To all suggesting people go buy a new CD-ROM to run N4:

Aside from a big raspberry... Two questions... 1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of course not. 2) Why are we only hearing about this with N4 and not any other current release racing sim or game? EA has used copy protection for quite a while, but we don't see the problems. I know some other non-racing titles have issues, but, to put it bluntly, I don't care about those games. As I have stated before, there is a specific problem with N4 and it needs to be addressed at point of sale. Fortunately, I bought my N4 at an EB. I picked up a second copy from another batch at an EB store across town yesterday. It installs and runs perfectly, whereas my original one had serious problems. I wouldn't have considered replacing a relatively recent Panasonic DVD player under any circumstances anyway, but I think that others may be led to go buy CD-ROMs just to get the game to run. This is a gigantic waste of money and lets Sierra off the hook for either poor quality pressings of the CDs or for using a botched copy protection scheme. N4, GPL, etc. cost enough money to upgrade CPU, memory, video, sound...you shouldn't encourage people to spend money to replace a ROM drive that runs everything else fine. I'll be returning my first N4 at the first opportunity--as a defective disk. Marc. -- **************************************************************************** Marc Collins [email hidden] Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change to take effect. Reboot now? ****************************************************************************

In article <NJwj6.244917$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > 2) Why are we only hearing about this with N4 and not any other current > release racing sim or game. I had it happen with Diablo II on my Creative DVD. The DVD would not work after many attempts to install and run DII. I sent it off to be fixed, but it was not under warranty and it was going to cost too much to fix. I bought a burner to replace it.

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > Marc. > > -- > **************************************************************************** > Marc Collins > [email hidden] > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > to take effect. Reboot now? > **************************************************************************** > > >

MRSisson -- LOAD "GPL",8,1 RUN

> I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > improve their copy-protection or lose sales. yeah, but CloneCD still works fine on N4 out of the box, so their plan didn't work. What has CP done for Sierra, except to piss off paying customers? At this moment, one could download a no-cd crack, a fixed .exe that allows one to play with a burned CD, burn a copy with CloneCD, or just dnload the whole friggin game from a warez site. It looks to me like the warez d00dz are having fun playing N4, and many customers who actually bought the game, are not.

Ok, a little OT but GP2 "way back in the day" had a form of copy protection... so that isn't really a new thing that should cause problems. Marc Collins <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NJwj6.244917$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Aside from a big raspberry... > > Two questions... > > 1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of course > not. > > 2) Why are we only hearing about this with N4 and not any other current > release racing sim or game? EA has used copy protection for quite a

while, > but we don't see the problems. I know some other non-racing titles have > issues, but, to put it bluntly, I don't care about those games. > > As I have stated before, there is a specific problem with N4 and it needsto

Quoted text (8 lines)

> be addressed at point of sale. > > Fortunately, I bought my N4 at an EB. I picked up a second copy from > another batch at an EB store across town yesterday. It installs and runs > perfectly, whereas my original one had serious problems. > > I wouldn't have considered replacing a relatively recent Panasonic DVD > player under any circumstances anyway, but I think that others may be led

to > go buy CD-ROMs just to get the game to run. This is a gigantic waste of > money and lets Sierra off the hook for either poor quality pressings ofthe

Quoted text (7 lines)

> CDs or for using a botched copy protection scheme. > > N4, GPL, etc. cost enough money to upgrade CPU, memory, video, sound...you > shouldn't encourage people to spend money to replace a ROM drive that runs > everything else fine. > > I'll be returning my first N4 at the first opportunity--as a defective

disk. > > Marc. > > -- >**************************************************************************** > Marc Collins > [email hidden] > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > to take effect. Reboot now? >**************************************************************************** > > >

"rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins"<[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > >Aside from a big raspberry... > > > >Two questions... > > > >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > >prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of

course

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >not. > > > > I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > improve their copy-protection or lose sales.

Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out before Sierra even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect their software. The ONLY thing they have limited is the ability to play online, and thats only due to the software key stored on their servers. Although you can still play online other places besides Sierras servers.

You would be wrong, the game was sitting on the shelves before the warez version of N4 was out. I love the whole cd-key scheme in games. I wish more games would use it for online play. I think that is a bigger stopper of piracy than anything. Having to have a legit cd-key to play online is what causes alot of people to actually go out and buy a game. Half-Life and Q3 really showed that. "Mr. Nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DeAj6.136030$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Aside from a big raspberry... > > > > > >Two questions... > > > > > >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > > >prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of > course > > >not. > > > > > > > I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > > improve their copy-protection or lose sales. > > Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out before

Sierra

Quoted text (8 lines)

> even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect their > software. The ONLY thing they have limited is the ability to play online, > and thats only due to the software key stored on their servers. > > Although you can still play online other places besides Sierras servers. > > >

I have a "legit" CD key and I cannot play on line. I can't play at all! It might have worked for Half Life and Q3 but it doesn't work for N4. Sierra offers a 90 day money back guarantee which I am going to take advantage of and would suggest that everyone who cannot get the game to play, do the same. I just bought my Yamaha CDR/RW a few months ago and I'm not about to buy another. There is nothing wrong with it, why should I replace it? It will be a cold day in hell before Sierra sees any money from me. -- Alastair Ingram www.saxlessons.com "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:96mk9q$12tq$[email hidden]... > You would be wrong, the game was sitting on the shelves before the warez > version of N4 was out. > > I love the whole cd-key scheme in games. I wish more games would use it for > online play. I think that is a bigger stopper of piracy than anything. > > Having to have a legit cd-key to play online is what causes alot of people > to actually go out and buy a game. Half-Life and Q3 really showed that. > > > "Mr. Nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:DeAj6.136030$[email hidden]... > > > > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > >Aside from a big raspberry... > > > > > > > >Two questions... > > > > > > > >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > > > >prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of > > course > > > >not. > > > > > > > > > > I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > > > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > > > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > > > improve their copy-protection or lose sales. > > > > Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out before > Sierra > > even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect their > > software. The ONLY thing they have limited is the ability to play online, > > and thats only due to the software key stored on their servers. > > > > Although you can still play online other places besides Sierras servers. > > > > > > > >

"Mr. Nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:DeAj6.136030$[email hidden]... > > Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out beforeSierra

Quoted text (7 lines)

> even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect their > software. The ONLY thing they have limited is the ability to play online, > and thats only due to the software key stored on their servers. > > Although you can still play online other places besides Sierras servers. > >

