RemoteSoft - is this really a company?

[toulouse-lautrec]

Is this a real company or some guy doing this on part time? I have tried contacting them/him multiple times about upgrading my paid Protector 3.0 version to 3.1.... no reply... nada ... zilch ... even trying email addresses inluding the "emergency" email address....

Obviously i must be totally unworthy of any kind of reply!

reading about the experiences other people had here with this "company" its kinda sad to realize this is the "best" solution out there according to Ninjatrader support.

Guys, please tell me you're joking!

[NinjaTrader_JoshP]

toulouse-lautrec,

Unfortunately RemoteSoft is the only solution we have seen that is actually sufficient for protecting your code. There are many other obfuscators out there, but we do not consider obfuscation to be a strong enough level of protection. RemoteSoft completely shuts down the process of decompiling so there is no way to even go through the obfuscation.

[noincomenojobnoassets]

Same problem here - contacted the guy 2 times, no response... someone should tell the neighbours they have to go over and take a look...?

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

At this time it makes no sense to contact RemoteSoft since we are working with them to resolve the pending issues. The result will be a version which would work with NT and which you then could purchase (or update to). We expect to get to that point within the next few days. After that step it would make sense to contact RemoteSoft again.

[Harry]

Try again

I sent a mail to [email protected] last Saturday. Huihong replied within less than 24 hours and sent me a link with the update to version 4. Installed it and tested it on NT 7 -> no problems. Don't worry.

Wrote this, before I could read Dierk's response below...

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

Harry, please see latest release notes on NT7B12: RemoteSoft support is work-in-progress, it may or may not work and definitely could cause all sorts of strange issues at this time. I again urge you to stick to the save path we recommend in our release notes to stay away of a good chunk of the trouble you keep experiencing. Thanks for your understanding.

[Harry]

Dierk, I am not experiencing any trouble. NT7 is not a finished product, so anybody who participates in testing should know that some issues will show up. My main motivation behind testing is to make sure that features that I am going to use later will work.

The "issue" you are referring to was not caused by Remotesoft, but by a Vendor.cs file referencing inexistent Jurik indicators. It took me a few minutes to do a clean reinstall, so no problem at all.

Nevertheless I have created and tested some assemblies and they worked on my second machine as expected. Not too bad for something that shouldn't work. I am not distributing these, of course.

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

It's your choice if you wanted to invest previous time in trying something which we declare as "not working". However, I kindly ask you to not recommend "your way" to others as this ultimately may cause unnecessary time consumption and frustration on everyone's end as people hit the wall. Thanks

[Harry]

Just following your release notes...

Dierk, it was not my choice. In the release notes for NT 7.0.0.10 you had recommended (#3483) to use v4 and confirmed that it supports exported assemblies. I had then sent a mail to HuiHong on March 24 and he replied on March 25. I then installed Remotesoft v4, as was recommended prior to release 12.

You then reverted back from your prior recommendation two releases later with NT 7.0.0.12. (#3564). This is no problem. But I simply followed your release notes....

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

Great, thanks

[eDanny]

I do have a question about Protector. I was understanding from early posts about the way NT7 was going to work that if you are running on a 64 bit machine and exported an indicator it would include both 32 and 64 bit versions in the .zip file but if running on a 32 bit OS only a 32 bit indicator would be exported. Is that not correct? When I export from a 32 bit Win XP machine, I have both indicators in the .zip file when running through Protector and only the 32 bit indicator if not protecting. Bug?

Dan

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

>> Bug?
No, you only needed 2 versions of protected.

[eDanny]

Maybe you are not following what I am saying. I compile/export without protecting and get only a 32 bit assembly in the .zip file. I compile/export and protect and get both 32 bit and 64 bit versions in the .zip file. This does not make any sense to me.


Dan

[NinjaTrader_Dierk]

I'm following exactly what you are saying. This is expected. We'll add some documentation as we have confirmation that the RemoteSoft protector approach as expected.

[eDanny]

Is it because NT assumes if I am not protecting I would only need a version that would run on my current install but if I am protecting I would more than likely be distributing and therefore need both?

Dan