Re: Damn Microsoft Activation!!!!

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

From: Seth Brundle (brundlefly76_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 08/06/04 

Date: 6 Aug 2004 00:10:57 -0700

> Replacing a non-defective motherboard more frequently than every 4
> months is not "hardware enthusiasm." It's just plain silly.

Thats your opinion. I can do whatever I want to do with my computers,
and I choose to upgrade frequently - no one gets to tell me what is
'silly'. Recently I upgraded my dual-boot system to AMD64 because Suse
can run 64-bit software, which I required to port my Linux software
projects so my users with AMD64 can compile and make use of the
extensions, but I dont need an excuse that good to upgrade any time I
choose. Thats my business, not M$'s

> Particularly since you know in advance that activation will be
> requires - you're just deliberately asking for trouble and looking for
> an excuse to whine. I've no sympathy.

No, its just that if I have decided I want new hardware, Im not going
to let Microsoft stop me from doing it just because its the one piece
of software on 16 of my workstations and servers which makes me call
them, like a friggin parent, to get their permission.

Let me ask you this - how would you like it if *every* piece of
software you own worked exactly like WPA? Doesnt scale very well, does
it? I would have been on the phone with over 25 companies every time I
make a significant hardware change. What is so special about Microsoft
that they get to do this?

Perhaps you'd prefer one of
> these other common means of software copy-protection:
(snip)

I dont own one single piece of software that requires any of those
methods, so I dont know what youre talking about.

Of the hundreds of titles I do own, Microsoft Windows and Office 2003
are the *only* ones that insist on getting involved when I change
hardware. Period.

Although even as a Linux developer I would be the last one to ever say
that Linux can replace Windows at this point, I *cant wait* until it
can. Even commercial Linux distros dont make me go through M$'s happy
horseshit.

What is really funny is that the only company which requires me to
take such invasive and bothersome steps to prevent piracy is also the
most profitable software company in the world - and was long before
WPA.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Prove that there is no need for additional domain controller
    ... Management we need to setup another DC in the remote site and not ... Microsoft has some best practices documentation which you could ... I dont know of a tool which would let you do this. ... Thats the primary cause. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory)
  • Re: CodeJock MFC products now 50% off thru end of October 2007
    ... Thats never going to happen. ... New apps from MS however can be in managed ... I dont see why not. ... platform would have been much higher than it currently is, if Microsoft had ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.mfc)
  • Re: organization
    ... BTW i was a Linux hacker and Linux kernel ... > nothing good to say then dont say nothing" ?. ... Thats not a really detailed ... personally sick of your condescending attitude towards everybody ...
    (freebsd-hackers)
  • Re: Antivirus for Ubuntu
    ... is nervous about is Antivirus on Linux. ... Thats not go the you dont ... but i dont use avg and i havent used it in years. ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: Video editing in Linux?
    ... However most software under linux is either well engineered or has ... >>if the code in linux were as poor as that in windows, ... You dont compiler userspace code for your kernel you ... Quite honestly, NTFS ...
    (alt.linux)