The Activation Game

Wait a minute. . . 10.3 doesn't come out 'till friday! :)

what software companies do not understand, is going the other way: impoving the experience of buying software.

instead they are killing boxes, they are killing paper-documentation (to the point where even hardcore-flashers are burning the mothership for lacking docs), they are killing updates. but raising the barriers and the prices... am i the only one wondering if adobe + macromedia really "know" their clients?

I just hope Apple does't go down that road with Panther. (or any other cat they let out of the bag.-- man thats clever. I'll leave you on that one)

I may well be wrong, but I thought Adobe and Macromedia used to run a loose ship when it came to preventing piracy because allowing 14 year olds to mess around with a warez version of Flash or Photoshop meant that they were more likely to use it professionally at a later age, where they would certainly either pay for it themselves or have it bought for them by their employer.

Wait a minute. . . 10.3 doesn’t come out ‘till friday! :)

True...but I have an ADC membership (Apple Developer Connection) so I have access to OS builds before the general public. Funny point though. :)

Forgive me if I missed a critical line among those many paragraphs, but from just a few minutes' reading:

-- how many times did you actually activate before? (it's quite rare to see that "exceeded" dialog)

-- are you actually install on one of the operating systems Flash was tested upon, or a later version which was in beta at the time Flash was frozen?

-- those "failure" dialogs and blank UI elements almost make it sound like the problem may be some changes to the code, rather than anything about activating a copy, but I'm not sure of the core problem (still working on first cup of coffee here)

(fwiw, that Mac "archive and install" does have known problems... if that was used then symptom should be slightly different though.)

If the thread instead gets around to "Is serial-authentication worthwhile for the creator of the software?" then yes it is. For "Has it caused problems for actual customers?" then possibly, but not widely reported... if you could follow up with the activation team themselves at the feedback page then they can check whether there was anything untoward in the authentication per se, thanks.

Regards,
John Dowdell
Macromedia Support

So you've installed 10.3-- what's the deal with the added anti-aliasing, drop shadows, and even glassier buttons everywhere? And did you notice that character spacing for Verdana is much looser? That Lucida Grande is now taller and more condensed? Compare 10.3 before and after versions fo whatdoiknow.org, and you'll see what I mean.

It is really sad that most software publishers now have to resort to complicated product activation schemes to protect their business. For a paying customer, the frustration is hardly justified, and the realization that you have to do it their way, or just pay up, makes people consider other alternatives. Sadly, sometimes there are just no alternatives.

Every protection scheme gets cracked sooner or later, so I don't worry about this crap.

Todd,

Thanks a bunch for the heads up! I'm going to clean install Windows XP and put Office 2003 on the machine this Wednesday. I bought Flash MX 2004 Pro a couple of weeks ago and wouldn't have known to deactivate it.

hi John,
> “Is serial-authentication worthwhile for the creator
> of the software?” then yes it is

any arguments here would be quite interesting.

> “Has it caused problems for actual customers?” then
> possibly, but not widely reported

any numbers to replace the quite ambiguous "widely" here ?

"keep legitimate customers from becoming frustrated, annoyed, and thus turning to alternate sources."

Well in this case your really don't have an alternative source so what choice do you have, but to be guilty until proven innocent.

"Marrkku" wrote: "For a paying customer, the frustration is hardly justified" Any problems would be bad, true, which is why we're trying to jump on any problems seen. So far it's all looking smoother than expected, but it still requires vigilance to make sure there's no actual hassle, no actual frustration.

Mike Steinbaugh wrote "I bought Flash MX 2004 Pro a couple of weeks ago and wouldn’t have known to deactivate it." You wouldn't necessarily have to... your serial number is valid for installs on your own two machines, and what the authenticator really watches for is a lot of action on one serial in a short period of time. More info in that FAQ at http://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/

"Robert" wrote: "[Persuade me it's advantageous for manufacturers to authenticate the use, and quantify 'hasn't been a "widespread" problem]" Persuading you that it's advantageous from the company's point of view isn't necessary... it's analogous to you persuading me you shouldn't upgrade or whatever. For what it's worth, though, a single datum is that one out of six serial-authentication requests is bogus (with the biggest serial attempted being one on the Macromedia site *illustrating* the authentication process!). For "I haven't seen 'too many authentications' widely reported", translate that to "This is the first case I've heard of myself, and I've been looking." There probably have been some coming in on the support lines -- we noticed right off that some did try to do three quick installs or more to test -- but it hasn't been coming up online. That's why I tried to find out more, and direct it to the people who can work on it. If you've got an actual problem we need to nail it.

