And yet another new section where we will express our opinion on controversial issues that have been raised somewhere in the SPECTRUM press. The reason for the emergence of this section was the complete unwillingness of the editorial offices of "ZX-Review" and SPECTROFON to review the texts included in the issue and check them for truthfulness.
This time we present to your attention our thoughts regarding SPECTROFON's comment on our letter to their editorial office. Well, it has happened. In the 18th issue of "SPECTROFON," our letter (only one, out of the two we sent) is published, and precisely after it is the magazine's comment. As we have already mentioned, the idea of creating "OBERON" was born during the writing of this first letter, and the almost three-month silence of "SPECTROFON" prompted us to start its release.
So, we are of course grateful to "SPECTROFON" for publishing our letter in full (allocating an entire section for it) and without distortions (except for the omission of one "k" in the word "hacker," and the absence of the date, although it was there), but the comment... Right now we will comment on the comment of "SPECTROFON" (pun intended).
══════════════════════════════════════════
ANTI-COMMENTARY or
HACKERS ARE NOT JUST PEOPLE - 2.
Let us clarify right away that we are not against "SPECTROFON" in general, we are against some of its statements. Everything that follows is written not to discredit this magazine, but to figure out how the editorial office understood our letter and what conclusions they made.
One more clarification. We will write the word "hacker" with two "k's." And for lovers of spelling debates, we will add that this word, like "upgrade," "coding," "debugger," is not "computer jargon," but a specific computer slang, and therefore it is very difficult to apply Russian "spelling rules" to it, as it has only a tangential relation to non-colloquial Russian. For example, some "purely Russian" phrases like "block diagram" (yes, yes, this is also jargon) are FORBIDDEN to be used in official documents, for example, in documentation.
Now let's move directly to the analysis of the comment.
A small quote: "thus, we can exclude from our discussion all HACKERS who are programmers, 'specializing in hacking and modifying programs' ... no one has ever had any complaints about them."
We would like to know how "it is possible to exclude" hackers who, by definition, are REAL HACKERS? Moreover, the editorial office changed its point of view too quickly. In the 15th issue, they literally "attacked" OLDMAN for saying, or rather implying the following thought: "a hacker who modifies a program has the moral right at least to his small INTRO, where he will write about the work he has done." So there were complaints, don't deny it...
Moving on. As already mentioned on the pages of "ON LINE," if "SPECTROFON" has "closed" a certain topic, it does not mean that all others have closed this topic, and that it has ceased to exist at all - "thus, we will consider the topic 'Hacker - also a human' closed, since swords were crossed over hacker-traders [traders, note OBERON], those who engage in the distribution of pirated copies."
Again, a substitution of concepts. Any hacker hacks in order to later distribute (the first consequence of the definition of "hacker"), otherwise he is not a hacker, but just a person who puts "just for himself" INFINIT's in programs and shows them to no one. We completely agree: "a person who has broken the official protection and modified the code to his liking is not yet a pirate," he is simply... A HACKER, since he has ALREADY "broken" the official protection - if you break someone else's door, no one will be interested in whether you intended to steal something or just wanted to take a look. The analogy is, of course, stretched, but still seems successful.
As for "selling twenty meters from the author," we, and everyone else, are against it, but the BUYERS are for it, if the pirated version is more functional (for the information of "beginning programmers" - for IBM, the pirated version is less functional than the official one, not the other way around)!!! But we were not talking about that, but about the fact that they hack in order to distribute in OTHER cities, as was the case with "UFO," and many others that "INFOCOM" "suddenly remembered" when almost everyone had already passed them long ago and had forgotten them.
"And so, finally, with the help of our readers, ... we managed to understand what the editorial office has been opposing all the time." We have only one thought: in one of the classic literary works, the hero learns that he has been speaking and writing in prose for many years!!!
"It is necessary to develop a network of regional distributors and dealers, ... However, how realistic is this in the current conditions?
