Embarcadero, please get off of the wrong side of history.

Have a look at this:

One of the biggest names in the entire computer industry just renounced the concept of software authentication, to thunderous applause and cheering. Even more amazingly, that name is Sony, one of the most infamous past offenders in that area.

Everywhere we look, DRM is dying.  People are starting to realize what it is, how it works, and how it violates their rights and devalues their property, and they’re not standing for it any longer, as Disney exec Peter Lee predicted almost a decade ago.  The concept has already been completely defunct in the music industry for years now, and the rest of the digital world is slowly starting to catch up.  The recent issues regarding the legality of cellphone unlocking have brought DRM to the public eye, and Congress is starting to listen.

It’s becoming increasingly clear that those still supporting the concept are losing.  Ironically, it was Apple who first brought the rejection of DRM into the mainstream when they stopped using it for music on iTunes, but now as they persist in clinging to it to lock down iOS devices, they’re hemorrhaging market share to the more open Android platform.  And Microsoft, whose stubborn attempts to cling to and further expand lock-in control over the XBox ecosystem prompted gamers to petition Sony to do exactly what they just did, is going to face stiff competition in the next generation of the console wars, not only from the PS4 but from the (again, Android-based) OUYA platform.  It may not have the hardware power to go head-to-head with the XBox One for AAA titles, but its much more open, friendly development process is likely to pull the rug out from under XBox Live Arcade’s feet on the indie side of things!

But Embarcadero is being just as stubbornly unreasonable in the face of reality as Microsoft.  Look around the Internet, and you’ll see people using the term “DRM-free” as an advertised feature of new software.  That’s the world in which we’re living today, but for some inexplicable reason, RAD Studio still has activation built in.  All that does is give people one more reason to pirate Delphi instead of buying it.  If someone wants to get a pirated copy, they will, DRM or no DRM.  Making things harder on legitimate users does nothing to convince them not to get a pirated copy.

Embarcadero, you’re on the wrong side of history.  Please get off of it, for all our sakes.

27 Comments

  1. I agree that this activation thing in RAD Studio is making things harder on legit users.
    I just purchased Delphi XE4 Pro and haven’t yet activated it because I have to make sure the machine I do that on will be the one I use for the next ‘x’ years. I don’t want to legitimately be re-installing some day to be told that I have used up my activation attempts. Anyways, to be fair to Embarcadero, I read in somewhere that you can always write to support to get additional activation attempts allowed. But you must request it.

  2. A dead diver found deep in the woods says:

    I don’t quite understand. I haven’t bought RAD Studio, my company did. However, since it’s bound to my personal name, I can (and do) install it not only on my work computer, but also on all my private machines. It requires an Embarcadero account. Just like steam.

    Is there anything I have missed? Something like “You may just activate this serial five times. After that, give us a phone call”?

    Best regards.

  3. Bunny says:

    Let’s have a look.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roUWhOd7zWk

    The greatest power of a computer is still that it’s a perfect copy machine. It made it’s success.

    The developer’s job is not about knowing tools. Myth spread by tool vendors. A wheelchair does not enable you in the Indy Race. The world does not benefit from people knowing tools. The world benefits from young people interested in certain topics.

    In general I agree. Innovation according to Schumpeter is about being early in order to create a monopoly but a lot more about making the better product succeed on a long term. Sometimes the cheaper solution succeeds TCP/IP, VHS …

    Even Telerik ‘advertise’ a no non-sense license.

    Zeitgeist
    Why do such things happen – different view
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl8GvPRvikM

  4. Sepp says:

    It’s not just the activation, it’s the whole installation process. Embarcadero is a company full of old men sticking to their old fart ways of doing things.

    To see how things are supposed to be done, they should take a look at Jetbrains.

    • Joseph says:

      >It’s not just the activation, it’s the whole installation process.

      I timed it and I was able to install an entire desktop Linux operating system with all standard desktop software – full office suite, image editing, instant messaging, e-mail/contacts, VoIP, CD burning, PDF reader, web browser, file archiver, music management, media player, etc. plus compiler tools in less time than it takes to install Delphi (without selecting any of the third party or cross-platform stuff)! It also required less user interaction. And I regularly use a full-featured open source IDE that completes a cold start in 5 seconds, unlike Delphi.