>Persuading you that it’s advantageous from the
> company’s point of view isn’t necessary…

well... this is I believe a very personnal opinion, tha tmay be really influenced by the fact you're working at MM (no offense here). Authentification is something new which is absolutely useless for the end user, and *maybe* useful for the company. Authentification are also preventing me (and many people I know, which is not a relevant number either) to upgrade. It prevents me from upgrading because in the first place, I don't understand how authentification will help MM, and I feel uncomfortable because I've read such doubtful opinions about it (is data collected and used for some reason ?, will it be annoying for me ? how many people reported problems related to authentification ? etc...)
The conclusion is that I feel potentially betrayed by authentification because I don't understand what it is good for.
Maybe I'm the only one feeling this way, may be not.

> it’s analogous to you persuading me you shouldn’t
> upgrade or whatever.

But I do believe I could obtain several advantages from upgrading !
For the moment I'm far from being sure that they are worth the unknown facts hidden behind authentification.

Shouldn't MM publish some more detailled and more specific explanations ? shouldn't they do what is needed to spread the word in a clear and understandable way ?

as always, copy protection / dongle / activation / DRM schemes end up simply hurting the legitimate user, while the pirates will eventually find a way to circumvent it quite quickly. again, software (and music/film/etc) companies should concentrate on giving additional incentive to legitimate users (support, cheap deals on other items, training, whatever), rather than trying to fight the losing battle of keeping the pirates at bay...
i'll have to upgrade my system soon from Win2k to XP, as most of the new software i want (Avid XPress, Adobe Encore, etc) is XP only...but i am dreading this whole activation crap (both with the OS itself, and some of the newer software). i frequently change my whole hardware configuration around, and that can be a right pain. what annoys me the most is that in 90% of cases all these activation schemes simply assume that you're online...it's even more of a pain trying to activate something if the machine you're installing on doesn't have internet access. additionally, this brings up one interesting issue: what happens after a product is officially "unsupported", beyond what the company regards as its viable life cycle ? will they still offer re-activation ? hell no, they'll tell you to upgrade to the latest and greatest version, thank you very much...but that's what the whole industry (soft- and hardware, entertainment, etc) is coming to: even though you pay, you're actually never really the owner of something. you're effectively leasing it from the companies, and you're at their mercy. brave new world...

— how many times did you actually activate before? (it’s quite rare to see that “exceeded” dialog)

Twice -- once on my main PowerMac, and once on my portable PowerBook. The problem is that I wasn't aware of the "Transfer License" option in the Help menu, and the need to select that before reinstalling the operating system. IMO, that option could be a little clearer, as in "Deactivate" or "Deauthorize this computer" instead of "Transfer License" which sounds like you're giving a license to someone else.

— are you actually install on one of the operating systems Flash was tested upon, or a later version which was in beta at the time Flash was frozen?

OS X 10.3 was still in developer cycles when FMX 2004 was released a few weeks ago. 10.3 has since gone golden master (which is what I'm using) and attempted to reinstall FMX 2004 on.

oh...and what really annoys me as well (fromhttp://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/faq/#itemC-1 )
"Macromedia understands that server customers have unique licensing and technology requirements. Any future plans for protecting customers and enabling server products with licensing technology will be carefully considered and developed with the input of the server community."

hmm...did they ask for input from the workstation community ?

>Whether the cracks actually worked is another story (I
>wasn’t about to spend the time trying one out), but the
>point was clear — any activation or encryption scheme
>will always, always, be broken by somebody.

You're 100% right about that. I did some testing on that. Just a week after new MX2004 release. What I found, was one crack (2 dlls, one of them emulating registration), which are good for every MX2004 product. Moreover, all products worked just fine. Therefore, I think it's just wasting of money, to create sophisticated registration system. Products are excessively popular...

Picture it, Detroit, 1999...

I was on hold with a Digidesign representative for quite some time when they informed me I had not purchased the software I was asking to authorize. This is when the screaming and cursing began.

You see, back in the day Digi used floppy disks to hold auth info which you could load and unload onto your hard drive. One complete crash and you have to call and ask them to send another (eventually a copy of my receipt was faxed to them and things were set straight). This sounds like an antiquated version of Macromedia's internet auth, which I have been dreading to see implemented.

Point of the story: If I ever see one of those "activation exceeded" dialogs I'm going to personally ask for John Dowdell and introduce him to some of the most colorful language on earth.

...see how Tomas get charged under the DMCA...
if you use cracked copies, the terrorists have already won, or some such rhetoric...