Of course, it is not realistic!!! For the legal distribution of "SPECTROFON" "INFOCOM" had to pay 90,000 in January 1996, and this is only for one issue! And there was no talk of opening a representative office (at least in our person, or in the person of our Samara "ZX-Club")!!! The discussion usually concerns the licensed sale of some (!!) programs!!! And you need not worry about the authors - for them a program like "UFO-2" or "PRINCE" brings no less than 500 thousand, if not more, "clean."
"Authors need good advertising, marketing, and buyers need the desire to support authors with money." We will talk about advertising a little later, we will only say that good advertising and marketing should be handled by "INFOCOM," since it is a "legal, official distributor," but as you can see, it does neither (which is also mentioned in our first letter). So what do we have to do with it? And buyers are already fed up with "supporting" "INFOCOM" programs, it is much cheaper and more profitable for them to buy a normal restored program "on the side," which they have repeatedly mentioned on the pages of "SPECTROFON." So think for yourselves.
"A lion's share of Western software has turned into FREEWARE, due to the passage of time..." Just a minute, what "passage of time" are we talking about? In this matter, "passage of time" does not exist AT ALL, this is not a criminal code. And even if so, four years (a program from 1992) - is that already "outdated"? Especially since copyright lasts FOR LIFE - throughout the life of the author.
"In England, there are still companies that still write programs for SPECCY..." Exactly, they are COMPANIES, not "beginning programmers," as we have!!!
Regarding copyright. We agree that we are not lawyers and may have misunderstood something, but... First. We were practically "pushed" (and we are strangely not offended by this) into the 1st issue of "PC-REVIEW" (something like IBM's "ZX-Review"), but they forgot to mention what year this issue is from. Although, for this purpose, professional publications like "MONITOR," "ComputerPress," "Computerrra," or similar would have been better suited, which, excuse us, we trust more, but never mind.
Secondly... The article dedicated to copyright is well quoted, although its author limps on all four legs in terminology and is clearly not at odds with the theory of information or with any of the special theories of cybernetics, but the conclusions made are somewhat incorrect. When mentioning the possibility of filing a lawsuit (by the way, either in an arbitration or civil court, and no other), both the author of the article (who spoke about copyright in a completely different context) and "SPECTROFON" (which cited it in this context) forgot to mention that the user (consumer) also has rights. Which are MORE PRIORITY in considering the case.
Now about "it is enough to put the '(C)' sign." By the way, this sign mainly only gives the right to call oneself "the author." It is enough to put it, but that does not mean that you will prove your case, and that you do not need a lawyer to represent you in court, which is what we meant.
Moreover, NOT A WORD is said about the fact that the author's, i.e. fully 100% legally protected, is ONLY that program WHICH IS MADE IN LICENSED PACKAGES, regardless of whether it has "(C)" in it or not (we tell you this as people closely related to this field).
Next. "Proving incurred losses is not easy, that's why we ... recommend demanding compensation in the amount of 5,000 to 50,000 minimum wages, ... the copyright violator can be held criminally liable." Well, tell me, how can you demand "from 5,000 to 50,000 minimum wages" if you do not prove that you have suffered damages???!!! In the best case, your claim will simply be rejected, and in the worst case - YOU will pay for moral damages. Ultimately, the final amount is determined by the court, not you. By the way, since it is an arbitration (or civil) court, there can be no talk of "criminal liability," unless there is a flagrant violation of the court's ruling!!!
Yes, we completely forgot, the author of the article writes that the law he is considering came into force on October 20, 1992, while we know for sure that the currently effective one is January 1, 1994, although there is a chance that we are talking about the same law. But let's not talk about it anymore.
Regarding the fact that "changing 31 bytes in the STS program is not prohibited for you, ... but distributing it is prohibited ...". First, one question: why is it allowed for "INFOCOM" (after all, it received the right to DISTRIBUTE, not MODIFY)??? Our words "thank you very much" dedicated to the publication in "ZX-Review" of bytes for "curing" TASM should be regarded as irony, which they indeed were, and not as gratitude.