    • Gandi says:

      i cant get the clou, please help me:
      the Java intelliIdea from JetBrains costs as
      commercial License including 1-year Upgrade Subscription
      €629 + VAT

      as far as i know NetBeans and Eclips, full blown
      Devenvironments are for free.

      Please help me i dont understand

  5. A dead diver found deep in the woods says:

    I still don’t get you guys.

    It’s neither limited to just two installs (I have it installed on one work and two private PCs), nor can I take anyone seriously who complains about installing time. Seriously, Visual Studio takes longer.

    I’m either near braindead or simply cannot find anything specific you guys are complaining about. Care to elaborate?

  6. Joseph says:

    >I still don’t get you guys.

    Don’t worry; we don’t even get each other!

    >nor can I take anyone seriously who complains about installing time. Seriously, Visual Studio takes longer.

    That Visual Studio is even worse doesn’t make the Delphi install time good. I just installed Eclipse for the heck of it and from first button click, download on a 1.5MB/s internet connection, to finish it took 3 minutes 4 seconds on an entry-level desktop CPU from 2009. On top of it, once past the beginning and authorizing the install, there was no user interaction necessary and required dependencies were resolved and installed (quite unlike Delphi). Comparing Delphi install practices to Microsoft (which has yet to realize that other OSes can exist on a PC even though it’s 2013) is like saying your neighborhood is safer than Kabul. 🙂

    Oh, and Java-based Eclipse started up faster than Delphi too. 🙁

    >I’m either near braindead

    >>A dead diver found deep in the woods

    Based on the self-description, the “near” part might be charitable. 😉

    > or simply cannot find anything specific you guys are complaining about. Care to elaborate?

    Installing J#, Help thingies, 700 other dependencies one at a time, all with their individual EULA checkboxes, is not only slow, it’s unnecessarily interactive. Back to the Linux example I brought up. I can select a bunch of software to install, and then any licenses that need to be agreed to *come up at the beginning, immediately after each other*. That’s the end of user interaction. All the files are then downloaded first – which helps avoid the issue of internet problems in the middle of an install leaving you in a broken state – and then installed with no more interaction. No such luck with Delphi. You can leave it or switch to doing something else only to switch back and realize it’s been sitting waiting for input from you for something for the past five minutes. That’s just poor design.

    And what I originally said still holds… I can install a full OS and a general suite of software to a VM in less time than it takes just Delphi to install in an identically configured VM. Startup is also slow, and the more features you have installed the slower it is to get going.

    These aren’t deal-breakers, but just one of many, many places where the “fit and finish” of Delphi is lacking compared to other (often cheaper) tools. Google had a “Project Butter” to drastically improve the polish of Android. Delphi really needs a “Project Butter” of its own covering IDE, language and standard library. It really needs to put its best foot forward as its introduced to new users, and we need to avoid “death by a thousand cuts”.

  7. Stringizer says:

    “Delphi really needs a “Project Butter” of its own covering IDE, language and standard library. ”
    so why dont you send a well elaborated list to Emba?

  8. Keith says:

    The article to which these comments are responses contends that DRM is wrong, in and of itself. It is not about the extra time imposed by DRM.

    If Sun could have found a way to charge for Java, it would not have GONE OUT OF BUSINESS!!!. (the popularity of Java dwarfed its hardward biz.) Is this what you want Emb to do? If you really buy this anti-DRM stuff, just switch over to Java (sure is quite out there ;-).

    Languages (and IDEs) are ‘TOOLS,’ not ‘CONTENT.’ The music industry’s product is Content, not Tools. Content can be supported by other means, e.g., advertising, Tools cannot. Even so, the music industry has been devestated by the lack of protection. To extend the author’s argument, the tools of the music industry should also be free (music instrument makers should give away their instruments, performing venue owners should give away their venue, etc. – do the developers using non-DRM software give away their products? I think not.).

    I am a Delphi contractor. I make $60/hr. Seveal years ago, I took advantage of Emp offer to subscribe to ALL of their products: dev tools, db tools, databases, etc. So … I pay about $2,400 per year and get back 120k. You people who don’t even want to pay $500-$1,000 for Delphi make me sick. Do you give away the products you make? NO!!!

