Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III
From: Greg R (webworm12_at_yes.hotmail.com)
Date: 02/02/05
- Next message: kurttrail: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Previous message: Rock: "Re: PROGRAMS RUNNING IN THE BACK GROUND"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Next in thread: kurttrail: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Reply: kurttrail: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 09:06:15 -0500
>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.
Yes, I believe Microsoft has a right to prevent or restrict people
form using the oses on more than one machine.
I do believe Activation and Genuine windows advantage is an
inconvenience . That have improved the activation problem with xp
sp2
I do need to correct you on a point. The enforcement of the eula for
consumers have not be proven yet.
Kurt claim of the Fair Use.
If only part may be used. If that is actual the case. He could only
half install windows on other computers. I would like to seen him try
½ even ¼ install of xp. I wish there was a custom install of xp.
I am surprised he is spending money on his website instead of
challenge the eula in court if he feels that strong about it.
I mean no derogatory comments toward Microsofts or Kurt. These are
just my opinions
Greg R
- Next message: kurttrail: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Previous message: Rock: "Re: PROGRAMS RUNNING IN THE BACK GROUND"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Next in thread: kurttrail: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Reply: kurttrail: "Re: Windows XP Issue (Activation) III"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|