Jersey is a very Labor - controlled state. So you found gas for 10 cents cheaper... take a whopping guess at how many other peripheral services took a jump in price...
They nick you every time you want to get anywhere on a major highway.
Don't _even_ break down on the "Joizy" pike. You are not even allow to fix_your_own_car on the pike, no matter how minor. You even get seen having pulled over for a second, and you are gonna get towed.
The trucking industry gets nailed royal in Jersey. I cannot tell you how many times in dispatch we told the drivers to drive on the flats and get off the pike just so we didn't get reamed an extra $300 for the call. And if they got noticed by the pike people, a tow truck would pull in front of the outfit and force the issue, whether by forcing pay to get towed off the pike (needed or not), or by paying the exhorbitant repair fees for them to do it. No acceptable form of payment on hand? Tough beans - to the impound lot.
You can keep your Jersey gas, thankyou.
Cheers!
~ Duane "I've been everywhere, man... (Johnny Cash)" Phillips
Think of it this way.. Does anyone post WinNT 4.0 disks on the net for free? (at least on Usenet), saying "I don't need this any more, so feel free to use it, and here's the CD key....".
You bought a license to use it, and part of the agreement is probably that the license is non-transferable. That means you can't even give it away. I'd check with Apogee before you offer to give their software away on a public news group, even if it's an old version.
People not in the software business are often confused when they "buy" software. Rarely do you "buy the software", but only a license to "use" the software, based on the agreement that most people simply "click through" when installing it.
Let's say you buy a license to "XYZ", then give the disks to someone, who gives the disks to to yet someone else. Three people are running the SW on a single license. It's called theft, even if the three people don't use the same SW at the exact same time. The author of the software lost 2/3 of the license fee that they've earned.
You can give the disks to someone else, but you probably can't give away the license to use it.
That's why big vendors are locking the SW to a specific machine. People like Apogee don't have the code in place to do this, but giving away software outside of your license, is kind of like stealing candy bars at the local 7-11 because the person behind the counter can't see it, but in this case, the person behind the counter is the owner.
But the more I think about AZ, tying software licenses to machines is kind of unfair. System boards and hard drives can fail and when they do should I have to buy all new software? How is someone giving away an old copy of some software different than me giving a book which I have read to my friend? Should we not lend books to friends any more?
Not excited (no need to calm down), but a software developer for almost
30 years.
I really don't like it when someone, due to not reading the the agreement that they click "I agree to this" when installing SW, doesn't understand (or read) what they agree to.
It's theft in many cases when the disks are even just "given away"
And BTW, I am also a L3 (for a few years), and have used rocksim since my L1.
The problems that many have run into is that they don't set the CD (coificent of Drag) correctly. The default in RS used to be way off for most birds.
If Apogee still has a "shareware/limited" version available, try that too. (but check the CD setting!)
That's why the license agreement or "EULA" for the SW is important.
With SW, it can be installed for user "A" and the disks are given to user "B" and installed.
With a book, if user "A" gives the book to user "B", there's no way user "A" can still read the book! Not the same with software!
Basically, with SW, the user doesn't buy the book, but only the license to read the book. The Disks or CD are only the media on which the book is delivered, and not the rights to the content.
As far as switching MB's etc, software is evolving to the point where the point where the license can be transfered to the new HW, but is then disabled on the old HW. That's like "giving a book to a friend", but isn't widely used today.
In the real world, if someone gives/sells you a set of disks, it's kind of like xeroxing an entire book and giving the copy to a friend.
Tim VanMilligan did change the licensing scheme to Rocksim. They give you a licensing file that tags your installation. They don't mind if you use it on more than one machine for your own use. Or if you gork your machine and need to re-install. I have copies on a server and a laptop I use in the field. I'm the only one that uses it and I have not nor will I ever give it to anyone else to use on their own machine.
Point -->>> Drive around. Fly around. Walk around. Or... just grin and bear it, while you dole out the dough. Besides, New Jersey has some beautiful places to visit.
My point was you save squat. Fuel taxes in most states cover the cost of the highways, augmented by Federal taxes which also are taxing the fuel... something Jersey cannot get out of.
In New Jersey, the gas prices are lower becuase they have allowed raised costs in other areas to make up the difference... like selling the highway maintenance, controll, and access to private entities, which creates a huge monopolistic channel for income... they more than recoup the costs of maintaining the highway.
Now, you save 10 cents... is that a significant drop in the fuel taxes that
*usually* were used to maintain highways? The drop should have been orders of magnitude higher... but then that is a very easy way to get *more* taxes out of the people, without them noticing the pain. !We get gas 10 cents cheaper! Hoorah! Selling fuel in Jersey must be a real cash cow...
But, New Jersey is not the only place this has happened. More and more places are requiring you to maintain a pocket full of coin and cash just to get from one place to another.
I keep saying that a politician could get elected in IL with a one issue campaign: put an end to our tollway ripoff. The roads were supposed to be free after the original bonds were paid off. But the burrocrats keep finding ways to make us keep paying and paying. The only solution to political lying is capital punishment.
If you're frustrated with high gas prices, take a look at the USA gas price map at
formatting link
Most of the midwest, except for IL and WI, have gas that is considerably cheaper than out west or northeast. When you see two states side by side with significant differences in gas prices, the difference is 100% politics.
Of course IL gas prices are highest around Chicago where I am. In my whole
5000 mile round trip to NARAM this year, the only place I saw gas prices higher than Chicago was the single gas station inside the Grand Canyon National Park, and perhaps the one outside Meteor Crater.