I think you would be very hard pressed to find anyone that offered a Warez version before N4 hit the streets. Don Burnette

Just so I understand, the biggest reason folks are not being able to run it is by running it in their cd-rw drives? I installed a Plextor 8/24/32 CD-RW several months ago, and not once thought about using it as my primary cd-rom drive. I left my plain jane vanilla cd-rom drive in my machine for those purposes, cd-rw's tend to have a shelf life anyways usually determined by the number of discs you burn - I don't want to be putting more wear on mine than necessary. I only use my Plextor for burning cd's, all my games and so forth go through my regular cd-rom. I guess that's why I never have problems to date with the copy protection schemes. -- Don Burnette "Alastair Ingram" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:D7Bj6.13785$[email hidden]... > I have a "legit" CD key and I cannot play on line. I can't play at all! It > might have worked for Half Life and Q3 but it doesn't work for N4. Sierra > offers a 90 day money back guarantee which I am going to take advantage of > and would suggest that everyone who cannot get the game to play, do the > same. I just bought my Yamaha CDR/RW a few months ago and I'm not about to > buy another. There is nothing wrong with it, why should I replace it? It > will be a cold day in hell before Sierra sees any money from me. > > -- > Alastair Ingram > www.saxlessons.com > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:96mk9q$12tq$[email hidden]... > > You would be wrong, the game was sitting on the shelves before the warez > > version of N4 was out. > > > > I love the whole cd-key scheme in games. I wish more games would use it > for > > online play. I think that is a bigger stopper of piracy than anything. > > > > Having to have a legit cd-key to play online is what causes alot of people > > to actually go out and buy a game. Half-Life and Q3 really showed that. > > > > > > "Mr. Nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:DeAj6.136030$[email hidden]... > > > > > > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins" > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >Aside from a big raspberry... > > > > > > > > > >Two questions... > > > > > > > > > >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > > > > >prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of > > > course > > > > >not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > > > > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > > > > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > > > > improve their copy-protection or lose sales. > > > > > > Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out before > > Sierra > > > even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect their > > > software. The ONLY thing they have limited is the ability to play > online, > > > and thats only due to the software key stored on their servers. > > > > > > Although you can still play online other places besides Sierras servers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

I respect your right to disagree, but I am not sure that you get my points since each one seems to be ignored in favour of your perspective that has been posted before. The bottom line is that no one should have to upgrade/change/add an otherwise functioning ROM drive to run a game designed to run on a ROM drive. It is a completely different point than upgrading all of the rest of the hardware to "keep up" or to make the game run better, which is inevitable. I wasn't accusing Sierra of promoting this approach--I read it here from people posting in r.a.s. Copy protection schemes--admittedly needed--cannot and never will be so stringent as to prevent the average person from using the product. I would love to hear a developer or publisher agree with your logic that preventing casual copying is more important than preventing interested, paying, potentially repeat customers from using the product. I just proved that at least one of the problems was due to a bad pressing, since the second disk works perfectly on the same system in the same DVD drive that first one failed. I am suggesting a bad pressing because I can only assume that the second disk also contains the copy protection scheme. I did not return the game, as many have suggested. What a ludicrous approach. That leaves the person with no N4 to use. I am returning my unneeded, malfunctioning first copy since I now have a second working one to use--the whole point of buying it in the first place. Marc. "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins"<[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > >Aside from a big raspberry... > > > >Two questions... > > > >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > >prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of

course

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >not. > > > > I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > improve their copy-protection or lose sales. > > [snip] > > >As I have stated before, there is a specific problem with N4 and it needs

to

Quoted text (34 lines)

> >be addressed at point of sale. > > > > It -is- addressed, Marc. If it don't work... return it. > > Or, alternatively, if you chose to buy it where it couldn't > be returned, then use Sierra's money-back guarantee. > > >I wouldn't have considered replacing a relatively recent Panasonic DVD > >player under any circumstances anyway, > > You don't have to -replace- your DVD player with a new CD drive. You just > add the CD drive to your existing system. Of course you don't have > to do anything at all to your hardware if you don't want to. > > > but I think that others may be led to > >go buy CD-ROMs just to get the game to run. This is a gigantic waste of > >money > > I guess that depends on the user. If it is worth an additional 40 bucks to > them to be able to run this sim, then so be it. You wouldn't be > upset about users reporting that they bought another stick of RAM, > or a new SB Live.. > > >and lets Sierra off the hook for either poor quality pressings of the > >CDs or for using a botched copy protection scheme. > > > > I don't know about quality of the CD pressings. What most of us > have been discussing is the copy-protection issue. > > Different stuff. > > >N4, GPL, etc. cost enough money to upgrade CPU, memory, video,

sound...you > >shouldn't encourage people to spend money to replace a ROM drive thatruns

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >everything else fine. > > > > They aren't encouraging anyone to purchase a new CD drive, Marc. > There has not been a single report, here, of Sierra mentioning that. > > That's a choice that the user has to make for themselves.... > > >I'll be returning my first N4 at the first opportunity--as a defective

disk. > > > > ..just like you're doing. > > >Marc. >

"Michael R Sisson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MPG.14f87c792f7c3b99896b1@news...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> In article <NJwj6.244917$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] says... > > > 2) Why are we only hearing about this with N4 and not any other current > > release racing sim or game. > > I had it happen with Diablo II on my Creative DVD. The DVD would not work > after many attempts to install and run DII. I sent it off to be fixed, > but it was not under warranty and it was going to cost too much to fix. I > bought a burner to replace it. >

Add Snooker to this list. I terrible game with a terrible copy-protection scheme-- what a waste. Alanb

