Charlie Tame wrote:

> The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'

> wrote:

>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:37:56 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>> nobbygee5 wrote:

>>>>> Hi,

>>>>> My computer has recently been returned after being repaired. I

>>>>> know windows was re-installed while it was away and i now keep

>>>>> getting an icon come up saying i need to activate windows. When i

>>>>> put my product key in i am told it is already in use. It is

>>>>> definitely the right product key and if it is already in use i must

>>>>> be using it so why do i keep getting a reminder. I have 25 days

>>>>> left to activate which sounds a lot but with the help microsoft

>>>>> gives you its not long. Can anyone help or advise.

>>>>> Regards Mark.

>>>>

>>>> You'll need to phone activate and grovel to the phone activators

>>>> that you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to

>>>> use something you bought.

>>>

>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>

>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>> has always resulted in immediate activation. 3) If your answer is

>>> "No", they will ask a further question:

>>

>> Which is more than they need to ask their paying customers and it

>> violates privacy.

>>

>> When you call for activation, being an educated consumer is beneficial.

>> Quoted from the MS website:

>>

>> http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/activation_facts.mspx

>>

>> "Mandatory Product Activation Data

>>

>> * The Installation ID is unique to each product and comprises two

>> components:

>>

>> 1. Product ID. Unique to the product key used during installation

>> 2. Hardware hash. Non-unique representation of the PC

>>

>> * The country in which the product is being installed (for Office

>> XP and Office XP family products only)"

>>

>> You are never required to provide any other info in order to get

>> activated. The agent is required to activate you immediately if you

>> phone in and provide only the product ID, hardware hash, and

>> occasionally the country in which the product(s) is being installed!

>> It is none of their business if you made hardware changes, why you are

>> reinstalling, etc and you do not need to answer questions like that.

>

>

> Which as I keep saying comes back to one simple question, what's the

> point? Mine us that each time online activation (Which is far less of a

> nuisance and provides MS with just as much data as requested above) is

> declined I remove the offending version of Windows and replace it with a

> version of Linux. That surely makes Microsoft very happy, doesn't it?

>

> Ask yourself who is punishing who here, sure as hell isn't me hurting

> any :)

 

That's because you are in the know Charlie. It is there to intimidate

computer illiterate paying customers into buying another copy of vista.

 

--

Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group -

Submit your nomination at the link below:

http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

 

"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on

free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the

creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer

rights in the digital age are not frivolous."

- Maura Corbett

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message

news:%23C9AXAfMIHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Brian W wrote:

>>

>> "Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message

>> news:O3$tMVbMIHA.5172@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>>>

>>> How many paying customers know the difference between an OEM or a retail

>>> copy?

>>>

>> Even MS don't know apparently. I re-activated my generic OEM Vista by

>> telling the operator I purchased it in a retail store (which is

>> technically true, even though it isn't a 'retail' version).

>

>

> Hehe, good one, maybe we should all call in and when they ask for the

> product code spell out P-C-L-I-N-U-X-O-S. Be the first one on your block

> to have an activated copy...

 

Er, not quite. You have to phone the activation line, and enter the

activation ID. Then if/when automated activation fails and you speak to the

operator, tell them it was purchased in a store when asked. I don't think

the system can determine OEM/retail keys from the activation ID. Although

the full ID must be entered, the human operator only asks for the first

block of numbers (six digits). Last time I activated, the automated system

did it without human intervention, and I chose the 'purchased in a retail

store' option (this was for a hard drive change).

Frank wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>

>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:37:56 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>> nobbygee5 wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> Hi,

>>>>> My computer has recently been returned after being repaired. I

>>>>> know windows was re-installed while it was away and i now keep

>>>>> getting an icon come up saying i need to activate windows. When i

>>>>> put my product key in i am told it is already in use. It is

>>>>> definitely the right product key and if it is already in use i must

>>>>> be using it so why do i keep getting a reminder. I have 25 days

>>>>> left to activate which sounds a lot but with the help microsoft

>>>>> gives you its not long. Can anyone help or advise.

>>>>> Regards Mark.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> You'll need to phone activate and grovel to the phone activators

>>>> that you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to

>>>> use something you bought.

>>>

>>>

>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone,

>>

>>

>> The fact that you have to activate by phone implies that you are a

>> thief until you prove otherwise.

>

> Only a fukkin thief like you would feel like that.

 

Only someone who can think logically would feel like that (not you).

> Get a fukkin life you POS loser!

> Frank

 

I have one, thanks. Got any more childish clichés to hurl my way little boy?

 

Alias

Brian W wrote:

>

> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message

> news:%23C9AXAfMIHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>> Brian W wrote:

>>>

>>> "Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message

>>> news:O3$tMVbMIHA.5172@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>>>>

>>>> How many paying customers know the difference between an OEM or a

>>>> retail copy?

>>>>

>>> Even MS don't know apparently. I re-activated my generic OEM Vista by

>>> telling the operator I purchased it in a retail store (which is

>>> technically true, even though it isn't a 'retail' version).

>>

>>

>> Hehe, good one, maybe we should all call in and when they ask for the

>> product code spell out P-C-L-I-N-U-X-O-S. Be the first one on your

>> block to have an activated copy...

>

> Er, not quite. You have to phone the activation line, and enter the

> activation ID. Then if/when automated activation fails and you speak to

> the operator, tell them it was purchased in a store when asked. I don't

> think the system can determine OEM/retail keys from the activation ID.

> Although the full ID must be entered, the human operator only asks for

> the first block of numbers (six digits). Last time I activated, the

> automated system did it without human intervention, and I chose the

> 'purchased in a retail store' option (this was for a hard drive change).

>

 

 

I have removable drives, they change all the time, so, often, do other

bits and pieces of hardware, that's part of my daily routine... so you

know, I do not hate Microsoft, I do not hate Vista (Though it does need

a few things fixed) and I do not hate XP, but I do hate being pushed

around and I dislike very much the thought of perfectly innocent users

being pushed around. and yes I do have several copies of operating

systems as backups but each time I restore one the so called hardware

change invalidates it, so MS need to address these issues in a sensible

manner because it will damage their business.

 

Look at this logically, it does not take a "Human Operator" to decide

that because I changed my video card I somehow stole something from

Microsoft, yet is DOES take a human operator to reactivate it after a

simple verbal assurance from me (the thief - so what else am I going to

say) that this is due to a card failure. Do they even check which bits

are replaced?

 

I don't mind watching a dog and pony show, but I don't intend to be the

starring role :)

 

See everyone seems to assume that because a person dislikes this

attitude he / she must have dishonest reasons for so doing, but that is

not the case. A lot of perfectly honest people are inconvenienced by

this behavior and two things arise from that, first they begin to

mistrust the company and feel it has become unreliable and second they

begin to look seriously at alternatives.

 

If some people did steal Windows it was still windows, and while it

would be wrong to call people lazy it is a fact that most have little

time for experiment and they will stick with what they know. When what

they know becomes troublesome however they will weigh up the perceived

trouble against adopting an alternative.

 

So while I do not advocate stealing Windows by any means, I do think the

pirated copies served to discourage people from looking for alternatives.

 

Here's how it goes. I set up a machine with Debian Linux on for someone

here at work, our normal setup is a W2003 server and a database accessed

using remote desktop. I left the room for a few hours with the Linux RDP

client running and simply told her to try the machine. When I got back

to ask how things were going (This a pretty old machine) she had

completed much of her work and was looking at some more stuff online

using firefox, she said the "Windows" looked unfamiliar but it was

working much faster then her old machine - you guessed it - same machine.

