XP Activation

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I recently re-ran the windows XP on one of the comuters in our lab and which
is on a network. The lab has 6 machines plus 2 other in other offices. But
after completing the installation I can not activate it using the
internet..."what could be the problem?
48 answers Last reply
More about activation
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    If you encounter a problem with activation via the internet,
    then simply choose the alternative option to "activate by phone".

    How to activate Windows XP
    http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;307890

    --
    Carey Frisch
    Microsoft MVP
    Windows XP - Shell/User
    Microsoft Newsgroups

    Get Windows XP Service Pack 2 with Advanced Security Technologies:
    http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/choose.mspx

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Uncle john" wrote:

    | I recently re-ran the windows XP on one of the comuters in our lab and which
    | is on a network. The lab has 6 machines plus 2 other in other offices. But
    | after completing the installation I can not activate it using the
    | internet..."what could be the problem?
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Uncle john wrote:
    > I recently re-ran the windows XP on one of the comuters in our lab
    > and which is on a network. The lab has 6 machines plus 2 other in
    > other offices. But after completing the installation I can not
    > activate it using the internet..."what could be the problem?

    Common problem. Could be many reasons. Just phone activate.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Thanks guys...I guess the only option here is to activate by phoning...Let's
    stay in touch

    "kurttrail" wrote:

    > Uncle john wrote:
    > > I recently re-ran the windows XP on one of the comuters in our lab
    > > and which is on a network. The lab has 6 machines plus 2 other in
    > > other offices. But after completing the installation I can not
    > > activate it using the internet..."what could be the problem?
    >
    > Common problem. Could be many reasons. Just phone activate.
    >
    > --
    > Peace!
    > Kurt
    > Self-anointed Moderator
    > microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    > http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    > "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    > "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
    >
    >
    >
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Uncle john wrote:
    > I recently re-ran the windows XP on one of the comuters in our lab and which
    > is on a network. The lab has 6 machines plus 2 other in other offices. But
    > after completing the installation I can not activate it using the
    > internet..."what could be the problem?

    Does it say why not?

    Are you using different XP activation codes for each machine, or just
    using one for all (in which case it will object). You'd be better
    getting a volume licence copy which does not need to be activated.
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in

    > If you encounter a problem with activation via the internet,
    > then simply choose the alternative option to "activate by phone".
    >
    > How to activate Windows XP
    > http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;307890
    >
    > --
    > Carey Frisch

    "simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than talking to
    someone on the phone about permission to use it.

    Alias
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer. On the other
    hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the computer, he will have
    to activate. Simple as that.

    Alias wrote:


    > "simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than talking to
    > someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >
    > Alias
    >
    >
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote

    > He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.

    Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid for
    that is on his computer.

    > On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the computer, he
    > will have to activate. Simple as that.

    I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money for and
    activation assumes that their paying customers are pirates/thieves until
    they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those who use pirated versions of
    XP can merrily use their computers and the software on it to their heart's
    content without having to waste their time phoning up MS for permission.

    Do you think that's fair?

    Alias
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >
    >
    >> "simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than talking
    >> to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>
    >> Alias
    >
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND
    a handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used. Oh and the
    CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20 years,
    nothing new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the
    "authentication" will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.

    Alias wrote:

    > "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >
    >
    >>He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >
    >
    > Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid for
    > that is on his computer.
    >
    >
    >>On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the computer, he
    >>will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >
    >
    > I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    > product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money for and
    > activation assumes that their paying customers are pirates/thieves until
    > they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those who use pirated versions of
    > XP can merrily use their computers and the software on it to their heart's
    > content without having to waste their time phoning up MS for permission.
    >
    > Do you think that's fair?
    >
    > Alias
    >
    >>Alias wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>"simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than talking
    >>>to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>
    >>>Alias
    >>
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    My Xp cd"s are not copy protected.

    "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:OSJLiu3aFHA.2288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    > Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    > in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    > with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND a
    > handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used. Oh and the
    > CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20 years, nothing
    > new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the "authentication"
    > will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >
    >> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>
    >>
    >>>He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>
    >>
    >> Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >> for that is on his computer.
    >>
    >>
    >>>On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the computer,
    >>>he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>
    >>
    >> I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >> product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money for
    >> and activation assumes that their paying customers are pirates/thieves
    >> until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those who use pirated
    >> versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the software on it to
    >> their heart's content without having to waste their time phoning up MS
    >> for permission.
    >>
    >> Do you think that's fair?
    >>
    >> Alias
    >>
    >>>Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than talking
    >>>>to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>
    >>>>Alias
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    No one said XP cd's were. As I mentioned SOME companies DO copy protect
    the CD's. Software copy protection schemes have been going on for 20+
    years and take many forms.

    Mary wrote:

    > My Xp cd"s are not copy protected.
    >
    > "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:OSJLiu3aFHA.2288@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
    >
    >>Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    >>in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    >>with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND a
    >>handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used. Oh and the
    >>CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20 years, nothing
    >>new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the "authentication"
    >>will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.
    >>
    >>Alias wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >>>for that is on his computer.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the computer,
    >>>>he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >>>product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money for
    >>>and activation assumes that their paying customers are pirates/thieves
    >>>until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those who use pirated
    >>>versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the software on it to
    >>>their heart's content without having to waste their time phoning up MS
    >>>for permission.
    >>>
    >>>Do you think that's fair?
    >>>
    >>>Alias
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than talking
    >>>>>to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Alias
    >>>>
    >>>
    >
    >
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Bob I wrote:
    > No one said XP cd's were. As I mentioned SOME companies DO copy
    > protect the CD's. Software copy protection schemes have been going on
    > for 20+ years and take many forms.

    Yeah, but in mainstream consumer software copy-protection is a 21st
    Century happening.

    The copy-protected software that has been so for 20+ years, is software
    99.9% of home computer users will ever use on their home systems. Why
    didn't you mention that, I wonder?

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote

    > Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    > in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    > with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND a
    > handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used.

    Who does that? I want to know so I can make sure I never, ever buy their
    software/licence or whatever you want to call it.

    > Oh and the CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20
    > years, nothing new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the
    > "authentication" will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.

    Only the thieves will not have to worry about it. How nice.

    Alias
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >
    >> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>
    >>
    >>>He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>
    >>
    >> Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >> for that is on his computer.
    >>
    >>
    >>>On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the computer,
    >>>he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>
    >>
    >> I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >> product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money for
    >> and activation assumes that their paying customers are pirates/thieves
    >> until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those who use pirated
    >> versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the software on it to
    >> their heart's content without having to waste their time phoning up MS
    >> for permission.
    >>
    >> Do you think that's fair?
    >>
    >> Alias
    >>
    >>>Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than talking
    >>>>to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>
    >>>>Alias
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Blizzard for one, Autodesk uses an authentication method like
    Microsofts, but have not verified the the "replace a broken key"
    requirements. Your "Only the thieves will not have to worry about it.
    How nice." is once more a fabrication of your own doing. It all comes
    down to the primary choice. If you don't like it don't buy it. Simple as
    that.