Furthermore, if instead of telling friends about the "cured" STS, they say: "I have no right, go buy STS from "INFOCOM" and redo it yourself," then our SPECTRUM will very soon DIE. And if they buy STS and we inform them of these bytes, then we will actually be distributing our version: any program is a collection of information, separated from the medium, and it does not matter whether it is recorded on a diskette or on paper (the theory must be known, dear gentlemen). By the way, this is exactly what was done in "ZX-Review" 4-5 for 1996 - there are published letters from A.Solovyov and M.Torgunov dedicated to correcting STS 3.3 and TASM (it is generally amazing how these programs will work normally after the published POKE).
Moreover, in this same issue, "INFOCOM," frankly speaking, is getting brazen, announcing STS 4.2: "acquisition through illegal channels of previous intermediate versions (4.1 and others) does not allow the owner to expect the program to work normally." Not only does "INFOCOM," having the right to distribute STS 2.6 and STS 3.3, FORBID us to buy version 4.1 (and it does not distribute it and HAS NO RIGHT to it, and it is unclear which channels are considered "illegal"), but it also does not guarantee "normal operation" if you suddenly have STSЧ.1!
By the way, STSЧ.2 now costs... a whopping 25,000 rubles! And it is also "recommended to use it together with the assembler ALASM 2.5," which costs another 15,000 rubles, regarding such advertising, read below. After doing some calculations, we find that a normally functioning STS 4.2 will cost you 40,000 rubles without postal expenses.
And who, I ask, will buy such a program, which, by the way, is only five or six (!!) times cheaper than a normal, official, full-CD (i.e., for the entire compact disk) IBM program (at least in Samara, at dealer firms)!
When we wrote these lines, we got both STS 4.2 and ALASM, and in the description of the first, it is stated that it constitutes a SINGLE PACKAGE with ALASM, we hope a comment on why "INFOCOM" divided them is unnecessary... Just like mentioning that "INFOCOM" on the pages of "ZX-Review" almost preaches hacking (at least encourages it in every way), saying, learn to hack, but only not our programs, but the programs of our competitors (whom they have "just plenty" of all over Russia). Yes, we bet that "INFOCOM" has no idea about the "author's" STS 4.3, in which, according to Stalker himself, there are even fewer bugs (well, when will programs finally be tested first and then sold???!!!).
Next. The term "program cleanliness" is not clear to you, let's introduce another concept "program usability from the user's point of view." [By the way, the word user, which many love to use, in the mouth of any programmer is a "soft" insult, the more "harsh" form of which is "lamer" - "a militant user-noob" (this is a lyrical digression for the "general development" of readers).] Now it's clear what errors in programs have to do with it?
As for "uncleanliness" in the sense of "blowing off," we did not mean the same user interface, which, by the way, has long been standardized on IBM. We meant the so-called conceptual model, as in the case of "UFO."
If the editorial office of "SPECTROFON" does not know, let us clarify, so that there are no misunderstandings later - any program is an embodiment of a conceptual model in a specific formal language, and as far as we know, it is still protected, at least through the mechanism of licenses for transfer to other platforms. It sounds, of course, convoluted, but it accurately describes everything. It is precisely this conceptual model that in "UFO" was "blown off" from IBM, and there is no "(R)" sign anywhere, indicating the licensing right to adaptation.
So we have come back to where we started - the rights of domestic authors are protected, but the rights of foreign authors (at least IBM's) are not. Want an experiment? Let someone try to make an IBM "TOTAL CONTROL" for "SPECTRUM," based on the reaction of the Moscow company "DOKA" (which has nothing to do with pizza), which created this game, we will see whose conclusions are correct - ours or "SPECTROFON's."
Next come the "wise" sayings about the fact that "if someone can resort to the services of a hacker-programmer [again, a confusion of concepts: a hacker is a programmer, just as oil is always oily] to revive a game, he will resort to his services...", and that the author "must keep his finger on the pulse." Well, we said the same thing: (1) if the user sees that it is cheaper to buy pirated versions that work normally, he will buy them: and (2) neither "INFOCOM" nor most programmers "keep their finger on the pulse"! For this reason, we spoke about introducing a new section in "SPECTROFON" for feedback with programmers (which, by the way, they still do not have)! And to comment on us with our own thoughts, excuse us... (you understand).