 

Now I could easily have placed a stolen copy of XP on that machine, it

originally had 98 but I know XP would run on it, so MS still would not

have gotten paid (They did of course get paid years ago for the 98) but

now not only are they not getting paid but one more person knows they

can find an alternative. Of course she wouldn't likely do that, if she

was the type to buy her own machine she'd almost certainly go to a store

and buy one with something installed, but it does serve to demonstrate

that preventing piracy does not always have the desired result and can

have positively undesirable ones. In this case it won't make one iota of

difference to MS sales, but I consider the result, a completely

untrained inexperienced user enjoying total success with another system

to be an indicator of what might be possible.

 

It is quite true that a number of integration steps for a big business

are not feasible or not easily achieved with a mixture of non Windows

systems, but in reality there are many times when users either do not

know about or will not use such sophisticated solutions, so why would a

business buy them anyway? I can only type as fast as I can type (Which

is not so great anymore but oh well) so what use to me or my employer

are faster graphics, a machine that can process my output 100,000 times

faster than I can input it or some amazing project control system that I

am far too stupid to understand. In this line of products MS have

designed some awesome stuff, but to assume that people will keep

updating and investing based on the idea that because it is there it

will be used is actually quite dangerous, life is not based around the

MS release cycle, rather it is quite dependent upon the human

generational cycle.

Alias wrote:

> Frank wrote:

>

>> Alias wrote:

>>

>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>

>>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:37:56 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> nobbygee5 wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> Hi,

>>>>>> My computer has recently been returned after being repaired. I

>>>>>> know windows was re-installed while it was away and i now keep

>>>>>> getting an icon come up saying i need to activate windows. When i

>>>>>> put my product key in i am told it is already in use. It is

>>>>>> definitely the right product key and if it is already in use i

>>>>>> must be using it so why do i keep getting a reminder. I have 25

>>>>>> days left to activate which sounds a lot but with the help

>>>>>> microsoft gives you its not long. Can anyone help or advise.

>>>>>> Regards Mark.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> You'll need to phone activate and grovel to the phone activators

>>>>> that you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to

>>>>> use something you bought.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone,

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> The fact that you have to activate by phone implies that you are a

>>> thief until you prove otherwise.

>>

>>

>> Only a fukkin thief like you would feel like that.

>

>

> Only someone who can think logically would feel like that (not you).

>

>> Get a fukkin life you POS loser!

>> Frank

>

>

> I have one, thanks. Got any more childish clichés to hurl my way little

> boy?

>

> Alias

 

Who are you hiding from? You're known liar, goes hand-in-hand with being

a thief?

Get lost. You're not wanted nor needed here.

Frank

The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'

wrote:

> Charlie Tame wrote:

>> The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'

>> wrote:

>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:37:56 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> nobbygee5 wrote:

>>>>>> Hi,

>>>>>> My computer has recently been returned after being repaired. I

>>>>>> know windows was re-installed while it was away and i now keep

>>>>>> getting an icon come up saying i need to activate windows. When i

>>>>>> put my product key in i am told it is already in use. It is

>>>>>> definitely the right product key and if it is already in use i

>>>>>> must be using it so why do i keep getting a reminder. I have 25

>>>>>> days left to activate which sounds a lot but with the help

>>>>>> microsoft gives you its not long. Can anyone help or advise.

>>>>>> Regards Mark.

>>>>>

>>>>> You'll need to phone activate and grovel to the phone activators

>>>>> that you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to

>>>>> use something you bought.

>>>>

>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>

>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation. 3) If your answer is

>>>> "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>

>>> Which is more than they need to ask their paying customers and it

>>> violates privacy.

>>>

>>> When you call for activation, being an educated consumer is beneficial.

>>> Quoted from the MS website:

>>>

>>> http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/activation_facts.mspx

>>>

>>> "Mandatory Product Activation Data

>>>

>>> * The Installation ID is unique to each product and comprises two

>>> components:

>>>

>>> 1. Product ID. Unique to the product key used during installation

>>> 2. Hardware hash. Non-unique representation of the PC

>>>

>>> * The country in which the product is being installed (for Office

>>> XP and Office XP family products only)"

>>>

>>> You are never required to provide any other info in order to get

>>> activated. The agent is required to activate you immediately if you

>>> phone in and provide only the product ID, hardware hash, and

>>> occasionally the country in which the product(s) is being installed!

>>> It is none of their business if you made hardware changes, why you

>>> are reinstalling, etc and you do not need to answer questions like that.

>>

>>

>> Which as I keep saying comes back to one simple question, what's the

>> point? Mine us that each time online activation (Which is far less of

>> a nuisance and provides MS with just as much data as requested above)

>> is declined I remove the offending version of Windows and replace it

>> with a version of Linux. That surely makes Microsoft very happy,

>> doesn't it?

>>

>> Ask yourself who is punishing who here, sure as hell isn't me hurting

>> any :)

>

> That's because you are in the know Charlie. It is there to intimidate

> computer illiterate paying customers into buying another copy of vista.

>

 

 

 

Well that may be true and work once, but next time a WINDOWS UPDATE

changes a driver and invalidates their system even the most easily

intimidated are going to ask WTF, do I have to buy a new copy every month :)

 

It was imperative when this concept was introduced that there be no

false positives, the first time MS had to apologize for false positives

(Which has happened of course) doomed the technology and highlighted the

fact that BS are no more capable or writing flawless code than anyone

else, it also demonstrated an "Apparent" attitude that indicates MS

don't care about inconveniencing their users. As I've said before, I

fully support attempts to combat serious and malicious piracy but

there's a need for some logic in the solution.

 

The worst of this situation is that ordinary folks do not understand

what's going on, but the malicious thieves and less than honest users -

the very same ones causing the problem in the first place - can find

ways to beat it in no time at all. Heaven knows what it costs to

maintain this massive system but it seems to me to be an extraordinary

waste of money since those genuinely caught by it were never going to

pay anyway and those accidentally caught by it aren't going to keep

paying for more of the same :)

Charlie Tame wrote:

> The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'

> wrote:

>> Charlie Tame wrote:

>>> The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina

>>> DiBoy' wrote:

>>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:37:56 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> nobbygee5 wrote:

>>>>>>> Hi,

>>>>>>> My computer has recently been returned after being repaired.

>>>>>>> I know windows was re-installed while it was away and i now keep

>>>>>>> getting an icon come up saying i need to activate windows. When i

>>>>>>> put my product key in i am told it is already in use. It is

>>>>>>> definitely the right product key and if it is already in use i

>>>>>>> must be using it so why do i keep getting a reminder. I have 25

>>>>>>> days left to activate which sounds a lot but with the help

>>>>>>> microsoft gives you its not long. Can anyone help or advise.

>>>>>>> Regards Mark.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> You'll need to phone activate and grovel to the phone activators

>>>>>> that you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to

>>>>>> use something you bought.

>>>>>

>>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>>

>>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation. 3) If your answer is

>>>>> "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>>

>>>> Which is more than they need to ask their paying customers and it

>>>> violates privacy.

>>>>

>>>> When you call for activation, being an educated consumer is beneficial.

>>>> Quoted from the MS website:

>>>>

>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/activation_facts.mspx

>>>>

>>>> "Mandatory Product Activation Data

>>>>

>>>> * The Installation ID is unique to each product and comprises two

>>>> components:

>>>>

>>>> 1. Product ID. Unique to the product key used during installation

>>>> 2. Hardware hash. Non-unique representation of the PC

>>>>

>>>> * The country in which the product is being installed (for

>>>> Office XP and Office XP family products only)"

>>>>

>>>> You are never required to provide any other info in order to get

>>>> activated. The agent is required to activate you immediately if you

>>>> phone in and provide only the product ID, hardware hash, and

>>>> occasionally the country in which the product(s) is being

>>>> installed! It is none of their business if you made hardware

>>>> changes, why you are reinstalling, etc and you do not need to answer

>>>> questions like that.

