.

 

Point taken, lol.

 

As I understand it having just updated, if you already bought SBIE sometime in the past all you are doing by updating to v3.48 is changing the key number to a different one in a new system. Every 90 days (my) SBIE will verify that number forever and I will not be billed further. Correct Mr. Tzuk?

 

The responses here are drifting this way and that, tossed about into a giant salad.

Lets sum it up with some common sense then.

1. Some people don't like things doing online activity.. period. Reasoning is simple, it does not need to, so why should it.

2. Some people don't like key checks because they feel rather insulted that they paid the $$ and they feel they should be trusted.

3. Some people would prefer alternative routes to key checks that don't involve online methods.

4. Some people are concerned of what happens on the key check day if there is no internet and/or how they might be inconvenienced.

Now, we examine the other side.

1. Most people agree piracy sucks.

2. Most people agree an author should get paid for thier product.

3. Most people agree that piracy causes the need for key verification.

But, we have to also include..

1. Some people are OK with verification because they just don't care.

2. Some people think as long as it is easy/painless/transparent, what is the care?

3. Some people don't mind because they will continue to use the program even with such a small thing being imposed.

And finally, without great detail..

1. Some people question the decision, wondering if it is the correct way to approach it.

In conclusion, this thread exposes the dislike of many people to different aspects of online key checks. Those with some patience and an open mind might continue to use the newer versions, while those with less patience or a sense of principles that should not be compromised might not. Either way, Tzuk has to do something about piracy, and likely will never be able to please everyone anyway.

I will wait and see myself, and make a decision after the dust settles, maybe in 180 days

Sul.

 

It appears the yearly license will be used for promos, like a 50% off deal. So, the cost of the year license would be like $13.00, which is not bad. The activation issue is really overblown. If you have a legal copy of the program it will silently validate 4 times a year, taking a few seconds each time. I don't understand what the big deal is. Why is everyone so sensitive about this? "I bought his program and now he doesn't trust me", c'mon give me a break.

 

I agree!

 

The level of sensivity differs on both ends of the spectrum. I think it has more to do with dis-liking online activity more than what it is actually doing. I make it a matter of principle to avoid programs that need online verification. Not that I won't, I would just prefer not to have to. For me, I simply don't want to be tied to the internet for a program to work. It is becoming more of a trend I think. The assumption that I want to be online whenever I use a program is a false assumption, no matter what the program. Not much to gripe about other than a preference is all.

Sul.

Edit: This comes from dial-up days when you could not use the phone and be on-line at once. The periodic downtime of DSL also is a chance to not be able to use a program during that period, however it is not often unless a contractor cut a fiber line or a car took out a power pole. I understand the odds against the 90th day and my internet being out are slim, but I try to make a principle to not have that worry. The inconvenience would likely be minuscule I admit.

 

In tune with this long lament, could I please refer posters to :- https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=274246, post 351 and subsequent.

Looks like it has a bearing on the subject. I hope Mr.Tzuk hasn't discovered this yet, he`ll go crazy.

John B

 

John - you could of at least linked to the page response 351 is on

 

I am so sorry, I thought it would be easy as there are only 355 posts at the time of this note - the last page.

John B

 

Holy virtualization!

 

No need to apologize - just givin you a heads up for next time

 

Hello,

I have been suggesting Tzuk at SBIE forums an idea to stop (or at least to reduce) piracy of his software.

Somebody may ask: Why do people pirate SBIE when there is a so called “FREE” version of it?

Okay, let's answer that: There is NOT such a free version of SBIE strictly speaking. All of them are the same version. There is one that you pay for and have access to all its menus, you can sanbox multiple programs at the same time and force other programs to run sanboxed right from the start.

The “other” version is exactly the same as above but with the exception it pauses 5 seconds before becoming functional and NAGS you offering a link to pay for the “full version”, and it has some GRAYED menus only available to paid customers, etc., etc.

Okay, again the original question.... Why do people pirate SBIE? Well, maybe because they download the so called “free” version only to find out that it's a crippled version with an ugly NAG screen.
Perhaps, people want the full blown version with all the bells and whistles enabled and then, practice piracy.

I am NOT by any means endorsing or supporting piracy at all. All the software installed on my computers at home has been purchased by myself with my hard earned cash (e.g. Windows 7, Office 2010, ESET NOD32, Ad Muncher, Diskeeper 2010, Registry Mechanic and...SBIE, this one I bought it on June 11, 2010 Friday for US$ 40.00 using my Master Card when it was at version 3.442).

I find that at this price, for not being an Antivirus, an Internet Security Suite, a software Firewall, SBIE is way TOO EXPENSIVE. I purchased a lifetime license and now I am thinking: Should I keep it on my PC? I find rather annoying, intrusive, a piece of software needing to check upon me every 3 MONTHS to assure that this same product I purchased LEGALLY is valid.

I was at Tzuk's forums comparing the business model of AVAST! Anti-virus with the new business model Tzuk wants to implement with SBIE.

AVAST! has two versions: one FREE version with not limitations, no NAG screen when you open the GUI, no GRAYED menus indicating that “some features are reserved to the paid version”. AVAST! has also another version that is called AVAST! Pro with all the bells and whistles aimed to enthusiasts who want more features.