I went through a quasi-similar hula hoop with Final Draft screenwriting software. I run a lab on Fairfield University's campus that we wipe the OS every semester and reinstall to clear out bugs. Little did we know that we had to deauthorize Final Draft in order to get it to work again on the machines. After much searching and emailing to the company, finally on their site I found a deauthorization option. If the deauthorization process was clearly outlined in the authorization card, I would not have to have dealt with the headaches. I don't think the problem is with having to deauthorize but I think the problem is having the customers jump through hoops in order to do it.

I had a simillar problem with Dreamweaver MX 2004. I had to call Macromedia twice to get the problem resolved and the operator insisted that I had the program installed on two machines (which the licence allows for). I only had it installed on my Powerbook and ran into activation problems when I updated my OS. I had no idea about the 'deactivation' option under the HELP menu. (I certainly do now!) I just can't help but feel Macromedia are punishing the people who do the right thing and actually purchase their products. BTW... Dreamweaver on OS X is a slow, unusable mess. Incredibly disappointed with it and I am hopeful some of the vast sluggishness of the program will be fixed with Panther.

"Robert" wrote: ">Persuading you that it’s advantageous from the > company’s point of view isn’t necessary… well… this is I believe a very personnal opinion, tha tmay be really influenced by the fact you’re working at MM (no offense here). Authentification is something new which is absolutely useless for the end user, and *maybe* useful for the company." This is getting into arguing for the sake of arguing... the original person challenged the company's finding its own advantage in making sure a single serial number couldn't be used a thousand times, and you're branching off into the other issue (previously addressed above) about whether it's to the advantage of a potential purchaser. These are two distinct issues... reading the original would avoid the risk of confusing others further. No issue here, imho.

"Shouldn’t MM publish some more detailled and more specific explanations ?" If there's a hole in the previously-referenced URLs, then please advise: http://www.macromedia.com/software/activation/

Patrick Lauke wrote "as always, copy protection / dongle / activation / DRM schemes end up simply hurting the legitimate user" Are you, yourself, seeing any particular problem with Macromedia's implementation of serial-authentication? (As noted previously, we're trying to jump immediately on any actual hassle to any actual customer, and these have been quite rare.)

"i frequently change my whole hardware configuration around, and that can be a right pain." Reinstalling and resetting prefs is likely to be the bigger pain... may not need to re-authenticate at all, depending on the changes made... see FAQ for more info.

"what annoys me the most is that in 90% of cases all these activation schemes simply assume that you’re online" I don't know details of other activation implementations, but I know that online authentication is much easier than the phone options also provided. (The computer can trade codes without you having to type or speak stuff into a phone.) The process can be done anytime within the first 30 days of use... should be easy.

"what happens after a product is officially “unsupported”" Future hypotheticals are always tough... I don't have a good citation for the earthquake objection, for instance. The goal is that you should be able to use something you bought, regardless... there's no advantage to the company to "cheating" you in any sense.

Todd wrote that he installed on two machines, then (if I'm reading correctly) wiped one and tried to reinstall it. You're right, in a short period of time those three hits on a license would require intervention. An OS update wouldn't trigger it, but changes to hardware or formatting could, depending. The FAQ has more info about which types of configuration changes can trigger a request to authenticate a serial number.

"Whether the cracks actually worked is another story" Yup, most of the newsgroup regulars by now know the symptoms associated with faulty cracks. ("Can't open old files" is the most frequent.) Anybody who installs known-to-be-criminal software on their machine is, of course, a danger to the rest of the machines on the network (Google on "dos zombie army" for more.

For Tomas, who installed stuff to swipe Macromedia software, may the Gods of Karma visit you quite soon. Regardless, the difficulty of stopping all theft is insufficient reason to pursue the stopping of any theft, particularly inadvertent theft.

John Raptis wrote of a problem after updating Mac OS. If you picked up the (later-recalled) Mac OS 10.2.8 then there was a problem there, true, sorry... the archiver/reinstaller didn't do a complete job which could lead to problems when installing the fixed OS. We've got it documented in technotes now but that still doesn't help people who got stung by that OS reinstall, sorry.... :(

This activation "feature" is only going to bring more headaches and problems to legitimate users, specially those of us located overseas where there is not such a thing as a "free" 1-800 number. If this would happen to me on my home's Mac, where I still have to put up with dial-up (seems like DSL will take forever and a day to arrive), I'd probably be SOL.