    Why doesn’t the author of this article just switch over to Free Pascal? I suspect that the people who want Delphi to be DRM-free want to make it easier to steal Delphi. I am going to call the author’s bluff. I would like the author to go on the record that he/she has never stolen Delphi. That still does not mean I am obliged to believe it, but I think it is important to get the author on the record. So … I challenge to the author to make the proclamation … while still wanting to make it easier to steal.

    • Mason Wheeler says:

      DRM is wrong in and of itself. It’s not about protecting content, and it’s not about extra time; it’s about the rights of the user. Under any other context, some remote programmer putting software on my machine that causes it to deliberately act against my interests and take control of my system away from me would be an act of hacking, which is illegal. The fact that it’s occurring in response to an alleged violation of the law makes it even worse: now you have private parties taking the enforcement of the law into their own hands, which is vigilantism. (Also illegal, especially when the vigilante and the victim are the same person, for a very good reason: vigilantes tend to overreact and the punishment tends to be vastly disproportionate to the crime. And you need look no further than the Sony Rootkit to see that the exact same thing happens with DRM.)

      If Sun could have found a way to charge for Java, it would not have GONE OUT OF BUSINESS!!! (the popularity of Java dwarfed its hardware biz.)

      You assume that Java would have been as popular as it was if it had been as expensive as Delphi? Based on what?

      Is this what you want Emb to do?

      Borland went out of business, because they did a bad job of delivering what the customer wanted. Delphi is still around. I see no reason why it couldn’t happen again.

      Content can be supported by other means, e.g., advertising, Tools cannot.

      And yet somehow Python, PHP, MySQL, Firebird, Ruby, Lua, and plenty of other tools manage to survive, and even thrive, as free software. How does your theory account for them?

      I am a Delphi contractor. I make $60/hr

      Awesome! I’m a full-time Delphi developer. I make… not quite that much, but enough to live comfortably on. So we both agree that Delphi allows professionals to make a good living.

      So … I pay about $2,400 per year and get back 120k. You people who don’t even want to pay $500-$1,000 for Delphi make me sick.

      I’m not one of the “you people” you seem to think I am. What I don’t want is for people who aren’t professionals making $120K/year yet (hobbyists, students, etc.) to reject Delphi because they don’t have $2,400 per year. Your high salary seems to have distorted your perspective somewhat.

      I first started programming when I was 8 years old. Think back to when you were 8. $2,400 may be pocket change to you today, but was it back then?

      Do you give away the products you make? NO!!!

      http://code.google.com/p/turbu/
      http://www.libsdl.org/
      http://code.google.com/p/portal-m/
      http://code.google.com/p/dwscript/

      All products that I either made or contributed significant features to. All given away for free.

      I suspect that the people who want Delphi to be DRM-free want to make it easier to steal Delphi.

      Why? Because programming is all about the money to you, so you think it’s all about the money to everyone else too? I didn’t get into programming because it was lucrative; I got into programming because it was fun.

      Also, please don’t use the word “steal” in the context of software. It just makes you sound ignorant and destroys your credibility. Stealing software is nearly impossible, because theft implies and requires loss. Copying is not theft.

      I want Delphi to be DRM-free for two reasons. First, because having DRM drives people away from your product, and I want more people using Delphi. And second, because it’s completely wrong and entirely unjustifiable. It’s quite simple: piracy is the developer’s problem. It is not my problem, and the developer has zero justification for making it my problem unless and until they can prove in a court of law that I am part of the problem. Which they can’t, because I’m not.

      I would like the author to go on the record that he/she has never stolen Delphi.

      I have never stolen Delphi, or any other work of digital media, as this is pretty much impossible to do.

      • Keith says:

        DRM is … about the rights of the user.
        Hmmm …. this is interesting. Just from where are these ‘rights’ derived? It is clear that you think you have a ‘right’ to the commercial software that I may write … because … what? … because you CAN take it, against my will as the creator?

        The fact that it’s occurring in response to an alleged violation of the law makes it even worse: now you have private parties taking the enforcement of the law into their own hands, which is vigilantism. (Also illegal, especially when the vigilante and the victim are the same person, for a very good reason: vigilantes tend to overreact and the punishment tends to be vastly disproportionate to the crime. And you need look no further than the Sony Rootkit to see that the exact same thing happens with DRM.)
        So … let me get this right. If I put a lock on my house, to prevent a thief from coming into my house and stealing the software I have created, I am a vigilante? Wow! Oh … by the way, you admit that it is against ‘the law’ to copy software, without the consent of the creator. So, by definition, if you are ‘legally’ obligated only to use software only on the ‘terms and conditions’ imposed by its creator. In fact, even Open Software is protected by various license types, each stipulating ‘terms and conditions.’ (For your information, Sony has its entertainment division up for sale. And, it is the market consensus that they are going to take a huge loss … hmmm … why would that be?)