I have never heard of "shelf life" for a CDR/RW drive. If you have a quality CDR/RW drive, I see no reason to not use it. The problem is NOT with my system. The problem is with the Sierra copy protection scheme. Otherwise, how do you explain all the other folks, with all their different systems, having problems with this? Besides, I only have two bays on my Dell box. One is for the CDR/RW and the other is for my SB Live! control panel. -- Alastair Ingram www.saxlessons.com "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wlBj6.293587$[email hidden]... > Just so I understand, the biggest reason folks are not being able to run it > is by running it in their cd-rw drives? > I installed a Plextor 8/24/32 CD-RW several months ago, and not once thought > about using it as my primary cd-rom drive. I left my plain jane vanilla > cd-rom drive in my machine for those purposes, cd-rw's tend to have a shelf > life anyways usually determined by the number of discs you burn - I don't > want to be putting more wear on mine than necessary. > I only use my Plextor for burning cd's, all my games and so forth go through > my regular cd-rom. > I guess that's why I never have problems to date with the copy protection > schemes. > -- > Don Burnette > > > "Alastair Ingram" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:D7Bj6.13785$[email hidden]... > > I have a "legit" CD key and I cannot play on line. I can't play at all! It > > might have worked for Half Life and Q3 but it doesn't work for N4. Sierra > > offers a 90 day money back guarantee which I am going to take advantage of > > and would suggest that everyone who cannot get the game to play, do the > > same. I just bought my Yamaha CDR/RW a few months ago and I'm not about to > > buy another. There is nothing wrong with it, why should I replace it? It > > will be a cold day in hell before Sierra sees any money from me. > > > > -- > > Alastair Ingram > > www.saxlessons.com > > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:96mk9q$12tq$[email hidden]... > > > You would be wrong, the game was sitting on the shelves before the warez > > > version of N4 was out. > > > > > > I love the whole cd-key scheme in games. I wish more games would use it > > for > > > online play. I think that is a bigger stopper of piracy than anything. > > > > > > Having to have a legit cd-key to play online is what causes alot of > people > > > to actually go out and buy a game. Half-Life and Q3 really showed that. > > > > > > > > > "Mr. Nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:DeAj6.136030$[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins" > > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >Aside from a big raspberry... > > > > > > > > > > > >Two questions... > > > > > > > > > > > >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme > that > > > > > >prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of > > > > course > > > > > >not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > > > > > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > > > > > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > > > > > improve their copy-protection or lose sales. > > > > > > > > Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out before > > > Sierra > > > > even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect > their > > > > software. The ONLY thing they have limited is the ability to play > > online, > > > > and thats only due to the software key stored on their servers. > > > > > > > > Although you can still play online other places besides Sierras > servers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Sure there is, just read any of the cd-rw forums and you'll see folks talking about how many burns they hope to get out of their cd-rw's. Granted, for us casual users it probably wouldn't mean a lot - but I still didn't want to use my burner as my good ole day to day cd-rom. -- Don Burnette "Alastair Ingram" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bhDj6.977$[email hidden]... > I have never heard of "shelf life" for a CDR/RW drive. If you have a quality > CDR/RW drive, I see no reason to not use it. The problem is NOT with my > system. The problem is with the Sierra copy protection scheme. Otherwise, > how do you explain all the other folks, with all their different systems, > having problems with this? Besides, I only have two bays on my Dell box. One > is for the CDR/RW and the other is for my SB Live! control panel. > > -- > Alastair Ingram > www.saxlessons.com > "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:wlBj6.293587$[email hidden]... > > Just so I understand, the biggest reason folks are not being able to run > it > > is by running it in their cd-rw drives? > > I installed a Plextor 8/24/32 CD-RW several months ago, and not once > thought > > about using it as my primary cd-rom drive. I left my plain jane vanilla > > cd-rom drive in my machine for those purposes, cd-rw's tend to have a > shelf > > life anyways usually determined by the number of discs you burn - I don't > > want to be putting more wear on mine than necessary. > > I only use my Plextor for burning cd's, all my games and so forth go > through > > my regular cd-rom. > > I guess that's why I never have problems to date with the copy protection > > schemes. > > -- > > Don Burnette > > > > > > "Alastair Ingram" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:D7Bj6.13785$[email hidden]... > > > I have a "legit" CD key and I cannot play on line. I can't play at all! > It > > > might have worked for Half Life and Q3 but it doesn't work for N4. > Sierra > > > offers a 90 day money back guarantee which I am going to take advantage > of > > > and would suggest that everyone who cannot get the game to play, do the > > > same. I just bought my Yamaha CDR/RW a few months ago and I'm not about > to > > > buy another. There is nothing wrong with it, why should I replace it? It > > > will be a cold day in hell before Sierra sees any money from me. > > > > > > -- > > > Alastair Ingram > > > www.saxlessons.com > > > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:96mk9q$12tq$[email hidden]... > > > > You would be wrong, the game was sitting on the shelves before the > warez > > > > version of N4 was out. > > > > > > > > I love the whole cd-key scheme in games. I wish more games would use > it > > > for > > > > online play. I think that is a bigger stopper of piracy than > anything. > > > > > > > > Having to have a legit cd-key to play online is what causes alot of > > people > > > > to actually go out and buy a game. Half-Life and Q3 really showed > that. > > > > > > > > > > > > "Mr. Nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:DeAj6.136030$[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > > > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins" > > > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >Aside from a big raspberry... > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Two questions... > > > > > > > > > > > > > >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme > > that > > > > > > >prevents potential paying customers from running their > product...of > > > > > course > > > > > > >not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > > > > > > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > > > > > > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > > > > > > improve their copy-protection or lose sales. > > > > > > > > > > Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out > before > > > > Sierra > > > > > even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect > > their > > > > > software. The ONLY thing they have limited is the ability to play > > > online, > > > > > and thats only due to the software key stored on their servers. > > > > > > > > > > Although you can still play online other places besides Sierras > > servers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Seems publishers are trying to get their disks printed cheaper and cheaper these days. I had *two* copies of Tomb Raider 5 explode in the CD drive after Christmas. Could be something to do with the poor financial state of the industry at the moment. "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NJwj6.244917$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Aside from a big raspberry... > > Two questions... > > 1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of course > not. > > 2) Why are we only hearing about this with N4 and not any other current > release racing sim or game? EA has used copy protection for quite a

while, > but we don't see the problems. I know some other non-racing titles have > issues, but, to put it bluntly, I don't care about those games. > > As I have stated before, there is a specific problem with N4 and it needsto

Quoted text (8 lines)

> be addressed at point of sale. > > Fortunately, I bought my N4 at an EB. I picked up a second copy from > another batch at an EB store across town yesterday. It installs and runs > perfectly, whereas my original one had serious problems. > > I wouldn't have considered replacing a relatively recent Panasonic DVD > player under any circumstances anyway, but I think that others may be led

to > go buy CD-ROMs just to get the game to run. This is a gigantic waste of > money and lets Sierra off the hook for either poor quality pressings ofthe

Quoted text (7 lines)

> CDs or for using a botched copy protection scheme. > > N4, GPL, etc. cost enough money to upgrade CPU, memory, video, sound...you > shouldn't encourage people to spend money to replace a ROM drive that runs > everything else fine. > > I'll be returning my first N4 at the first opportunity--as a defective

disk. > > Marc.

