Re: Interesting article about Linux at InternetWeek
From: Keith Benedict (spamgotcha_at_workingworld.ca)
Date: 07/01/03
- Next message: mjt: "Re: GAIM segfaults with MSN"
- Previous message: Vilmos Soti: "Re: Looking for program to compare pixel pictures"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 30 Jun 2003 19:20:53 -0700
<telford@xenon.triode.bogus.au> wrote in message news:<bdmhpd$2l8g$1@arachne.labyrinth.net.au>...
> In comp.os.linux Keith Benedict <spamgotcha@workingworld.ca> wrote:
> > <telford@xenon.triode.bogus.au> wrote in message news:<bdfbr2$paj$1@arachne.labyrinth.net.au>...
> > <snip>
>
> >> Microsoft force every user to register online and insist that the user may
> >> not perform substantial hardware upgrades. In effect, this guarantees that
> >> all licenses have a limited lifetime. At some stage the user must upgrade and
> >> buy a new license, for a newer version.
>
> > Not true here, although you will be prompted to reactivate and if you
> > have a retail home version it may even require you to contact
> > Microsoft to tell them who you are and that you just upgraded your
> > machine. You will not have to buy a new license to use XP when you
> > upgrade your machine.
>
> I'm sure that the whole world feels a lot safer now that they have your
> personal guarantee on that issue but meanwhile back in reality the problem
> remains that Microsoft offers no such guarantee. Both the license itself
> and the protection mechanism only provide for the support of one particular
> PC configuration so the only thing you can be sure of is that they will
> allow you to use it the first time.
>
> This URL covers most of their policy:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/basics/activation/mpafaq.asp
Yes and read it I have, I didn't state my personal guarentee on the
issue...where in that did I use the term gaurentee? You must be
misreading my post.
As for the facts, read the link you provided. I am not advocating
windows, simply stating that as per their own policies as you
convienently pointed out to us, Microsoft will allow you to reinstall
and transfer the software as per the legal agreement of said software.
Now in the case of XP, it is fully transferable if you remove the
product from the previous machine...or in the case of a significant
upgrade where the machine believes it is a new machine you'd simply go
on to reactivating.
I don't care for activation, I personally dislike it very much, but
the fact of the matter is someone stated *YOU MUST* buy a new license
if you upgrade your machine. I simply corrected this as
misinformation doesn't do anything for Linux or Windows beyond
spreading FUD.
> The point is that when you must go back and ask permission to use the
> software again, re-activation is at Microsoft's discretion and they
> don't give any written promise that what you call an upgrade, they
> might call a "different PC". Here is a quote from their page:
>
Which is why I dislike it, but I didnt say I liked it...I simply said
he was worng for spreading the idea you have to buy something again
for a simple upgrade.
<snipped rest as irrelevent>
Simply stated we all dislike it which is why I am not in a Microsoft
Advocacy group cheering up and down....But at least we can dislike it
for the real reasons.
Keith.
- Next message: mjt: "Re: GAIM segfaults with MSN"
- Previous message: Vilmos Soti: "Re: Looking for program to compare pixel pictures"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
