Re: reactivation when nothing changed

Yours is the ignorance. The db would be in a compressed file on the local
machine. It would take all of 10 - 20K . MS could hide it with all the other
hidden files WIndows lands on your HD. IT would save time, bandwidth, and
aggravation.
--
I know enuff to be dangerous.


"Vanguard" wrote:

> "RealGomer" <RealGomer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:5FA17D93-8206-4221-9864-4A0269E96366@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > You know, Vanguard, it's [----] like you who give support / community
> > forms a
> > bad name.
> > First off, IF Microsoft's hardware database for each PC were coded
> > correctly, it would realize that every piece of hardware had been reseated
> > into the exact same position as before.
>
> Your ignorance of hardware is showing. Put a pencil in your pencil cup.
> Have someone record what is in the pencil cup. Now take out the pencil and
> have that someone record again what is in the pencil cup. Now put the
> pencil back in. Yeah, the recorder can see there is now a pencil in the cup
> but has not a clue that it is the SAME pencil as it could be a different
> pencil that just looks the same.
>
> So how huge do you want this database to be? For you, it should keep track
> of everything (by device type since it obviously cannot tell that the device
> is the same one as before) ever installed or removed. That means there
> would be a lot of useless information in the database but which no
> uniqueness of device can be recorded. The database knows what you changed
> from before, keeps tracks of what changes were made (since some devices are
> weighted heavier than others, like the CPU), but doesn't keep track of
> everything that ever happened on that host.
>
> > That's called fall over. Secondly,
> > with the way Microsoft has its reactivation currently coded, you can need
> > to
> > reactivate after just swpping CD-Drives, which by the way, has happened to
> > me. Not put a new one in. I mean just switching their positions on the
> > cable.
>
> Again, how does anyone (other than you) know that the device is the same one
> as before? What if the device broke and you installed a completely
> different and new one? You think Microsoft should record everything that
> was ever installed and allow you to remove and add the same devices without
> tracking those changes? All it would take to get around activation would be
> for a company to install every piece of hardware they have in their
> inventory to build up a huge but bogus database of once-installed devices,
> remove it all, give you the prebuilt computer, and then you would never have
> to reactivate no matter how many changes you made thereafter. Well, then
> there would be no point to activation because it could easily be thwarted.
> What would be the point of passwords if all of them every used or could
> possibly be used were accepted?
>
> > Thirdly, if Microsoft were in the least bit interested in its customers
> > and
> > users, it would simply compare the license and user info to a database
> > first,
> > then see if the mobo were the same.
>
> But you could also keep changing the mobo with the same brand and model
> although it was a NEW mobo and was thus a change (i.e., it wasn't simply you
> removing it and putting it back in, especially since you would've needed
> another mobo in the interim). I really doubt users want their hardware so
> uniquely identified that it could immediately and always be traced back to
> them, and have to pay for that uniqueness and loss of privacy and
> interchangeability. I'm sure Microsoft would LOVE if all hardware were
> uniquely identified because they could absolutely lock a license to a
> particular host. As it stands now, activation is based on a very loose and
> non-unique description of the hardware. That's the nature of the hardware
> platform on which you choose to run an operating system.
>
> > Most of the people I know have changed
> > CPUs, hard drives, optical drives, memory and goodness knows what else
> > several times on the SAME box.
> > Anyway, I installed XP into my own PC after I had to replace a fried hard
> > drive. That happens occasionally with lightning strikes, car wrecks, and
> > winter static. Microsoft's paranoia over reactivation is second only to
> > those
> > in Washington.
>
> Activation isn't to make your life easier. It is to protect Microsoft's
> assets at a minimum of nuisance to their customers. Microsoft doesn't care
> about making it easier for you; otherwise, they would simply toss activation
> altogether (maybe by removing it in a service pack). If the 5 minutes to
> reactivate or to make a phone call are so infuriating to you, I have to
> wonder how long your keyboard or computer lasts when you bang it from having
> to insert a CD *every* time you want to play a game that uses protection.
> The little bit of nuisance is just that: a little bit. Sorry, but any
> manufacturer of any product has the right to protect themself against
> thieves and it is NOT their legal responsibility about incurring some almost
> insignificant nuisance to an individual user. The mosquito bites so you
> swat. Ranting on and on about having to swat that mosquito makes you look
> foolish, or having to swat another the next day or a month later for another
> one. With the time dispersal between activations, it's not like you are
> being swarmed by a cloud of mosquitos. You over react to activation.
>
> I see users bitching about activation as somehow consuming such a major
> portion of their time when in fact they are lying and they spend far more
> time wasted on non-functional tweaking of their OS, like the desktop
> background, personalized or scrolling menus, window sizes, and so on. They
> wail about maybe once, twice, or even a dozen times over time having to
> reactivate Windows and yet they still hunt around or swap CDs to play games.
> Or they waste days and weeks on trying to tweak their anti-spam solution
> because they are so oversensitive that they cannot manage to delete 2 spams
> a day. Users waste so much time on trivial stuff and then complain when
> having to perform one more action requiring little effort and very little
> time. Stop wasting your time watching fake reality television or any
> non-educational programming, or detach from your cell phone umbilical cord,
> and you'll have oodles of free time of which only a miniscule fraction would
> be consumed with [re]activation.
>
> Computers and general-purpose operating systems are NOT about making life
> easier. They are about maintaining or increasing your level of frustration.
> You want to blame Microsoft for activation simpy because they are an
> identifiable entity. You can't focus on the real culprits on WHY Microsoft
> had to waste their time and resources to add activation (you think
> activation was free for Microsoft?). Why not leave your house door unlocked
> so anyone having an emergency could use your phone? Because of the nasty
> others that have forced you to lock your doors. You have the right to
> protect your property. So does Microsoft.
>
> Get over it. It's Windows. You'll be having far bigger problems than
> activation.
>
>
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: my new PC rocks!!
    ... "hardware mix and match" for home users, where they could slot in any ... that with the PC's delibrately "loose" architecture then machines ... slowness of Windows software to cater for something that no-one seems ... The only advatange of Microsoft stuff; The installs tend to be less ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Windows vista will leave too many people behind.
    ... You are being forced to upgrade by Microsoft? ... 'force' making you get Windows Vista. ... persuade or to have the power to influence or control. ... hardware - then they likely wanted to in the first place. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: On-line Review of "Art of Assembly"
    ... > work with another PC OS, including the hardware drivers? ... Windows, you can use "CygWin" where the Linux kernel has been written ... Plus, on this score, stop to think about _why_ Microsoft insist on ... "protection" was totally flawed from beginning to end and only hurt ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: The revelation of St. f0dder the Divine
    ... Even for Microsoft, that would be an error of the highest ... for them...you CANNOT have such a "casual" attitude to concurrency on ... You simply could not get Windows to operate at all, ... how can it only effect specific hardware? ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: reactivation when nothing changed
    ... IF Microsoft's hardware database for each PC were coded ... Now take out the pencil and have that someone record again what is in the pencil cup. ... You think Microsoft should record everything that was ever installed and allow you to remove and add the same devices without tracking those changes? ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
Loading