AVAST! free ONLY annoyances are: the advertisements displaying on the free version exhorting people to buy the Internet Security suite or Avast! Pro and that it only updates twice a day but I think that for all that Avast! free has to offer those are just minor inconveniences people could live with.


Then, I say: Why aren't many people trying to pirate Avast! Pro? Well, the answer is because the free version offers a lot of features that people don't feel compelled to upgrade to the paid version NOR to pirate the paid version.


This bring me to my final question: Why can't TZUK implement something similar with SBIE as the Avast! people have done with their product? Is is that difficult to implement?

Why try to turn paid users away with these tactics supposedly aimed to curb piracy?


Have a nice day.



Carlos

 

I don't think it's fair to put Avast and Sandboxie side by side. They are two completely different programs for two completely different uses. 40 dollars for a lifetime is NOT too expensive, it's damn cheap. However, those who CHOOSE the yearly subscription are being oiled up and screwed. THAT is a problem, and checking on a user every 90 days is a problem. I'm trying to be fair in my vocal criticism of the situation. Some are going a little far in their criticism. The man has a right to protect his product, but, for the last time, I'll say the method is wrong, and the marketing is way off. I'm just not buying his reasons, but I'm not out to crucify the guy.

 

DW,

I've been reading this thread all along and I had been reluctant to post until now. I have also been reading all your posts. Not necessarily I have to agree with all your opinions but I respect them.

I am not comparing apples to oranges. I know Avast! and SBIE are different animals but what I am pointing out is to the BUSINESS MODEL used by each vendor not what each product does or any similarities and differences.


Regards,


Carlos

 

It seems to me ronan may be brilliant at creating security apps and not so much when it comes to the buisness end of things. However who amoung us is perfect? So why dont we all just take a couple of deep breathes and see what happens without starting a huge kurfuffle.

 

I guess I don't see it quite like some do. I don't see Tzuk has many options really. He is entitled to his profit, which means he needs to curb the piracy to do so. Some form of online checking is probably the easiest method, perhaps the most secure, who knows.

I come from the stance of perhaps there are other avenues. Online verification isn't the end of the world, but I should imagine the Tzuk is aware that advanced users (at least segment of them) have always voiced opinions of dislike towards such things. It is nothing new, has been going on since XP rolled out its activation process that I have noted.

I can't say it will effect me, that it will make using SBIE any more or less than it currently is. I can't say I will or will not continue with it. I cant' say much of anything except if I were Tzuk I would do something, and that something might very well be online verification. But I would like to think I would explore all avenues. We don't know for certain just what ideas he has entertained. But I daresay he would not post in this thread, it sort of beats him up in places.

Sul.

 

I was wondering why Tzuk wouldn't rather turn Sandboxie into a donationware?

Why do I say this? Well, would the paying costumers still pay for it? My guess is that they would, otherwise they would simply make use of illegal keys.
So, in this scenario, Tzuk would still keep his many loyal costumers. No loss here.

What about the rest of people making use of illegal keys? Well, they simply don't want to pay for software and some can't afford to pay for everything they need or feel they need.
What's the solution? Donationware... BUT, they won't donate anything, or they would simply buy it, right?
So, now comes the 1 million dollar suggestion: Include advertisement in Sandboxie, like some toolbar, giving the option for people not to install it, of course.
Tzuk would make money with these users, while they wouldn't pay for Sandboxie, directly that is.

Everybody becomes happy, uh?

 

Or maybe give away version 3.46 full for free

 

It is my unlikely hope that with the blessings of providence, Mr.Tzuk has had the inspiration and dedication to paranoia to read all these threads on Wilders. He may possibly learn something and apply a shot of oil to his precious SBxie so it runs a lot smoother.

John B

 

You make an interesting point there.

People think,due to natural cynicism that making a product Donationware will just mean that folks will use it and either donate a paltry sum or nothing at all.The evidence points to the contrary though.

I recently read about some games that were offered in such a way and the income generated far exceeded expectations.

My own thought is that overall revenue may be increased by doing this,as the many loyal fans will happily pay as before,plus a fair few free users will donate something to upgrade to the Pro.I feel more people have an inbuilt sense of fair play than we imagine.

 

You want to lose people really fast, include a toolbar. That would be close to a disaster for him with customers beyond the average joe who doesn't know any better. Toolbars around here are treated like quasi-malware, and customers like the types of people here at Wilders are his biggest audience. Having the option to install or not would help, but 9 out 10 of his biggest user pool wouldn't install the toolbar, so where would the extra revenue come from?

 

DW426 Right you are. ASK search engine has been including their toolbar in various software installations as a way for the software manufacturer to make some money. During the installation they included a radio button already checked off to accept the toolbar. If you didn't want it you had to uncheck the radio button. Well if you think Tzuks new rules generated a lot of posts, it pales to the uproar over the toolbar.

 

A TOOLBAR ! Like a nail in the head.

John B

 

Dear God, I hope at least he would settle for Google or Yahoo. Strapping ASK to the install would all but make Sandboxie a fond memory. I've said all I need to on the matter of the activation at this point. My opinion is still the same, whether it makes me unpopular or not. Tzuk did what he did and he isn't backing off, so that's all good and well. he has his thing, I have mine, no hate here towards him