    Alias wrote:

    > "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >
    >
    >>Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    >>in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    >>with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND a
    >>handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used.
    >
    >
    > Who does that? I want to know so I can make sure I never, ever buy their
    > software/licence or whatever you want to call it.
    >
    >
    >>Oh and the CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20
    >>years, nothing new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the
    >>"authentication" will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.
    >
    >
    > Only the thieves will not have to worry about it. How nice.
    >
    > Alias
    >
    >>Alias wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >>>for that is on his computer.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the computer,
    >>>>he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >>>product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money for
    >>>and activation assumes that their paying customers are pirates/thieves
    >>>until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those who use pirated
    >>>versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the software on it to
    >>>their heart's content without having to waste their time phoning up MS
    >>>for permission.
    >>>
    >>>Do you think that's fair?
    >>>
    >>>Alias
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than talking
    >>>>>to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Alias
    >>>>
    >>>
    >
    >
  14. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Bob I wrote:
    > Blizzard for one, Autodesk uses an authentication method like
    > Microsofts, but have not verified the the "replace a broken key"
    > requirements. Your "Only the thieves will not have to worry about it.
    > How nice." is once more a fabrication of your own doing. It all comes
    > down to the primary choice. If you don't like it don't buy it. Simple
    > as that.

    Their is no other OS that will run some of the hardware and most of the
    software that people already own. So you supposed choice is to deal
    with the trial and tribulations of copy-protection or allow your
    computer, software, and data to collect dust, both virtual and real
    dust. Yep, typical Rightard thinking.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  15. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote

    > Blizzard for one, Autodesk uses an authentication method like Microsofts,
    > but have not verified the the "replace a broken key" requirements. Your
    > "Only the thieves will not have to worry about it. How nice." is once more
    > a fabrication of your own doing. It all comes down to the primary choice.
    > If you don't like it don't buy it. Simple as that.

    I have no choice but to buy Windows. I can't afford a Mac and I don't want
    to spend a lot of time learning Linux. Most people are like that as you
    *well* know. Not to mention the fact that my daughter would really be pissed
    off if her Tombraider Games didn't work (no activation needed, no product
    key and, sonofabit*ch, TR makes tons of money, why is that?).

    Why doesn't just Bill just make a movie about windows and all his clever
    business practises to make up for the alleged money lost through piracy? I'd
    go see it if my ticket to get in didn't have to be activated more than once
    ;-)

    Alias
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >
    >> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>
    >>
    >>>Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    >>>in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    >>>with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND
    >>>a handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used.
    >>
    >>
    >> Who does that? I want to know so I can make sure I never, ever buy their
    >> software/licence or whatever you want to call it.
    >>
    >>
    >>>Oh and the CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20
    >>>years, nothing new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the
    >>>"authentication" will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.
    >>
    >>
    >> Only the thieves will not have to worry about it. How nice.
    >>
    >> Alias
    >>
    >>>Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >>>>for that is on his computer.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the computer,
    >>>>>he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >>>>product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money for
    >>>>and activation assumes that their paying customers are pirates/thieves
    >>>>until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those who use pirated
    >>>>versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the software on it to
    >>>>their heart's content without having to waste their time phoning up MS
    >>>>for permission.
    >>>>
    >>>>Do you think that's fair?
    >>>>
    >>>>Alias
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>"simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than
    >>>>>>talking to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Alias
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >>
    >
  16. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    You CHOOSE not to "afford" a Mac, and you CHOOSE not to learn linux. You
    do know the movie folks ink stamp your hand so they can check to see if
    you bought a ticket, and you have to keep showing to to them to "prove
    you paid". :-)

    Alias wrote:

    > "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >
    >
    >>Blizzard for one, Autodesk uses an authentication method like Microsofts,
    >>but have not verified the the "replace a broken key" requirements. Your
    >>"Only the thieves will not have to worry about it. How nice." is once more
    >>a fabrication of your own doing. It all comes down to the primary choice.
    >>If you don't like it don't buy it. Simple as that.
    >
    >
    > I have no choice but to buy Windows. I can't afford a Mac and I don't want
    > to spend a lot of time learning Linux. Most people are like that as you
    > *well* know. Not to mention the fact that my daughter would really be pissed
    > off if her Tombraider Games didn't work (no activation needed, no product
    > key and, sonofabit*ch, TR makes tons of money, why is that?).
    >
    > Why doesn't just Bill just make a movie about windows and all his clever
    > business practises to make up for the alleged money lost through piracy? I'd
    > go see it if my ticket to get in didn't have to be activated more than once
    > ;-)
    >
    > Alias
    >
    >>Alias wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    >>>>in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    >>>>with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND
    >>>>a handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Who does that? I want to know so I can make sure I never, ever buy their
    >>>software/licence or whatever you want to call it.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Oh and the CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20
    >>>>years, nothing new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the
    >>>>"authentication" will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Only the thieves will not have to worry about it. How nice.
    >>>
    >>>Alias
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >>>>>for that is on his computer.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the computer,
    >>>>>>he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >>>>>product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money for
    >>>>>and activation assumes that their paying customers are pirates/thieves
    >>>>>until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those who use pirated
    >>>>>versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the software on it to
    >>>>>their heart's content without having to waste their time phoning up MS
    >>>>>for permission.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Do you think that's fair?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Alias
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>"simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than
    >>>>>>>talking to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Alias
    >>>>>>
    >>>
    >
    >
  17. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Bob I wrote:
    > You CHOOSE not to "afford" a Mac,

    I choose to afford a Mac but I don't got the funds to pay for it, but I
    already own a computer, what is my choice.

    > and you CHOOSE not to learn linux.

    My computer won't run with linux, and even if it does, it runs at a very
    reduced functionality, and won't run any of the software I have bought
    over the years, what is my choice?


    > You do know the movie folks ink stamp your hand so they can check to
    > see if you bought a ticket, and you have to keep showing to to them
    > to "prove you paid". :-)

    Not where I live.

    I give the ticket to the doorman, and that is the last I see or hear
    about it.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  18. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote

    > You CHOOSE not to "afford" a Mac,

    Right, because it's not in my budget and I already have three PCs. If Apple
    comes up with an OS that will run on my machine, I might consider it.

    > and you CHOOSE not to learn linux.

    Yes, I choose to do something else with my time than learn an OS that won't
    run the paid for software sitting on my shelves.

    You
    > do know the movie folks ink stamp your hand so they can check to see if
    > you bought a ticket, and you have to keep showing to to them to "prove you
    > paid". :-)

    You're confusing a movie theater with a disco. A ticket stub, yaknow -- a
    receipt -- is all you need or should need. I have receipts of what I have
    bought. If MS wants to see them, they can get a court order and I will be
    happy to show them to them. Beyond that is called an "intrusion of privacy".

