Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III

From: Alias (aka_at_maskedandanonymous.com)
Date: 02/02/05 

Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 13:51:07 +0100

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote

| On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 11:29:55 +0100, Alias wrote:
| > I agree with Woody. Kurtis' views are refreshing compared to the "MS
said
| > it. I believe it and that settles it" toadyism of some of the MVPs.
|
| I've been on Usenet since the early 80's and find that Kurt and the people
| like him are what we call Trolls. They have a point, but, once they've
| said it they can't stop and they never address the facts part of a issue,
| they always divert from the issue when backed into a corner. That's why I
| plonked his main posting ID.
|
| The only valid part of anything that he's posted is that Users can install
| Win XP more than once and get away with it until MS does something to home
| user pirates.
|
| The vendors license is clear, and so is the section of TITLE that he
| spouts - one install per license, backup copies are permitted as long as
| they are only used for backup of the media, not to be installed at the
| same time on any other computer/system.
|
| What his diatribe comes down to is that he doesn't like a vendor forcing
| him to have to pay for software beyond the first copy and he will make
| sure that everyone knows they can pirate additional copies even if it
| violates the license agreement. In reality he's just advocating simple
| theft, as use without purchase or approval by the vendor takes money from
| the vendor and is theft to most reasonable people in the world.
|
| If you want refreshing, switch to another OS where you are not limited by
| a restrictive EULA.
|
| If you read the EULA and even look at Kurts posting of that Title, it's
| clear that installing unlicensed copies is a direct violation of the
| vendors EULA. I see no difference in his willful disregard violation of a
| MS EULA and any other vendors EULA.

That still doesn't make the EULA any less of a scam. Tombraider, for
example, has no EULA, can be installed on as many computers as you like and
is one of the most successful games to ever hit the market. Same for Diablo
and Doom. If games, which are not bought by nearly as many people as an OS
can be successful without the EULA scam, why can't Microsoft? Greed? That
said, I only install legit OSs and software on my computers even though I
don't agree with the EULA.

The Mini Mac is looking better and better, however, what with MS' OSs having
to have four or five anti spyware programs, anti browser/BHO hijack
programs, a good, updated AV program, needing to delete the Java cache (I
wonder how many people get the JavaByte virus, run their anti virus, nothing
comes up, and they mistakenly think they've gotten rid of it?), Temporary
Internet cache, defragging, etc, etc. I will wait for Jaguar, though, as I
hear it is a killer OS and makes XP look like some kindergarden kid wrote
it. For example, I hear the desktop will be a cube that you can rotate and,
in effect, have four desktops. Do you think Longhorn will have that feature?

As far as Kurtis being a troll, I suspect you say that because he disagrees
with you. He is, however, giving voice for a lot of people that agree with
him and he therefore serves a good purpose of telling the "rest of the
story". 

-- 
Alias
Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III
    ... > install Win XP more than once and get away with it until MS does ... > The vendors license is clear, and so is the section of TITLE that he ... > If you read the EULA and even look at Kurts posting of that Title, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III
    ... copyright protection systems like XP's activation feature and the possible ... >> The vendors license is clear, and so is the section of TITLE that he ... > anything one install per license. ... >> If you read the EULA and even look at Kurts posting of that Title, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III
    ... The only valid part of anything that he's posted is that Users can install ... The vendors license is clear, and so is the section of TITLE that he ... If you read the EULA and even look at Kurts posting of that Title, ... clear that installing unlicensed copies is a direct violation of the ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III
    ... After re-reading this junk (XP EULA and Title 17) I have to admit that you ... Fair enough, but in this business if you don't sell, install and support MS ... >> The vendors license is clear, and so is the section of TITLE that he ... > anything one install per license. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Shrink Wrap my EULA ?
    ... >> You may refuse to accept it and the install will be cancelled. ... >>> You have the right to refuse the EULA. ... >>> permits you as a party to the contract to refuse the terms of such. ... >>> you wanted an OEM version that included all the license documentation, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
Loading