Also, I have always felt that most software is just artificially overpriced. If the big software companies know that for every legitimate copy they sell at least a thousand pirate copies exist (a probably very conservative ratio), why not drop down prices enough to an attractive enough point so would-be pirates should convert into legitimate customers? (Who wouldn't agree to pay $100 or less for a full version of Photoshop?) I think that, far from hurting revenue, they would gain tremendous market share otherwise lost to piracy. It isn't as baloney as it may sound.

i know this is about activation, but i am curious, if anyone (including Todd) has any remarks about MX 2004 vs. MX 2004 Professional. is it worth the extra money, overall thoughts on upgrading from the original MX, etc.

My master's thesis is related to this - here are some interesting tidbits:

- Intuit sold 5.5 million copies of TurboTax for the 2001 tax year, and those copies were used to file 12.5 million tax returns.

- Intuit added product activation to TurboTax in 2002 and a public relations nightmare ensued (and continues to this day). A class-action lawsuit was filed against the company contending that Intuit engaged in unfair and deceptive business practices by failing to completely disclose the mechanisms and consequences of the technology before customers purchased TurboTax.

- H&R Block, maker of a TaxCut, took this opportunity to take advantage of the negative publicity and capture many long-time TurboTax users. Their retail promotions read, “Switch Today. TaxCut imports from TurboTax. No product activation required.”

- Hoping to win back alienated customers, on Oct. 9th, 2003 Intuit issued a formal apology - and has been running the letter as full page ads in popular newspapers. TurboTax general manager Tom Allanson said they were originally going to mail the letter to customers - however, research indicates that customers are still so upset and angry about product activation that they might not even have opened the letter. Intuit has promised to drop product activation in its next version of TurboTax.

- With the piracy rate being defined as “the volume of software pirated as a percent of total software installed in each state,” the average piracy rate in the United States in 2002 was 23%.

- Total retail dollar loss to the software industry from piracy in the U.S. is estimated to be $6.2 billion. Direct and indirect losses are felt in the form of impacts on receipts, employment, wages, and taxes. Employment impacts are estimated at 30,100 jobs – or slightly less than 12% of total employment for the packaged business software industry.

- US. Senate Bill 893, effective October 28, 1992, increased the penalty for copyright infringement to include fines of as much as $250,000 and jail terms of up to five years.

I too have been bitten by the "too many activations" dialog, but I'm probably not counted in the ranks which will probably always be "a few isolated cases solved immediately" no matter how many are reported.

I think that a very interesting question will be whether activation is causing the performance problems and bugs that are out there. It sure is speculated out there by other developers. All I do know is I shut down Flash and my problems cease to exist. Other programs suddenly start working again.

If activation is causing all those other problems with software conflicts and memory management, thats when the air around here starts turning blue. I really hope this problem is solved or the future of Flash in this household comes into doubt.

I have to second Jack's sentiments here. I too have awful problems with Flash and all the sudden my IE doesnt load pages or i get errors trying to open Adobe Photoshop. Once i close Flash everything works as expected, so I am positive that Flash is the culprit here. As far as activation and the like are concerned, i have had several problems there as well which forced me to call a "less then helpful" customer support staff. Then again, reading John's blogs and his comments to the posters of comments i often find him to be downright rude and his behavior and conduct apalling. I'm not overly concerned with Flash MX 2004 as i seem to be switching back to Flash 6 (plain ol MX) more and more, as the size of SWFs seems to have tripled and quadrupled with this new ActionScript 2.0 and Screens and these new "features". and the fact that Macromedia won't even tell users when a updater will be released to fix the massive bugs that are Flash 2004 is another slap in the face of consumers.

count me in the "dissatisfied" customers list.

K

i wonder if im the only person here to HAS to reformat every month or so (yes XP is that un-fucking-stable for me!). I frequently end up slamming in my XP disc and hitting teh fresh install button... XP eats my RAM as soon as I boot so how in god's name and I meant to "deactivate/Authorise" or what ever the hell it is in FlashMX2004 if i can get the damn program to open because of "innsufficient memory"?!

i hate product activation but it seems something that we will have to deal with.

the worst situation i have ahd was with my dads new laptop - he doesnt have internet access at home jsut now (i moved out and so cancelled the old broadband acount) and he doesnt want to have to pay the ~£5 call charges to activate XP... it takes me around 10 minutes on broadband for it to work (several attempts and faliures). He has 2 days left until XP locks him out so we either pay the call charges and activate it (after paying £200 for the Pro licence!) or we "crack" it... I know exactly what we will do and it wont be what MS want but they can piss off if they expect us to activate it at OUR cost.

and i've rambled... my apologise :D

Its ironic how the only people annoyed by such anti-piracy protection in software are the people whom actually buy the software.

