1) They actually outright state that the "basic" protection is simply requiring that someone sign in with a Live ID before they can download, then deleting the CAB file. It's phrased to imply that there's more going on, but that's it.
2) Apparently only a few hypothetical "super-hackers" could possibly work around the protection provided by (1)
3) The expensive, premium protection is seemingly the same old tie-the-app-to-the-IMEI patching of the binary that everyone and their dog uses, which is probably trivial to hack too.
I had heard that he was just hijacking the CAB file. It's probably downloading to some temp location. If you make a copy of that CAB while the installer is running, you should be able to then copy the CAB to any other WinMo device. Most of them have a point where they prompt for input (install to device or to card is a good candidate) and you can probably grab it then.
If they use Pocket IE, then it's very likely in that standard directory. A quick "Chandler" should find the full path. You could probably even write a small app that automatically mirrored any CAB file out of there.
@SQLGuru: Yes, that's basically it. Although to be fair, the documentation spells this out pretty clearly. It also talks about an alternate key-based system that involves adding some code to your program. I think maybe that's not available yet.
I'm still undecided on whether to submit my software to the Marketplace. I'm not worried about piracy much, as they're only $1.99 apps anyway. But the expense and trouble that seems to be involved in getting things approved is an impediment to individual developers like me.
I have two apps now in the Samsung App Store. That was very cheap and easy, and it has a pretty good copy protection scheme, tied to the phone's ID.
@CSX321: Do you have a good "finger friendly" set of widgets that you use for your app? I have an app that I've started writing, but with no native controls as part of the SDK, I'm torn between continuing working on it and giving up. (I'm more of a function over form guy.) My app is about 90% done in terms of function but only about 10% done in terms of "pretty" -- at least the version I plan on giving away for free. Then I would release a "pro" version with additional features.
As for piracy, I'm really writing it for me but wouldn't mind a few buck from others who find it just as useful.
@SQLGuru: I got started writing stuff for myself, too.
No, I don't really have a set of controls or anything yet. I have a C# image button class I did for one app. For other things, I just space them so they can be hit easily with a finger. Oh, I also have a form base class with "flick" gesture support and the ability to slide up, down, left, or right between forms. I've pretty much found the limits of what can be done graphics-wise with the .NET 2 CF.
For my apps I have demo versions that have limited features and nag screens, but no time limit. They can be activated with an RPN key (Handango-style) to full version status. I haven't decided yet whether to put them on Handango, etc. 50% is a lot compared to Samsung's and Microsoft's 30%.
THE DUMB FUCKS WHO HONESTLY THOUGHT THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.
Think with your brain and not your ass next time.
WHY WOULD MICROSOFT HURT DEV'S? to please people that no matter what they do will find the smallest thing possible and make it a "I HATE MICROSOFT FOR DOING_____"
WOW...the stupidity of some people goes further then that guy on youtube that said his favorite color is clear and sometimes he just likes to watch the wind go by...
First - the Computerworld article spends more time talking about the App Store than about Microsoft's plans. The entire story is about a comment made at TechEd - and it's not even a quote: it's an interpretation by the writer.
Then suddenly everyone is getting all excited about this secondhand information as if it's official. Then someone at Microsoft goes 'Geeze - that's not what we meant at all... here's what we actually said/meant.' Then there's the 'they're backpedalling/lying' backlash.
I know it's nowhere near as entertaining - but why not wait until Microsoft actually *announces* something formally before criticising their 'decision'?
There are LINKS in the article that JUSTIFY this criticism IF you were to read these links and then comment.
Daniel Bouie, a senior product planner at Microsoft, during a talk last week at the software maker's TechEd conference announced these plans and was obviously authorized to report this news at a conference by Microsoft.
In a potentially market-changing move, Microsoft Corp. plans to let customers of its upcoming Windows Marketplace for Mobile run purchased applications on as many as five Windows Mobile phones at the same time.
But it could also allow users to share apps by "authorizing" the phones of close friends and family using the same generation of Windows Mobile phone, said Daniel Bouie.
When you tell people that they are going to get something and then all the sudden you take it away you are subject to reporting/blogging about the change of plans. Clearly this was a desirable feature and people are disappointed. Do you NOT understand the purpose of journalism?
The way I read the VoIP item (#4) it would allow for Skype or another VoIP app over WiFi. Unless I'm misinterpreting "mobile operator network" and that term includes WiFi.
