"latest version of the client" error in Mumbai now

siddhesh

Newbie
Messages
68
Hi guys,I got the "Please install the latest version of the client" error today morning and felt completely like fish out of water. I don't have an alternate OS (Windoze) so I simply couldn't come online at all.I called customer care in the morning and after much confusion they solved the problem for me. I think they changed some settings in the backend and got me access. So for those who are getting this problem simply hassle the customer care. They will get you through in the end if you're persistent enough. tell them you don't have any alternative OS. I think rather than it being some devious scheme to drop non-Windows support, it is simply a case of an inept development team that fails to adhere to their own standards.I have requested them to have their backend team member call me, but I don't think that will happen.If I go by the count of downloads of antidialer there's more than 250 linux users using Sify out there (267 downloads in all). That's not a small number. Perhaps the older dialers (easysify) could share how many downloads they've had.Regards,SiddheshPS: I live in Mumbai. Can any linux users in Mumbai confirm whether they got this problem and whether they got it solved? It would be interesting to know whether they're disabling/enabling the entire old protocol set or whether they are putting us guys into an "allow list" of some sort.
 

priyoban

Regular
Messages
107
This is definitely a case of ''allow list'' as you put it. When some of the alternate clients would not work because of the protocol issue... some users did call up sify and tell them that they were using linux... and as a side effect these alternate clients starting working again.
 

siddhesh

Newbie
Messages
68
Yeah, it sure did :)The CC guy called me twice after that to confirm whether everything is working. He assured me that I won't have a problem regarding this as "your IP was blocked". God alone knows what he meant by that.Probably a conspiracy theory but they may have decided to disable the old protocol to discourage the use of alternative clients for windows. They can then easily identify the "desperate" linux users and give them access using their drab client.One thing's for sure, they don't seem to be in any kind of hurry to update the non-windows clients. I'd be very surprised if they pulled out a Linux/Java client anytime in the next few months (years even).Siddhesh
 


power

supersupersuper...
Messages
1,349
a java client just to login on internet would suck :( Would be slow and java = memory hog for old pc's :(
 

Dukes Mangola

Regular
Messages
175
Originally posted by power@Apr 14 2006, 10:55 AM
a java client just to login on internet would suck :( Would be slow and java = memory hog for old pc's :(
[snapback]48195[/snapback]
[/quote]
tell me....my anti virus uses less RAM than their client :(
 


siddhesh

Newbie
Messages
68
Originally posted by power@Apr 14 2006, 10:55 AM
a java client just to login on internet would suck :( Would be slow and java = memory hog for old pc's :(
[snapback]48195[/snapback]
[/quote]

Well actually a decently done client would be barely a couple of hundred KB (max). Ofcourse, the JRE will be in memory for all the time that Sify wants its dialer online. Plus if Sify's writing it then its gonna have a load of shit as well (wasted code to open up sifymax.com, stupid animations/graphics that have absolutely no purpose other than wasting CPU cycles redrawing them, and much much more ;) ).

But if they want a truly platform independent solution then they have only two options: Java and web-based.

Due to their Mac address locking scheme the latter is ruled out as its impossible to get someones Mac address in a web based app.

And I feel a platform independent solution would be best for them because that way they take care of all possible platforms without having to worry even a bit.

The Mac address recognition scheme that they're banking on (and thus eliminating the web-based option) is bullshit by the way and they should be told about it. Anyone who is skilled enough to crack someone elses login/password is skilled enough to circumvent that. Its possible though that their intention is not to stop cracked logins. Their real intention must be disallowing of sharing of unlimited packs among multiple people.
 

Swap0

Newbie
Messages
22
Originally posted by siddhesh@Apr 15 2006, 11:43 AM
Anyone who is skilled enough to crack someone elses login/password is skilled enough to circumvent that.
[snapback]48353[/snapback]
[/quote]

Well, anyone NOT skilled enought to crack someone elses login/password can also easily circumvent MAC address with a little help from google.

I think its more a case of inept programmers who probably used some dumb protection scheme like this in their college project and thought it was unbeatable.
Believe me, in my company some 'technically good' senior suggested this scheme. Luckily I was able to trash his idea.
 

power

supersupersuper...
Messages
1,349
yup there intention is to stop multiple people to stop using packs at multiple places ( like home/office ) but still they do add 2 macs to the same acc if you request . Btw thinking that mac authentication is unbeateable is the dumbest idea they can have .. its too easy to change it but still its sify you are dealing with so maybe :p
 

Top