clarifications for v1.81
Moderators: fgagnon, nikos, Site Mods
clarifications for v1.81
there are a couple of changes in the latest version that seem to be catching people by surprise
for starters the new trial version does not show the usual nag dialog when it starts for the first day only. This means that if you want to paste a registration key you have to wait for a day to see the registration dialog. However most of the time xplorer2 automatically imports your registration if you are a customer that merely upgrades to the latest x2 version
then, if you are the type that tinkers with xplorer2 to change the executable (eg changing dialogs and other resources), you can't do it any more or you will see periodic fireworks. Nothing more will i say about this
for starters the new trial version does not show the usual nag dialog when it starts for the first day only. This means that if you want to paste a registration key you have to wait for a day to see the registration dialog. However most of the time xplorer2 automatically imports your registration if you are a customer that merely upgrades to the latest x2 version
then, if you are the type that tinkers with xplorer2 to change the executable (eg changing dialogs and other resources), you can't do it any more or you will see periodic fireworks. Nothing more will i say about this
Re: clarifications for v1.81
Sounds like a challenge to me!!nikos wrote:.. if you are the type that tinkers with xplorer2 to change the executable (eg changing dialogs and other resources), you can't do it any more...
Re: clarifications for v1.81
You won't like the fireworks. They've been burning my sorry arse for the last week, regardless of the foot of snow on the ground. My tush is either too hot or too cold, and Goldilocks stole my bloody din-dins, the crazy wench.kunkel321 wrote:Sounds like a challenge to me!!
Re: clarifications for v1.81
Oh no! I would often edit the X2 resources to resize the fixed sized dialogs which were too small for my taste. I had even reorder and inserted new menu items to the X2 menu bar.nikos wrote: then, if you are the type that tinkers with xplorer2 to change the executable (eg changing dialogs and other resources), you can't do it any more or you will see periodic fireworks. Nothing more will i say about this
Any chance of reverting this change?
Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's universe simulator.
snakebyte, otlaolap, & others,
Could you please post the items/resources you have found most useful to adjust, how much, and why.
nikos,
Could you please consider providing settings options (registry or .ini file) for some of the items these good folks have found to be improvements, instead of having them hard-coded in the program. Especially settings dialog sizes. 8)
Could you please post the items/resources you have found most useful to adjust, how much, and why.
nikos,
Could you please consider providing settings options (registry or .ini file) for some of the items these good folks have found to be improvements, instead of having them hard-coded in the program. Especially settings dialog sizes. 8)
No joke, but I've got 43 .RES files I repack into the binary with each new release: 40 Dialogs, 2 bitmaps, and an icongroup.
I'm not generally a fatalist (life sucks, then you die ) but no well-meaning compromise is likely to come close to the freedom of personalisation that was possible previously, and even that was a bit of work. I would be quite capable of listing all my changes, enumerating the dialogs, giving happy rationalisations (a few of which are actually logical), but it's difficult to be too vociferous - I understand why and how the policy was changed, and I find it difficult to disagree with.
But I also find the idea of enforced compromise a despicable trend in internet security. Considering how many threads have resulted in perfectly rational well-meaning conclusions, and yet aren't even close to being implemented, or considered - I would be vastly surprised if Nikos even blinked at a few quarrelsome tinkerers whining about things they probably shouldn't have been messing with in the first place (in a perfect world of developer rule).
However, to at least keep up the appearances of participating in the illusion of democratic consensus, I will point out two obvious things: all dialogs have to be adjustable (width, height) and remember their settings. And Verdana 8 is so laughably useless on high resolution monitors that even Microsoft have changed their "suggested modal defaults" to Segoe UI 9. (In this instance, more the size than the font.)
As one last thing, compare the dialogs for Select Columns and Customise Toolbar. Is it too much to ask for a little directional consistency? (Which way is Add and which way is Remove?) I live in a country which has roadsign directions which are probably worse than Uzbekistan's (on a cloudy day), but even I baulk at such irrationality in software.
The ultimate point though, is that as these are all minuscule details we (were) able to modify ourselves, without having to bother anyone by asking, so to have that taken away is actually more trouble than it's worth for the developer - except, it is one more step towards a "working" DRM.
Nikos has always resisted such superficial frivolities as (proper) "skinning" or excessive customising - to a degree I can agree with this swimming against the tide of current software development (never, ever follow trends), but it was only made tolerable by the knowledge that I could change almost anything I wanted as long as I was willing to work at it. This makes that a bit difficult.
Unless, of course, I write my own file manager, which isn't likely to happen, no matter how bored I get.