    Alias
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >
    >> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>
    >>
    >>>Blizzard for one, Autodesk uses an authentication method like Microsofts,
    >>>but have not verified the the "replace a broken key" requirements. Your
    >>>"Only the thieves will not have to worry about it. How nice." is once
    >>>more a fabrication of your own doing. It all comes down to the primary
    >>>choice. If you don't like it don't buy it. Simple as that.
    >>
    >>
    >> I have no choice but to buy Windows. I can't afford a Mac and I don't
    >> want to spend a lot of time learning Linux. Most people are like that as
    >> you *well* know. Not to mention the fact that my daughter would really be
    >> pissed off if her Tombraider Games didn't work (no activation needed, no
    >> product key and, sonofabit*ch, TR makes tons of money, why is that?).
    >>
    >> Why doesn't just Bill just make a movie about windows and all his clever
    >> business practises to make up for the alleged money lost through piracy?
    >> I'd go see it if my ticket to get in didn't have to be activated more
    >> than once ;-)
    >>
    >> Alias
    >>
    >>>Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their
    >>>>>interests in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't
    >>>>>even bother with the phone method, but make you return your software
    >>>>>discs, code AND a handling fee to get a new code for the software to be
    >>>>>used.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Who does that? I want to know so I can make sure I never, ever buy their
    >>>>software/licence or whatever you want to call it.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Oh and the CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20
    >>>>>years, nothing new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the
    >>>>>"authentication" will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Only the thieves will not have to worry about it. How nice.
    >>>>
    >>>>Alias
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >>>>>>for that is on his computer.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the
    >>>>>>>computer, he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >>>>>>product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money
    >>>>>>for and activation assumes that their paying customers are
    >>>>>>pirates/thieves until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those
    >>>>>>who use pirated versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the
    >>>>>>software on it to their heart's content without having to waste their
    >>>>>>time phoning up MS for permission.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Do you think that's fair?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Alias
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>"simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than
    >>>>>>>>talking to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Alias
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >>
    >
  19. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote
    > Bob I wrote:
    >> You CHOOSE not to "afford" a Mac,
    >
    > I choose to afford a Mac but I don't got the funds to pay for it, but I
    > already own a computer, what is my choice.
    >
    >> and you CHOOSE not to learn linux.
    >
    > My computer won't run with linux, and even if it does, it runs at a very
    > reduced functionality, and won't run any of the software I have bought
    > over the years, what is my choice?
    >
    >
    >> You do know the movie folks ink stamp your hand so they can check to
    >> see if you bought a ticket, and you have to keep showing to to them
    >> to "prove you paid". :-)
    >
    > Not where I live.
    >
    > I give the ticket to the doorman, and that is the last I see or hear about
    > it.
    >
    > --
    > Peace!
    > Kurt

    You mean you give the doorman half the ticket and keep the ticket stub, like
    a receipt for a product or service.

    Alias
  20. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Alias wrote:
    > "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote
    >> Bob I wrote:
    >>> You CHOOSE not to "afford" a Mac,
    >>
    >> I choose to afford a Mac but I don't got the funds to pay for it,
    >> but I already own a computer, what is my choice.
    >>
    >>> and you CHOOSE not to learn linux.
    >>
    >> My computer won't run with linux, and even if it does, it runs at a
    >> very reduced functionality, and won't run any of the software I have
    >> bought over the years, what is my choice?
    >>
    >>
    >>> You do know the movie folks ink stamp your hand so they can check to
    >>> see if you bought a ticket, and you have to keep showing to to them
    >>> to "prove you paid". :-)
    >>
    >> Not where I live.
    >>
    >> I give the ticket to the doorman, and that is the last I see or hear
    >> about it.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Peace!
    >> Kurt
    >
    > You mean you give the doorman half the ticket and keep the ticket
    > stub, like a receipt for a product or service.
    >


    Yeah, that is the way it is supposed to work, but I just walk away
    without keeping the stub.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  21. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Alias wrote:

    >
    > "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >
    >> You CHOOSE not to "afford" a Mac,
    >
    > Right, because it's not in my budget and I already have three PCs. If
    > Apple comes up with an OS that will run on my machine, I might consider
    > it.
    >
    I doubt you'd be capable of learning how to run an Apple operating system
    after listening to you whine and seeing how obviously lazy you are.

    >> and you CHOOSE not to learn linux.
    >
    > Yes, I choose to do something else with my time than learn an OS that
    > won't run the paid for software sitting on my shelves.
    >
    Why worry about your paid for software when you can easily replace it with
    better software that doesn't cost anything? You're an idiot.

    > You
    >> do know the movie folks ink stamp your hand so they can check to see if
    >> you bought a ticket, and you have to keep showing to to them to "prove
    >> you paid". :-)
    >
    > You're confusing a movie theater with a disco. A ticket stub, yaknow -- a
    > receipt -- is all you need or should need. I have receipts of what I have
    > bought. If MS wants to see them, they can get a court order and I will be
    > happy to show them to them. Beyond that is called an "intrusion of
    > privacy".
    >
    Whine, whine .. woof, woof.

    > Alias

    Is this an "Alias" for your buddy Kurttrail? You know the guy. The one
    you're always agreeing with and supporting in his rants.


    --
    Re: Micro$oft OneCare:
    "When a company is run like the mafia why would you not expect them to
    progress to charging protection money." NF
  22. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Bob I wrote:
    > Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    > in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    > with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND
    > a handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used. Oh and the
    > CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20 years,
    > nothing new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the
    > "authentication" will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >
    >> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>
    >>
    >>> He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >> for that is on his computer.
    >>
    >>
    >>> On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the
    >>> computer, he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >> product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money
    >> for and activation assumes that their paying customers are
    >> pirates/thieves until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those
    >> who use pirated versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the
    >> software on it to their heart's content without having to waste their
    >> time phoning up MS for permission.
    >>
    >> Do you think that's fair?
    >>
    >> Alias
    >>
    >>> Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> "simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than
    >>>> talking to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>
    >>>> Alias
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    We used to have a piece of software (and this was 5 years ago) where the
    installation process involved semi-installing it, phoning up, dictating
    a 16 digit activation code down the phone, typing in the new 25 digit
    code they gave you - and if you wanted to move it to another machine you
    had to get an de-activation code the same way otherwise they wouldn't
    let you have a new activation code: give me XP activation any day!
  23. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 07:46:06 +0100, in
    microsoft.public.windowsxp.general RE: Re: XP Activation andy smart
    <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

    >We used to have a piece of software (and this was 5 years ago) where the
    >installation process involved semi-installing it, phoning up, dictating
    >a 16 digit activation code down the phone, typing in the new 25 digit
    >code they gave you - and if you wanted to move it to another machine you
    >had to get an de-activation code the same way otherwise they wouldn't
    >let you have a new activation code: give me XP activation any day!

