[coffin filler]

Aye. While "Steam" has many anoyances for the user it dosent do what SF dose. Anoyances are (imo) eaiser to deal with and leave you with a working PC. (Unlike what SF can leave you with besides a head ache). Online activation is more straight forward. It dose what it says on the tin and thats that. Once you uninstall a game with online activation (HL2 etc) then its gone where SF isnt. As the devs etc look for better ways to protect there games from piracy etc we are gonna come into contact with such things i guess. Therefore its up to us (the consumer) to let the ppl who matter (devs,publishers etc) know that were not happy with a protection like SF due to the consequences having a SF protected game can cause. I wonder if On-line activation is the way forward ?. I for one would perfer that. Its the better of two evils is it not?. Its not a cast iron guarentee to protect games from becoming warez (which is what the devs etc are looking for is it not?) because as im sure many of us know there was a version of HL2 avalible with the online activation ripped out meaning the S/P part of the game was playable. I do belive online activation is more user freindly than SF and i dont mind having games with online activation installed on my PC unlike SF protected games. Do you think its the way more and more games will be protected ?? It is a winner in many ways is it not ? I say that because people who own the original game (bought from shop etc) are able to back it up quiet easily and its all about the code. The only loosers in one way are the ppl who wish to own the game for nothing weather thats by D/L or whatever, and thats what its meant to stop is it not?. Having said all this i wouldnt be surprised is ppl arnt of the same opinion and dont want online activation instead of "other" protections. So SF or Online activation ? (im intrested to know which ppl would choose if given the option).