>>>

>>>

>>> Which as I keep saying comes back to one simple question, what's the

>>> point? Mine us that each time online activation (Which is far less of

>>> a nuisance and provides MS with just as much data as requested above)

>>> is declined I remove the offending version of Windows and replace it

>>> with a version of Linux. That surely makes Microsoft very happy,

>>> doesn't it?

>>>

>>> Ask yourself who is punishing who here, sure as hell isn't me hurting

>>> any :)

>>

>> That's because you are in the know Charlie. It is there to intimidate

>> computer illiterate paying customers into buying another copy of vista.

>>

>

> Well that may be true and work once, but next time a WINDOWS UPDATE

> changes a driver and invalidates their system even the most easily

> intimidated are going to ask WTF, do I have to buy a new copy every

> month :)

 

Yes, I'm sure you are right. One can only guess at MS's motives for

treating their customers like this.

>

> It was imperative when this concept was introduced that there be no

> false positives, the first time MS had to apologize for false positives

> (Which has happened of course) doomed the technology and highlighted the

> fact that BS are no more capable or writing flawless code than anyone

> else, it also demonstrated an "Apparent" attitude that indicates MS

> don't care about inconveniencing their users. As I've said before, I

> fully support attempts to combat serious and malicious piracy but

> there's a need for some logic in the solution.

 

If they are going to do anything to combat piracy, it needs to be

seemless. I don't want to know it's there and I don't want to see it

(or any side effects of it) if I'm a paying customer.

>

> The worst of this situation is that ordinary folks do not understand

> what's going on, but the malicious thieves and less than honest users -

> the very same ones causing the problem in the first place - can find

> ways to beat it in no time at all. Heaven knows what it costs to

> maintain this massive system but it seems to me to be an extraordinary

> waste of money since those genuinely caught by it were never going to

> pay anyway and those accidentally caught by it aren't going to keep

> paying for more of the same :)

 

True. They are really going about it in the wrong way right now.

 

--

Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group -

Submit your nomination at the link below:

http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

 

"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on

free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the

creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer

rights in the digital age are not frivolous."

- Maura Corbett

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:41:58 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 12:21:14 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>> dennis@home wrote:

>>>>

>>>> "Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:eNGrP8JLIHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>> 8<

>>>>

>>>>>> Please, alias, use proper English?

>>>>> Than capitalize Alias, will ya?

>>>>>

>>>> Err.. alias isn't a name so it does not need capitalization in English.

>>> False. Any word can be a name in English. There are people in the States

>>> who have named their children anything from Pepsi to Atlasta. All are

>>> legal names. I am using it as a name so it should therefore be capitalized.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>> If it floats your boat to claim to be named "Alias", then it floats

>> your boat. Far be it for me to find fault with your slaughtered

>> English.

>

>*Any* word can be a name and if it's used as a name, it should be

>capitalized.

>

>> Note, sir, that I never hide my true identity, warts and all.

>> Apparently, neither do you.

>>

>> Donald L McDaniel

>

>How do we know your real name is Donald L McDaniel? We don't know any

>more than if Alias is my name.

>

>Alias

 

Friend, sometimes you have a lot of good to say. Sometimes you don't.

This seems to be one of those times you don't.

 

Anyway, "alias", have a great day..

 

Donald L. McDaniel

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:53:29 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:37:56 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>> nobbygee5 wrote:

>>>> Hi,

>>>> My computer has recently been returned after being repaired. I know

>>>> windows was re-installed while it was away and i now keep getting an icon

>>>> come up saying i need to activate windows. When i put my product key in i am

>>>> told it is already in use. It is definitely the right product key and if it

>>>> is already in use i must be using it so why do i keep getting a reminder. I

>>>> have 25 days left to activate which sounds a lot but with the help microsoft

>>>> gives you its not long. Can anyone help or advise.

>>>> Regards Mark.

>>>

>>> You'll need to phone activate and grovel to the phone activators that

>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>> something you bought.

>>

>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone,

>

>The fact that you have to activate by phone implies that you are a thief

> until you prove otherwise. And, if you don't activate by phone, you

>will not be able to use what you paid for.

>

> the tech asks me two

>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>

>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>> type:

>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>> machine at once.

>

>How many paying customers know the difference between an OEM or a retail

>copy?

>

>>

>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>> something you bought"?

>

>So, you're saying that activation is guaranteed? If so, what's the point

>of doing it?

>

>>

>> You JUST don't get it yet, do ya, "alias"?

>

>Alias, not alias.

>

>> We've been trying to tell you for years that as far as Semantics are

>> concerned, there are no grounds for comparison between a new Ford and

>> an Operating System. They are "apples and oranges", semantically, as

>> well as opposite polarities, logically, financially, or legally..

>>

>> Yet you keep trotting out those same poor, worn-out metaphors.

>

>I don't recall using a Ford as an example. You're confusing me with

>someone else.

>

>>

>> Again, friend,

>> A man who pays cash for a new Ford receives something he can grasp

>> with his hands, while the same man who pays cash for a "copy" of Vista

>> receives a "LICENSE-to-USE", or "The right to use the provided media

>> to install and use the software contained on the media on one [or

>> more] machines *according to the terms* of the user agreement, which

>> the user agrees to when he installs the software."

>>

>> This is NOT "a Deed to everything on the media, including the media

>> itself" [all which are owned lock, stock, and smoking barrel by the

>> manufacturer and/or author of the software and media.]

>>

>> You don't seem to be able to grasp this simple point, friend. The

>> ONLY thing you "own" is a "license to use the provided media to

>> install the software contained on the media provided."

>>

>> Yes, ''alias", Microsoft owns the disks themselves, as well as the

>> bits on the disks, and has the right to request them back at any time,

>> at its own discretion.

>>

>> In fact, the Microsoft EULA is not even a formal (or informal) "deed

>> of ownership".

>>

>> It's simply a "license to install and use /the software/ on one or

>> more machines, *according to the terms of the license* agreed to when

>> initially installing it."

>>

>> This "License to Use" shouldn't be considered to be "real property"

>> [such as what anyone could see with their eyes, like a Ford

>> automobile], but lies in the realm somewhere between "you paid for a

>> copy...", and "but the owner can take it back if he wants." So

>> really, who owns the product? The one who paid for a copy, or the one

>> who paid for its manufacture and distribution?

>>

>> Personally, I believe that once a manufacturer/author advertises his

>> product publically [sic], it no longer belongs exclusively to him, but is

>> co-owned [quietly] by his paying customers from the first copy sold.

>>

>> The same goes for all other creative works, except those the artist

>> gives to the Public at no cost.

>>

>>> You might want to consider Open Source or Linux. It's free and there is

>>> no activation, becoming genuine or DRM to have to put up with. Check it

>>> out at http://www.ubuntu.com/

>>

>> It would seem to me that if one is to be believed, he must present an

>> air of genuineness. The best way to do that, if one is currently NOT

>> genuine, is to become genuine. When the man does that, he no longer

>> needs to present an air of genuineness, but is truly "genuine". At

>> that point, he will then recognize the absolute necessity for defences [sic]

>> against the non-genuine, who cause things like Windows Activation and

>> Digital Rights Management to exist in the first place.

>>

>> When I was a child, no one in my neighborhood left their doors locked.

>> Why lock the door,when everyone knew if someone needed something of

>> his, he would be free to take what was necessary subject, of course,

>> to the mores of the time and common human decency.

>>

>> Now, everyone locks their doors, even from their dearest friends.

>> Sad.

>>

>> Donald L McDaniel

>

>You have described Microsoft's scam perfectly. And, Donald, or whatever

>your real name is, it is a scam and you can't continue to accuse paying

>customers of being thieves until they prove otherwise and expect stay in

>business.

