On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 11:31:28 -0700, Frank wrote:

> ray wrote:

>

>> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:27:13 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>

>>

>>>ray wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:59:06 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>ray wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:59:31 -0700, Henry wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>Really!

>>>>>>>No freezes, faults, crashes, breakdowns. Everything works

>>>>>>>perfectly including my old custom stuff from W95 days. Speed is

>>>>>>>about the same as XP. Vista repairs itself, defrags the drive,

>>>>>>>protects my work, solves problems on its own. The sidebar has

>>>>>>>seriously useful gadgets that make life easier. Files and

>>>>>>>folders are now easier to find, in any of several ways.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>I came by looking for more joy, gadgets, exploitation stories,

>>>>>>>and high fives -- and learned that people happy with Vista don't

>>>>>>>waste time here. That leaves the rest...

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>I'm glad it works for you. Judging by the volume you may be in the

>>>>>>minority.

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>Only if you can't count!

>>>>>Frank

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>Come on frankie, don't get your panties in a twist. I said he/she 'may be

>>>>in the minority' - if you can prove otherwise, I'd be interested to see it.

>>>>

>>>

>>>Which part upset you...the panties or the minority...?

>>>:-)

>>>Frank

>>

>>

>>

>> I'm not upset, frankie, I simply realize that you seem to have problems

>> with comprehension, so I thought I'd try to spell it out for you.

>>

>

> And obviously my first reply went right over your head. Suggest you

> check your reading comprehension as it appears to not be working.

> And for proving you're assumption is incorrect...the burden of proof

> lies with you...it's your assumption not mine.

> Frank

 

Wrong again, frankie baby. I made no assumption at all. Once more: 'he/she

may be in the minority' - please note, I did not say: you are in the

minority.

ray wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 11:31:28 -0700, Frank wrote:

>

>

>>ray wrote:

>>

>>

>>>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:27:13 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>>ray wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:59:06 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>ray wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:59:31 -0700, Henry wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>Really!

>>>>>>>>No freezes, faults, crashes, breakdowns. Everything works

>>>>>>>>perfectly including my old custom stuff from W95 days. Speed is

>>>>>>>>about the same as XP. Vista repairs itself, defrags the drive,

>>>>>>>>protects my work, solves problems on its own. The sidebar has

>>>>>>>>seriously useful gadgets that make life easier. Files and

>>>>>>>>folders are now easier to find, in any of several ways.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>I came by looking for more joy, gadgets, exploitation stories,

>>>>>>>>and high fives -- and learned that people happy with Vista don't

>>>>>>>>waste time here. That leaves the rest...

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>I'm glad it works for you. Judging by the volume you may be in the

>>>>>>>minority.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>Only if you can't count!

>>>>>>Frank

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>Come on frankie, don't get your panties in a twist. I said he/she 'may be

>>>>>in the minority' - if you can prove otherwise, I'd be interested to see it.

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>>Which part upset you...the panties or the minority...?

>>>>:-)

>>>>Frank

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>I'm not upset, frankie, I simply realize that you seem to have problems

>>>with comprehension, so I thought I'd try to spell it out for you.

>>>

>>

>>And obviously my first reply went right over your head. Suggest you

>>check your reading comprehension as it appears to not be working.

>>And for proving you're assumption is incorrect...the burden of proof

>>lies with you...it's your assumption not mine.

>>Frank

>

>

> Wrong again, frankie baby. I made no assumption at all. Once more: 'he/she

> may be in the minority' - please note, I did not say: you are in the

> minority.

>

 

Once again...I never said you said that!

Gawd...give it a rest ok?

Go peddle your linux crap somewhere else ok?

Frank

ray wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 11:31:28 -0700, Frank wrote:

>

>

>>ray wrote:

>>

>>

>>>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:27:13 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>>ray wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:59:06 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>ray wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:59:31 -0700, Henry wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>Really!

>>>>>>>>No freezes, faults, crashes, breakdowns. Everything works

>>>>>>>>perfectly including my old custom stuff from W95 days. Speed is

>>>>>>>>about the same as XP. Vista repairs itself, defrags the drive,

>>>>>>>>protects my work, solves problems on its own. The sidebar has

>>>>>>>>seriously useful gadgets that make life easier. Files and

>>>>>>>>folders are now easier to find, in any of several ways.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>I came by looking for more joy, gadgets, exploitation stories,

>>>>>>>>and high fives -- and learned that people happy with Vista don't

>>>>>>>>waste time here. That leaves the rest...

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>I'm glad it works for you. Judging by the volume you may be in the

>>>>>>>minority.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>Only if you can't count!

