EXCEEDED ACTIVIATION

[Acorn]

It turned out that the message was being triggered simply by my having plugged my mobile phone into one of the USB ports to recharge it; the software decided that this simple action, something that many people must do every day, turned the laptop into a different, third device and that therefore I had exceeded the number of permitted activations.

I think this is the first hard evidence of what is causing the error for some TGers. I have a stable set-up for both my laptop and PC but I charge my phone from the laptop and it acts as a media device and I connect my tablet (ditto) to my PC. Neither in/out operation has ever tricked the Xara lockware.

Acorn

[jaydear]

With the possible exception of the Windows OS, I don't think that I have any other software that feels the need to phone home every time I use it to check if I have loaded it up on another computer. I really don't like the idea of being presumed to be a software thief! The other paid software I use, and I have used through many upgrades over many years has issued me with a key/password and that is all.

In all the time I have used, e.g. CorelDRAW it has never been an issue to simply install it on the next latest and greatest computer I buy. Of course I stop using it on the old one because the old one is either too slow, unreliable or disassembled for spares. I still have all my old hard drives and they have occasionally been of use to retrieve some file that has been otherwise lost or corrupted. I have never had an issue with the keys/passwords, ever, nor have I been locked out.

As I pointed out in another thread (http://www.talkgraphics.com/showthre...P11-once-again!) I think it is a huge mistake for a company to use any system that can erroneously lock legitimate users out and prevent them from using what they have paid for. It hasn't happened to me, but I just think that approach is heavy-handed and draconian.

There are other quite adequate methods of software security. For instance in Australian businesses and government there is software auditing to ensure the right number of licenses have been purchased. In some instances software displays the name of the registered user when starting up. Thing is, you can never stop theft or pilfering and we all pay for that at the checkout. Can we assume that we have already paid for pilferage when buying our Xara software? If so why do we need to have further checkups and lockouts?

I hope that Xara will reconsider their security methods and lighten up on us legit users who are just trying to enjoy learning and using the software, rather than having to worry about whether it is going to kill a project or damage our reputation without warning.

[pauland]

There are other quite adequate methods of software security. For instance in Australian businesses and government there is software auditing to ensure the right number of licenses have been purchased. In some instances software displays the name of the registered user when starting up. Thing is, you can never stop theft or pilfering and we all pay for that at the checkout. Can we assume that we have already paid for pilferage when buying our Xara software? If so why do we need to have further checkups and lockouts?

Government departments and businesses perform software auditing to ensure they know what software is in use on their systems and prevent them being sued or having bad publicity by having improperly licensed, unapproved, pirate or rogue software on their systems.

Many small businesses don't perform these kind of audits and it's well known that some small business environments will turn a blind eye to pirated software. It's true of large companies too - last year it was suggested to me by a manager in a HUGE corporation that I download a hockey version of office onto my computer (when I objected, they thought I was crazy).

While these schemes don't stop dedicated hackers, they do stop the casual copying of software and passing from friend to friend. I suspect that the main user-base of Xara is with the home hobbyist, semi-professional or home business/freelancer, rather than larger organisations, so it's important that Xara prevents casual copying and it's not feasible to rely on in-company audits to police users.

There does seem to be some issue with the Xara protection scheme and I hope that the next release resolves that situation, but I wouldn't expect Magix/Xara to do away with software protection.

[gracehjs]

Interesting - I plug both a Windows 8.1 and an Android phone into my PC all the time. It does not seem to cause a problem.

Just as a follow on to my original post.

I have no problem with Xara seeking to protect their intellectual copyright but their implementation of this policy has left a lot to be desired creating a lot of unnecessary frustration.

My own problem was that I was frequently getting a pop-up message when starting WD11 telling me that I had exceeded the number of activations even though the hardware of the two installations I had, one on my desktop and one on my laptop, had not changed - or so I thought.

It turned out that the message was being triggered simply by my having plugged my mobile phone into one of the USB ports to recharge it; the software decided that this simple action, something that many people must do every day, turned the laptop into a different, third device and that therefore I had exceeded the number of permitted activations.

Protecting intellectual property rights is fine by me but lets keep in contact with everyday reality guys.