You are having a problem with the CD, not the cd-key So saying that the cd-key does not work for Sierra has nothing to do with your problem. The cd-key portion of the program works perfectly, its the copy protection on the CD itself that some people are having problems with "Alastair Ingram" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:D7Bj6.13785$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> I have a "legit" CD key and I cannot play on line. I can't play at all! It > might have worked for Half Life and Q3 but it doesn't work for N4. Sierra > offers a 90 day money back guarantee which I am going to take advantage of > and would suggest that everyone who cannot get the game to play, do the > same. I just bought my Yamaha CDR/RW a few months ago and I'm not about to > buy another. There is nothing wrong with it, why should I replace it? It > will be a cold day in hell before Sierra sees any money from me. > > -- > Alastair Ingram > www.saxlessons.com > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:96mk9q$12tq$[email hidden]... > > You would be wrong, the game was sitting on the shelves before the warez > > version of N4 was out. > > > > I love the whole cd-key scheme in games. I wish more games would use it > for > > online play. I think that is a bigger stopper of piracy than anything. > > > > Having to have a legit cd-key to play online is what causes alot of

people

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > to actually go out and buy a game. Half-Life and Q3 really showed that. > > > > > > "Mr. Nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:DeAj6.136030$[email hidden]... > > > > > > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins" > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >Aside from a big raspberry... > > > > > > > > > >Two questions... > > > > > > > > > >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme

that

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > > >prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of > > > course > > > > >not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > > > > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > > > > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > > > > improve their copy-protection or lose sales. > > > > > > Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out before > > Sierra > > > even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect

their > > > software. The ONLY thing they have limited is the ability to play > online, > > > and thats only due to the software key stored on their servers. > > > > > > Although you can still play online other places besides Sierrasservers.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

"Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wlBj6.293587$[email hidden]... > Just so I understand, the biggest reason folks are not being able to runit > is by running it in their cd-rw drives? > I installed a Plextor 8/24/32 CD-RW several months ago, and not oncethought > about using it as my primary cd-rom drive. I left my plain jane vanilla > cd-rom drive in my machine for those purposes, cd-rw's tend to have ashelf > life anyways usually determined by the number of discs you burn - I don't > want to be putting more wear on mine than necessary. > I only use my Plextor for burning cd's, all my games and so forth gothrough > my regular cd-rom. > I guess that's why I never have problems to date with the copy protection > schemes. All due respect, but that's faulty reasoning. Many people -chose- CDRW drives as their primary drives, and don't have a second CD drive. CDRW drives are not as delicate as you make them out to be. CDRW drives are meant to be used for multiple purposes, not the least of which is the simple process of reading a CD. The problem people are having is having their N4 CD's read. The fault does not lie with the hardware, but with the screwed up methods that copy protection schemes such as SecuROM use. Essentially, they generate intentional physical faults on the CD that should never be there. To blame that on Plextor, or Toshiba, etc, is just plain silly.

I wasn't laying the blame on Plextor, or anything for that matter. Just trying to understand where the main problem lies, and expressing that obviously the reason I was having no problems is because in addition to my cd-rw, i have a regular cd-rom that I use for everyday gaming use. It was just an observation. -- Don Burnette "Jeff Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:96ngl9$l41$[email hidden]... > > "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:wlBj6.293587$[email hidden]... > > Just so I understand, the biggest reason folks are not being able to run > it > > is by running it in their cd-rw drives? > > I installed a Plextor 8/24/32 CD-RW several months ago, and not once > thought > > about using it as my primary cd-rom drive. I left my plain jane vanilla > > cd-rom drive in my machine for those purposes, cd-rw's tend to have a > shelf > > life anyways usually determined by the number of discs you burn - I don't > > want to be putting more wear on mine than necessary. > > I only use my Plextor for burning cd's, all my games and so forth go > through > > my regular cd-rom. > > I guess that's why I never have problems to date with the copy protection > > schemes. > > All due respect, but that's faulty reasoning. Many people -chose- CDRW > drives as their primary drives, and don't have a second CD drive. CDRW > drives are not as delicate as you make them out to be. CDRW drives are meant > to be used for multiple purposes, not the least of which is the simple > process of reading a CD. The problem people are having is having their N4 > CD's read. The fault does not lie with the hardware, but with the screwed up > methods that copy protection schemes such as SecuROM use. Essentially, they > generate intentional physical faults on the CD that should never be there. > To blame that on Plextor, or Toshiba, etc, is just plain silly. > >

> Sure there is, just read any of the cd-rw forums and you'll see folks > talking about how many burns they hope to get out of their cd-rw's. That's just plain nonsense. > for us casual users it probably wouldn't mean a lot - but I still didn't > want to use my burner as my good ole day to day cd-rom. I can just about guarantee you that you put your main CD drive through much more strain than all but the most active CD burners do with their CDRW drives. There is not some mystical and delicate thing that lies beneath the hood of CDRW drives, they use lasers to write with, just the same as your reader does to read with. You mention that you have a Plextor 8/4/32 drive (same as me) .. you do know what the "32" is for right? It means the drive is intended to -read- CD's at 32x speed. Absolutely no differently than any other CDROM drive. Besides, most of the posts I've seen complaining about failed N4 reads have to do with DVD drives. Should they only use those drives to play DVD's?

Actually, I am like Don.. I do not like to use my Burner to do anything but Burn CDs Think about it.. EVERYTHING has a lifespan to it.. you may not know what it is, but it has one. Your monitor may last for a total of 1500 hours, your cd-rom may work for 1000 hours before it dies.. you never know. Anything can and will break eventually. Heck, if you are unlucky.. it may have a life of only a few hundred hours of use. You just never know. My reasoning is why should I put more wear and tear into my Burner than I need to? I would much rather pay $40 for a 50x cd-rom that can do all the grunt work at a fraction of the price and do it faster. "Jeff Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:96nh1i$tdn$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > Sure there is, just read any of the cd-rw forums and you'll see folks > > talking about how many burns they hope to get out of their cd-rw's. > > That's just plain nonsense. > > > for us casual users it probably wouldn't mean a lot - but I still didn't > > want to use my burner as my good ole day to day cd-rom. > > I can just about guarantee you that you put your main CD drive through

much > more strain than all but the most active CD burners do with their CDRW > drives. There is not some mystical and delicate thing that lies beneaththe > hood of CDRW drives, they use lasers to write with, just the same as your > reader does to read with. > > You mention that you have a Plextor 8/4/32 drive (same as me) .. you doknow > what the "32" is for right? It means the drive is intended to -read- CD'sat > 32x speed. Absolutely no differently than any other CDROM drive. > > Besides, most of the posts I've seen complaining about failed N4 readshave > to do with DVD drives. Should they only use those drives to play DVD's? > >

"Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:96nrev$ul8$[email hidden]... > Actually, I am like Don.. I do not like to use my Burner to do anythingbut > Burn CDs > > Think about it.. EVERYTHING has a lifespan to it.. you may not know whatit

Quoted text (8 lines)

> is, but it has one. Your monitor may last for a total of 1500 hours, your > cd-rom may work for 1000 hours before it dies.. you never know. Anything > can and will break eventually. Heck, if you are unlucky.. it may have a > life of only a few hundred hours of use. You just never know. > > My reasoning is why should I put more wear and tear into my Burner than I > need to? I would much rather pay $40 for a 50x cd-rom that can do all the > grunt work at a fraction of the price and do it faster.