I could imagine a couple hundred people going through what you did, and a few of them being ticked off enough to decide to never buy a macromedia product again.

Costs up, revenue down customer satisfaction down. Not a good business plan.

Hey John Dowdell - not sure if you're still reading this, but I found a very specific bug with FMX 2004 and OS X 10.3 that's easily replicable. Couldn't figure out how to contact you at your site, so if you would drop me a personal email, I'll forward details wherever they need to go. address: mail at whatdoiknow dot org

Chris → "With the piracy rate being defined as “the volume of software pirated as a percent of total software installed in each state,” the average piracy rate in the United States in 2002 was 23%."

Jump across the border where average income per capita is 5-10 times lower and that percentage increases sharply. Here in Central America, for example, piracy rate is about a whopping 75-80%, due in no small part -I think- because of the income differences. A price that might be OK in America is often outrageous and expensive elsewhere, specially in Third World countries. That's why I think price is a determining factor in the piracy problem.

"Web" wrote: "Its ironic how the only people annoyed by such anti-piracy protection in software are the people whom actually buy the software." Actually, it's ironic how that is so clearly *not* the case. The Activation Center has info, and a feedback page open to all visitors, and the majority of comment there is negative (and usually anonymous).

But when people who have actually gone through the process are contacted in follow-up surveys, the majority say they either didn't notice activation at all, or have no opinion about it. There *were* negative comments among people who authenticated a serial number before activating it, for sure, but... these were *outweighed* by pro-activation comments! ("gets rid of cheap competition", "insulates me from requests for my serial number", etc). Surprising but true... people who actually buy and use tools either don't care either way, or spontaneously approve of checking serials. The majority of "annoyance" has come from elsewhere.

Todd wrote "I found a very specific bug with FMX 2004 and OS X 10.3 that’s easily replicable. Couldn’t figure out how to contact you at your site". Thanks, you can reach the Flash team directly at http://www.macromedia.com/go/wish. New operating systems are always a potential issue... Apple was well along in its development by the time Flash was frozen, so I don't know what they could have gotten in this release if the two parallel efforts conflicted. Now that Panther is frozen we'll be trying to finish off the list of change-requests against it.

jd/mm

> “gets rid of cheap competition”

That simply can't be meant seriously! Please. As was stated, "workarounds" were spread all over p2p networks days after FMX2004 release. Moreover, competition is someone with skills, not someone with a copy a of a sw box.

Make the product better, fix found bugs, provide paper documentation, etc -- that's what makes customer to pay.

As for the "authentization" in general, I have bunch of friends working in the 3D field: nothing, nothing they hate so much as "authentization".

Karel

Thanks John. For others out there, the bug I found (at least on my side) is in regard to 10.3's new FileVault feature, which encrypts / decrypts the user's home folder on the fly. With FileVault turned on, Flash MX 2004 Pro pops up a ton of errors upon launch. If you turn it off, Flash launches fine. The issue seems to only apply to Flash MX 2004 Pro -- all my other apps launch fine.

Adding to the comments about the stability of MX 2004. On Windows XP I have really noticed a sluggish slowdown in all of the MX 2004 products as compared to the old MX Studio. The new features are awesome and at first glance it's a very worthwile upgrade. But for example, scrolling down a long list of code in the Actions Panel on Flash MX 2004, maxes out the CPU, and it jumps all choppy and sluggish. When the same function runs smooth as ice in Flash MX. It's pretty annoying. I'm hoping MM is working on a free update to fix the major issues.

off topic:
i cannot help but wonder what the people who were worried about todd "selling out" to macromedia by sporting a MM banner, are thinking in the face of this well reported (and fairly sharp) crit of a new aspect of macromedia's flagship product.

Simon, i agree with you a bit there... I had heard that 3D studio Max gained a large user base and thus a large market share, early in it's release versions in this manner.
it's a good conspiriacy theory at least! :D

Absolutly brilliant post Todd! I agree with everything you have said.

Did you know that if you have a volume code the App doesn't ask you to activate it ! You could always get a volume code off the net to prevent the fuss of activation, because you have actually paid for a legitamate serial. Using a volume code on the installation of one Macromedia Studio MX2004 packages also prevents the need to enter a serial for all other MX2004 packages.

The Welcome box phones home to Macromedia but ticking the "dont show this again" prevents the welcome box appearing and thus prevents any phone home calls. The only phone home feaure I know of within the 2004 apps is from the Welcome Box but there could be more because I have not even looked at the Demo's on a Mac yet.

I have not upgraded to the MX2004 yet because I am going for Adobe CS first because I can't afford both at the moment.