>

>Alias

 

Again, "alias", WHERE does Microsoft "accuse paying customers of being

thieves until they prove otherwise?)

 

I personally have NEVER been accused of being a thieves, by ANYONE at

ANYTIME in my 62 years. I do not see it happening during the rest of

my stay on the earth.

 

I see nothing wrong with accusing Microsoft of falsely accusing all

its customers of being thieves. However, in a court of law, one must

PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that the charges against someone are

supportable.

 

You have failed to support your delusion since the release of XP and

Microsoft's requirement to activate one's License. Telling us your

delusion over and over can never "prove" its verity.

 

The Bible tells us "Let every word be established at the mouth of two

or more witnesses."

 

You seem to be the ONLY one who has consistently made this charge over

the years. That's definitely NOT "at the mouth of two or more

witnesses."

 

Even I, who dislikes activation as much as the next man, do not make

such a delusional accusation against Microsoft -- and I am sure I've

made more than my share of delusional accusations againt Microsoft in

these newsgroups.

 

But I have NEVER felt as if Microsoft were somehow accusing me of

being a software pirate. In fact, Microsoft has treated me MUCH better

than I deserve over the years.

 

If you feel as if Microsoft is accusing you of being a pirate, I

suggest that maybe you are. In which case, the guilt you feel when

you activate your OS is certainly not misplaced.

 

Donald L McDaniel

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:50:50 GMT, "Brian W"

<brian.wescombeSODOFF@ntlSPAMworld.com> wrote:

>

>"Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message

>news:O3$tMVbMIHA.5172@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>>

>> How many paying customers know the difference between an OEM or a retail

>> copy?

>>

>Even MS don't know apparently. I re-activated my generic OEM Vista by

>telling the operator I purchased it in a retail store (which is technically

>true, even though it isn't a 'retail' version).

 

Which only proves what I have been saying all along: The Activation

techs are told by Microsoft to bend over backward in ensuring that

customers leave the phone with a POSITIVE experience, whether they

deserve it or not.

 

They are TRULY committed to their customers' satisfaction.

Unlike many others.

 

Donald L McDaniel.

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

wrote:

>See below...

>

>Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>

>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>

>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>> type:

>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>> machine at once.

>>

>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>> something you bought"?

>

>Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you keep

>getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>tires or fit a new light bulb?

>

>Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>

>When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

 

Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

activation?

 

BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

 

If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

 

I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

circustances.

 

It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

they have a problem with.

 

Idiots!!!

 

Donald L McDaniel.

..

 

Get your consciences clean, and you won't have to worry.

Donald L McDaniel wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

> wrote:

>

>>See below...

>>

>>Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>

>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>

>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>>> type:

>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>> machine at once.

>>>

>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>> something you bought"?

>>

>>Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you keep

>>getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>>purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>>tires or fit a new light bulb?

>>

>>Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>>users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>>police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>>

>>When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>>abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>>Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

>

> Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

> activation?

>

> BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

> very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

>

> If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

> wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

>

> I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

> circustances.

>

> It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

> people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

> more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

> drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

> they have a problem with.

>

> Idiots!!!

>

More and more users will only have access to a cell phone. Depending on the

package they're using, a 10 minute call can cost them money. Money they

shouldn't have to spend to "prove" they are the legitimate holders of the

license. But, as always, Microsoft couldn't care less. And it appears that

MickeyMouse Fan Boys don't either.

 

Cheers.

 

 

--

Remove Vista Activation Completely ...

http://tinyurl.com/2w8qqo

 

Frank - seek help immediately! Visit ...

http://www.binsa.org/

NoStop wrote:

> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>

>

>>On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

>>wrote:

>>

>>

>>>See below...

>>>

>>>Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>>Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>>[or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>>1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>

>>>>2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>>If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>>>which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>>>has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>>>3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>>"Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>>>Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>>>a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>>>to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>>>>type:

>>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>>>activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>>>second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>>>it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>>>machine at once.

>>>>

>>>>Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>>>you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>>something you bought"?

>>>

>>>Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you keep

>>>getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>>>purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>>>tires or fit a new light bulb?

>>>

>>>Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>>>users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>>>police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>>>

>>>When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>>>abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>>>Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

>>

>>Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

>>activation?

>>

>>BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

>>very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

>>

>>If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

>>wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

>>

>>I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

>>circustances.

>>

>>It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

>>people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

>>more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

>>drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

>>they have a problem with.

>>

>>Idiots!!!

>>

>

> More and more users will only have access to a cell phone. Depending on the

> package they're using, a 10 minute call can cost them money. Money they

> shouldn't have to spend to "prove" they are the legitimate holders of the

> license. But, as always, Microsoft couldn't care less. And it appears that

> MickeyMouse Fan Boys don't either.

>

> Cheers.

>

>

How stupid are you doris? 5-7 mins is all it takes.

You're stupid doris.

RS is calling...LOL!

Frank

NoStop wrote:

> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>

>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

>> wrote:

>>

>>> See below...

>>>

>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>

>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>

>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>>>> type:

>>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>>> machine at once.

>>>>

>>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>> something you bought"?

>>> Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you keep

>>> getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>>> purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>>> tires or fit a new light bulb?

>>>

>>> Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>>> users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>>> police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>>>

>>> When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>>> abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>>> Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

>> Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

>> activation?

>>

>> BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

>> very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

>>

>> If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

>> wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

>>

>> I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

>> circustances.

>>

>> It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

>> people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

>> more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

>> drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

>> they have a problem with.

>>

>> Idiots!!!

>>

> More and more users will only have access to a cell phone. Depending on the

> package they're using, a 10 minute call can cost them money. Money they

> shouldn't have to spend to "prove" they are the legitimate holders of the

> license. But, as always, Microsoft couldn't care less. And it appears that

> MickeyMouse Fan Boys don't either.

>

> Cheers.

>

>

 

 

As I said clearly (I think) it has nothing in this case to do with

Governments or Blackwater, except for the fact that given "Implied"

permission for one thing large organizations will take that permission

for other things.

 

We now accept having to "Prove" our innocence every few weeks, days,

whatever - and yet as the reply suggests no questions are asked so what

does this system achieve?

Donald L McDaniel wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:53:29 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

 

 

You answered your own argument Donald...

 

> I see nothing wrong with accusing Microsoft of falsely accusing all

> its customers of being thieves. However, in a court of law, one must

> PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that the charges against someone are

> supportable.

 

So what do you call it when Microsoft summarily removes your access to

your computer, your data and the operating system you have paid to use?

 

Where was the court when your system was deactivated...

On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 21:28:06 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

wrote:

>Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:53:29 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>You answered your own argument Donald...

>

>

>> I see nothing wrong with accusing Microsoft of falsely accusing all

>> its customers of being thieves. However, in a court of law, one must

>> PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that the charges against someone are

>> supportable.

>

>So what do you call it when Microsoft summarily removes your access to

>your computer, your data and the operating system you have paid to use?

>

>Where was the court when your system was deactivated...

 

Again, Mr. Tame, where's your proof?

F.U.D. are not admissable in court as evidence, Charlie.

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:27:28 GMT, NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>

>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

>> wrote:

>>

>>>See below...

>>>

>>>Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>

>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>

>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>>>> type:

>>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>>> machine at once.

>>>>

>>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>> something you bought"?

>>>

>>>Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you keep

>>>getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>>>purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>>>tires or fit a new light bulb?

>>>

>>>Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>>>users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>>>police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>>>

>>>When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>>>abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>>>Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

>>

>> Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

>> activation?

>>

>> BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

>> very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

>>

>> If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

>> wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

>>

>> I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

>> circustances.

>>

>> It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

>> people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

>> more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

>> drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

>> they have a problem with.

>>

>> Idiots!!!