    Just curious. Is that company still in business?

    --
    To reply to me directly, remove the CLUTTER from my email address.
  24. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "andy smart" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:d8647h$h5v$1@newsfeed.th.ifl.net...
    > Bob I wrote:
    >> Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    >> in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    >> with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND
    >> a handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used. Oh and the
    >> CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20 years,
    >> nothing new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the
    >> "authentication" will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.
    >>
    >> Alias wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >>> for that is on his computer.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the
    >>>> computer, he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >>> product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money
    >>> for and activation assumes that their paying customers are
    >>> pirates/thieves until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those
    >>> who use pirated versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the
    >>> software on it to their heart's content without having to waste their
    >>> time phoning up MS for permission.
    >>>
    >>> Do you think that's fair?
    >>>
    >>> Alias
    >>>
    >>>> Alias wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> "simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than
    >>>>> talking to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Alias
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    > We used to have a piece of software (and this was 5 years ago) where the
    > installation process involved semi-installing it, phoning up, dictating
    > a 16 digit activation code down the phone, typing in the new 25 digit
    > code they gave you - and if you wanted to move it to another machine you
    > had to get an de-activation code the same way otherwise they wouldn't
    > let you have a new activation code: give me XP activation any day!

    Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name me one
    good thing activation provides the paying customer.

    Alias
  25. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Alias wrote:
    > "andy smart" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:d8647h$h5v$1@newsfeed.th.ifl.net...
    >> Bob I wrote:
    >>> Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their
    >>> interests in the manner they chose. For instance some companies
    >>> won't even bother with the phone method, but make you return your
    >>> software discs, code AND a handling fee to get a new code for the
    >>> software to be used. Oh and the CD's are copy protected too. This
    >>> has been going on for 20 years, nothing new, nothing different. If
    >>> anything, I expect that the "authentication" will only get fine
    >>> tuned,but it won't go away. Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP
    >>>> paid for that is on his computer.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the
    >>>>> computer, he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >>>> product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money
    >>>> for and activation assumes that their paying customers are
    >>>> pirates/thieves until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile,
    >>>> those who use pirated versions of XP can merrily use their
    >>>> computers and the software on it to their heart's content without
    >>>> having to waste their time phoning up MS for permission.
    >>>>
    >>>> Do you think that's fair?
    >>>>
    >>>> Alias
    >>>>
    >>>>> Alias wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> "simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than
    >>>>>> talking to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Alias
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >> We used to have a piece of software (and this was 5 years ago) where
    >> the installation process involved semi-installing it, phoning up,
    >> dictating a 16 digit activation code down the phone, typing in the
    >> new 25 digit code they gave you - and if you wanted to move it to
    >> another machine you had to get an de-activation code the same way
    >> otherwise they wouldn't let you have a new activation code: give me
    >> XP activation any day!
    >
    > Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name
    > me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >
    > Alias

    Reduces the price of software? No, it hasn't done that. In a way you
    are payng for piracy twice with PA. Once in the price of the product,
    and a second time in the time spent dealing with PA.

    Increases the reliability of software? Nope!

    All PA does is add another layer, of basically useless code, that can go
    wrong with the OS, but unlike Windows Messenger for example, when PA
    goes south, it takes the rest of the OS with it!

    What was your question again, Alias? Oh yeah, "Name me one good thing
    activation provides the paying customer."

    Well for those that like being hassled by PA problems and wasting their
    time dealing with PA, I suppose those masochists love what PA does for
    them. For the rest of us, that didn't get off when their mommies
    spanked them as a kid, their is absolutely no benefit whatsoever as a
    result of PA, or ANY copy-protection scheme for the paying customer.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  26. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    It allows said customer to use the software in accordance with the
    agreement provided in the EULA. You keep forgetting the operating system
    is provided by the manufacturer who determines the final product
    specifications. The customer is free to determine whether or not that
    product is suitable for their use and purchase it or not. End of story.
    Yell all you want, but if no customers, product dies. Simple as that.

    Alias wrote:

    >
    > Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name me one
    > good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >
    > Alias
    >
    >
  27. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Bob I wrote:
    > It allows said customer to use the software in accordance with the
    > agreement provided in the EULA.

    What a toady you are! That is no benefit to the customer at all.

    > You keep forgetting the operating
    > system is provided by the manufacturer who determines the final
    > product specifications.

    And you didn't answer Alias. "Name me one good thing activation
    provides the paying customer."

    > The customer is free to determine whether or
    > not that product is suitable for their use and purchase it or not.
    > End of story. Yell all you want, but if no customers, product dies.
    > Simple as that.

    Unless the company is a proven monopoly but was given an overly
    favorable settlement.

    Nothing is simple, except your brain.

    But back to the topic. Name a benefit of PA for the PAYING CUSTOMER,
    not for your beloved Microsoft, FOOL!

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  28. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Vic Dura wrote:
    > On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 07:46:06 +0100, in
    > microsoft.public.windowsxp.general RE: Re: XP Activation andy smart
    > <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
    >
    >> We used to have a piece of software (and this was 5 years ago) where
    >> the installation process involved semi-installing it, phoning up,
    >> dictating a 16 digit activation code down the phone, typing in the
    >> new 25 digit code they gave you - and if you wanted to move it to
    >> another machine you had to get an de-activation code the same way
    >> otherwise they wouldn't let you have a new activation code: give me
    >> XP activation any day!
    >
    > Just curious. Is that company still in business?

