Most active commenters
  • milen(5)

←back to thread

Monodraw

(monodraw.helftone.com)
603 points mafro | 14 comments | | HN request time: 0.216s | source | bottom
1. shirol ◴[] No.45038235[source]
> Monodraw does not use activation or any other form of DRM. We have complete trust in our customers.

Interesting. But, why?

replies(4): >>45038281 #>>45038293 #>>45038384 #>>45039395 #
2. milen ◴[] No.45038281[source]
Any time spent on copy protection is time not spent on improving the product for the paying customers.

I find it unlikely that such copy protection would actually convert a non-paying user into a customer.

I also don't want to make the software network dependent in any way.

replies(2): >>45038652 #>>45038803 #
3. msephton ◴[] No.45038293[source]
Cool app! What part excludes it from being sandboxed?
replies(1): >>45038312 #
4. milen ◴[] No.45038312[source]
The direct version is not sandboxed as I didn't want to deal with Sparkle (autoupdater) and sandboxing. The Mac App Store version is sandboxed.
replies(1): >>45050593 #
5. __MatrixMan__ ◴[] No.45038384[source]
The way that DRM and similar user-not-in-control technologies are making the world into a skinner box is a bigger problem than anything solved by those technologies.

Companies participating in that transformation don't get my money and I'm glad to know that this isn't one of them.

6. jonpalmisc ◴[] No.45038652[source]
> I also don't want to make the software network dependent in any way.

As a user of Monodraw in an airgapped environment: thank you!

7. tonyedgecombe ◴[] No.45038803[source]
>I find it unlikely that such copy protection would actually convert a non-paying user into a customer.

I used to think that but then kept tripping across customers who ran multiple copies of my software after purchasing a single license. I now wish I'd tightened the DRM from the start.

replies(1): >>45039105 #
8. awill ◴[] No.45039105{3}[source]
I think you're missing his point. If you tightened DRM, would those customers that ran multiple copies pay for multiple licenses?

Fighting piracy is generally not worth it. Those people would never pay, so you're fighting to stop a pirate from using it, not to get them to pay. There's a big difference.

replies(2): >>45039315 #>>45040929 #
9. wingerlang ◴[] No.45039315{4}[source]
I have had a handful of people request additional licenses (at a discount) for the purpose of running my software on multiple.
10. dheera ◴[] No.45039395[source]
People who pirate software at scale are not typically interested in ASCII art. It doesn't quite cross the threshold of business value and usefulness (e.g. SolidWorks, Photoshop) that would attract pirates.
replies(2): >>45040241 #>>45041002 #
11. mmastrac ◴[] No.45040241[source]
I can't tell if this comment is satire, given how prevalent .nfo files here...
12. milen ◴[] No.45040929{4}[source]
Yeah, it's unclear how many people fall into that bucket. I'm sure it's non-zero but I don't know if it's worth the time.
13. milen ◴[] No.45041002[source]
FWIW, pirated copies of Monodraw are widely available, I take that as a form of flattery :D
14. msephton ◴[] No.45050593{3}[source]
Thanks. Then the wording on the website is somewhat confusing. I didn't even realise there is a Mac App Store version.