Great post!

I don't use Flash or Dreamweaver but I wanted to install them and see what's different; I also hate it when I've install a demo and didn't look deep into it before the end of the demo period. So I went on the net and 15 minutes later, I had Flash/Dreamweaver 2004 installed, no activation !

I do buy software, I personally own Illustrator, Photoshop, GoLive, Pagemaker (really old) and lots of software that don't even exist anymore like mTropolis and I would hate it if a stupid activation scheme would have me call to reactivate.

I understand the problem with pirating software, but to me it looks like it's the people actually paying for the thing that get screwed, same thing with music.

Thanks for the tip, I'll try to remember to deactivate my app when my next disk failure force me to reinstall ;-)

John D wrote: "Surprising but true… people who actually buy and use tools either don’t care either way, or spontaneously approve of checking serials. The majority of “annoyance” has come from elsewhere."

This is a very generalized statement because it is not entirely accurate, and not always true. I purchased the Studio MX 2004 products, and I DO CARE about the *problems* with activation and the other OS problems activation seemingly causes. And why do I, legal purchaser, care? Because I had activation problems on more than one occassion! In fact, not only do I care, but many others who have bought the products - some of which are also here, and also non-anonymous. And I've seen them tell Macromedia about it - using their legal names. And others not, for fear of the MM retribution, but are far more truthful in those cases.

I have heard of many legal purchasers, some here, having problems with activation and countless others who are having serious problems with your software (activation aside). But heck, if the "positive" is the only side that's acknowledged, then that's an interesting way of beta testing and running a software cycle. Selective listening only gets a product (or politician) so far.

Hi,

If anyone has problems activating over the internet (unable to connect to server), try going through the phone activation process, then cancel out of that, then try activating over the internet (again)....stupid, but it worked for me...dunno if it was a beta-thang

My 0.2c: Activation Sucks Ass, Open Source Kicks Ass.

I love the possibilities and potential of Flash, but MM are really pissing A LOT of people off with MX 2004 (activation, stability, documentation). I know if there was a command line compiler for Flash I'd use it in a snap over the IDE. It's like they're trying to satisfy too many lifeforms with the one product...perhaps a "Designer" version with limited code monkey stuff, and a "Developer" version with limited visual (crap:) is more appropriate than a "standard" and "pro" version?

Oh well...when life hands you a lemon, ask for the tequila and salt!

It'll be interesting to see how much hassle activation is going to cause when you're on deadline and have to reinstall for any reason...ever think about that regarding your "PRO" users, Macromedia?

I once had the same problem with Dreamweaver, but what do you do? Abandon the software you paid good money for? Spend your time on hold? Or just keep using it.

i was wondering if there are any open-source, share- or free-ware softwares that can be used like flash?
i'm smack in the middle of the visual/code styles of working, as i do projects that are all timeline/stage animation and also projects that are entirely actionscript, as well as the usual mixed. any suggestion/help/links are appreciated.
(i guess one could argue that enough knowlege of PHP and javascript, combined with other elements, could go a long way in this direction...)
At a digital media conference i attended in March, one of the presenters said they had the original share/free ware that became flash after macromedia bought it, and that this simple program was still useable and still distributable; unfortunately, they took off pretty quickly and i didn't get a copy. anyone know what they were talking about?

to John Dowell: i have actively pursued finding someone who appreciates authentification and even serials, to discuss the matter with in person; after ten years of support, training, jobs, and friendships with people using software every day, i have yet to find anyone. There is no software customer who *prefers* authentification or serialization, only the corpos.

The huge issue here is not only the activation process, but, the fact that you are paying for something that you KNOW IN YOUR HEART will not work correctly. There isn’t a serious designer, artist or developer that hasn’t thrown up their hands in anger, disbelief or amazement at what their Macromedia product has or has not done. I pay for things that work, and I don’t beta test software after I purchase it. Macromedia is one of the few big software developers that do not leak their own betas to their development team or the public for the fact that the bugs will come out in the press. Finding an Adobe beta is about as easy as catching a cold if you look in the right places, but Macromedia makes their betas call home and make sure that the developer that is testing it out is the correct person that build was released to. Legally this makes sense, you need to protect what is yours, but functionally, this is a terrible way to test things, and is a giant flaw in their development cycle. Not everyone uses software in the same regard, and with the impact that flash has on the web community, and the simple fact that IT HAS NO VIABLE COMPETITION makes seeding a public beta a pretty wise idea.