    Actually, they probably are. Many specialty software solutions for
    small businesses have such PITA built in.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  29. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Alias wrote:
    > "andy smart" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:d8647h$h5v$1@newsfeed.th.ifl.net...
    >
    >>Bob I wrote:
    >>
    >>>Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their interests
    >>>in the manner they chose. For instance some companies won't even bother
    >>>with the phone method, but make you return your software discs, code AND
    >>>a handling fee to get a new code for the software to be used. Oh and the
    >>>CD's are copy protected too. This has been going on for 20 years,
    >>>nothing new, nothing different. If anything, I expect that the
    >>>"authentication" will only get fine tuned,but it won't go away.
    >>>
    >>>Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP paid
    >>>>for that is on his computer.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the
    >>>>>computer, he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >>>>product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good money
    >>>>for and activation assumes that their paying customers are
    >>>>pirates/thieves until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile, those
    >>>>who use pirated versions of XP can merrily use their computers and the
    >>>>software on it to their heart's content without having to waste their
    >>>>time phoning up MS for permission.
    >>>>
    >>>>Do you think that's fair?
    >>>>
    >>>>Alias
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>"simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than
    >>>>>>talking to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Alias
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>We used to have a piece of software (and this was 5 years ago) where the
    >>installation process involved semi-installing it, phoning up, dictating
    >>a 16 digit activation code down the phone, typing in the new 25 digit
    >>code they gave you - and if you wanted to move it to another machine you
    >>had to get an de-activation code the same way otherwise they wouldn't
    >>let you have a new activation code: give me XP activation any day!
    >
    >
    > Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name me one
    > good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >
    > Alias
    >
    >
    Nothing, but that's not what it's for is it?
  30. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    andy smart wrote:
    > Alias wrote:
    >> "andy smart" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    >> news:d8647h$h5v$1@newsfeed.th.ifl.net...
    >>
    >>> Bob I wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Guess it boils down to the software publisher protecting their
    >>>> interests in the manner they chose. For instance some companies
    >>>> won't even bother with the phone method, but make you return your
    >>>> software discs, code AND a handling fee to get a new code for the
    >>>> software to be used. Oh and the CD's are copy protected too. This
    >>>> has been going on for 20 years, nothing new, nothing different. If
    >>>> anything, I expect that the "authentication" will only get fine
    >>>> tuned,but it won't go away.
    >>>>
    >>>> Alias wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> He doesn't need anyone's permission to use his computer.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Are you always this anal? You know I meant use the Windows the OP
    >>>>> paid for that is on his computer.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On the other hand if he want to use WindowsXP features on the
    >>>>>> computer, he will have to activate. Simple as that.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I know. That's my point. One has to waste one's time to activate a
    >>>>> product/licence OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT one paid good
    >>>>> money for and activation assumes that their paying customers are
    >>>>> pirates/thieves until they prove/activate otherwise. Meanwhile,
    >>>>> those who use pirated versions of XP can merrily use their
    >>>>> computers and the software on it to their heart's content without
    >>>>> having to waste their time phoning up MS for permission.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Do you think that's fair?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Alias
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Alias wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "simply"? Perhaps the OP wanted to use his computer rather than
    >>>>>>> talking to someone on the phone about permission to use it.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Alias
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>> We used to have a piece of software (and this was 5 years ago)
    >>> where the installation process involved semi-installing it, phoning
    >>> up, dictating a 16 digit activation code down the phone, typing in
    >>> the new 25 digit code they gave you - and if you wanted to move it
    >>> to another machine you had to get an de-activation code the same
    >>> way otherwise they wouldn't let you have a new activation code:
    >>> give me XP activation any day!
    >>
    >>
    >> Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name
    >> me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>
    >> Alias
    >>
    >>
    > Nothing, but that's not what it's for is it?

    LOL! Nope that is not what it is for, it is for the benefit of Big
    Brother. And all copy-protection
    is for the corporate copyright elite, not its customers.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  31. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote

    > It allows said customer to use the software in accordance with the
    > agreement provided in the EULA.

    Activation is not necessary for that. Validation is not necessary for that.
    All it does is inconvenience the paying customer. It does not stop piracy.
    It does not stop casual copying. ALL it does is inconvenience the paying
    customer.

    > You keep forgetting the operating system is provided by the manufacturer
    > who determines the final product specifications.

    You keep forgeting that Windows is a monopoly.

    > The customer is free to determine whether or not that product is suitable
    > for their use and purchase it or not.

    No, he or she isn't.

    > End of story.

    LOL! For you, maybe.

    > Yell all you want, but if no customers, product dies. Simple as that.

    Any company that doesn't listen to paying customer's complaints will
    eventually lose their customers except, of course, idiots like you that when
    MS says, "Jump!", you say "How high?"

    Alias
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name me
    >> one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>
    >> Alias
    >
  32. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Bottom line is that you keep ranting but buy anyway, boils down to no
    spine in my book. Your arguments are vapor because you "believe what you
    want to believe". If activation bugs you that bad, DON'T BUY IT. Not an
    issue with me, I buy what I want to use, and don't buy that which I
    don't.

    Alias wrote:

    > "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >
    >
    >>It allows said customer to use the software in accordance with the
    >>agreement provided in the EULA.
    >
    >
    > Activation is not necessary for that. Validation is not necessary for that.
    > All it does is inconvenience the paying customer. It does not stop piracy.
    > It does not stop casual copying. ALL it does is inconvenience the paying
    > customer.
    >
    >
    >>You keep forgetting the operating system is provided by the manufacturer
    >>who determines the final product specifications.
    >
    >
    > You keep forgeting that Windows is a monopoly.
    >
    >
    >>The customer is free to determine whether or not that product is suitable
    >>for their use and purchase it or not.
    >
    >
    > No, he or she isn't.
    >
    >
    >>End of story.
    >
    >
    > LOL! For you, maybe.
    >
    >
    >> Yell all you want, but if no customers, product dies. Simple as that.
    >
    >
    > Any company that doesn't listen to paying customer's complaints will
    > eventually lose their customers except, of course, idiots like you that when
    > MS says, "Jump!", you say "How high?"
    >
    > Alias
    >
    >>Alias wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name me
    >>>one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>>
    >>>Alias
    >>
    >
    >
  33. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote

    > Bottom line is that you keep ranting but buy anyway, boils down to no
    > spine in my book. Your arguments are vapor because you "believe what you
    > want to believe". If activation bugs you that bad, DON'T BUY IT. Not an
    > issue with me, I buy what I want to use, and don't buy that which I don't.

    No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three computers. Are
    you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS has a monopoly on PCs.
    Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have* to buy Windows.

    Oh, and can you stick to the issues and stop using ad hominem attacks? Ad
    hominem attacks are very amateurish.

    Again, name me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.

    Alias
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >
    >> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>
    >>
    >>>It allows said customer to use the software in accordance with the
    >>>agreement provided in the EULA.
    >>
    >>
    >> Activation is not necessary for that. Validation is not necessary for
    >> that. All it does is inconvenience the paying customer. It does not stop
    >> piracy. It does not stop casual copying. ALL it does is inconvenience the
    >> paying customer.
    >>
    >>
    >>>You keep forgetting the operating system is provided by the manufacturer
    >>>who determines the final product specifications.
    >>
    >>
    >> You keep forgeting that Windows is a monopoly.
    >>
    >>
    >>>The customer is free to determine whether or not that product is suitable
    >>>for their use and purchase it or not.
    >>
    >>
    >> No, he or she isn't.
    >>
    >>
    >>>End of story.
    >>
    >>
    >> LOL! For you, maybe.
    >>
    >>
    >>> Yell all you want, but if no customers, product dies. Simple as that.
    >>
    >>
    >> Any company that doesn't listen to paying customer's complaints will
    >> eventually lose their customers except, of course, idiots like you that
    >> when MS says, "Jump!", you say "How high?"
    >>
    >> Alias
    >>
    >>>Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name me
    >>>>one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>>>
    >>>>Alias
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
  34. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <OFPoYmDbFHA.1088@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    maskedandanonymous.org says...
    > No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three computers. Are
    > you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS has a monopoly on PCs.
    > Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have* to buy Windows.

    I have 8 systems running FC3 (linux) and doing normal business work, not
    much of a Monoploy if you ask me.