ZOMG!!! This is awesome news! I haven't seen the show, and I don't own a Zune, but it's almost impossible not to run out and buy one just to hear none other than David Eick(!!!) talk about what a pleasure it was to work with such a fine and talented cast!
@Linux Chief hardware engineer: No, you simply said epic fail. You didn't explain why it was an epic fail, or what was an epic fail, you simply said epic fail. That's still trolling, buddy.
10/09/09
1) They actually outright state that the "basic" protection is simply requiring that someone sign in with a Live ID before they can download, then deleting the CAB file. It's phrased to imply that there's more going on, but that's it.
2) Apparently only a few hypothetical "super-hackers" could possibly work around the protection provided by (1)
3) The expensive, premium protection is seemingly the same old tie-the-app-to-the-IMEI patching of the binary that everyone and their dog uses, which is probably trivial to hack too.
10/09/09
If they use Pocket IE, then it's very likely in that standard directory. A quick "Chandler" should find the full path. You could probably even write a small app that automatically mirrored any CAB file out of there.
10/09/09
[blogs.msdn.com]
"\Windows\Profiles\guest\Temporary Internet Files".
Anyone with the WinMo app store that can verify this for 6.5?
10/09/09
I'm still undecided on whether to submit my software to the Marketplace. I'm not worried about piracy much, as they're only $1.99 apps anyway. But the expense and trouble that seems to be involved in getting things approved is an impediment to individual developers like me.
I have two apps now in the Samsung App Store. That was very cheap and easy, and it has a pretty good copy protection scheme, tied to the phone's ID.
10/09/09
As for piracy, I'm really writing it for me but wouldn't mind a few buck from others who find it just as useful.
10/09/09
No, I don't really have a set of controls or anything yet. I have a C# image button class I did for one app. For other things, I just space them so they can be hit easily with a finger. Oh, I also have a form base class with "flick" gesture support and the ability to slide up, down, left, or right between forms. I've pretty much found the limits of what can be done graphics-wise with the .NET 2 CF.
For my apps I have demo versions that have limited features and nag screens, but no time limit. They can be activated with an RPN key (Handango-style) to full version status. I haven't decided yet whether to put them on Handango, etc. 50% is a lot compared to Samsung's and Microsoft's 30%.
05/23/09
THE DUMB FUCKS WHO HONESTLY THOUGHT THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.
Think with your brain and not your ass next time.
WHY WOULD MICROSOFT HURT DEV'S? to please people that no matter what they do will find the smallest thing possible and make it a "I HATE MICROSOFT FOR DOING_____"
WOW...the stupidity of some people goes further then that guy on youtube that said his favorite color is clear and sometimes he just likes to watch the wind go by...
05/23/09
05/23/09
First - the Computerworld article spends more time talking about the App Store than about Microsoft's plans. The entire story is about a comment made at TechEd - and it's not even a quote: it's an interpretation by the writer.
Then suddenly everyone is getting all excited about this secondhand information as if it's official. Then someone at Microsoft goes 'Geeze - that's not what we meant at all... here's what we actually said/meant.' Then there's the 'they're backpedalling/lying' backlash.
I know it's nowhere near as entertaining - but why not wait until Microsoft actually *announces* something formally before criticising their 'decision'?
05/23/09
There are LINKS in the article that JUSTIFY this criticism IF you were to read these links and then comment.
Daniel Bouie, a senior product planner at Microsoft, during a talk last week at the software maker's TechEd conference announced these plans and was obviously authorized to report this news at a conference by Microsoft.
In a potentially market-changing move, Microsoft Corp. plans to let customers of its upcoming Windows Marketplace for Mobile run purchased applications on as many as five Windows Mobile phones at the same time.
But it could also allow users to share apps by "authorizing" the phones of close friends and family using the same generation of Windows Mobile phone, said Daniel Bouie.
When you tell people that they are going to get something and then all the sudden you take it away you are subject to reporting/blogging about the change of plans. Clearly this was a desirable feature and people are disappointed. Do you NOT understand the purpose of journalism?
05/23/09
i must commend them on allowing refunds. i think that is a progressive step forward.
/golf clap
05/23/09
05/24/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
Last I checked it was the same and there was a fair bit of net neutrality uproar over it.
05/06/09
05/06/09
04/22/09
04/22/09
04/22/09
04/22/09
04/22/09
04/22/09
04/22/09
04/22/09
03/11/09
03/11/09
03/11/09
Yet im the one posting on topic about a relevant post...
03/11/09
03/11/09
2nded.
@Linux Chief hardware engineer:
dude, you can do better. we believe in you.