On 20/07/14 17:07, Kevin Miller wrote:
License agreements are not irrelevant. We do not have a single reason for
commercial as it stands by any means. Most users are honest and are
willing to pay for software providing doing so is fair, easy and
convenient.
In commercial desktop/mobile we have password protection that is not
present in non-commercial. In commercial HTML5, we will have obfuscation
that is not present in non-commercial. Both can be hacked in theory.
Neither will be easy. Obfuscated source code does not convert well into
human readable code no matter what you do.
Kind regards,
Kevin
Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can code
Thanks for that Kevin.
I do, however, have a few questions, and a few points:
Q1. If password protection of stacks in standalones is NOT the only
difference
[beyond the very different licensing arrangements]
between the Commercial and the Community variants of Livecode could you
be kind enough to
explain what the other differences are?
P1. I don't doubt that "most users are honest and are willing to pay for
software". However, once a piece of software becomes successful it
becomes a target for pirating and reverse engineering. The problem as
always,
is not with "most users", it is with the one "nasty piece of stuff".
When walking across the hills, even if everybody bar 1 of one's party
can put on
a pretty turn of speed, one MUST always wait for the slow one.
Q2. Can you please explain what 'obfuscation' means exactly.
P2. 'Obfuscated' code will still have to be executable.
Richmond.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