    [snip]

    > Again, name me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.

    An attempt to keep costs lower for purchasers by trying to keep more
    revenue in-bound. If activation was not used, it would be pirated
    without any concern by more people that it currently is, which would
    reduce the income stream, which would increase product costs.

    --
    --
    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  35. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Tit for tat. It matters not what I put forward, as you simply discount
    it. So you HAVE NO argument because you elect not to CHOOSE from the
    available options.

    Alias wrote:

    > "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >
    >
    >>Bottom line is that you keep ranting but buy anyway, boils down to no
    >>spine in my book. Your arguments are vapor because you "believe what you
    >>want to believe". If activation bugs you that bad, DON'T BUY IT. Not an
    >>issue with me, I buy what I want to use, and don't buy that which I don't.
    >
    >
    > No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three computers. Are
    > you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS has a monopoly on PCs.
    > Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have* to buy Windows.
    >
    > Oh, and can you stick to the issues and stop using ad hominem attacks? Ad
    > hominem attacks are very amateurish.
    >
    > Again, name me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >
    > Alias
    >
    >>Alias wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>It allows said customer to use the software in accordance with the
    >>>>agreement provided in the EULA.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Activation is not necessary for that. Validation is not necessary for
    >>>that. All it does is inconvenience the paying customer. It does not stop
    >>>piracy. It does not stop casual copying. ALL it does is inconvenience the
    >>>paying customer.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>You keep forgetting the operating system is provided by the manufacturer
    >>>>who determines the final product specifications.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>You keep forgeting that Windows is a monopoly.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>The customer is free to determine whether or not that product is suitable
    >>>>for their use and purchase it or not.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>No, he or she isn't.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>End of story.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>LOL! For you, maybe.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Yell all you want, but if no customers, product dies. Simple as that.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Any company that doesn't listen to paying customer's complaints will
    >>>eventually lose their customers except, of course, idiots like you that
    >>>when MS says, "Jump!", you say "How high?"
    >>>
    >>>Alias
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name me
    >>>>>one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Alias
    >>>>
    >>>
    >
    >
  36. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Leythos wrote:
    > In article <OFPoYmDbFHA.1088@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    >> No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three
    >> computers. Are you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS
    >> has a monopoly on PCs. Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have*
    >> to buy Windows.
    >
    > I have 8 systems running FC3 (linux) and doing normal business work,
    > not much of a Monoploy if you ask me.

    No you are a fool running a business on a development OS!

    >
    > [snip]
    >
    >> Again, name me one good thing activation provides the paying
    >> customer.
    >
    > An attempt to keep costs lower for purchasers by trying to keep more
    > revenue in-bound.

    LOL! MS never promised to lower prices due to PA. The piracy rate had
    been in decline prior to PA in Win XP, yet MS has yet to lower it price
    for it's OSs!

    As for reducing the cost for MS, Bah Humbug! Development costs of PA
    and the running of PA Phone activation Centers around the world only
    adds to MS costs!

    Show a tangible good thing for the consumer.

    > If activation was not used, it would be pirated
    > without any concern by more people that it currently is, which would
    > reduce the income stream, which would increase product costs.

    Bah Humbug! Most people buy their computers from major OEMs with an MS
    OS preinstalled. I doubt PA adds adds anything to MS's Income Stream,
    especially when you consider the added cost of developing and running
    its PA infrastructure!

    If I were a stockholder I'd be very concern about that.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  37. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Bob I wrote:
    > Tit for tat. It matters not what I put forward, as you simply discount
    > it. So you HAVE NO argument because you elect not to CHOOSE from the
    > available options.

    No you gave a good for the manufacturer as a good for the customer.
    Your tit has run dry.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  38. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote

    > In article <OFPoYmDbFHA.1088@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    >> No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three computers. Are
    >> you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS has a monopoly on
    >> PCs.
    >> Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have* to buy Windows.
    >
    > I have 8 systems running FC3 (linux) and doing normal business work, not
    > much of a Monoploy if you ask me.

    You're a techie. Sorry, but you don't count. I am talking about people like
    myself that are not techies. Besides, what about all that software I paid
    for that's sitting on my shelf that I won't be able to use with FC3?
    >
    > [snip]
    >
    >> Again, name me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >
    > An attempt to keep costs lower for purchasers by trying to keep more
    > revenue in-bound.

    Is this a joke? What about all the costs involved in designing and
    implementing PA and Validation? I know that the good folks in India work for
    slave wages, but they aren't free.

    > If activation was not used, it would be pirated
    > without any concern by more people that it currently is, which would
    > reduce the income stream, which would increase product costs.

    It's pirated *anyway*. It *only* affects paying customers, most of which
    don't know the difference between a generic OEM, a bundled with bullsh*t OEM
    or a retail copy. I went to an Internet cafe the other day and they had 20
    computers with pirated XPs on them, all of them! The owner of the cafe
    didn't even know what activation is!

    Alias
  39. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <Om#oL2DbFHA.760@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    maskedandanonymous.org says...
    > "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote
    >
    > > In article <OFPoYmDbFHA.1088@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    > >> No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three computers. Are
    > >> you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS has a monopoly on
    > >> PCs.
    > >> Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have* to buy Windows.
    > >
    > > I have 8 systems running FC3 (linux) and doing normal business work, not
    > > much of a Monoploy if you ask me.
    >
    > You're a techie. Sorry, but you don't count. I am talking about people like
    > myself that are not techies. Besides, what about all that software I paid
    > for that's sitting on my shelf that I won't be able to use with FC3?

    You said MS has a monopoly, you didn't say what about all my already
    purchased software.

    Does your software run on a MAC - NO, does it run on Linux, some of it
    may (MS Office does), does it run on any other OS - most likely not.

    A monopoly means that you don't have any viable options, and wanting to
    keep your old software doesn't have anything to do with being a monopoly
    or not, that's your choice.

    A few years ago, even two, I would have agree with you, that there were
    no reasonable alternatives to Windows, not even the MAC, but in 2005
    there are several easy to use alternatives that clearly provide
    solutions that MS provides with their OS.

    Stay on focus - Monopoly is not something MS has any more, it's just a
    choice.

    --
    --
    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  40. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Alias wrote:

    >
    > "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote
    >> I have 8 systems running FC3 (linux) and doing normal business work, not
    >> much of a Monoploy if you ask me.
    >
    > You're a techie. Sorry, but you don't count. I am talking about people
    > like myself that are not techies.

    Mentally challenged is a better description of yourself then "not techies".
    Today's mature Linux distros don't require one be a techie to install or
    use. In fact, installing something like Mandrake (Mandriva it's now called)
    is far easier than installing XP. If you're so mentally challenged that
    you're unable to boot from a CD, I guess it would be beyond you. But having
    the ability to boot from a CD doesn't require a "techie" status. But maybe
    more brains than a chicken has.