        You assume that Java would have been as popular as it was if it had been as expensive as Delphi? Based on what?
        No, you are trying to put words in my mouth. I am just stating facts. Do you know that they would have gone out of business when they could have charged money for Java?

        Borland went out of business, because they did a bad job of delivering what the customer wanted. Delphi is still around. I see no reason why it couldn’t happen again.
        That is a very simplistic speculation. You are entitled to speculate, but don’t pretend its fact. For your information, Delphi is doing quite well, thank you. The question becomes, would Emb have been able to create the fantastic improvements in Delphi if they did not prevent people from stealing Delphi? I would say no.

        And yet somehow Python, PHP, MySQL, Firebird, Ruby, Lua, and plenty of other tools manage to survive, and even thrive, as free software. How does your theory account for them?
        I am glad these Open Software projects are doing well. If you think I am against Open Software, you are wrong and possibly not understanding what I am saying. I am saying everyone should use software under the terms and conditions of its creators. Every project you list has its own license, including terms and conditions. Now, if you go to Pirate sites and download Delphi, do you think you are using Delphi under Emb ‘terms and conditions?’

        I’m not one of the “you people” you seem to think I am. What I don’t want is for people who aren’t professionals making $120K/year yet (hobbyists, students, etc.) to reject Delphi because they don’t have $2,400 per year. Your high salary seems to have distorted your perspective somewhat.
        No problem. Hobbyists and students can just get Free Pascal. They do not have the ‘right’ to download Delphi from Pirate sites. What is the moral imperative that they must have ‘Delphi?’ I just don’t understand. Your personal attack on me is not justified and not appreciated.

        I first started programming when I was 8 years old. Think back to when you were 8. $2,400 may be pocket change to you today, but was it back then?
        No. I bought a copy of Delphi. I think it was about a hundred dollars (American). Did I make it clear that the $2,400 is not just for Delphi. I get all the Languages, Dev Tools, DB Tools, and database engines for $2,400.

        Do you give away the products you make? NO!!!
        http://code.google.com/p/turbu/
        http://www.libsdl.org/
        http://code.google.com/p/portal-m/
        http://code.google.com/p/dwscript/

        All products that I either made or contributed significant features to. All given away for free.
        This does not counter my argument. I specifically wrote “the software,” which entails ALL of the software you write, including where you work at. Do give your programming away to your employer for free?

        Why? Because programming is all about the money to you, so you think it’s all about the money to everyone else too? I didn’t get into programming because it was lucrative; I got into programming because it was fun.
        It’s just a speculation of mine. And I wrote it as such. However, again, you are attacking me personally. It is not appreciated and detracts from your presentation. Want to have some ‘fun?’ Get Free Pascal.

        Also, please don’t use the word “steal” in the context of software. It just makes you sound ignorant and destroys your credibility. Stealing software is nearly impossible, because theft implies and requires loss. Copying is not theft.
        Again with the personal attacks. When do you quit with the personal attacks? If the ‘terms and conditions’ of the license allows for copying, I am just fine with that.

        I want Delphi to be DRM-free for two reasons. First, because having DRM drives people away from your product, and I want more people using Delphi. And second, because it’s completely wrong and entirely unjustifiable. It’s quite simple: piracy is the developer’s problem. It is not my problem, and the developer has zero justification for making it my problem unless and until they can prove in a court of law that I am part of the problem. Which they can’t, because I’m not.
        Why are you consumed that people use Delphi? They can use Free Pascal or any of the other Open Source languages. Second, we finally get to the point. I understand you to be saying its morally right to use software, created by someone else, regarless of their ‘terms and conditions.’ Oh, that’s right, you have a ‘Right,’ as a ‘User’ (see beginning paragaph) to other people’s software.