>>

>More and more users will only have access to a cell phone. Depending on the

>package they're using, a 10 minute call can cost them money. Money they

>shouldn't have to spend to "prove" they are the legitimate holders of the

>license. But, as always, Microsoft couldn't care less. And it appears that

>MickeyMouse Fan Boys don't either.

>

>Cheers.

 

"Mickey Mouse Fan Boys"? You are "one wild and crazy guy", aren't ya?

My anti-Microsoft tirades in these newsgroups are there for all to

see. I've never been called a "Fan Boy" before. It's a new

experience for me.

 

Cheers

 

Donald L McDaniel

On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 21:06:45 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

wrote:

>NoStop wrote:

>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>

>>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>> See below...

>>>>

>>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>>

>>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>>>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>>>>> type:

>>>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>>>> machine at once.

>>>>>

>>>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>>> something you bought"?

>>>> Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you keep

>>>> getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>>>> purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>>>> tires or fit a new light bulb?

 

Crap!! I thought you guys had been called on that comparison of a

Ford and a License to an OS too many times already. I guess you just

never learn, do you?

>>>>

>>>> Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>>>> users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>>>> police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>>>>

Normally, when one changes scenarios in a Usenet thread, he also

changes the Subject, since that is what he is actually doing.

>>>> When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>>>> abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>>>> Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

>>> Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

>>> activation?

>>>

>>> BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

>>> very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

>>>

>>> If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

>>> wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

>>>

>>> I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

>>> circustances.

>>>

>>> It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

>>> people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

>>> more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

>>> drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

>>> they have a problem with.

>>>

>>> Idiots!!!

>>>

>> More and more users will only have access to a cell phone. Depending on the

>> package they're using, a 10 minute call can cost them money.

 

If I had a cell phone contract like that, I would change providers

quickly.

>> Money they shouldn't have to spend to "prove" they are the legitimate holders of the

>> license. But, as always, Microsoft couldn't care less. And it appears that

>> MickeyMouse Fan Boys don't either.

 

Well, if that were what they were doing, I could see where you're

coming from. But of course, "prove" is a legal term, and does not

exist outside a Courtroom.

 

Since Microsoft Activation Servers do not in any way "judge" the

legality or illegality of a particular license, not being a part of

the Legal Systems of nations where they exist, your statement is

obviously nothing but F.U.D.

>> Cheers.

>>

>>

>

>

>As I said clearly (I think) it has nothing in this case to do with

>Governments or Blackwater, except for the fact that given "Implied"

>permission for one thing large organizations will take that permission

>for other things.

>

>We now accept having to "Prove" our innocence every few weeks, days,

>whatever - and yet as the reply suggests no questions are asked so what

>does this system achieve?

 

Again, you speak from ignorance, rather than truth.

Activation is NOT a "legal process" of any kind. It is simply a

mechanism for helping insure that one has a valid license, and is

using it legitimately. While it may not be a very good mechanism, it

does what it is designed to do. It helps. Microsoft actually relies

on the basic honesty of its licensees more than it relies on such

mechanical tests. Knowing the nature of man, that he is actually

dishonest, rather than basically honest, I sometimes think their

policy is unwise, but an honest man must always give a chance for a

dishonest man to be honest.

 

Donald McDaniel

Donald L McDaniel wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:53:29 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>

>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:37:56 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>> nobbygee5 wrote:

>>>>> Hi,

>>>>> My computer has recently been returned after being repaired. I know

>>>>> windows was re-installed while it was away and i now keep getting an icon

>>>>> come up saying i need to activate windows. When i put my product key in i am

>>>>> told it is already in use. It is definitely the right product key and if it

>>>>> is already in use i must be using it so why do i keep getting a reminder. I

>>>>> have 25 days left to activate which sounds a lot but with the help microsoft

>>>>> gives you its not long. Can anyone help or advise.

>>>>> Regards Mark.

>>>> You'll need to phone activate and grovel to the phone activators that

>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>> something you bought.

>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone,

>> The fact that you have to activate by phone implies that you are a thief

>> until you prove otherwise. And, if you don't activate by phone, you

>> will not be able to use what you paid for.

>>

>> the tech asks me two

>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>

>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>>> type:

>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>> machine at once.

>> How many paying customers know the difference between an OEM or a retail

>> copy?

>>

>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>> something you bought"?

>> So, you're saying that activation is guaranteed? If so, what's the point

>> of doing it?

>>

>>> You JUST don't get it yet, do ya, "alias"?

>> Alias, not alias.

>>

>>> We've been trying to tell you for years that as far as Semantics are

>>> concerned, there are no grounds for comparison between a new Ford and

>>> an Operating System. They are "apples and oranges", semantically, as

>>> well as opposite polarities, logically, financially, or legally..

>>>

>>> Yet you keep trotting out those same poor, worn-out metaphors.

>> I don't recall using a Ford as an example. You're confusing me with

>> someone else.

>>

>>> Again, friend,

>>> A man who pays cash for a new Ford receives something he can grasp

>>> with his hands, while the same man who pays cash for a "copy" of Vista

>>> receives a "LICENSE-to-USE", or "The right to use the provided media

>>> to install and use the software contained on the media on one [or

>>> more] machines *according to the terms* of the user agreement, which

>>> the user agrees to when he installs the software."

>>>

>>> This is NOT "a Deed to everything on the media, including the media

>>> itself" [all which are owned lock, stock, and smoking barrel by the

>>> manufacturer and/or author of the software and media.]

>>>

>>> You don't seem to be able to grasp this simple point, friend. The

>>> ONLY thing you "own" is a "license to use the provided media to

>>> install the software contained on the media provided."

>>>

>>> Yes, ''alias", Microsoft owns the disks themselves, as well as the

>>> bits on the disks, and has the right to request them back at any time,

>>> at its own discretion.

>>>

>>> In fact, the Microsoft EULA is not even a formal (or informal) "deed

>>> of ownership".

>>>

>>> It's simply a "license to install and use /the software/ on one or

>>> more machines, *according to the terms of the license* agreed to when

>>> initially installing it."

>>>

>>> This "License to Use" shouldn't be considered to be "real property"

>>> [such as what anyone could see with their eyes, like a Ford

>>> automobile], but lies in the realm somewhere between "you paid for a

>>> copy...", and "but the owner can take it back if he wants." So

>>> really, who owns the product? The one who paid for a copy, or the one

>>> who paid for its manufacture and distribution?

>>>

>>> Personally, I believe that once a manufacturer/author advertises his

>>> product publically [sic], it no longer belongs exclusively to him, but is

>>> co-owned [quietly] by his paying customers from the first copy sold.

>>>

>>> The same goes for all other creative works, except those the artist

>>> gives to the Public at no cost.

>>>

>>>> You might want to consider Open Source or Linux. It's free and there is

>>>> no activation, becoming genuine or DRM to have to put up with. Check it

>>>> out at http://www.ubuntu.com/

>>> It would seem to me that if one is to be believed, he must present an

>>> air of genuineness. The best way to do that, if one is currently NOT

>>> genuine, is to become genuine. When the man does that, he no longer

>>> needs to present an air of genuineness, but is truly "genuine". At

>>> that point, he will then recognize the absolute necessity for defences [sic]

>>> against the non-genuine, who cause things like Windows Activation and

>>> Digital Rights Management to exist in the first place.

>>>

>>> When I was a child, no one in my neighborhood left their doors locked.

>>> Why lock the door,when everyone knew if someone needed something of

>>> his, he would be free to take what was necessary subject, of course,

>>> to the mores of the time and common human decency.

>>>

>>> Now, everyone locks their doors, even from their dearest friends.

>>> Sad.

>>>

>>> Donald L McDaniel

>> You have described Microsoft's scam perfectly. And, Donald, or whatever

>> your real name is, it is a scam and you can't continue to accuse paying

>> customers of being thieves until they prove otherwise and expect stay in

>> business.