Well, we have reached advertising. "Advertising is the engine of commerce and should be treated indulgently." And does many know that in Russia a law on advertising has been in effect for six months? This law PROHIBITS advertising in which:
1. Those who do not resort to the advertised goods or services are discredited. Example: the gel "Klerasil" - "Pasha is dating Dasha, and Sasha is in a helmet."
2. The merits of the goods or services are greatly exaggerated, or their shortcomings are downplayed, i.e., the goods do not correspond (!!!) to the advertisement. Example: the advertisement of PANADOL, where its merits are overstated, and shortcomings and side effects are not mentioned.
3. It is silent about accompanying goods and services without which the advertised goods cannot function normally. Example: pardon, bio-toilets - the advertisement does not mention the special bio-filler that needs to be purchased monthly.
So, legislation has long drawn a line between "the engine of commerce" and administratively punishable acts. We will not go into details and explain which of the two categories "INFOCOM's" advertising in price lists often falls into.
Next, honestly speaking, there is generally some kind of madness (sorry for the harsh word) with the pen as an analogy. The general meaning, as we understood it, boils down to the following: before buying a program from "INFOCOM," weigh your financial situation and the necessity of the purchase!!!
"Although the price list does not lie, ... the description is designed with the expectation that you will be interested in the program." They do not lie??? Let's not discuss this, it is too sensitive a question. Although, perhaps we are being unfair - they do not lie. They do not tell the whole truth. For example, that "STS" does not work on SCORPION, PROFI,... - this can be learned from magazines, conversations, but not from the price list: that FWORD FOR GENS has a size of 21 kilobytes and is therefore not suitable for serious work: that "LAND OF MYTHS" is a terribly underdeveloped, raw idea: that MagOS 6.3c is applicable only in rare cases, and not as a universal addition to the service monitor, which often glitches by itself: that THE REGENERS is just another "LIFE" program, and nothing more: that VIRUS is a raw untested program:... and much more. In the case of REGENERS, we have a strong discrepancy between the advertisement and the program itself.
And does many know why such a wonderful game as "LAND OF MYTHS" perished untimely? Because the authors did not care that they laid contradictory conditions in their program, as a result of which your win becomes purely random, an affair not dependent on you. Not to mention all sorts of unfinished things like writing to disk, the absence of auto-configuration for the type of computer, or just purely mocking over the state file. And "INFOCOM" "charges" 30,000 for it, describing it as a completely finished, "awesome" game.
And what will happen if a remix version from some hacker, with "fine-tuned" algorithms and rules, and working on 128K, and not just on 256, takes the top spots in the charts? Will they drag him to court? For the fact that another full-scale, "global" game, even if pirated, appeared on "SPECTRUM"?
Well, we have reached VIRUS. "We played it for more than two weeks, and for the most part, we did not pay attention to the shortcomings of the program, although they are visible to the naked eye." Well, what is this, if not advertising (moreover, prohibited) - to see the shortcomings of the program and not mention them, instead encouraging people to buy this "glitchy" program? By the way, our section "REVIEW" is precisely intended for reviewing the quality of software and excluding such situations. This is firstly.
Secondly. We are simply amazed by the Christian humility of the editorial office, as already after half an hour of playing, these "shortcomings" were literally driving us crazy, and not only because they exist, but also because even after the most superficial testing, they could have been easily removed. There would only be a desire, and not the same old mother laziness.
"Simply, the game turned out to be addictive, and our readers liked it, after all, how many people responded to the announcement of the championship." By the way, many magazines hold their charts of games, has anyone ever seen VIRUS there, even in 10th place, let alone first?
When the championship was announced, not a word was said about the quality of the program, so regarding "responses," no need. And if the program has already been purchased, why not participate, by the way, in psychology, there is such a syndrome - "I suffered, let others suffer" (this is not a hint).