You can bypass their hokey activation scheme on both the mac and the pc platforms with little effort if you really want to. Then you can experience first hand things that haven’t worked correctly EVER in any flash release (the scale tool for example) and marvel at how you didn’t waste your own cash on something that only works correct 90% of the time.

John, instead of preaching to me the benefits of what activation does for US as end users (while thinly veiling your own towing of the company line, and kissing up to someone you show these posts to) do us all a favor and take the energy you will use to reply to this and walk down and slap all of the developers for looking so far forward that they are not fixing fundamental issues with the software. There hasn’t been ONE Macromedia product that hasn’t left the end user holding the bag in some regard, while we get told of how this new toy will “change the web, design, the planet,” or whatever. If you give us something at a reasonable price, with working documentation that explains everything and useful demos, without trumped-up marketing bullshit we will buy it. Until then…

What happens if Macromedia merges with another company, is bought out, or goes out of business.

There is no guarantee that Macromedia will be around in five, ten years to "activate" your software . . . Granted, I most likely won't be using today's version of Flash MX in five, ten years . . . but I should be able to! I have a Mac IIci at home running Adobe PhotoShop LE 2.5. I am sure that if Adobe used activation at that time that my software now would be no longer activate-able. And that's just wrong.

"Activation" puts you at the mercy of the software vendor. Which is why I refuse to use any product with "activation."

I have been slowly moving to OpenSource software whenever possible . . . because of things like activation.

I am a registered user of 4 Macromedia products. But no longer.

Well, I tell you one thing: I'm glad I'm a Java developer. My IDE of choice is Eclipse (http://www.eclipse.org) and its completely free. No serial numbers, no activation codes, no cash changing hands. And it's a world class piece of software. Long term view here - but it must be the way forward, surely? Don't we need to get away from the idea of licensing the tools of the trade? Wouldn't the business model be more sensible if it sold peoples services? I mean, if you want something designed you employ a designer and he designs something for you and you pay him. Fair enough. If you want a support contract you pay for the support contract (like the MySql people do it) Seems fairer to the end user somehow - fairer then paying Uncle Bill his squillionth dollar for an operating system that ceases to function when you change the motherboard in your PC, in any case.

As I say its a long term view, but this whole sorry saga of product activation that is currently unfolding seems to me to add further credence to the idea that its the open source movement that holds the key to the future of software development.

Hmm...I'm obviously more stoned than I thought... I enjoyed reading this thread though, only stumbled across this website by chance. Most interesting to hear everyone's opinions and thank you for baring with me.

Tom

In my haste to install Panther over the weekend - I foolishly forgot to deactive/deauthorize Dreamweaver (again!) Honestly, DW was the last thing on my mind.

After installing the new OS - I needed to do some work on some sites I look after. I quickly turned a whiter shade of pale when I realized I would have to go through the entire 'Activation' process yet again. I can assure you the number of expletives that were heard wafting through the air were plentiful and abundant.

I didn't want to go through that whole process of calling Macromedia up. (again!)

So I put my work off for two days. I called the Activation Center again. I was on hold for 10 minutes. When I finally got through I explained to the Macromedia representative my situation. I told him this isn't the first time I have had to call. Because of that, I was put on hold again for 10 minutes. Great way to kick off a busy Monday morning I can assure you.

When the rep returned to the phone he instructed me that this will be the FINAL time I will be able to re-acrivate my software. He told me before it could happen tho, I would need to fill out a form and either email it back or fax it to them. He instructed me that the email would be sent to me 'within the next 5 minutes'.

It is now 2 hours later. Still no email. Still no activation. Still no work being able to be achieved. I have to keep reminding myself that this is software I purchased. This is software that cost me close to $1,000AU that I bought in good faith and in high anticipation on what this software would allow me to do.

I'm fed up. I'm angry. I'm frustrated.

Macromedia... you have just lost a long time supporter and customer of yours. I will never purchase ANY of your products again. Ever.

Fuck you!

Why not tie the activation to the serial number of the computer? Then "transfering a license" will only apply when you actually are transfering a license to another computer!

I went through this hoop Sunday after I accidently "Erase and Installed" Panther even after reading Todd's post back on the 19th. I just plain forgot...

Am I to gather from these posts that if I try to re-activate Studio MX on another computer 3-months or so from now that it will go through w/ out a problem even though I technically have (3 now) activations?