    > Besides, what about all that software I
    > paid for that's sitting on my shelf that I won't be able to use with FC3?

    Like? Many Windoze apps can be run under FC3 using Wine. And for those apps
    that cannot, there are probably better Linux apps available anyways and
    they're free. So you wouldn't be out of pocket at all if you made the
    switch.

    Find a listing of Windoze alternatives here ...

    http://www.linuxrsp.ru/win-lin-soft/table-eng.html

    Find what Windoze apps presently run under Wine here ...

    http://winehq.org/


    > Alias

    --
    Re: Micro$oft OneCare:
    "When a company is run like the mafia why would you not expect them to
    progress to charging protection money." NF
  41. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote

    > Tit for tat. It matters not what I put forward, as you simply discount it.
    > So you HAVE NO argument because you elect not to CHOOSE from the available
    > options.

    There are only two options: buy a bonafide copy of XP and activate it or
    buy/get for free a pirated version and not worry about activating it. All
    other options are not reasonable and MS knows and takes full advantage of
    this fact. Your supporting them makes you an MS toady.

    Again, name me one good thing that activation provides the paying customer
    that a pirated XP can't give him for less money and far less hassle. One.

    Alias
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >
    >> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>
    >>
    >>>Bottom line is that you keep ranting but buy anyway, boils down to no
    >>>spine in my book. Your arguments are vapor because you "believe what you
    >>>want to believe". If activation bugs you that bad, DON'T BUY IT. Not an
    >>>issue with me, I buy what I want to use, and don't buy that which I
    >>>don't.
    >>
    >>
    >> No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three computers. Are
    >> you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS has a monopoly on
    >> PCs. Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have* to buy Windows.
    >>
    >> Oh, and can you stick to the issues and stop using ad hominem attacks? Ad
    >> hominem attacks are very amateurish.
    >>
    >> Again, name me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>
    >> Alias
    >>
    >>>Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>It allows said customer to use the software in accordance with the
    >>>>>agreement provided in the EULA.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Activation is not necessary for that. Validation is not necessary for
    >>>>that. All it does is inconvenience the paying customer. It does not stop
    >>>>piracy. It does not stop casual copying. ALL it does is inconvenience
    >>>>the paying customer.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>You keep forgetting the operating system is provided by the
    >>>>>manufacturer who determines the final product specifications.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>You keep forgeting that Windows is a monopoly.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>The customer is free to determine whether or not that product is
    >>>>>suitable for their use and purchase it or not.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>No, he or she isn't.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>End of story.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>LOL! For you, maybe.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Yell all you want, but if no customers, product dies. Simple as that.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Any company that doesn't listen to paying customer's complaints will
    >>>>eventually lose their customers except, of course, idiots like you that
    >>>>when MS says, "Jump!", you say "How high?"
    >>>>
    >>>>Alias
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name me
    >>>>>>one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Alias
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >>
    >
  42. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <OZ31P9DbFHA.1148@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    maskedandanonymous.org says...
    > Again, name me one good thing that activation provides the paying customer
    > that a pirated XP can't give him for less money and far less hassle. One.

    Pirated XP may not be supported without proper activation in the future.
    Pirated XP may get the user prosecuted at some point.
    Pirated XP is not entitled to support or upgrades under any MS terms.
    Pirated XP may contain malicious code inserted by the distributor.

    --
    --
    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  43. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    I support NO ONE. Actually YOU are the MS toady because you CHOOSE to
    USE it despite the alternatives. I told you and you dismissed it. YOU
    CHOOSE TO BE A SHEEP. Your choice. You MADE it, you LIVE with it. As
    LONG as you insist on whining about it, you will continue to be reminded
    that you CHOSE to use it. Question is when will you choose an
    alternative? Obviously the since YOU claim the alternatives are
    unreasonable, then you find WindowsXP w/activation to be a reasonable
    alternative. Period. End of discussion.

    Alias wrote:
    > "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >
    >
    >>Tit for tat. It matters not what I put forward, as you simply discount it.
    >>So you HAVE NO argument because you elect not to CHOOSE from the available
    >>options.
    >
    >
    > There are only two options: buy a bonafide copy of XP and activate it or
    > buy/get for free a pirated version and not worry about activating it. All
    > other options are not reasonable and MS knows and takes full advantage of
    > this fact. Your supporting them makes you an MS toady.
    >
    > Again, name me one good thing that activation provides the paying customer
    > that a pirated XP can't give him for less money and far less hassle. One.
    >
    > Alias
    >
    >>Alias wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Bottom line is that you keep ranting but buy anyway, boils down to no
    >>>>spine in my book. Your arguments are vapor because you "believe what you
    >>>>want to believe". If activation bugs you that bad, DON'T BUY IT. Not an
    >>>>issue with me, I buy what I want to use, and don't buy that which I
    >>>>don't.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three computers. Are
    >>>you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS has a monopoly on
    >>>PCs. Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have* to buy Windows.
    >>>
    >>>Oh, and can you stick to the issues and stop using ad hominem attacks? Ad
    >>>hominem attacks are very amateurish.
    >>>
    >>>Again, name me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>>
    >>>Alias
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>It allows said customer to use the software in accordance with the
    >>>>>>agreement provided in the EULA.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Activation is not necessary for that. Validation is not necessary for
    >>>>>that. All it does is inconvenience the paying customer. It does not stop
    >>>>>piracy. It does not stop casual copying. ALL it does is inconvenience
    >>>>>the paying customer.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>You keep forgetting the operating system is provided by the
    >>>>>>manufacturer who determines the final product specifications.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>You keep forgeting that Windows is a monopoly.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>The customer is free to determine whether or not that product is
    >>>>>>suitable for their use and purchase it or not.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>No, he or she isn't.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>End of story.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>LOL! For you, maybe.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Yell all you want, but if no customers, product dies. Simple as that.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Any company that doesn't listen to paying customer's complaints will
    >>>>>eventually lose their customers except, of course, idiots like you that
    >>>>>when MS says, "Jump!", you say "How high?"
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Alias
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name me
    >>>>>>>one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Alias
    >>>>>>
    >>>
    >
    >
  44. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Leythos wrote:
    > In article <OZ31P9DbFHA.1148@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    >> Again, name me one good thing that activation provides the paying
    >> customer that a pirated XP can't give him for less money and far
    >> less hassle. One.
    >
    > Pirated XP may not be supported without proper activation in the
    > future.

    And that is a bad for computer users everywhere by increasing the number
    of Zombie machines clogging up the internet with spam and viruses!

    > Pirated XP may get the user prosecuted at some point.

    LOL! What is pirated? Installing software on more than one computer
    has yet to be legally proven to be PIRATED!

    And people that are actually distributing pirated software to others
    SHOULD be prosecuted! That is the best deterent to REAL PIRACY! I say
    bring all illegal distributors of pirated software to justice!

    > Pirated XP is not entitled to support or upgrades under any MS terms.