Of course, many really liked it, but just what exactly: the idea or the program (i.e., the game itself)? The idea pleases us too, but the program... Now about the idea, as we have already said, the idea taken from T.Ray was, to put it mildly, somewhat perverted, and not just redone on "SPECTRUM." Not to mention that a virus is generally a NON-CELLULAR form of life.
If you read the article we mentioned in "Technique-Youth," you will understand what "candy" could have been made (which has already been done on IBM by one of our acquaintances, after familiarizing himself with VIRUS and our comments on it), even if with the same quality of the program (i.e., glitchiness), if Mr. Kukoviyakin cannot do it differently. And about the addictiveness, perhaps after two weeks if we finally figured out the behavior of viruses, it would have seemed addictive to us too.
But the battles between our viruses, the viruses of our friends lasted only a couple of evenings, and then everyone got tired of randomly spending half an hour adjusting the parameters of the viruses, as no one understood the laws of the interrelation of parameters, and we had a lot of other more interesting and less glitchy games. And after our detailed acquaintance with the algorithm, it became clear that there can be no meaningful game due to the imperfection of the latter (gentlemen "STEP" people, admit honestly, after all, you held a championship, did you not notice this? Moreover, you COMPLETELY IGNORED our words that "in a battle of two identical viruses, due to the incorrect algorithm, the virus with the lower number will ALWAYS win," i.e., we questioned the ACCURACY of the championship results!!!). That's how it is.
Next. VIRUS-2. But, at least Mr. Kukoviyakin (the author of VIRUSob) "dear editorial office" could have mentioned the discovered "glitches," if "INFOCOM" succumbed to flattery as "official distributor" (quote from the game VIRUS-2), and not the game VIRUS-2, as stated in the price list and in the splash screen, but the program "VIRUS, version 2.0 [!!!]" (again, quote from the game)? And would VIRUS-2 not turn out to be an even greater abomination?
But no. The matter almost reached the championship in VIRUS-2, in which even swearing and unnecessary jokes were specifically inserted instead of properly functioning, or even simply absent procedures. Here you have "supporting the ruble for beginning authors."
And honestly, we did not expect personal attacks regarding the fact that "not everyone studies to become programmers." At least because we are not programmers, we are systems engineers - developers of information processing systems (hardware + programs), but we can work as simple programmers. And it is even possible that a person who has not received, for example, a medical education knows and can do more than a certified doctor, but no one will let him near patients, you know, responsibility... Then we will allow ourselves a small personal attack - cybernetics, a subdivision of which is programming, has long been an independent technical science with no relation to mathematics. And in general, programmers are by no means a scientific title or profession, it is a position. This is for the broadening of the readers' and "SPECTROFON" editorial office's horizons in particular.
As for "comparable to writing programs from scratch." So, we sent not only "remakes of popular Western programs," by the way, among these "remakes" there is one resurrected (SILENT SERVICE, the normal version of which half of Moscow searched for a long time), but indeed "from scratch" in the full sense, or rather in the sense that programmers understand - starting from the development of the conceptual model of the algorithm (we apologize to those who "do not study to become programmers" - there are some specific terms and definitions that do not translate into "normal Russian"), as in TRACK DOCTOR, which is only similar to DCU, ADS,... by general purpose - disk treatment - but has its own unique (we do not hesitate to say) algorithm for saving information from "bad" sectors and a completely different interface.
Our AFT (Assembler Format Translator) is one of the first, if not the very first (it was written in early 1994) programs that performs the conversion of texts of assembler programs from one format to another. Or our ZEUS128, with a built-in disassembler (though not a debugger), allowing viewing and creating source texts of both programs from RAM and such ROMs as the 48th, 128th, TR-DOS, EXPANSION (for SCORPION). ZEUS is made on the basis of the "basic" cassette version, and in it, the original only plays the role of the core - editor + translator.
Moreover, in OCEAN CONQUEROR (our version of which was described in one of the issues of "ON LINE" and is currently distributed by "INFOCOM") we had to redevelop the program's architecture to "hang" our resident menu there.
And in general, without delving into the modified program, one cannot speak of the work done. We say all this so that we are not considered braggarts "from scratch."