I can understand your angle, but I still feel the reasoning is flawed. I have two drives myself, a Toshiba DVD, and a Plextor CDRW. I use the Toshiba for all installations, normal reading etc. But .. my point is, that it really makes no difference which one you use. They both serve as readers, they should both work the same for that purpose. Before I got my DVD drive, I used the Plextor for everything, reading, writing, and doing the dishes ... and guess what .. it survived! I've never had a single problem out of it, and it's still going strong, hundreds of burns later. I used to know this guy back in the early 90's that wouldn't let you put a floppy disk in his floppy drive if it had a hand-written label (he was afraid that the ink would rub off in the drive and ruin it or something). You guys being afraid to use your CDRW for reading CD's remind me of that guy :) Just a little too paranoid. C'mon guys, these things have a MTBF rating in the thousands of hours, they aren't delicate flowers :) Hell, if my Plextor 8432 broke, I'd just use it as an excuse to buy one of those new Plextor 16x burners!

Interesting, I've got a HP CDR-W and a 52X Cdrom and never had a problem. Even in testing i switched them back and forth with the N4 cd and didn't have a problem. Is this brand specific maybe. -- Mike Grandy Precision Racing www.precision-racing.com "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 22:48:22 GMT, "Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > >Add Snooker to this list. I terrible game with a terrible copy-protection > >scheme-- what a waste. > > So you've had problems with other copy-protection schemes on your > system? >

So let me get this straight. The need for copy protection increases in proportion to the total number of sales, right? The bigger the potential market, the greater the need for some unbreakable encryption scheme. Which, I suppose, is why GPL was offered with no copy protection whatsoever. <g> On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 19:01:34 -0600, rrevved <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (31 lines)

>On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 21:17:28 GMT, "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote: > >>I would >>love to hear a developer or publisher agree with your logic that preventing >>casual copying is more important than preventing interested, paying, >>potentially repeat customers from using the product. > >Marc, that is precisely what the publisher would say. > >They are applying copy-protection to prevent -casual- copying >by a zillion users. They know that there are a small percentage >of cd-roms that will have problems with the scheme, so they >offer a money-back guarantee to customers that own those cd-roms. > >I'm pretty sure that publishers would like to not spend ANY >money on expensive copy-protection schemes, but they would >expose themselves to millions of dollars in lost sales, and the >stockholders of the company would kick the execs out on their >asses. > >As to your allusion to ... > > 'interested, paying, potentially repeat customers' > >..let me say this. -All- paying customers meet that criteria. >You, me and the guy who buys it because the box has cool >pictures on it. The 1,000,000 buyers that will have no >problem and the 10,000 who will. > >You do the math. >

Remove "hi" from address or it will bounce....

Its not about being scared.. I have had about 6 burners in my life. My first one costing me $600. Ever hear of people using Tape Rewinders for the VCR? That is the same reason I use a normal cd-rom for my server machine (the one that has the Burner). My normal cd-rom is faster, cheaper (in case something does happen) and allows me to do cd-to-cd copies. If that is flawed logic, sorry.. but you are not the one that owns my machine so to be honest, my logic is the only one that matters on my machine :) "Jeff Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:96nuap$5gu$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:96nrev$ul8$[email hidden]... > > Actually, I am like Don.. I do not like to use my Burner to do anything > but > > Burn CDs > > > > Think about it.. EVERYTHING has a lifespan to it.. you may not know what > it > > is, but it has one. Your monitor may last for a total of 1500 hours,

your > > cd-rom may work for 1000 hours before it dies.. you never know.Anything > > can and will break eventually. Heck, if you are unlucky.. it may have a > > life of only a few hundred hours of use. You just never know. > > > > My reasoning is why should I put more wear and tear into my Burner thanI > > need to? I would much rather pay $40 for a 50x cd-rom that can do allthe > > grunt work at a fraction of the price and do it faster. > > I can understand your angle, but I still feel the reasoning is flawed. I > have two drives myself, a Toshiba DVD, and a Plextor CDRW. I use theToshiba > for all installations, normal reading etc. But .. my point is, that it > really makes no difference which one you use. They both serve as readers, > they should both work the same for that purpose. > > Before I got my DVD drive, I used the Plextor for everything, reading, > writing, and doing the dishes ... and guess what .. it survived! I'venever

Quoted text (16 lines)

> had a single problem out of it, and it's still going strong, hundreds of > burns later. > > I used to know this guy back in the early 90's that wouldn't let you put a > floppy disk in his floppy drive if it had a hand-written label (he was > afraid that the ink would rub off in the drive and ruin it or something). > You guys being afraid to use your CDRW for reading CD's remind me of that > guy :) Just a little too paranoid. C'mon guys, these things have a MTBF > rating in the thousands of hours, they aren't delicate flowers :) > > Hell, if my Plextor 8432 broke, I'd just use it as an excuse to buy one of > those new Plextor 16x burners! > > > >

You would have to be burning CD's all day long as a business to worry about wearing out the drive. If you were doing that, the cost of a new CD-RW would be insignificant. Marc. "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:96nrev$ul8$[email hidden]... > Actually, I am like Don.. I do not like to use my Burner to do anythingbut > Burn CDs > > Think about it.. EVERYTHING has a lifespan to it.. you may not know whatit

Quoted text (19 lines)