>>

>> Alias

>

> Again, "alias", WHERE does Microsoft "accuse paying customers of being

> thieves until they prove otherwise?)

>

> I personally have NEVER been accused of being a thieves, by ANYONE at

> ANYTIME in my 62 years. I do not see it happening during the rest of

> my stay on the earth.

>

> I see nothing wrong with accusing Microsoft of falsely accusing all

> its customers of being thieves. However, in a court of law, one must

> PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that the charges against someone are

> supportable.

>

> You have failed to support your delusion since the release of XP and

> Microsoft's requirement to activate one's License. Telling us your

> delusion over and over can never "prove" its verity.

>

> The Bible tells us "Let every word be established at the mouth of two

> or more witnesses."

>

> You seem to be the ONLY one who has consistently made this charge over

> the years. That's definitely NOT "at the mouth of two or more

> witnesses."

>

> Even I, who dislikes activation as much as the next man, do not make

> such a delusional accusation against Microsoft -- and I am sure I've

> made more than my share of delusional accusations againt Microsoft in

> these newsgroups.

>

> But I have NEVER felt as if Microsoft were somehow accusing me of

> being a software pirate. In fact, Microsoft has treated me MUCH better

> than I deserve over the years.

>

> If you feel as if Microsoft is accusing you of being a pirate, I

> suggest that maybe you are. In which case, the guilt you feel when

> you activate your OS is certainly not misplaced.

>

> Donald L McDaniel

 

If you have to prove that your bought Windows not once, but twice, or MS

will make it impossible for you to use the copy of Windows that you

bought, that is called assuming you are guilty of piracy until you prove

otherwise. You, yourself, blinded by MS FUD, have accused me of piracy

with no proof.

 

MS says bend over and Donald asks "how far?"

 

Alias

Donald L McDaniel wrote:

> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:27:28 GMT, NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>

>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>

>>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>> See below...

>>>>

>>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>>

>>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>>>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>>>>> type:

>>>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>>>> machine at once.

>>>>>

>>>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>>> something you bought"?

>>>> Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you keep

>>>> getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>>>> purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>>>> tires or fit a new light bulb?

>>>>

>>>> Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>>>> users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>>>> police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>>>>

>>>> When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>>>> abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>>>> Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

>>> Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

>>> activation?

>>>

>>> BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

>>> very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

>>>

>>> If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

>>> wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

>>>

>>> I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

>>> circustances.

>>>

>>> It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

>>> people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

>>> more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

>>> drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

>>> they have a problem with.

>>>

>>> Idiots!!!

>>>

>> More and more users will only have access to a cell phone. Depending on the

>> package they're using, a 10 minute call can cost them money. Money they

>> shouldn't have to spend to "prove" they are the legitimate holders of the

>> license. But, as always, Microsoft couldn't care less. And it appears that

>> MickeyMouse Fan Boys don't either.

>>

>> Cheers.

>

> "Mickey Mouse Fan Boys"? You are "one wild and crazy guy", aren't ya?

> My anti-Microsoft tirades in these newsgroups are there for all to

> see. I've never been called a "Fan Boy" before. It's a new

> experience for me.

>

> Cheers

>

> Donald L McDaniel

 

Well, that's what you're doing, being a fanboy. There is no reason for

MS to question whether a paying customer has paid for his Windows or

not. If MS thinks that someone is stealing from them, they should call

the proper legal authorities, not force paying customers to prove they

are running a legit copy over and over and over again. This is the main

reason I am running Ubuntu.

 

The sad thing is that fanboys like you think that WPA and WGA are

perfectly normal.

 

Alias

"Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message news:fiu902$tsi$1@aioe.org...

> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:53:29 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:37:56 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> nobbygee5 wrote:

>>>>>> Hi,

>>>>>> My computer has recently been returned after being repaired. I

>>>>>> know windows was re-installed while it was away and i now keep

>>>>>> getting an icon come up saying i need to activate windows. When i put

>>>>>> my product key in i am told it is already in use. It is definitely

>>>>>> the right product key and if it is already in use i must be using it

>>>>>> so why do i keep getting a reminder. I have 25 days left to activate

>>>>>> which sounds a lot but with the help microsoft gives you its not

>>>>>> long. Can anyone help or advise.

>>>>>> Regards Mark.

>>>>> You'll need to phone activate and grovel to the phone activators that

>>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>>> something you bought.

>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone,

>>> The fact that you have to activate by phone implies that you are a thief

>>> until you prove otherwise. And, if you don't activate by phone, you will

>>> not be able to use what you paid for.

>>>

>>> the tech asks me two

>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>

>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation. 3) If your answer is "No",

>>>> they will ask a further question:

>>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>>>> type: If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>>> machine at once.

>>> How many paying customers know the difference between an OEM or a retail

>>> copy?

>>>

>>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>> something you bought"?

>>> So, you're saying that activation is guaranteed? If so, what's the point

>>> of doing it?

>>>

>>>> You JUST don't get it yet, do ya, "alias"?

>>> Alias, not alias.

>>>

>>>> We've been trying to tell you for years that as far as Semantics are

>>>> concerned, there are no grounds for comparison between a new Ford and

>>>> an Operating System. They are "apples and oranges", semantically, as

>>>> well as opposite polarities, logically, financially, or legally..

>>>>

>>>> Yet you keep trotting out those same poor, worn-out metaphors.

>>> I don't recall using a Ford as an example. You're confusing me with

>>> someone else.

>>>

>>>> Again, friend,

>>>> A man who pays cash for a new Ford receives something he can grasp

>>>> with his hands, while the same man who pays cash for a "copy" of Vista

>>>> receives a "LICENSE-to-USE", or "The right to use the provided media

>>>> to install and use the software contained on the media on one [or

>>>> more] machines *according to the terms* of the user agreement, which

>>>> the user agrees to when he installs the software."

>>>> This is NOT "a Deed to everything on the media, including the media

>>>> itself" [all which are owned lock, stock, and smoking barrel by the

>>>> manufacturer and/or author of the software and media.]

>>>> You don't seem to be able to grasp this simple point, friend. The

>>>> ONLY thing you "own" is a "license to use the provided media to

>>>> install the software contained on the media provided."

>>>>

>>>> Yes, ''alias", Microsoft owns the disks themselves, as well as the

>>>> bits on the disks, and has the right to request them back at any time,

>>>> at its own discretion.

>>>>

>>>> In fact, the Microsoft EULA is not even a formal (or informal) "deed

>>>> of ownership".

>>>> It's simply a "license to install and use /the software/ on one or

>>>> more machines, *according to the terms of the license* agreed to when

>>>> initially installing it."

>>>>

>>>> This "License to Use" shouldn't be considered to be "real property"

>>>> [such as what anyone could see with their eyes, like a Ford

>>>> automobile], but lies in the realm somewhere between "you paid for a

>>>> copy...", and "but the owner can take it back if he wants." So

>>>> really, who owns the product? The one who paid for a copy, or the one

>>>> who paid for its manufacture and distribution?

>>>> Personally, I believe that once a manufacturer/author advertises his

>>>> product publically [sic], it no longer belongs exclusively to him, but

>>>> is

>>>> co-owned [quietly] by his paying customers from the first copy sold.

>>>>

>>>> The same goes for all other creative works, except those the artist

>>>> gives to the Public at no cost.

>>>>

>>>>> You might want to consider Open Source or Linux. It's free and there

>>>>> is no activation, becoming genuine or DRM to have to put up with.

