heavy discussions here… :)
I personally don’t mind the naming of crack.exe. I totally get the gag and I think it’s good to have it. I also don’t mind to explain the policy of V4 extensively to everybody who is asking. But isn’t this issue actually much simpler than this?
Many V4 users (like myself) work professionally with V4, passing the (considerable) licensing cost on to the client, often developing the patches ON (sometimes expensive) hardware owned by the client.
This essentially means: clients pay many €€€€ or sometimes $$$$ for VVVV which go directly to the VVVV-group.
Usually I’m in a healthy and friendly relationship with my contractors and customers, so there is room for humor and it’s no problem to explain situations like this.
But, yes, for me it is easy to understand that there could be lots of ??? if a client (or even the client’s client, who usually has no humor at all) actually ends up finding a crack.exe on HIS own machines that seems to serve software he has paid big €€€€ for.
So I think commercial (paid) versions should simply have a different naming for the lovely crack.exe, because the software has been paid for and is directly intended for commercial use. Stiff department managers of big car companies etc. might also not be the apropriate audience for being lectured about software licensing. At the end of the day those are the people paying for the development of V4, right?
Unpaid, non-commercial, educational versions, in my opinion, should have their crack.exe, hell yes, including the music and little ASCII animations we all love…