Skunksoft CodeNapper [Discontinued]

Post by **Dare2** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 12:55 am

Argh, sad to hear. Props on your ethics!

If you've already done the work, don't drop it! Do like MS et al and charge an arm and a leg plus a torso or two for it. Couple of good sales -v- '000s little ones.

PolyVector · Post by **PolyVector** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 1:03 am

Thanks for the support Dare2... That's what we are talking about doing right now... Which is rather unfortunate, seeing as the whole point of Skunksoft is to make quality inexpensive software... Oh well, this was only a side project anyways... If anybody's interested in learning the fundimentals of API-Hooking/DLL-Injection for a legitimate use just contact me and I'll help in any way I can

All I can say is, Back to FreeStyle!

Post by **Dare2** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 1:31 am

PolyVector wrote:All I can say is, Back to FreeStyle!

Yes!.

Pity that the malicious few stuff things around so much. CodeNapper could have made for some really interesting ways to create code. Very dynamic, ideas keep coming to mind.

ricardo · Post by **ricardo** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 2:08 am

Your lib sounds interesting!!

Any chance to test it?

BTW your image processor is very nice, i have a real estate office and need to resize images very often and your app makes the job fasta and easy, thanks!!

PolyVector · Post by **PolyVector** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 2:22 am

@ricardo
Thank you very much! I didn't think anybody used ImageCP... When FreeStyle is released we are planning on skinning ImageCP and putting it on Downloads.com as shareware... Skinned applications sell!

Maybe we can run some sort of 'case study' with both unskinned and skinned versions of ImageCP on Downloads.com... That way we can show developers what an impact skinning can have on an application's popularity

Max.Â² · Post by **Max.Â²** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 10:22 am

PolyVector wrote:Notice:
I'm temperarily removing the file from our servers because of something that was recently brought to our attention... Apparently there's been a rash of people using this kind of library with a malicious intent! Even madCodeHook has experienced this...

Kudos for thinking about the implications, but my opinion is that it is futile to create a less hassleful world by restricting information & knowledge.

If we would argue on that level, we should worry about 50% of the snippets, libs & codes posted in the forum. Or not, because Fred wouldn't have released PureBasic at all, as it's lean and fast output of easy to understand commands is a real weapon of mass programming.

The technique of hooking/dll injection is there - as foundation of the OS. It is the OS developer's task to limit abuse, not the application developers.

Anyway, if someone is interested, take a look at these links:

http://www.codeproject.com/system/hooksys.asp
http://www.windowsitlibrary.com/Content/356/06/1.html
http://help.madshi.net/Content.htm
http://www.infoprocess.biz/

PolyVector · Post by **PolyVector** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 11:42 am

That's true, but we're trying to start a company and we don't want half or our applications to get picked up by anti-virus software because somebody mis-used our library...

Edit: It's funny how people suddenly became interested in this library when we decided not to release it... I'm getting a lot of complaints, maybe we'll have to reconsider this... It was pointed out to me that we don't have to use the DLL version in our software, that would prevent the anti-virus problem I was worried about...hmmmm

Tommeh · Post by **Tommeh** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 3:18 pm

I really would like to be able to use the full lib of this, Not for anything mallicious but to experiment.

Shame if you do discontinue developing it, Besides if you don't somebody else will

But at the end of the day its totaly your decision

[EDIT] Isnt your lib just like this http://www.infoprocess.biz/HookTool.aspx If so, Then somebody has also released it free which means... were all doomed

thefool · Post by **thefool** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 3:38 pm

well i have tested it because im a beta tester, and it was promising. Very
sad indeed.

No people using image-cp? Well actually i use it.

Well i was actually kind of expecting to see this lib, and i had no bad uses
of it.

Well, ill contact you about the api learning then, cause i had uses of this.

Max.Â² · Post by **Max.Â²** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:15 pm

PolyVector wrote:Edit: It's funny how people suddenly became interested in this library when we decided not to release it...

I was no. 2 who opted "to buy it" in your initial poll. So I think I am quite eligible to voice my opinion when you decide not to sell it.

PolyVector · Post by **PolyVector** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 10:09 pm

@Max.Â²
I didn't mean you specificly, I've been swamped with PMs in this forum and Skunksoft's asking me to release it... That's all I meant...

ricardo · Post by **ricardo** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 1:49 am

PolyVector wrote: It's funny how people suddenly became interested in this library when we decided not to release it... I'm getting a lot of complaints, maybe we'll have to reconsider this... It was pointed out to me that we don't have to use the DLL version in our software, that would prevent the anti-virus problem I was worried about...hmmmm

Because your description sound very interesting, i was wondering if there are any chance to test this lib too !!

ricardo · Post by **ricardo** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 1:57 am

PolyVector wrote:@ricardo
Thank you very much! I didn't think anybody used ImageCP... When FreeStyle is released we are planning on skinning ImageCP and putting it on Downloads.com as shareware... Skinned applications sell!

Maybe we can run some sort of 'case study' with both unskinned and skinned versions of ImageCP on Downloads.com... That way we can show developers what an impact skinning can have on an application's popularity

Yes, cuold be a good idea to test both options and verify if there is some difference in downloads in first place and in registering in second place.

The only problem is that download.com is not cheap (U$99 montlhy) and that we cant know how much people see the screenshot before downloading it, because in download.com the screenshot is not showed in the product page.

I think a better studie case will be put both options in the same page (some site) with screenshots and then verify if there is some difference in downloadings OR maybe, using download.com you can develop an installer that prompts asking the user if want to install skinned or unskinned version (with screenshot of both) when installing and sending the resulting option to your site database or something.

newbie · Post by **newbie** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:13 pm

Edit: It's funny how people suddenly became interested in this library when we decided not to release it

do not make truth out of coincidences

I indeed asked you more info by PM, because when I first heard of this project the DLL/lib wasn't available.
When now I come back here weeks later, the project is both published/removed, I am here too late

PolyVector · Post by **PolyVector** » Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:31 pm

I was only making a joke about people's interest... I actually think it's great that so many are interested...
Right now we're working out the details of how we can release CodeNapper without incident... We wouldn't have bothered if it weren't for so many PM's asking us to release it

I'll keep you posted...

My appologies to everybody for all the confusion... Things are very hectic around here...