>>>>>>Frank

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>Come on frankie, don't get your panties in a twist. I said he/she 'may be

>>>>>in the minority' - if you can prove otherwise, I'd be interested to see it.

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>>Which part upset you...the panties or the minority...?

>>>>:-)

>>>>Frank

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>I'm not upset, frankie, I simply realize that you seem to have problems

>>>with comprehension, so I thought I'd try to spell it out for you.

>>>

>>

>>And obviously my first reply went right over your head. Suggest you

>>check your reading comprehension as it appears to not be working.

>>And for proving you're assumption is incorrect...the burden of proof

>>lies with you...it's your assumption not mine.

>>Frank

>

>

> Wrong again, frankie baby. I made no assumption at all. Once more: 'he/she

> may be in the minority' - please note, I did not say: you are in the

> minority.

>

 

Once again...I never said you said that!

Gawd...give it a rest ok?

Go peddle your linux crap somewhere else ok?

Frank

FYI: Chat Rules

.Please treat all other online participants with respect and do

not

use Microsoft Community Chats to threaten, harass, stalk, or

abuse

other users.

.Impersonating a Microsoft employee, agent, manager, host, or

another user is forbidden. .Do not use Microsoft Community

Chats services to spam others. Spam

includes sending identical and irrelevant or unsolicited

submissions

to many different users, and includes misrepresenting the source

of

anything you post. Spamming and scrolling in chat rooms are

serious

violations of online etiquette.

 

"Frank" <fb@nospamer.cmn> wrote in message

news:#u9ioK9yHHA.1132@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> ray wrote:

>

>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 11:31:28 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>

>>

>>>ray wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:27:13 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>ray wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:59:06 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>ray wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:59:31 -0700, Henry wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>Really!

>>>>>>>>>No freezes, faults, crashes, breakdowns. Everything works perfectly

>>>>>>>>>including my old custom stuff from W95 days. Speed is about the

>>>>>>>>>same as XP. Vista repairs itself, defrags the drive, protects my

>>>>>>>>>work, solves problems on its own. The sidebar has seriously useful

>>>>>>>>>gadgets that make life easier. Files and folders are now easier to

>>>>>>>>>find, in any of several ways.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>I came by looking for more joy, gadgets, exploitation stories, and

>>>>>>>>>high fives -- and learned that people happy with Vista don't waste

>>>>>>>>>time here. That leaves the rest...

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>I'm glad it works for you. Judging by the volume you may be in the

>>>>>>>>minority.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>Only if you can't count!

>>>>>>>Frank

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>Come on frankie, don't get your panties in a twist. I said he/she 'may

>>>>>>be

>>>>>>in the minority' - if you can prove otherwise, I'd be interested to

>>>>>>see it.

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>Which part upset you...the panties or the minority...?

>>>>>:-)

>>>>>Frank

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>I'm not upset, frankie, I simply realize that you seem to have problems

>>>>with comprehension, so I thought I'd try to spell it out for you.

>>>>

>>>

>>>And obviously my first reply went right over your head. Suggest you check

>>>your reading comprehension as it appears to not be working.

>>>And for proving you're assumption is incorrect...the burden of proof lies

>>>with you...it's your assumption not mine.

>>>Frank

>>

>>

>> Wrong again, frankie baby. I made no assumption at all. Once more:

>> 'he/she

>> may be in the minority' - please note, I did not say: you are in the

>> minority.

>>

>

> Once again...I never said you said that!

> Gawd...give it a rest ok?

> Go peddle your linux crap somewhere else ok?

> Frank

FYI: Chat Rules

.Please treat all other online participants with respect and do

not

use Microsoft Community Chats to threaten, harass, stalk, or

abuse

other users.

.Impersonating a Microsoft employee, agent, manager, host, or

another user is forbidden. .Do not use Microsoft Community

Chats services to spam others. Spam

includes sending identical and irrelevant or unsolicited

submissions

to many different users, and includes misrepresenting the source

of

anything you post. Spamming and scrolling in chat rooms are

serious

violations of online etiquette.

 

"Frank" <fb@nospamer.cmn> wrote in message

news:#u9ioK9yHHA.1132@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> ray wrote:

>

>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 11:31:28 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>

>>

>>>ray wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:27:13 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>>ray wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:59:06 -0700, Frank wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>>ray wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:59:31 -0700, Henry wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>Really!

>>>>>>>>>No freezes, faults, crashes, breakdowns. Everything works perfectly

>>>>>>>>>including my old custom stuff from W95 days. Speed is about the

>>>>>>>>>same as XP. Vista repairs itself, defrags the drive, protects my

>>>>>>>>>work, solves problems on its own. The sidebar has seriously useful

>>>>>>>>>gadgets that make life easier. Files and folders are now easier to

>>>>>>>>>find, in any of several ways.