I'm not generally a fatalist (life sucks, then you die ) but no well-meaning compromise is likely to come close to the freedom of personalisation that was possible previously, and even that was a bit of work. I would be quite capable of listing all my changes, enumerating the dialogs, giving happy rationalisations (a few of which are actually logical), but it's difficult to be too vociferous - I understand why and how the policy was changed, and I find it difficult to disagree with.
But I also find the idea of enforced compromise a despicable trend in internet security. Considering how many threads have resulted in perfectly rational well-meaning conclusions, and yet aren't even close to being implemented, or considered - I would be vastly surprised if Nikos even blinked at a few quarrelsome tinkerers whining about things they probably shouldn't have been messing with in the first place (in a perfect world of developer rule).
However, to at least keep up the appearances of participating in the illusion of democratic consensus, I will point out two obvious things: all dialogs have to be adjustable (width, height) and remember their settings. And Verdana 8 is so laughably useless on high resolution monitors that even Microsoft have changed their "suggested modal defaults" to Segoe UI 9. (In this instance, more the size than the font.)
As one last thing, compare the dialogs for Select Columns and Customise Toolbar. Is it too much to ask for a little directional consistency? (Which way is Add and which way is Remove?) I live in a country which has roadsign directions which are probably worse than Uzbekistan's (on a cloudy day), but even I baulk at such irrationality in software.
The ultimate point though, is that as these are all minuscule details we (were) able to modify ourselves, without having to bother anyone by asking, so to have that taken away is actually more trouble than it's worth for the developer - except, it is one more step towards a "working" DRM.
Nikos has always resisted such superficial frivolities as (proper) "skinning" or excessive customising - to a degree I can agree with this swimming against the tide of current software development (never, ever follow trends), but it was only made tolerable by the knowledge that I could change almost anything I wanted as long as I was willing to work at it. This makes that a bit difficult.
Unless, of course, I write my own file manager, which isn't likely to happen, no matter how bored I get.
Nikos, do you really think that your current implementation of DRM will prevent any future attempts to crack Xplorer2? Do you really think that you have made X2 uncrackable?
How many people who currently are using a cracked copy of X2, do you think you will be able to force into buying Xplorer2? If someone does not wants to pay for it, they will not pay no matter how hard you try.
There are tons of nice features that Directory Opus and other file managers have which are missing from X2. Try implementing those and you might be able to win loyals of other file managers.
DRM is bad. It affects your own customers more than it affects others. I think you should spend more time adding new features than implementing these types of checks which actually alienates your own loyal users.
With this new check of yours, I may stop upgrading X2 or may even be forced into looking for a cracked X2 copy that allows me to update resources without worrying about loosing settings.
How many people who currently are using a cracked copy of X2, do you think you will be able to force into buying Xplorer2? If someone does not wants to pay for it, they will not pay no matter how hard you try.
There are tons of nice features that Directory Opus and other file managers have which are missing from X2. Try implementing those and you might be able to win loyals of other file managers.
DRM is bad. It affects your own customers more than it affects others. I think you should spend more time adding new features than implementing these types of checks which actually alienates your own loyal users.
With this new check of yours, I may stop upgrading X2 or may even be forced into looking for a cracked X2 copy that allows me to update resources without worrying about loosing settings.
Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's universe simulator.
First off, as a software developer I fully understand your desire to both protect your intellectual property and to protect your customers from fake (and potentially malicious) downloads.
However, as a compromise, would a resource-only DLL containing the UI settings still meet the security goals? The DLL would have no executable code in it, but would still expose the UI settings for tinkering. The DLL could even be optional - use it if it exists, otherwise use what's in the EXE.
However, as a compromise, would a resource-only DLL containing the UI settings still meet the security goals? The DLL would have no executable code in it, but would still expose the UI settings for tinkering. The DLL could even be optional - use it if it exists, otherwise use what's in the EXE.
that's an excellent idea! So people wanting to mess up the resources just download the 'translators pack' below, make any changes you like, then create the resource only dll and call it x2t_something.dll, and xplorer2 will use it as a 'translation'!
www.zabkat.com/x2translate.zip
www.zabkat.com/x2translate.zip
Those are not words usually associated with x2 request development. However, in this case, we'll take what we can get.VHZ wrote:That's pretty quick feature implementation.
As a general query, is there an easier (lighter) way of creating a dll than re-installing the resource monstrosity that is VS2008 just for this? I don't mind VS, but every time I install it something goes wonky... either the updates screw up the .NET requirements or it randomly decides to reorder my service starting orders...
Anything lightweight? Mingwin, Bloodshed... played with these years ago. What's the "lightest" preferably stand-alone tool?
Or, even better, can I just use ResHacker to corrupt a "here's one I made earlier" language DLL?