Think that Macomedia is bad? Try Quark. You could talk to someone on the phone at macomedia, or even have the dubious luxury of being put on hold? Call quark, because after you instlled panther, followed the dialog box instructions that quark gave you, reinstalled, tried to activate, only to remember that you can only activate once a year, then trying tech support on sunday, closed, then trying again today- only to have the 800 number hang up on you, and the toll number be busy. Fun fun. Yes, I know- indesign.

ben

Hi guys. We take every reported issue with our licensing system seriously, and as a result we've reviewed this thread looking for problems we can resolve and improvements we can make. Although the vast majority of customers successfully activate without incident, this may not comfort the few who find the need to contact us for whatever reason.

Calling our 24x7 activation support center is the quickest way to get help if you run into any type of issue. The software will lead you through this if it's necessary. The callback mentioned above is not the norm, and I'm following up on it.

Our activation feedback form is the best way to let us know what you think, and how we can improve the system. We honestly do review every single piece of feedback that's sent in, and have already made improvements to the system based on customer feedback.

We keep our Activation FAQ up to date with answers to a wide range of questions, including many of the "What If's". If you've got a question that isn't answered in the FAQ, please let us know.

On the topic of Panther, we haven't observed any conflicts with activation except for the Archive and Install process. The potential FileVault issue mentioned above is being investigated, but it doesn't affect the licensing mechanism.

Thanks again for the feedback, it's much appreciated. Keep it coming.

et@mm

I wish Macromedia would allow cross-platform (Windows/Mac) activation of their products. I bought Studio MX 2004 a few weeks ago, to use for a college class I installed on my desktop PC and ignorantly activated it and now I can't use it on my Mac laptop without buying another license. I HATE MM's STUPID ACTIVATION POLICIES!

I bought Studio MX 2004 (Academic version). On the box it said the program must be activated on the web or over the phone. I wanted to install the program on my home machine (no internet, no modem) I used a machine connected to the web at the school where I work to get Macromedia's phone number and called them. I actually talked to a human. I told her I wanted to activate a product and was transfered to a machine and after making several menu selections I encountered another human and he connected me to activation, a human who asked me for the numbers on the screen. I told her that I hadn't opened the box yet. She said that I must install the program and then give here some numbers from the activation screen. She gave me her number and told me to call back after I installed the program and had the activation screen up. I did this like a good boy (after shutting off my airport card) and called back. Unfortunately she had given me her fax number. So back to square one (ignoring the correct phone number which was on the activation screen) . Again human, machine, menu, menu, menu, human and transfer to activation. I gave her the numbers on the screen and grabbed a screen shot of them so I would have them to use on my home machine. She gave me some numbers and I wrote them on the printout of my screen shot and then entered them into the school computer. Bingo I was activated on a computer which I did not need to be activated on. I carried my numbers happily home and installed the program on my computer and went to the activation screen. The numbers had changed. It was then I noticed the phone number on the activation screen so I tossed my old numbers and activated by phone. This was done through a non-human, who (are non-humans referred to as who?) wanted all of the numbers on the screen (the human earlier couldn't cope with more than 20 numbers). Anyway I was activated. A happy ending! No way! Dreamweaver MX 2004 really sucks. At least it sucks if your are using frames. I have a sheet of paper 8.5 by 11 which is covered on both sides with comments about what doesn't work. From reading comments from others on this site I get the impression tht if I upgrade from Jaguar 10.2.6 to Panther 10.3.whatever I may have to reactivate. Well Apple, I fooled you. I've seen Panther and it's another disaster like Jaguar but with even more eye crap. I long for the days of Mac OS 8.6

So, I buy flash 3,4,dw3,4,frehand I get my books I'm happy.
I buy studio Mx for a fortune and I get one measly thin book, then I upgrade to Studio MX2004 and I get the biggest collection of empty air in my software box I've ever seen!
I paid huge sums of money and I don't even get a fu..en book.
Macromedia stick it where the sun don't shine.
Aaron

Well my thoughts on software are as follows.
Big companies like webdesigners advertisers schools and all similiar types of commerce,have plenty of money to throw around so macromedia and adobe and others try to cash in on that ,they charge them big ass fees and make you jump thru a hoop to use there software...they are not concerned with 12 year olds or broke dicks like the rest of us who canot afford that $1000+ price tag..and for that matter why should they >Those of us who use pirated copies of these programs are the same ones who would ordinarly not be buying the stuff anyway so they have not lost anything even though they claim they lose millions...those that can pay usualy do ..so I hate it when they say they lose money hell there full of it ..Now if there programs were more inline wiht the average mans income then I my self would purchase a copy ....I buy games because they are affordable $39 to $50 thats in my bracket not $1000

so they should wise up and make there stuff for anyone who at least hAS A JOB AND CAN AFFORD IT

Theft is Theft and a Thief is a Thief