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>>I came by looking for more joy, gadgets, exploitation stories, and

>>>>>>>>>high fives -- and learned that people happy with Vista don't waste

>>>>>>>>>time here. That leaves the rest...

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>I'm glad it works for you. Judging by the volume you may be in the

>>>>>>>>minority.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>Only if you can't count!

>>>>>>>Frank

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>Come on frankie, don't get your panties in a twist. I said he/she 'may

>>>>>>be

>>>>>>in the minority' - if you can prove otherwise, I'd be interested to

>>>>>>see it.

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>Which part upset you...the panties or the minority...?

>>>>>:-)

>>>>>Frank

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>I'm not upset, frankie, I simply realize that you seem to have problems

>>>>with comprehension, so I thought I'd try to spell it out for you.

>>>>

>>>

>>>And obviously my first reply went right over your head. Suggest you check

>>>your reading comprehension as it appears to not be working.

>>>And for proving you're assumption is incorrect...the burden of proof lies

>>>with you...it's your assumption not mine.

>>>Frank

>>

>>

>> Wrong again, frankie baby. I made no assumption at all. Once more:

>> 'he/she

>> may be in the minority' - please note, I did not say: you are in the

>> minority.

>>

>

> Once again...I never said you said that!

> Gawd...give it a rest ok?

> Go peddle your linux crap somewhere else ok?

> Frank

"carl feredeck" laid this egg...

> You guys do not understand that being pro-crap, does not make you positive

> people.

>

> You may like crap but in effect you are the negative ones and you are the

> trolls.

> Personal experience counts very little in this case

>

> The masses dislike vista and its everywhere on the internet. If you cannot

> see it,

> you are surfing the world wide web with blindfolds!

>

 

It isn't crap, doofus, but PEBKAC. Just because you don't like it, or can't

get it to work, doesn't give the right to come into the MS/Vista groups and

squat everywhere.

"carl feredeck" laid this egg...

> You guys do not understand that being pro-crap, does not make you positive

> people.

>

> You may like crap but in effect you are the negative ones and you are the

> trolls.

> Personal experience counts very little in this case

>

> The masses dislike vista and its everywhere on the internet. If you cannot

> see it,

> you are surfing the world wide web with blindfolds!

>

 

It isn't crap, doofus, but PEBKAC. Just because you don't like it, or can't

get it to work, doesn't give the right to come into the MS/Vista groups and

squat everywhere.

"carl feredeck" thumped...

> What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

>

> Now its guilty and you have to prove you are innocent many times a year!

>

> Vista is very aggressive and it calls home way too much...

 

How many times a year? I've been activated since day one, many months ago,

but haven't re-upgraded anything. I don't reinstall the OS more than twice

for the life of the hard drive, either. Since 3.11, you always upgrade all

the hardware and get the latest drivers for all of it, on disc, _before_ you

clean install a new OS. I'm guessing you haven't been around that long.

"carl feredeck" thumped...

> What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

>

> Now its guilty and you have to prove you are innocent many times a year!

>

> Vista is very aggressive and it calls home way too much...

 

How many times a year? I've been activated since day one, many months ago,

but haven't re-upgraded anything. I don't reinstall the OS more than twice

for the life of the hard drive, either. Since 3.11, you always upgrade all

the hardware and get the latest drivers for all of it, on disc, _before_ you

clean install a new OS. I'm guessing you haven't been around that long.

"Frank" pointed out...

> Legitimate users will become "casual pirates" when they "loan" their copy

> of Windows OS to a family member, friend or acquaintance.

> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

> activation and easiest to deter.

>

 

 

Too true! They just never bother to read the EULA, ever. Windows has always

been licensed, not sold, since early DOS, and we only buy permission to use

it on one computer. How many offices installed the same copy of '95 or '98

on over twenty systems? How many times has someone with a CD-R bootlegged a

dozen 'free' copies for their closest friends? It may sound penny-ante but

it's really nickle 'n diming. I'll explain that to any of you children out

there too young to get it.

"Frank" pointed out...

> Legitimate users will become "casual pirates" when they "loan" their copy

> of Windows OS to a family member, friend or acquaintance.

> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

> activation and easiest to deter.

>

 

 

Too true! They just never bother to read the EULA, ever. Windows has always

been licensed, not sold, since early DOS, and we only buy permission to use

it on one computer. How many offices installed the same copy of '95 or '98

on over twenty systems? How many times has someone with a CD-R bootlegged a

dozen 'free' copies for their closest friends? It may sound penny-ante but

it's really nickle 'n diming. I'll explain that to any of you children out

there too young to get it.

here@home.again wrote:

> "Frank" pointed out...