        I have never stolen Delphi, or any other work of digital media, as this is pretty much impossible to do.
        This is clever wording, but underscores you position the best. In Aruba, does not have a dope problem. But this is because abusing drugs is NOT AGAINST THE LAW! To summarize your position. As a ‘User’ you have a ‘right’ to software created by others, regardless of their expressed ‘terms and conditions’ and if you are not caught, it is not ‘your problem.’ If I have mis represented your position in any way, I apologize. I presented my side as best I can, so I am not going to respond again. I just don’t have the time. But thank you for this discussion.

        • Mason Wheeler says:

          Yes, you’ve completely and consistently misrepresented my position. You seem to think that DRM is about stopping piracy, and that any opposition to it must be rooted in a pro-piracy attitude. You also apparently think that I’m running off a “stolen” copy of Delphi.

          Think about that for a second. Do you seriously think I’d be an active voice in the community, writing this blog, going to speak at Delphi conferences, participating on the forums, etc, frequently talking about technical details of the implementation of various aspects of Delphi that I could only know from having the software in my possession, where anyone (including Embarcadero representatives) could see it, if I knew that they had no record of me having a valid license? Seriously? I’ve been on SA for years now. I’m as legal as it gets.

          So … let me get this right. If I put a lock on my house, to prevent a thief from coming into my house and stealing the software I have created, I am a vigilante?

          Wrong. See, that’s the thing. No one’s coming into your house and stealing the software you have created. The software is running in my house, inside my computer, and you have no right to put a lock on my house.

          The question becomes, would Emb have been able to create the fantastic improvements in Delphi if they did not prevent people from stealing Delphi? I would say no.

          The more fundamental question is, is Emb able to prevent people from “stealing” Delphi?

          You know that thing where Google will suggest ways to complete a query in progress? Type in “Delphi XE4” and see the word “crack” come up as one of the highest-ranked suggestions. Run that search and see how many results you get, barely two months after release. If someone wants an illegal copy of Delphi, they’re going to get it, and the DRM does absolutely nothing to impede them. I don’t say this out of any pro-piracy sentiment, but simply because it’s true.

          And yet somehow Python, PHP, MySQL, Firebird, Ruby, Lua, and plenty of other tools manage to survive, and even thrive, as free software. How does your theory account for them?

          I am glad these Open Software projects are doing well. If you think I am against Open Software, you are wrong and possibly not understanding what I am saying.

          Well, what you said was: “Languages (and IDEs) are ‘TOOLS,’ not ‘CONTENT.’ … Content can be supported by other means, e.g., advertising, Tools cannot.” I didn’t understand that as “Keith is against Open Software;” I understood that as “Keith is factually incorrect on this point, as evidenced by these several examples of popular tools that are supported by other means than by charging hundreds or thousands of dollars per license.” Or was that not what you meant?

          No problem. Hobbyists and students can just get Free Pascal. They do not have the ‘right’ to download Delphi from Pirate sites.

          I never said they did, and your persistent harping on that particular strawman isn’t helping your credibility any. What I said is that they have the right to not have their computer hacked by software that assumes that they are probably pirates.

          And the problem with Free Pascal is that it’s not Delphi, it’s still not compatible with Delphi in many important areas, and most software written for Delphi is going to trip over one of them. And there isn’t all that much code out there written “for FPC;” it’s written “for Delphi.” Which means that most code that someone is going to run across (libraries, for example) will either not compile or not run right without a lot of modification and tweaking, at a level that’s beyond the skill of newcomers to the language.

          Again with the personal attacks. When do you quit with the personal attacks?

          When you afford me the same courtesy. You can start by laying off the entirely unfounded accusations of thievery.

          I understand you to be saying its morally right to use software, created by someone else, regarless of their ‘terms and conditions.’ Oh, that’s right, you have a ‘Right,’ as a ‘User’ (see beginning paragaph) to other people’s software.

          …and when you stop twisting everything I say inside out. I never said anyone has a right to use anyone’s software illegally. What I said is that they have a right to Due Process and the presumption of innocence. When did that simple idea become something worth mocking?

          Simply put, if the police can’t punish me for breaking copyright law without actual evidence and a conviction in court, why should a private entity be able to do so?

          P.S. WordPress supports various HTML tags in comments, including BLOCKQUOTE. Please use it; it makes your replies much cleaner and easier to read.

