I understand that people want to protect their intellectual property and all but this is unacceptable.....

I have already paid for Swath and now when I have to reinstall I need to contact swath's technical support which could take between
24-48 hours response IF YOU EVEN GET A RESPONSE.

I have several old emails that have my UserID and password that I have used for previous versions of swath but now when I try to register
it says my license key file is corrupt ... contact swath....

I try to contact swath and here I am WAITING for a response,

For all you people out there that are contemplating a copy protection scheme similar to the current swath scheme
just remember you do NOT want to P*** off your paying customers because your paying customers are your best and cheapest way to
get new customers.

Maniac


I say n

Nod. There are a handful of things I'd loved to see fixed or changed. Unlikely tho.

Slow. So... painfully... slow...

When you do a large fig refresh do you get that big pause afterwards?

So, Maniac, what do you think 24/7 full time operational support with multiple hot-lines would cost?
If you divide that cost by the number of paying customers, do you think that number might exceed the SWATH license cost?

I have treated your support issue well and we are still working on it. Because it is a 3PP problem makes it a little harder.
You however seem to think that I work on this on full time and this is my only source of income.
I do this on my own spare time and try to help people as fast as I can. People are almost never complaining, so I think I do a good job.

You seem to be very impatient and have been rude from the beginning of the conversation.
What is your goal of all this? To make a good product look bad?
You do run SWATH 1.8.3 without any problems so you are not locked out.

SWATH had no big software protection back in the days. Then SWATH was hacked.
This made us use a professional software protection and since then we have not had any other successful hack attempts.
Otherwise, we wouldn't be where we are today. It is a necessary evil.

I doubt anyone expects that.



Really? I've tried to do that, it doesn't work. It tries to go to a website to get the unlock
code and never returns. All it does is show up blank and the program never registers. A while
back I asked for that code so I could unlock it manually... never got one.

I went to the trouble to install wireshark to get the URL to see if I could manually do it,
but the code on the site is encoded and decoded inside the EXE and I'd rather not spend 6
months trying to trace the debug. Guess I could write a proxy or something and use lmhosts
to redirect it, but again... just not worth the headache.

So... we can get 1.8.3 working? That'd be sweet. 1.9.x is fine, but it's awfully slow
sometimes. A 90 second pause after a fig refresh or buydown is a real problem.




The EXE is compressed with something that verifies the checksums. This makes it very tough
to change the actual code in the file. But someone could write a trainer to inject variables
or an emu layer hack (hack wine or something) and do it. All of that would be a royal pain
in the butt, and completely not worth it given the cost.

My point is: There's ways around every protection method, so each protection method used
is a careful balance between the time, cost and difficulty they add versus the time required
to crack. Being obsessed that someone somewhere might make a crack and tightening stuff to
the point where it breaks... eh, that might be a bit overboard considering the average tech
level of TW players.

Thread moved to Open Discussion forum.

Mods: If it turns to Smack, please move it to Smack.

Well, maybe the topic is off a bit, but the support request fits the helpers topic.

I'm guessing this means I won't get a reply to my questions. I have to say, I'm getting a little tired
of getting shut down every time I ask a question nobody wants to answer.

Sorry Sing, I hope you get your questions answered. In my experience, Stein has always been great about responding to emails and feature requests.

Out of curiousity, how do you get a support request out of a topic named Swath SUX? Wouldn't you want to ask your questions in a separate topic? And why wouldn't you just ask the questions in a thread of your own making?

Helix

Trying to make a negative topic carry a more positive tone, that's how. Plus it had Stein's attention, which was +1.

I get the concept but I dont think you can do much with a topic called Swath Sux lol

And if you want a specific response you may not want to bury your question so deep in your post.

Helix

I've asked all of this before too.

Sigh

And this is the sort of reason why you can't get a real answer in open discussions anymore. It's just a
surrogate for smack.

I agree. It's a shame it has become this. Surrogate for smack one day, or the "spam catch basin for the spam accounts" on other days.

Thats only because the mods let it happen. You guys have no teeth. Whats the worse that can happen to someone who posts smack? Nothing, everyone dithers or the thread gets moved to smack, which is basically what the offender was trying to do anyway. Start banning people for 3 days to 2 weeks at a time for posting smack in threads, hi-jacking threads, or otherwise being an Butt outside Smack and see what happens then.

Its all about boundaries. For example, if you have a rule and you don't enforce it, its not a rule.

Thats my 2 cents

Helix

1. I'm not a mod.
2. Mods can't ban people anyway. SG can, tho, I think.
3. Just because you CAN post something doesn't mean you should.
4. On the subject of hi-jacking...

Have to say I agree with both of you, even though it seems like you're arguing. Singularity has a point about this being a surrogate for smack, and Helix makes some good points about smack in forums other than smack. If the mods are so eager to keep smack talk out, they need to exercise true enforcement, and not simply be moving things around chaotically all the time. Of course, there should be a warning system, preferably public in order to minimize the occurrence of bans that are based on moderators' personal interpretations of what's smack and what isn't.