In general, we (yes, and not only we) have come to the opinion that "SPECTROFON" nitpicked at words and phrases and read lectures instead of answering "on the merits" on the touched topics.
And in conclusion, we want to reiterate the thought that runs like a red thread through our first letter, addressed to the readers (and not to the editorial staff, as they thought): Gentlemen, stop: the tide of amateurism has already flooded the SINCLAIR trend in the country, the computer has already begun to die from low-quality programs and "smart" hardware tweaks: users are already cautiously buying programs for it!!! Understand: the computer is one of the most complex devices ever invented by Man, and normal operation with it requires knowledge, not just talent and a desire to make a name for oneself!!!
P.S. While these lines were being written, we received a new "INFOCOM" price list. So, there is a whole section of disks "prepared by the CODE BUSTERS group, in particular by MAX IWAMOTO." We think it is not worth saying much about the fact that all the creations of this very IWAMOTO, to put it mildly, leave much to be desired, and that the CODE BUSTERS group stubbornly does not want to make programs that work on all computers, and not just on the PENTAGON. We also won't say anything about such "love" from "INFOCOM", they have long since said everything to everyone with their actions.
══════════════════════════════════════════
* * *
Contents of the publication: Oberon #02
- Introduction
Introduction to the second issue of Oberon magazine, with insights into its delays and team expansion. The editorial team acknowledges past misunderstandings and introduces the new issue's contributors. Details on distribution, contributions, and user interaction features are provided.
- Scroll - Alex Noman
Game manual for 'Peking', detailing controls, menu options, and gameplay strategy, involving matching pairs of crates under time constraints.
- Scroll
Empire 128 is a strategic space game where players act as merchants dealing with an alien invasion. Gameplay involves trading, mission completion, and space exploration. The game requires 128K memory and offers both disk and RAM save options.
- Scroll
Description of various space ships, including their specifications, weapon systems, and purposes. Each model differs in speed, armament, and functionality. Includes notes on origins and uses.
- Review
Review of ZX Spectrum games and tools: Double Xinox 128 offers a modern twist on Xonix with 80 levels and new challenges. UFO 2: Terror in the Deep has multiple versions with improvements and issues noted. Shadow Dancer for ZX Spectrum shows graphical evolution but maintains classic gameplay elements.
- Review - Unbeliever
Analysis of the 1996 ENLIGHT demo competition in St. Petersburg, evaluating participants and results across platforms. Highlights the achievements and critiques of notable entries. Provides insights into the dynamics of the competition and perspectives on the ZX Spectrum demos.
- Our Response
Reader feedback and editor's response regarding magazine content, the need for more graphics, and the state of local Samara software distribution.
- About Everything
Critique of Sinclair software quality, concerns about poor programming affecting computer lifespan, and commentary on CODE BUSTERS group's practices.
- Educational Program - Paul Atrides
An in-depth examination of the eight essential stages of software development, from defining technical requirements to testing and distribution. The article provides insights into the necessity of each stage and critiques poorly executed examples. It emphasizes the importance of systematic programming for both commercial and personal software projects.
- Hardware
The article discusses synchronization issues in various Spectrum models and provides a circuit solution to correct INT signal delays for improved graphics performance.
- Announcement - M.M.A
Introduction of new column highlighting Samara programmers' works, detailing projects like ZX-WINWORD, UNRECOGNIZED FORMATTING OBJECT, and DESIGNER ANALYSIS FUNCTIONS. ZX-WINWORD aims to be a publishing system for Spectrum, while U.F.O. offers advanced disk copying. DESIGNER ANALYSIS FUNCTIONS aids in mathematical graphing and function analysis.
- Programming - Unbeliever
A humorous narrative featuring Stirlitz, a fictional intelligence officer, in absurd and surreal situations involving Gestapo, programming, and secret plans.
- Pogurammim - Unbeliever
A humorous and fictional narrative involving Shtrilitz's spy adventures during a covert operation with many unexpected turns and satire.
- Advertisement
Advertisement for electronics and components store offering used equipment, software, and literature.