> is, but it has one. Your monitor may last for a total of 1500 hours, your > cd-rom may work for 1000 hours before it dies.. you never know. Anything > can and will break eventually. Heck, if you are unlucky.. it may have a > life of only a few hundred hours of use. You just never know. > > My reasoning is why should I put more wear and tear into my Burner than I > need to? I would much rather pay $40 for a 50x cd-rom that can do all the > grunt work at a fraction of the price and do it faster. > > > "Jeff Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:96nh1i$tdn$[email hidden]... > > > > > Sure there is, just read any of the cd-rw forums and you'll see folks > > > talking about how many burns they hope to get out of their cd-rw's. > > > > That's just plain nonsense. > > > > > for us casual users it probably wouldn't mean a lot - but I still

didn't

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > want to use my burner as my good ole day to day cd-rom. > > > > I can just about guarantee you that you put your main CD drive through > much > > more strain than all but the most active CD burners do with their CDRW > > drives. There is not some mystical and delicate thing that lies beneath > the > > hood of CDRW drives, they use lasers to write with, just the same as

your > > reader does to read with. > > > > You mention that you have a Plextor 8/4/32 drive (same as me) .. you do > know > > what the "32" is for right? It means the drive is intended to -read-CD's

Quoted text (10 lines)

> at > > 32x speed. Absolutely no differently than any other CDROM drive. > > > > Besides, most of the posts I've seen complaining about failed N4 reads > have > > to do with DVD drives. Should they only use those drives to play DVD's? > > > > > >

VCR rewinders help save a very complex mechanical device in the VCR from being taxed (although VCRs are now cheap enough to render them frivolous). There is no parallel in a ROM drive. Maybe we should go back to secondary video accelerators so we aren't wearing out our main video card when we use racing sims.?? Marc. "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:96oq9f$1a1e$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> Its not about being scared.. I have had about 6 burners in my life. My > first one costing me $600. > > Ever hear of people using Tape Rewinders for the VCR? That is the same > reason I use a normal cd-rom for my server machine (the one that has the > Burner). > > My normal cd-rom is faster, cheaper (in case something does happen) and > allows me to do cd-to-cd copies. If that is flawed logic, sorry.. but you > are not the one that owns my machine so to be honest, my logic is the only > one that matters on my machine :) > > > "Jeff Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:96nuap$5gu$[email hidden]... > > > > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:96nrev$ul8$[email hidden]... > > > Actually, I am like Don.. I do not like to use my Burner to do

anything > > but > > > Burn CDs > > > > > > Think about it.. EVERYTHING has a lifespan to it.. you may not knowwhat > > it > > > is, but it has one. Your monitor may last for a total of 1500 hours, > your > > > cd-rom may work for 1000 hours before it dies.. you never know. > Anything > > > can and will break eventually. Heck, if you are unlucky.. it may havea > > > life of only a few hundred hours of use. You just never know. > > > > > > My reasoning is why should I put more wear and tear into my Burnerthan

Quoted text (10 lines)

> I > > > need to? I would much rather pay $40 for a 50x cd-rom that can do all > the > > > grunt work at a fraction of the price and do it faster. > > > > I can understand your angle, but I still feel the reasoning is flawed. I > > have two drives myself, a Toshiba DVD, and a Plextor CDRW. I use the > Toshiba > > for all installations, normal reading etc. But .. my point is, that it > > really makes no difference which one you use. They both serve as

readers,

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > they should both work the same for that purpose. > > > > Before I got my DVD drive, I used the Plextor for everything, reading, > > writing, and doing the dishes ... and guess what .. it survived! I've > never > > had a single problem out of it, and it's still going strong, hundreds of > > burns later. > > > > I used to know this guy back in the early 90's that wouldn't let you put

a > > floppy disk in his floppy drive if it had a hand-written label (he was > > afraid that the ink would rub off in the drive and ruin it orsomething). > > You guys being afraid to use your CDRW for reading CD's remind me ofthat > > guy :) Just a little too paranoid. C'mon guys, these things have a MTBF > > rating in the thousands of hours, they aren't delicate flowers :) > > > > Hell, if my Plextor 8432 broke, I'd just use it as an excuse to buy oneof

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > those new Plextor 16x burners! > > > > > > > > > >

Yeah, but we can run N4. :) Sorry, couldn't resist. When I added my cdrw, I saw no reason to remove my cd rom drive - let it take all the abuse from day to day use of a cdrom drive. -- Don Burnette "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QbSj6.149307$[email hidden]... > VCR rewinders help save a very complex mechanical device in the VCR from > being taxed (although VCRs are now cheap enough to render them frivolous). > There is no parallel in a ROM drive. Maybe we should go back to secondary > video accelerators so we aren't wearing out our main video card when we use > racing sims.?? > > Marc. > > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:96oq9f$1a1e$[email hidden]... > > Its not about being scared.. I have had about 6 burners in my life. My > > first one costing me $600. > > > > Ever hear of people using Tape Rewinders for the VCR? That is the same > > reason I use a normal cd-rom for my server machine (the one that has the > > Burner). > > > > My normal cd-rom is faster, cheaper (in case something does happen) and > > allows me to do cd-to-cd copies. If that is flawed logic, sorry.. but you > > are not the one that owns my machine so to be honest, my logic is the only > > one that matters on my machine :) > > > > > > "Jeff Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:96nuap$5gu$[email hidden]... > > > > > > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:96nrev$ul8$[email hidden]... > > > > Actually, I am like Don.. I do not like to use my Burner to do > anything > > > but > > > > Burn CDs > > > > > > > > Think about it.. EVERYTHING has a lifespan to it.. you may not know > what > > > it > > > > is, but it has one. Your monitor may last for a total of 1500 hours, > > your > > > > cd-rom may work for 1000 hours before it dies.. you never know. > > Anything > > > > can and will break eventually. Heck, if you are unlucky.. it may have > a > > > > life of only a few hundred hours of use. You just never know. > > > > > > > > My reasoning is why should I put more wear and tear into my Burner > than > > I > > > > need to? I would much rather pay $40 for a 50x cd-rom that can do all > > the > > > > grunt work at a fraction of the price and do it faster. > > > > > > I can understand your angle, but I still feel the reasoning is flawed. I > > > have two drives myself, a Toshiba DVD, and a Plextor CDRW. I use the > > Toshiba > > > for all installations, normal reading etc. But .. my point is, that it > > > really makes no difference which one you use. They both serve as > readers, > > > they should both work the same for that purpose. > > > > > > Before I got my DVD drive, I used the Plextor for everything, reading, > > > writing, and doing the dishes ... and guess what .. it survived! I've > > never > > > had a single problem out of it, and it's still going strong, hundreds of > > > burns later. > > > > > > I used to know this guy back in the early 90's that wouldn't let you put > a > > > floppy disk in his floppy drive if it had a hand-written label (he was > > > afraid that the ink would rub off in the drive and ruin it or > something). > > > You guys being afraid to use your CDRW for reading CD's remind me of > that > > > guy :) Just a little too paranoid. C'mon guys, these things have a MTBF > > > rating in the thousands of hours, they aren't delicate flowers :) > > > > > > Hell, if my Plextor 8432 broke, I'd just use it as an excuse to buy one > of > > > those new Plextor 16x burners! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

