Searching \ for 'elevation' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=elevation
Search entire site for: 'elevation'.

Truncated match.
PICList Thread
'elevation'
1996\11\09@125451 by peter

flavicon
face
Todd Peterson wrote:

snip-----

> but I have come to realize that software is THE
> MOST VALUABLE part of a design.  And THAT's why
> not too many people  want to
> help you take it - that's how many of us make a living.
>
> Todd Peterson.

It must be very lonely so far up

I have 30 years of electronics experience and one year in programming
I repair industrial machines. For me software that's code protected
is not the most valuable part,in my job it's the most worthless part.
One example : (private email if you want lots more)
I bought four cellular telephones from Brick Lane Market (London)
Type FKI Burndept BE 2088 (  Old 200Mhz system )
Burndept have ceased trading
The radio side if it could work on its own would be worth
~ 100 US , with the inaccessable (to me) software they are worth
only 20 US. Thats four radios -80 US each = 320 US less because
of the inaccessable software
Would anyone like to help me steal the code so I can take
on Noika, Sony and Panasonic ?

Well what do you expect after
such a pretentious statment ? Ice ?

--
Peter Cousens
email: spam_OUTpeterTakeThisOuTspamcousens.her.forthnet.gr
snailmail: Peter Cousens, karteros, Heraklion, Crete, 75100, Greece,

1996\11\09@203723 by Todd Peterson

picon face
At 01:51 PM 11/9/96 -0800, you wrote:
>Todd Peterson wrote:
>
>snip-----
>
>> but I have come to realize that software is THE
>> MOST VALUABLE part of a design.  And THAT's why
>> not too many people  want to
>> help you take it - that's how many of us make a living.
>>
>> Todd Peterson.
>


To which Peter Cousens wrote:

{Quote hidden}

Peter,

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying, or why you are saying it.
But I AM sure that you totally misunderstood what I was saying.  What I
meant was that for many of us, there is a substantially larger investment IN
PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT COSTS for the software (firmware) that the hardware due
to the time involved.  That's why we aren't too helpful to those who try to
defeat the Code Protection in the PICs.  Could you please clarify what it
was that I said that seemed to disagree with you so much?

-Todd Peterson.

1996\11\10@045636 by Nikos Papaioannou

flavicon
peter cousens wrote:
{Quote hidden}

hi peter,
  my name is nikos and i'm a computer engieer from Cyprus.
I have similar problem with those code protection softwares.
fo example, now i'm working on a project which is using a ready made IR
remote control TX based on the PIC 16c54. This remote control is for TV
sets, but I want to use it for a different application. how i'm going to
make the receiver if i don't know how the TX work (software)?
either i have to find a way to read the code on the 16c54 or to replace
the ic with a new 16c54 and reprogram it, something that will take more
time.  by the way, do you have a such ready code for remote controls?
the receiver will be 16c64 with matrix output (three tx-16c54 will be
used).
   any way my e-mail is open for further descusion and exchange of
ideas.

see you.

Nikos Papaioannou
Computer Engineer
elnicspamKILLspamspidernet.com.cy

1996\11\10@114515 by Gerhard Fiedler

flavicon
face
At 11:56 10/11/96 +0200, Nikos Papaioannou wrote:
>   my name is nikos and i'm a computer engieer from Cyprus.
>I have similar problem with those code protection softwares.
>fo example, now i'm working on a project which is using a ready made IR
>remote control TX based on the PIC 16c54. This remote control is for TV
>sets, but I want to use it for a different application. how i'm going to
>make the receiver if i don't know how the TX work (software)?
>either i have to find a way to read the code on the 16c54 or to replace
>the ic with a new 16c54 and reprogram it, something that will take more
>time.  by the way, do you have a such ready code for remote controls?
>the receiver will be 16c64 with matrix output (three tx-16c54 will be
>used).

How about just analyzing what the transmitter sends? Doesn't seem too
complicated.

Gerhard

1996\11\11@024901 by Eric Smith
flavicon
face
Todd Peterson <.....elabKILLspamspam.....NETINS.NET> wrote:
> but I have come to realize that software is THE MOST VALUABLE part of a
> design.  And THAT's why not too many people want to help you take it -
> that's how many of us make a living.

Peter Cousens <EraseMEpeterspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTcousens.her.forthnet.gr> replied:

{Quote hidden}

See!  You've proven Todd's point that the code-protected software *IS* the
most valuable part.  Without the software the telephones are nearly worthless,
having essentially only scrap value.

I'm not going to state my opinion at this time as to the merits of code
protection, or efforts to defeat it, because it has generated much flamage
on this list in the past.

However, Todd is wrong about one thing.  Many of the people who know how to
defeat the protection are in fact quite eager to help you out.  For a price.
But they're much less likely to give away their secrets.

Cheers,
Eric

1996\11\11@084258 by myke predko

flavicon
face
Arguments/examples deleted...

Eric Smith wrote:

>However, Todd is wrong about one thing.  Many of the people who know how to
>defeat the protection are in fact quite eager to help you out.  For a price.
>But they're much less likely to give away their secrets.

Isn't this quite an ironic statement?

myke

Avoiding precedents does not mean nothing should ever be done.  It only
means that nothing should ever be done for the first time - Sir Humphrey
Appleby K.C.B.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1996 , 1997 only
- Today
- New search...