No, it is more like "Xeroxing" the book, and _you_ keep the "Xerox" copy, but give the original to the friend. I am basically agreeing with AZ, just turning it around a bit.
The copy is morally the illegal portion. Software companies have now written language that makes it illegal to give the "book" in whole or part, to the friend at all, whether or not you keep and use it, and whether or not you are trading money or other goods/services for it.
If people would always delete/stop usage of said software, then licensing transferral would not be such a big issue. But a significant enough portion of people do not maintain that kind of integrity with relation to software, using excuses like "M$ makes too much money anyway" or various other mis-guided thoughts and understandings; they do not actually complete the transfer.
That is why most companies made licensing NON-TRANSFERRABLE (it is usually displayed in upper case intentionally in the licensing agreements).
However, those terms can be legally moved and stretched, such as in the case when a company buys software, and then another company buys that company. There is still only one set of software in use, and the license has in effect been LEGALLY been transferred to another entity.
That is also why a company-owned license should NEVER have an individual's name in the registration, even if the software seems to tell you to. The name of the company *IS* the owning entity, and also is the company in question. In court, the company is the legal owner, an entity in and of itself, *especially* if the company is publicly owned, without a designated private or limited ownership. In the case of small private ownership, what name you put should be considered carefully, just in case you ever desire to sell the company and its' assets. I *would* put the name of the owner if it is a home-based sole proprietorship type business, as you can upgrade your equipment and software, and still move the old box into the ownership of the home for use by family, but you still cannot install a second copy using the same license on the new hardware, if you keep the existing box installed with that software.
However, the debate is still out on whether it is legal for a company to sell existing stock of software, even if it is unopened and unused. Parties on both sides of this issue wage very good arguments. It basically comes down to this: did the company pay full over-the-counter price for the software and then not open it, or did they purchase in volume discounted modes? It's all tied up in the shrink-wrap.
The software industry actually has more in common with the video/movie industry. It is illegal for you to rent a movie and then show it at a large party or gathering, or to keep passing it from house to house without those houses paying royalties to see it. The mentality is "just compensation". When the movie has been out long enough, the industry does not chase their rights as much, as they have made a significant profit from the idea and plot and act. Some movies tank, but not that many. That is why the video release is usually held while it plays in the higher-paying movies houses. But the common theme is this: it is illegal to make a copy of it at all, as that copy is by majority used for the sole purpose of piracy.
For me personally, it comes down to this: If it is something I will use, then I should pay for it. I should not expect to get someone elses work for free. I don't believe in getting something for nothing. There has to be balance in the transaction. But I also believe in willing proxy, where someone can make that balance for another, provided they purposefully and knowingly did it or allowed it; such as forgiving a debt, or buying something for someone else, or taking care of someone who is incapable of some real need either temporarily or permanently.
I drive through there on a regular basis. I don't go there to get gas.
Jersey drivers come ripping through my neighborhood & wear out my roads so it goes both ways.
Lastly, it was just a comment. I don't care about any of the seemimgly valid points you guys have made. If I cared about any of this crap, I'd tell everyone to stay out of NJ because Steve Dicker (rymes with Decker) get paid by (not works for) NJ DOT.
Absolutely, although there is not much call for NT 4.0 these days. It still does not make it right.
Life is too short to read that stuff. Still, I remember catching father installing some cheap simple software. He was on the phone with their tech support going through the installation step by agonizing step, and even read the license agreement back to the support guy.
Depends on "XYZ", but the odds are the author has already been fully compensated and only the publisher and distributors get cheated.
It's not like stealing candy bars at all. It is more like photocopying a journal article, and paying for the paper copies, but not sending the journal its fee.
Open source does not equal "free-ware"; it just means that you get the source code with whatever pricing and distribution terms the creator or owner allows.
That is just the *beginning* of the open source confusion. There are 4 or so semi-standards of open source licensing models that are main-stream, but not every open source vendor outfit offers in accordance to those licensing models.
I would not call that easier, productive, or logical...; it's just another paradigm... on a far more inconsistently defined model.
Even in the models that more closely resemble "freeware", the concept only works well when those who use the software contribute to the effort.
Bottom line: one still should read the license agreement.
2nd bottom line: one should still not expect to get something for nothing. If one expects others to provide the solution and do not compensate that community in some equitable fashion, whether by time, code, feedback, and/or etcetera, then that entity is a drain on that community. Laziness, "something for nothing", theft of code or concept, or even purchasing the rights to the originating company (see Oracle buys InnoDB), has killed more than few "open source" projects.
So we are still set with the same needs and issues whether or not you have proprietary or opensource.
Not at all. This is not something merely "read"... it is accomplishing work on the persons' behalf... a license to use a tool... something more akin to a rental fee of the tractor that pulls your trailer and gets one from point a to b.
To fit your analogy, one would turn and reprint the written work or article, and claim the article as their "owned" work, without giving the originator due credit... plagiarism.
If all software was Open Source, things like Rocksim wouldn't get developed. I have no doubt that Apogee viewed it as a product they could develop, sell the license, and make money.
By ignoring licensing, you're not only screwing the "distributor", but also the person/company responsible for the development of that software. It's theft.
"Open source" is nice, but in reality, most software isn't "open" and "free".
I've developed various apps for Linux, and you can BUY the license from me to use them! Even though Linux is "open", that doesn't mean that all that runs on that system is also "free".
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.