why hide the binaries

[John Esak]

oops!  Sorry. I cross-posted this from the beta list, sorry.
John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces+john=valar.com at lists.celestial.com]On
> Behalf Of John Esak
> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 6:41 PM
> To: Fplist (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: why hide the binaries
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: joe at magnatechonline.com [mailto:joe at magnatechonline.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 2:31 PM
> > To: Kenneth Brody
> > Cc: alpha at fptech.com
> > Subject: Re: why hide the binaries
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 01:59:27PM -0400, Kenneth Brody wrote:
> > > Quoting Joe Chasan (Thu, 20 Jul 2006 13:38:54 -0400):
> > >
> > > > now that one needs valid license file to get fp to run, why hide the
> > > > 5.6 binaries behind the browser login scripts?
> > > >
> > > > i am at a customer now with 5.6.2 and license server
> failures.  i want
> > > > to put in 5.6.3 but have no PC's here to login to website,
> but i can,
> > > > through a series of ssh hops, get to a box with outgoing ftp
> > to pick it
> > > > up if that were possible - and it then occured to me - why are the
> > > > binaries still cloaked if they are useless without proper licensing
> > > > anyway - can't we just have them somewhere accssible via
> ftp or sftp?
> > >
> > > A valid point.  I have several licensed programs that allow you to get
> > > the latest versions via anonymous ftp, since you can't use
> them without
> > > a license anyway.  (Well, actually, some of them require that
> you go to
> > > a web site and enter your registration information first, but
> then they
> > > simply take you to a web page with an anon-ftp URL to download it.  I
> > > just bookmark the URL for future reference.)
> > >
> > > The only thing I see that fPTech "loses" is the tracking of who has
> > > downloaded the latest versions.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what should be included.  Should it be a full install
> > > image?  An ISO image?  Individual executables?
> >
> > full install & ISO
> > if someone is technical enough to know they they need individual
> > executable
> > and knows how to install it (e.g. where to put, set perms,
> etc), they can
> > probably pick it out of the install image themselves.
> >
> > -joe
> >
> > --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---
> > -Joe Chasan-                      Magnatech Business Systems, Inc.
> > joe at magnatechonline.com           Hicksville, NY - USA
> > http://www.MagnatechOnline.com    Tel.(516) 931-4444/Fax.(516) 931-1264
>
> I agree... it would be kind of odd to just need dclerk or dclerk.exe or
> dxmaint or dxmaint.exe without needing all the rest.
>
> As to losing who downloaded what... that is a concern. But, how does that
> really help you out now? Do you ever use this info for anything??
>
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list