>>>>> Check it out at http://www.ubuntu.com/

>>>> It would seem to me that if one is to be believed, he must present an

>>>> air of genuineness. The best way to do that, if one is currently NOT

>>>> genuine, is to become genuine. When the man does that, he no longer

>>>> needs to present an air of genuineness, but is truly "genuine". At

>>>> that point, he will then recognize the absolute necessity for defences

>>>> [sic]

>>>> against the non-genuine, who cause things like Windows Activation and

>>>> Digital Rights Management to exist in the first place.

>>>>

>>>> When I was a child, no one in my neighborhood left their doors locked.

>>>> Why lock the door,when everyone knew if someone needed something of

>>>> his, he would be free to take what was necessary subject, of course,

>>>> to the mores of the time and common human decency.

>>>>

>>>> Now, everyone locks their doors, even from their dearest friends.

>>>> Sad.

>>>>

>>>> Donald L McDaniel

>>> You have described Microsoft's scam perfectly. And, Donald, or whatever

>>> your real name is, it is a scam and you can't continue to accuse paying

>>> customers of being thieves until they prove otherwise and expect stay in

>>> business.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>> Again, "alias", WHERE does Microsoft "accuse paying customers of being

>> thieves until they prove otherwise?)

>>

>> I personally have NEVER been accused of being a thieves, by ANYONE at

>> ANYTIME in my 62 years. I do not see it happening during the rest of

>> my stay on the earth.

>>

>> I see nothing wrong with accusing Microsoft of falsely accusing all

>> its customers of being thieves. However, in a court of law, one must

>> PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that the charges against someone are

>> supportable.

>>

>> You have failed to support your delusion since the release of XP and

>> Microsoft's requirement to activate one's License. Telling us your

>> delusion over and over can never "prove" its verity.

>>

>> The Bible tells us "Let every word be established at the mouth of two

>> or more witnesses."

>>

>> You seem to be the ONLY one who has consistently made this charge over

>> the years. That's definitely NOT "at the mouth of two or more

>> witnesses."

>>

>> Even I, who dislikes activation as much as the next man, do not make

>> such a delusional accusation against Microsoft -- and I am sure I've

>> made more than my share of delusional accusations againt Microsoft in

>> these newsgroups. But I have NEVER felt as if Microsoft were somehow

>> accusing me of

>> being a software pirate. In fact, Microsoft has treated me MUCH better

>> than I deserve over the years.

>>

>> If you feel as if Microsoft is accusing you of being a pirate, I

>> suggest that maybe you are. In which case, the guilt you feel when

>> you activate your OS is certainly not misplaced.

>>

>> Donald L McDaniel

>

> If you have to prove that your bought Windows not once, but twice, or MS

> will make it impossible for you to use the copy of Windows that you

> bought, that is called assuming you are guilty of piracy until you prove

> otherwise. You, yourself, blinded by MS FUD, have accused me of piracy

> with no proof.

>

> MS says bend over and Donald asks "how far?"

>

> Alias

 

 

Here is a coupon for $1.00 off.

http://www.geritol.com/

 

--

Awesome

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/default.mspx

"Alias" <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote in message news:fiu997$tsi$2@aioe.org...

> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:27:28 GMT, NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>>

>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>

>>>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> See below...

>>>>>

>>>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>>>

>>>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of

>>>>>> numbers,

>>>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK",

>>>>>> which

>>>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>>>>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>>>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>>>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>>>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>>>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>>>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product

>>>>>> ID

>>>>>> type:

>>>>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>>>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>>>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>>>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>>>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>>>>> machine at once.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>>>> something you bought"?

>>>>> Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you

>>>>> keep

>>>>> getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>>>>> purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>>>>> tires or fit a new light bulb?

>>>>>

>>>>> Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>>>>> users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>>>>> police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>>>>>

>>>>> When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>>>>> abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>>>>> Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

>>>> Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

>>>> activation?

>>>>

>>>> BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

>>>> very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

>>>>

>>>> If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

>>>> wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

>>>>

>>>> I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

>>>> circustances.

>>>>

>>>> It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

>>>> people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

>>>> more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

>>>> drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

>>>> they have a problem with.

>>>>

>>>> Idiots!!!

>>>>

>>> More and more users will only have access to a cell phone. Depending on

>>> the

>>> package they're using, a 10 minute call can cost them money. Money they

>>> shouldn't have to spend to "prove" they are the legitimate holders of

>>> the

>>> license. But, as always, Microsoft couldn't care less. And it appears

>>> that

>>> MickeyMouse Fan Boys don't either.

>>>

>>> Cheers.

>>

>> "Mickey Mouse Fan Boys"? You are "one wild and crazy guy", aren't ya?

>> My anti-Microsoft tirades in these newsgroups are there for all to

>> see. I've never been called a "Fan Boy" before. It's a new

>> experience for me.

>>

>> Cheers

>>

>> Donald L McDaniel

>

> Well, that's what you're doing, being a fanboy. There is no reason for MS

> to question whether a paying customer has paid for his Windows or not. If

> MS thinks that someone is stealing from them, they should call the proper

> legal authorities, not force paying customers to prove they are running a

> legit copy over and over and over again. This is the main reason I am

> running Ubuntu.

>

> The sad thing is that fanboys like you think that WPA and WGA are

> perfectly normal.

>

> Alias

 

 

A coupon for $1.00 off.

http://www.preparationh.com/

 

Merry Christmas : )

 

--

Awesome

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/default.mspx

Donald L McDaniel wrote:

> On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 21:28:06 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

> wrote:

>

>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:53:29 +0100, Alias <alias@aliasmail.com> wrote:

>>

>> You answered your own argument Donald...

>>

>>

>>> I see nothing wrong with accusing Microsoft of falsely accusing all

>>> its customers of being thieves. However, in a court of law, one must

>>> PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that the charges against someone are

>>> supportable.

>> So what do you call it when Microsoft summarily removes your access to

>> your computer, your data and the operating system you have paid to use?

>>

>> Where was the court when your system was deactivated...

>

> Again, Mr. Tame, where's your proof?

> F.U.D. are not admissable in court as evidence, Charlie.

 

 

The proof is that as you admit your system was deactivated with no

warning based on the assumption that you were guilty of something. You

are obviously willing to accept that so I trust your confinement at

Guantanamo on the grounds that you "Might" be a terrorist and there's no

need to provide any evidence for that will also meet with you approval.

Donald L McDaniel wrote:

> On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 21:06:45 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

> wrote:

>

>> NoStop wrote:

>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>

>>>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> See below...

>>>>>

>>>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>>>

>>>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of numbers,

>>>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK", which

>>>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>>>>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>>>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>>>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>>>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>>>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>>>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your Product ID

>>>>>> type:

>>>>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>>>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>>>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>>>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>>>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>>>>> machine at once.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>>>> something you bought"?

>>>>> Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you keep

>>>>> getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>>>>> purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>>>>> tires or fit a new light bulb?

>

> Crap!! I thought you guys had been called on that comparison of a

> Ford and a License to an OS too many times already. I guess you just

> never learn, do you?

>

>>>>> Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>>>>> users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>>>>> police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>>>>>

> Normally, when one changes scenarios in a Usenet thread, he also

> changes the Subject, since that is what he is actually doing.

>

>>>>> When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>>>>> abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>>>>> Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

>>>> Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

>>>> activation?

>>>>

>>>> BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

>>>> very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

>>>>

>>>> If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

>>>> wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

>>>>

>>>> I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

>>>> circustances.

>>>>

>>>> It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

>>>> people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

>>>> more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

>>>> drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

>>>> they have a problem with.

>>>>

>>>> Idiots!!!

>>>>

>>> More and more users will only have access to a cell phone. Depending on the

>>> package they're using, a 10 minute call can cost them money.

>

> If I had a cell phone contract like that, I would change providers

> quickly.

>

>>> Money they shouldn't have to spend to "prove" they are the legitimate holders of the

>>> license. But, as always, Microsoft couldn't care less. And it appears that

>>> MickeyMouse Fan Boys don't either.

