In an update to the article, the author concedes that this attack was only made possible because they didn't go through the real licensing process, which cryptographically signs the resources and protects against things like XAML tampering. Wow, that's slimy.
If the premise of the article is debunked, then the article should be taken down. Keeping it up for pageviews raises profits for Ars but incurs big externalities on MS, as it spreads misinformation and FUD.
Nothing is uncrackable. Considering Microsoft's DRM for Windows has constantly been hacked since Windows XP before the final consumer public release, it's no surprise Windows 8 apps can be hacked as well. Why do companies even bother in the end anything can be bypassed, save yourself the cash and just give it up Microsoft and every other software company.
Look, people that want to make copies of your software without paying are going to. If they want to modify the local game options to get infinite money, it's only their own enjoyment of the game that gets hurt. If they disable your ads, well that can be a problem if done in significant numbers. But if not, who cares?
People that are going to pay will pay. Otherwise, it's not lost revenue, it's revenue you were never going to have in the first place. It's been seen time and again where "piracy" often helps increase earnings rather than decrease it. It's called word of mouth. If enough edge cases feel like cracking your game and then tell more people what a great game it is, that's FREE ADVERTISING. Just put out a free version!
In the case where you want to sell in-game upgrades or have some user profile, store that shit on the server.
I don't have an answer for free ad-based apps. They're annoying and I don't use any. Because I pay for shit I like and copy when you make it too annoying or hard to take my freaking money.
I do. Your game would need to display the ads as part of the game's texture (say, if its a side scroller). its much harder to hack it out, and its less intrusive (it doesn't stop the game and force you to watch the ad).
But think about the business proposition of an ad based revuenue stream - your customers are no longer the gamer, but the advertiser! Which means that either you don't serve your customer well (by displaying ads that don't convert), or _do_ serve your customer well, but fuck over the actual gamer. Neither is a good way to go in my opinion. Its better to get the game paid for by the gamer, and if your game is worth it, it will be bought.
If the premise of the article is debunked, then the article should be taken down. Keeping it up for pageviews raises profits for Ars but incurs big externalities on MS, as it spreads misinformation and FUD.