I think that you might just have a bad CD! After reading the many problems posted here, I decided to buy N4, just yesterday, and give it a try anyway. Like you, I have a Yamaha CDR/RW (Model 6416, I think) which is perhaps only 6 months old, and N4 installed off of it this morning, and seem to be running fine. (Except that I can't seem to get the car up to full speed, but I'm sure that's a configuration issue.) I have not tried online yet, though. N4 wouldn't install using my (more recently purchased) Digital Research DVD drive, but the Yamaha burner did the trick. So, don't give up yet. Have you tried a full install? That would require less disc access, and might therefore make a difference. Or, perhaps a simple exchange of the CD where you bought it might do the trick! Good Luck! Alastair Ingram wrote:

Quoted text (60 lines)

> I have a "legit" CD key and I cannot play on line. I can't play at all! It > might have worked for Half Life and Q3 but it doesn't work for N4. Sierra > offers a 90 day money back guarantee which I am going to take advantage of > and would suggest that everyone who cannot get the game to play, do the > same. I just bought my Yamaha CDR/RW a few months ago and I'm not about to > buy another. There is nothing wrong with it, why should I replace it? It > will be a cold day in hell before Sierra sees any money from me. > > -- > Alastair Ingram > www.saxlessons.com > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:96mk9q$12tq$[email hidden]... > > You would be wrong, the game was sitting on the shelves before the warez > > version of N4 was out. > > > > I love the whole cd-key scheme in games. I wish more games would use it > for > > online play. I think that is a bigger stopper of piracy than anything. > > > > Having to have a legit cd-key to play online is what causes alot of people > > to actually go out and buy a game. Half-Life and Q3 really showed that. > > > > > > "Mr. Nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:DeAj6.136030$[email hidden]... > > > > > > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins" > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >Aside from a big raspberry... > > > > > > > > > >Two questions... > > > > > > > > > >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > > > > >prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of > > > course > > > > >not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > > > > sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > > > > increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > > > > improve their copy-protection or lose sales. > > > > > > Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out before > > Sierra > > > even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect their > > > software. The ONLY thing they have limited is the ability to play > online, > > > and thats only due to the software key stored on their servers. > > > > > > Although you can still play online other places besides Sierras servers. > > > > > > > > > > > > >

-- Bert

Tell you what Marc, I will not tell you what to run in your machine, you do not tell me what to run in mine? Sound fair? Thank you and have a good day "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QbSj6.149307$[email hidden]... > VCR rewinders help save a very complex mechanical device in the VCR from > being taxed (although VCRs are now cheap enough to render them frivolous). > There is no parallel in a ROM drive. Maybe we should go back to secondary > video accelerators so we aren't wearing out our main video card when weuse

Quoted text (15 lines)

> racing sims.?? > > Marc. > > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:96oq9f$1a1e$[email hidden]... > > Its not about being scared.. I have had about 6 burners in my life. My > > first one costing me $600. > > > > Ever hear of people using Tape Rewinders for the VCR? That is the same > > reason I use a normal cd-rom for my server machine (the one that has the > > Burner). > > > > My normal cd-rom is faster, cheaper (in case something does happen) and > > allows me to do cd-to-cd copies. If that is flawed logic, sorry.. but

you > > are not the one that owns my machine so to be honest, my logic is theonly

Quoted text (21 lines)

> > one that matters on my machine :) > > > > > > "Jeff Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:96nuap$5gu$[email hidden]... > > > > > > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:96nrev$ul8$[email hidden]... > > > > Actually, I am like Don.. I do not like to use my Burner to do > anything > > > but > > > > Burn CDs > > > > > > > > Think about it.. EVERYTHING has a lifespan to it.. you may not know > what > > > it > > > > is, but it has one. Your monitor may last for a total of 1500 hours, > > your > > > > cd-rom may work for 1000 hours before it dies.. you never know. > > Anything > > > > can and will break eventually. Heck, if you are unlucky.. it may

have

Quoted text (7 lines)

> a > > > > life of only a few hundred hours of use. You just never know. > > > > > > > > My reasoning is why should I put more wear and tear into my Burner > than > > I > > > > need to? I would much rather pay $40 for a 50x cd-rom that can do

all > > the > > > > grunt work at a fraction of the price and do it faster. > > > > > > I can understand your angle, but I still feel the reasoning is flawed.I

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > have two drives myself, a Toshiba DVD, and a Plextor CDRW. I use the > > Toshiba > > > for all installations, normal reading etc. But .. my point is, that it > > > really makes no difference which one you use. They both serve as > readers, > > > they should both work the same for that purpose. > > > > > > Before I got my DVD drive, I used the Plextor for everything, reading, > > > writing, and doing the dishes ... and guess what .. it survived! I've > > never > > > had a single problem out of it, and it's still going strong, hundreds

of > > > burns later. > > > > > > I used to know this guy back in the early 90's that wouldn't let youput

Quoted text (7 lines)

> a > > > floppy disk in his floppy drive if it had a hand-written label (he was > > > afraid that the ink would rub off in the drive and ruin it or > something). > > > You guys being afraid to use your CDRW for reading CD's remind me of > that > > > guy :) Just a little too paranoid. C'mon guys, these things have a

MTBF > > > rating in the thousands of hours, they aren't delicate flowers :) > > > > > > Hell, if my Plextor 8432 broke, I'd just use it as an excuse to buyone

Quoted text (10 lines)

> of > > > those new Plextor 16x burners! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 12:58:40 -0600, rrevved <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 15:15:06 GMT, [email hidden] wrote: > >>So let me get this straight. The need for copy >>protection increases in proportion to the total >>number of sales, right? The bigger the potential >>market, the greater the need for some unbreakable >>encryption scheme. > >I didn't say that..