>

> Well, if that were what they were doing, I could see where you're

> coming from. But of course, "prove" is a legal term, and does not

> exist outside a Courtroom.

>

> Since Microsoft Activation Servers do not in any way "judge" the

> legality or illegality of a particular license, not being a part of

> the Legal Systems of nations where they exist, your statement is

> obviously nothing but F.U.D.

>

>>> Cheers.

>>>

>>>

>>

>> As I said clearly (I think) it has nothing in this case to do with

>> Governments or Blackwater, except for the fact that given "Implied"

>> permission for one thing large organizations will take that permission

>> for other things.

>>

>> We now accept having to "Prove" our innocence every few weeks, days,

>> whatever - and yet as the reply suggests no questions are asked so what

>> does this system achieve?

>

> Again, you speak from ignorance, rather than truth.

> Activation is NOT a "legal process" of any kind. It is simply a

> mechanism for helping insure that one has a valid license, and is

> using it legitimately.

 

And that is not a legal judgment, oh but wait, is is a judgment of

"Legitimacy". I stand corrected then, I now see a huge difference.

 

The comparison with Ford is in fact quite valid, though not perfect. If

you lease a car the leasing agent will normally try to contact you

exhaustively before repossession. Not so with only 3 days to deal with

the problem. Then you simply call and promise the check is in the mail

and they let you have it back... don't think so. I think they wait until

they have some evidence of non payment before they repossess and then

whatever hoops one has to jump through to get the vehicle back are your

own problem.

 

You are the one who published here the instructions for the activation

process, clearly explaining that as long as you "Say" you have only one

copy it will be activated. Seems to me that the dishonest person will

say that anyway, which brings us neatly back to "What use is it?" If

there are 100 people using the same product key, 99 of them lying, who

ultimately gets to lose out when MS finally slam the door? You can bet

it will be the single honest user.

Alias wrote:

> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:27:28 GMT, NoStop <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>>

>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>

>>>> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 09:01:13 -0600, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> See below...

>>>>>

>>>>> Donald L McDaniel wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> I wonder why you would say that, sir...

>>>>>> Each time I need to activate my OS via phone, the tech asks me two

>>>>>> [or more, depending on my answer] questions:

>>>>>> 1) "Please give me the numbers on your screen"

>>>>>>

>>>>>> 2) "Is this your first time installing this Software?"

>>>>>> If your answer is "Yes", they simply respond with a string of

>>>>>> numbers,

>>>>>> which you enter, after which the tech asks you to click on "OK",

>>>>>> which

>>>>>> has always resulted in immediate activation.

>>>>>> 3) If your answer is "No", they will ask a further question:

>>>>>> "Is this the only computer you have installed this OS on?"

>>>>>> Depending on your answer, they will ask further questions:

>>>>>> If your answer to this third question is "Yes", they will give you

>>>>>> a string of numbers, which you will enter. Then they will direct you

>>>>>> to click on "OK", upon which the OS is immediately activated.

>>>>>> If your answer is "no", the outcome will depend upon your

>>>>>> Product ID

>>>>>> type:

>>>>>> If it is "OEM", you will be told that the product is already

>>>>>> activated on another machine, and will be directed to purchase a

>>>>>> second license, and the activation will be denied.

>>>>>> If it is "RETAIL", you will be given an opportunity to explain why

>>>>>> it appears that you are installing your product on more than one

>>>>>> machine at once.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Just WHERE in this does one find "grovel to the phone activators that

>>>>>> you're not a thief and maybe they will give you permission to use

>>>>>> something you bought"?

>>>>> Just why do you have to keep activating your copy by phone? Do you

>>>>> keep

>>>>> getting asked by Ford to appear at their agency and provide proof of

>>>>> purchase? Do you have to reactivate your car each time you change the

>>>>> tires or fit a new light bulb?

>>>>>

>>>>> Yes this is a somewhat different scenario, just as thieves and genuine

>>>>> users are "Different". When a crime occurs it's quite rare for the

>>>>> police to arrest and detain everybody who just "Might" be responsible.

>>>>>

>>>>> When you allow the Federal Government to do things "Because they can"

>>>>> abuses occur, abuses are even more likely when a non Government

>>>>> Corporation (Blackwater) is given a free hand to do what they "Can".

>>>> Tell us, Charlie, HOW that has anything to do with Windows Product

>>>> activation?

>>>>

>>>> BTW, I usually wind up activating via phone because I reinstall my OS

>>>> very often, especially when I am breaking in a new machine.

>>>>

>>>> If I waited for the full 120 days until the activation records to be

>>>> wiped, I would have no "minor problems" such as activating via phone.

>>>>

>>>> I've NEVER been turned down for an activation, BTW, under ANY

>>>> circustances.

>>>>

>>>> It takes all of 10 minutes (maximum) to activate via phone. Why

>>>> people think this is some kind of "problem", I have no idea. They are

>>>> more than willing to spend hours on the phone making plans to get

>>>> drunk on Friday evening. Yet 5 or 10 minutes to activate their OS

>>>> they have a problem with.

>>>>

>>>> Idiots!!!

>>>>

>>> More and more users will only have access to a cell phone. Depending

>>> on the

>>> package they're using, a 10 minute call can cost them money. Money they

>>> shouldn't have to spend to "prove" they are the legitimate holders of

>>> the

>>> license. But, as always, Microsoft couldn't care less. And it appears

>>> that

>>> MickeyMouse Fan Boys don't either.

>>>

>>> Cheers.

>>

>> "Mickey Mouse Fan Boys"? You are "one wild and crazy guy", aren't ya?

>> My anti-Microsoft tirades in these newsgroups are there for all to

>> see. I've never been called a "Fan Boy" before. It's a new

>> experience for me.

>>

>> Cheers

>>

>> Donald L McDaniel

>

> Well, that's what you're doing, being a fanboy. There is no reason for

> MS to question whether a paying customer has paid for his Windows or

> not. If MS thinks that someone is stealing from them, they should call

> the proper legal authorities, not force paying customers to prove they

> are running a legit copy over and over and over again. This is the main

> reason I am running Ubuntu.

>

> The sad thing is that fanboys like you think that WPA and WGA are

> perfectly normal.

>

> Alias

 

 

Actually it is very like the relaxation in domestic spying and patriot

act laws. People who have not done any wrong think it doesn't apply to

them, which indeed it should not apply to them, however the agencies

like FBI, CIA etc have no way to know who it applies to - so in fact the

overall effect is to make us all suspects.

 

I haven't stolen Vista, I am sure Donald hasn't, but Microsoft do not

know, so they assume we have until we satisfy them that we have not.

 

While we have been discussing this 1000 pirate copies hit the streets in

China.

 

It is very easy for Governments to claim "The innocent have nothing to

fear" because that is what we would like to think, but what that does is

push the burden of proof from the authorities onto the innocent.

 

Given the way that the apparently innocent WGA has grown with WPA into a

kill switch one has to wonder where this is going, and Microsoft risks

losing the helpful friendly face ordinary people expect.

 

As I keep saying, MS do have a right to pursue this course if they wish,

we have a right to avoid it and that may not be good for business. If I

were in the developer business my reaction would be to start using some

multi platform development system, Eclipse, Java, something like that so

as people rebel my market does not suffer. The bad side effect for MS is

that where some software is now only available for Windows that will

change because Developers now have a good reason for writing multi platform.

 

What Donald and other are basically asking for is for Microsoft to bury

themselves, and love 'em or hate 'em that would be a bad things for the

industry, to say nothing of their 1000s of employees.

 

This "Nothing to fear if you are innocent" is the biggest swindle going,

and politics is riddled with the same misconceptions.