          • Gambit says:

            I know people who installed a software more times than they we legally allowed just because it was easier and faster to do it than to take the time to buy another license. It was not about piracy, it was about comfort!

            They were wrong of course, but the software vendor was hurt anyway.

            Sorry to disagree, but I think vendors have the right to protect their investment.

            • Mason Wheeler says:

              Oh, I completely agree with you. I never said that a software vendor doesn’t have the right to protect their investment; only that they don’t have the right to do so by violating *my* property rights. The correct way to deal with someone who you suspect of harming you by breaking the law is through the legal system; not by taking the law into your own hands.

              • Gambit says:

                I guess I see your point but what I don´t see is what are the vendors´ options. They can sue people, but that is also expensive and you have to know who you are sueing. Considering piracy nowadays happens around the globe, how to use the legal system to prevent an ilegal use of a product from someone?

                I understand (I guess) that you feel disrespected because you have to activate the product you payed for and at some moment you will have to send an e-mail or request an activation extension to be able to use it, but I can´t see a different way to a software producer to protect it/him/herself.

                • Mason Wheeler says:

                  You make a good point. But you seem to be under the misconception that DRM is actually effective in preventing piracy and “protecting the author’s investment”. The problem is, this isn’t true and never has been. It simply does not work.

                  The problem is, DRM is software, and all software has bugs. And if one person, anywhere in the world, finds a bug in your DRM, they can crack it and post it on the Web, and it’s cracked forever. Heck, one of the latest high-profile offerings in the business world lasted less than a day before being cracked. The better ones usually last about a month. But either way, it does nothing to actually protect your program from pirates; if they want a pirated copy, they’ll get one.

                  The only way to make money from software in this day and age is the way of the free market: find some way to legitimately convince the potential customer that the value your software will bring to them is greater than the price that you’re asking for it, and they will pay, even if there’s a cracked version available somewhere. There are many ways to do that; twisting their arm with DRM is not one of them.

                  • Gambit says:

                    I see. So what you defend is:

                    1. Offer a good product
                    2. Provide good support
                    3. Charge a “fair” price

                    and people will prefer to buy instead pirate.

                    • Mason Wheeler says:

                      Exactly. Not everyone will, of course, but those who won’t, won’t anyway, and there’s really nothing you can do about them except taking them to court. (Which, as you pointed out, is often too expensive to be worthwhile.) So the best thing to do is to just ignore them, and focus on making your product attractive to the people who *are* willing to pay.

                      And keep a long-term view. Remember, someone using your product and not paying for it is certainly not better than someone using your product and paying for it, but it’s still better than someone not using your product at all!

    • Gambit says:

      Agreed! It´s very easy to say “trust people, they will not steal your property”, but who leaves the home door unlocked when goes out?

  9. Rob says:

    This whole DRM issue is a created problem by non Delphi users. For Delphi users it’s a non problem. They never ever think about DRM in Delphi. Stop creating problems that not exist.

  10. I’m with Mason on this one. Anyone who thinks DRM is a necessary evil consider this thought experiment:

    If tomorrow Embarcadero decided that it was no longer if their best interests to continue activating versions of Delphi older than those they currently support it would turn thousands of installation disks into drink coasters in an instant. What if tomorrow Embarcadero closed their doors? How useful is a thousand dollar IDE that you can’t install because the activation server is no longer available?

    What right does any copyright holder have to deny the legal purchaser of a product access to that product? It doesn’t matter how long ago they purchased it or whether it is no longer profitable to maintain the ancient activation system it was built upon. This is the real problem with DRM. It denies legitimate purchasers access to their purchases based on the whim or financial health of the copyright holder… and it does so through entirely artificial means.

    Yes, it may keep some honest people honest but does nothing to thwart a determined hacker who isn’t going to respect the copyright holder’s rights regardless of artificial protection mechanisms. And said hacker is going to publish his work so anyone with the ability to click a download link can obtain a unencumbered copy. So the end result is that DRM inconveniences legitimate users while utterly failing to prevent illegal copying. The copyright holder looses, the legitimate user looses and the software pirate couldn’t care less.

    The resources expended on DRM are a complete waist of time, effort and money. More/better features, more marketing or a more affordable price tag would have been a better use of those resources for Embarcadero.

  11. Install into vmware. No one i know have their dev stuff on real hw anymore

Leave a Reply to Kenneth Cochran