Watcher0363
Well-Known Member
Thread Starter
- Joined
- May 24, 2016
- Messages
- 251
- Likes
- 111
I am going to put in my 2 cents on the subject. Siding more with the upset people, because they have the moral high ground on so many levels. As some one who was an early adopter of Slysofts products my life time license was grandfather in when they started offering several different licensing periods. So with that in mind here I go.
The RedFox staff and any moderators should put up with every last bit of vile and hatred thrown at them. Redfox has made it perfectly clear that they are not the Slysoft company. But what they have done in actuality is create a distinction without a difference and they are paying the price for it. At least verbally. Redfox took upon itself to use much of the terminology in naming its NEW products and also took a very familiar look with its logo. There website accepts the old screen names and passwords of the Slysoft site. Now, I know why they did it, money, not necessarily greed, but the desire to have a good income stream. So they maintained as much contact as they could with a customer base.
But here is the moral failing. If you are not Slysoft. Then your severs and software had no rights in any way, shape or form to access the auto update function of Slysofts software. PEROID! Let me head you off at the pass. If you wanted to do the Slysoft customers a favor, then you should have let the auto update send them to a page saying Slysoft was shut down, and give them a list of alternative software with yours being the first one. Or let the people discover that the site was shutdown on their own. But to literally have a different company access another companies software and then make it worthless unless you pay for something that you may or may not have wanted is morally wrong.
Slysoft in the early days was always doing updates sometimes two in a day. Sometimes the change log was long, but who cared at a point. Just click click and wait for the update to complete. To be morally right in this situation what Redofx should have done. Is create a new website or completely scrub the database of Slysoft's, change their name and logo to something worlds apart from Slysoft's image. But they did not. Instead they co-opted as much of Slysoft's reputation as they could while maintaining they were a separate entity. Which is fine right up to the point where their totally different software from a totally different company interfaced and accessed another company software to passively perpetrate a fraud. For that they should suffer the slings and arrows of the victims to ad nauseam!!!!!!
On a personal note there was a time in my adult life where the price of Slysoft product meant nothing to me. But the last recession hit home like none other. I now know what it means to have to spend, or want to buy something for just fifty dollars, and literally have to way the consequences of spending fifty dollars. Redfox is operating globally with many people having different levels of access to the internet and even different levels of education and understanding of different languages. So to so blatantly co-opt something and declare those upset at that co-opting as misguided and other worse chastising is also to an extent morally wrong.
To sum it all up, Redfox you can only defend your business plan and model to a point. Then you are just wrong. With being wrong usually comes some type of punishment. In your case it is a relative few people venting their anger. Sometimes the price one has to pay to eat. Ask any repo man.
The RedFox staff and any moderators should put up with every last bit of vile and hatred thrown at them. Redfox has made it perfectly clear that they are not the Slysoft company. But what they have done in actuality is create a distinction without a difference and they are paying the price for it. At least verbally. Redfox took upon itself to use much of the terminology in naming its NEW products and also took a very familiar look with its logo. There website accepts the old screen names and passwords of the Slysoft site. Now, I know why they did it, money, not necessarily greed, but the desire to have a good income stream. So they maintained as much contact as they could with a customer base.
But here is the moral failing. If you are not Slysoft. Then your severs and software had no rights in any way, shape or form to access the auto update function of Slysofts software. PEROID! Let me head you off at the pass. If you wanted to do the Slysoft customers a favor, then you should have let the auto update send them to a page saying Slysoft was shut down, and give them a list of alternative software with yours being the first one. Or let the people discover that the site was shutdown on their own. But to literally have a different company access another companies software and then make it worthless unless you pay for something that you may or may not have wanted is morally wrong.
Slysoft in the early days was always doing updates sometimes two in a day. Sometimes the change log was long, but who cared at a point. Just click click and wait for the update to complete. To be morally right in this situation what Redofx should have done. Is create a new website or completely scrub the database of Slysoft's, change their name and logo to something worlds apart from Slysoft's image. But they did not. Instead they co-opted as much of Slysoft's reputation as they could while maintaining they were a separate entity. Which is fine right up to the point where their totally different software from a totally different company interfaced and accessed another company software to passively perpetrate a fraud. For that they should suffer the slings and arrows of the victims to ad nauseam!!!!!!
On a personal note there was a time in my adult life where the price of Slysoft product meant nothing to me. But the last recession hit home like none other. I now know what it means to have to spend, or want to buy something for just fifty dollars, and literally have to way the consequences of spending fifty dollars. Redfox is operating globally with many people having different levels of access to the internet and even different levels of education and understanding of different languages. So to so blatantly co-opt something and declare those upset at that co-opting as misguided and other worse chastising is also to an extent morally wrong.
To sum it all up, Redfox you can only defend your business plan and model to a point. Then you are just wrong. With being wrong usually comes some type of punishment. In your case it is a relative few people venting their anger. Sometimes the price one has to pay to eat. Ask any repo man.