No. What you said was "I'm pretty sure that publishers would like to not spend ANY money on expensive copy-protection schemes, but they would expose themselves to millions of dollars in lost sales, and the stockholders of the company would kick the execs out on their asses." My point -- made as a joke -- was that execs who exposed themselves to tens of dollars of lost sales would probably have fewer problems than those who exposed themselves to millions of dollars of lost sales. Put another way, the more valuable the property is considered to be, the more incentive to wrap it up in some clever protection scheme.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>>> >>Which, I suppose, is why GPL >>was offered with no copy protection whatsoever. >><g> >> > >And sold very few copies...

Which is sort of the whole -- admittedly trivial -- point. The execs responsible for GPL would not be sacked for losing sales. There were precious few sales to lose. They would be sacked for greenlighting a project that returned so little on its investment. Of course, the case could be made that the copy protection on NASCAR 4 is, in fact, a way of protecting some of the investment made in the GPL engine. Few care about 1967 F1, but many care about NASCAR. By the way, rrevved, thanks again for the tip on the stickworks controller config utility. Spirit of Speed is a joy with decent steering.

Quoted text (39 lines)

> >>On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 19:01:34 -0600, rrevved >><[email hidden]> wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 21:17:28 GMT, "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote: >>> >>>>I would >>>>love to hear a developer or publisher agree with your logic that preventing >>>>casual copying is more important than preventing interested, paying, >>>>potentially repeat customers from using the product. >>> >>>Marc, that is precisely what the publisher would say. >>> >>>They are applying copy-protection to prevent -casual- copying >>>by a zillion users. They know that there are a small percentage >>>of cd-roms that will have problems with the scheme, so they >>>offer a money-back guarantee to customers that own those cd-roms. >>> >>>I'm pretty sure that publishers would like to not spend ANY >>>money on expensive copy-protection schemes, but they would >>>expose themselves to millions of dollars in lost sales, and the >>>stockholders of the company would kick the execs out on their >>>asses. >>> >>>As to your allusion to ... >>> >>> 'interested, paying, potentially repeat customers' >>> >>>..let me say this. -All- paying customers meet that criteria. >>>You, me and the guy who buys it because the box has cool >>>pictures on it. The 1,000,000 buyers that will have no >>>problem and the 10,000 who will. >>> >>>You do the math. >>> >> >> >>Remove "hi" from address or it will bounce.... >

Remove "hi" from address or it will bounce....

EA's copy protection is utter crap. I had to remove all my harddrives except one and make it one partition just so my CDrom could be the D: drive with nothing in between. This was the only way for me to get FIFA 2001 and Need for speed to run on my system. I now have 2 harddrives sitting on my shelf that I can't use thanks to EA. All copy protection should be scrapped. No matter what they come up with, the hackers break it within hours and bootleg copies pop up within days. It's not worth the hassle. Vintook "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NJwj6.244917$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Aside from a big raspberry... > > Two questions... > > 1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of course > not. > > 2) Why are we only hearing about this with N4 and not any other current > release racing sim or game? EA has used copy protection for quite a

while, > but we don't see the problems. I know some other non-racing titles have > issues, but, to put it bluntly, I don't care about those games. > > As I have stated before, there is a specific problem with N4 and it needsto

Quoted text (8 lines)

> be addressed at point of sale. > > Fortunately, I bought my N4 at an EB. I picked up a second copy from > another batch at an EB store across town yesterday. It installs and runs > perfectly, whereas my original one had serious problems. > > I wouldn't have considered replacing a relatively recent Panasonic DVD > player under any circumstances anyway, but I think that others may be led

to > go buy CD-ROMs just to get the game to run. This is a gigantic waste of > money and lets Sierra off the hook for either poor quality pressings ofthe

Quoted text (7 lines)

> CDs or for using a botched copy protection scheme. > > N4, GPL, etc. cost enough money to upgrade CPU, memory, video, sound...you > shouldn't encourage people to spend money to replace a ROM drive that runs > everything else fine. > > I'll be returning my first N4 at the first opportunity--as a defective

disk. > > Marc. > > -- >**************************************************************************** > Marc Collins > [email hidden] > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > to take effect. Reboot now? >**************************************************************************** > > >

Amen about the CompUSA sales staff! Just yesterday, I heard a salesman tell a customer that wanted to buy a hard drive that the customer would have to upgrade from Windows 95 because Win95 didn't support drives over 2 Gigs! -- DUH. Then he quoted him a price of $80 to install the hard drive _without_ copying the files over. The ironic thing was that I was there buying DriveCopy (for $30), which does exactly what their $80 "service" does not. CompUSA -- An uneducated consumer is their best customer. rrevved wrote:

Quoted text (41 lines)

> On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 19:25:23 GMT, "Mr. Nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >"rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 15:25:33 GMT, "Marc Collins" > ><[email hidden]> wrote: > >> > >> >Aside from a big raspberry... > >> > > >> >Two questions... > >> > > >> >1) Do you think Sierra wants to employ a copy protection scheme that > >> >prevents potential paying customers from running their product...of > >course > >> >not. > >> > > >> > >> I think Sierra has to use stern copy-protection to -increase- the > >> sales of their products. As the casula user copying technology > >> increases with each new version of CloneCD, etc., they have to > >> improve their copy-protection or lose sales. > > > >Thats funny because the Warez groups I'm sure had the game out before Sierra > >even did. This isn't any protection they can do that will protect their > >software. > > Note I said -CASUAL- users. > > People with net access & who visit warez sites & who know what 'usenet' > stands for & who have the skill to download multi-part warez rips & > then unarchive & then install those warez versions ain't casual users. > Sierra's copy protection doesn't affect those people in the least. > It never will. > > BTW, the last time you were at CompUSA, how many people were > buying games there that met my definion of casual? My guess is > over 90% of them are 'casual' users. I can guarantee you that the > sales staff is.. :) > > That's my 2 cents.

-- Bert

In article <96nrev$ul8$[email hidden]>, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>Actually, I am like Don.. I do not like to use my Burner to do anything but >Burn CDs > >Think about it.. EVERYTHING has a lifespan to it.. you may not know what it >is, but it has one. Your monitor may last for a total of 1500 hours, your >cd-rom may work for 1000 hours before it dies.. you never know. Anything >can and will break eventually. Heck, if you are unlucky.. it may have a >life of only a few hundred hours of use. You just never know. > >My reasoning is why should I put more wear and tear into my Burner than I >need to? I would much rather pay $40 for a 50x cd-rom that can do all the >grunt work at a fraction of the price and do it faster. >

That's like people who buy VHS tape rewinders to save wear and tear on their VCR. The VCR might cost $200, the rewinder might cost $10. Makes sense to me... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.