    Just repeated your first sentence in other words.

    > Pirated XP may contain malicious code inserted by the distributor.

    None of that is better for the customer than an OS without PA.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  45. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Bob I wrote:
    > I support NO ONE. Actually YOU are the MS toady because you CHOOSE to
    > USE it despite the alternatives. I told you and you dismissed it. YOU
    > CHOOSE TO BE A SHEEP. Your choice. You MADE it, you LIVE with it. As
    > LONG as you insist on whining about it, you will continue to be
    > reminded that you CHOSE to use it. Question is when will you choose an
    > alternative? Obviously the since YOU claim the alternatives are
    > unreasonable, then you find WindowsXP w/activation to be a reasonable
    > alternative. Period. End of discussion.

    And how do you know that he hasn't bypassed PA in some manner? Linux is
    not a viable alternative for most users yet. This is not a dissing of
    Linux, just my opinion. OSX will not run on any but MAC hardware, and
    even with their moving to an Intel chipset, Apple announce that they
    will keep it so the their OS will only run on MAC hardware.

    So the basic choice you say people of is running a MS OS or not using
    their computers and software. Not much of a real choice. But you know
    all this Bob, but you purposely ignore it like you ignore the fact that
    PA does absolutely no good for the paying customer.

    You are in total denial, and it is plain for any rational thinker to
    see.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  46. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d10dbeafa8845019898dd@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <Om#oL2DbFHA.760@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    >> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote
    >>
    >> > In article <OFPoYmDbFHA.1088@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    >> > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    >> >> No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three computers.
    >> >> Are
    >> >> you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS has a monopoly on
    >> >> PCs.
    >> >> Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have* to buy Windows.
    >> >
    >> > I have 8 systems running FC3 (linux) and doing normal business work,
    >> > not
    >> > much of a Monoploy if you ask me.
    >>
    >> You're a techie. Sorry, but you don't count. I am talking about people
    >> like
    >> myself that are not techies. Besides, what about all that software I paid
    >> for that's sitting on my shelf that I won't be able to use with FC3?
    >
    > You said MS has a monopoly, you didn't say what about all my already
    > purchased software.
    >
    > Does your software run on a MAC - NO, does it run on Linux, some of it
    > may (MS Office does), does it run on any other OS - most likely not.
    >
    > A monopoly means that you don't have any viable options, and wanting to
    > keep your old software doesn't have anything to do with being a monopoly
    > or not, that's your choice.
    >
    > A few years ago, even two, I would have agree with you, that there were
    > no reasonable alternatives to Windows, not even the MAC, but in 2005
    > there are several easy to use alternatives that clearly provide
    > solutions that MS provides with their OS.
    >
    > Stay on focus - Monopoly is not something MS has any more, it's just a
    > choice.

    It's a choice only for techies that can install and use Linux. Most people
    are not techies. Ergo, de facto monopoly.

    Alias
  47. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d10dc80e99cb3e79898de@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <OZ31P9DbFHA.1148@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    >> Again, name me one good thing that activation provides the paying
    >> customer
    >> that a pirated XP can't give him for less money and far less hassle. One.
    >
    > Pirated XP may not be supported without proper activation in the future.

    "may" What do you mean by "supported"?

    > Pirated XP may get the user prosecuted at some point.

    Horsepucky.

    > Pirated XP is not entitled to support or upgrades under any MS terms.

    Horsepucky. I know people who have gotten upgrades for their pirated XPs so
    you were saying? Nobody buys retails XPs in Spain so your support is just
    more horsepucky.

    > Pirated XP may contain malicious code inserted by the distributor.

    "may".

    LOL!

    Alias
  48. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:OhSOEBFbFHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    >I support NO ONE. Actually YOU are the MS toady because you CHOOSE to USE
    >it despite the alternatives. I told you and you dismissed it. YOU CHOOSE TO
    >BE A SHEEP. Your choice. You MADE it, you LIVE with it. As LONG as you
    >insist on whining about it, you will continue to be reminded that you CHOSE
    >to use it. Question is when will you choose an alternative? Obviously the
    >since YOU claim the alternatives are unreasonable, then you find WindowsXP
    >w/activation to be a reasonable alternative. Period. End of discussion.

    Straw argument. Please don't insult my intelligence.

    Alias
    >
    > Alias wrote:
    >> "Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>
    >>
    >>>Tit for tat. It matters not what I put forward, as you simply discount
    >>>it. So you HAVE NO argument because you elect not to CHOOSE from the
    >>>available options.
    >>
    >>
    >> There are only two options: buy a bonafide copy of XP and activate it or
    >> buy/get for free a pirated version and not worry about activating it. All
    >> other options are not reasonable and MS knows and takes full advantage of
    >> this fact. Your supporting them makes you an MS toady.
    >>
    >> Again, name me one good thing that activation provides the paying
    >> customer that a pirated XP can't give him for less money and far less
    >> hassle. One.
    >>
    >> Alias
    >>
    >>>Alias wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Bottom line is that you keep ranting but buy anyway, boils down to no
    >>>>>spine in my book. Your arguments are vapor because you "believe what
    >>>>>you want to believe". If activation bugs you that bad, DON'T BUY IT.
    >>>>>Not an issue with me, I buy what I want to use, and don't buy that
    >>>>>which I don't.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>No, I don't have a choice, which is my point! I have three computers.
    >>>>Are you suggesting I trash them and buy three MACs!? MS has a monopoly
    >>>>on PCs. Period. If I want to use a computer, I *have* to buy Windows.
    >>>>
    >>>>Oh, and can you stick to the issues and stop using ad hominem attacks?
    >>>>Ad hominem attacks are very amateurish.
    >>>>
    >>>>Again, name me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>>>
    >>>>Alias
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>"Bob I" <birelan@yahoo.com> wrote
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>It allows said customer to use the software in accordance with the
    >>>>>>>agreement provided in the EULA.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Activation is not necessary for that. Validation is not necessary for
    >>>>>>that. All it does is inconvenience the paying customer. It does not
    >>>>>>stop piracy. It does not stop casual copying. ALL it does is
    >>>>>>inconvenience the paying customer.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>You keep forgetting the operating system is provided by the
    >>>>>>>manufacturer who determines the final product specifications.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>You keep forgeting that Windows is a monopoly.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>The customer is free to determine whether or not that product is
    >>>>>>>suitable for their use and purchase it or not.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>No, he or she isn't.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>End of story.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>LOL! For you, maybe.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Yell all you want, but if no customers, product dies. Simple as that.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Any company that doesn't listen to paying customer's complaints will
    >>>>>>eventually lose their customers except, of course, idiots like you
    >>>>>>that when MS says, "Jump!", you say "How high?"
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Alias
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Alias wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Just because something is worse, doesn't make activation good. Name
    >>>>>>>>me one good thing activation provides the paying customer.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Alias
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>
    >>
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Windows XP Microsoft Internet Product