>> Legitimate users will become "casual pirates" when they "loan" their copy

>> of Windows OS to a family member, friend or acquaintance.

>> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

>> activation and easiest to deter.

>>

>

>

> Too true! They just never bother to read the EULA, ever. Windows has always

> been licensed, not sold, since early DOS, and we only buy permission to use

> it on one computer. How many offices installed the same copy of '95 or '98

> on over twenty systems? How many times has someone with a CD-R bootlegged a

> dozen 'free' copies for their closest friends? It may sound penny-ante but

> it's really nickle 'n diming. I'll explain that to any of you children out

> there too young to get it.

>

>

 

With your logic, Microsoft, Adobe, etc. would have gone out of business

years ago. Reality check: they made billions because most people --

maybe not the people you know -- are honest.

 

Alias

here@home.again wrote:

> "Frank" pointed out...

>> Legitimate users will become "casual pirates" when they "loan" their copy

>> of Windows OS to a family member, friend or acquaintance.

>> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

>> activation and easiest to deter.

>>

>

>

> Too true! They just never bother to read the EULA, ever. Windows has always

> been licensed, not sold, since early DOS, and we only buy permission to use

> it on one computer. How many offices installed the same copy of '95 or '98

> on over twenty systems? How many times has someone with a CD-R bootlegged a

> dozen 'free' copies for their closest friends? It may sound penny-ante but

> it's really nickle 'n diming. I'll explain that to any of you children out

> there too young to get it.

>

>

 

With your logic, Microsoft, Adobe, etc. would have gone out of business

years ago. Reality check: they made billions because most people --

maybe not the people you know -- are honest.

 

Alias

"Alias" blurted out...

> here@home.again wrote:

>> "Frank" pointed out...

>>> Legitimate users will become "casual pirates" when they "loan" their

>>> copy of Windows OS to a family member, friend or acquaintance.

>>> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

>>> activation and easiest to deter.

>>>

>>

>>

>> Too true! They just never bother to read the EULA, ever. Windows has

>> always been licensed, not sold, since early DOS, and we only buy

>> permission to use it on one computer. How many offices installed the same

>> copy of '95 or '98 on over twenty systems? How many times has someone

>> with a CD-R bootlegged a dozen 'free' copies for their closest friends?

>> It may sound penny-ante but it's really nickle 'n diming. I'll explain

>> that to any of you children out there too young to get it.

>

> With your logic, Microsoft, Adobe, etc. would have gone out of business

> years ago. Reality check: they made billions because most people --

> maybe not the people you know -- are honest.

>

> Alias

 

 

Who said anything about going out of business? For those "billions" they

made, they lost, what, 2 or 3 hundred thousand? -)

"Alias" blurted out...

> here@home.again wrote:

>> "Frank" pointed out...

>>> Legitimate users will become "casual pirates" when they "loan" their

>>> copy of Windows OS to a family member, friend or acquaintance.

>>> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

>>> activation and easiest to deter.

>>>

>>

>>

>> Too true! They just never bother to read the EULA, ever. Windows has

>> always been licensed, not sold, since early DOS, and we only buy

>> permission to use it on one computer. How many offices installed the same

>> copy of '95 or '98 on over twenty systems? How many times has someone

>> with a CD-R bootlegged a dozen 'free' copies for their closest friends?

>> It may sound penny-ante but it's really nickle 'n diming. I'll explain

>> that to any of you children out there too young to get it.

>

> With your logic, Microsoft, Adobe, etc. would have gone out of business

> years ago. Reality check: they made billions because most people --

> maybe not the people you know -- are honest.

>

> Alias

 

 

Who said anything about going out of business? For those "billions" they

made, they lost, what, 2 or 3 hundred thousand? -)

here@home.again wrote:

> "Alias" blurted out...

>> here@home.again wrote:

>>> "Frank" pointed out...

>>>> Legitimate users will become "casual pirates" when they "loan" their

>>>> copy of Windows OS to a family member, friend or acquaintance.

>>>> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

>>>> activation and easiest to deter.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Too true! They just never bother to read the EULA, ever. Windows has

>>> always been licensed, not sold, since early DOS, and we only buy

>>> permission to use it on one computer. How many offices installed the same

>>> copy of '95 or '98 on over twenty systems? How many times has someone

>>> with a CD-R bootlegged a dozen 'free' copies for their closest friends?

>>> It may sound penny-ante but it's really nickle 'n diming. I'll explain

>>> that to any of you children out there too young to get it.

>> With your logic, Microsoft, Adobe, etc. would have gone out of business

>> years ago. Reality check: they made billions because most people --

>> maybe not the people you know -- are honest.

>>

>> Alias

>

>

> Who said anything about going out of business? For those "billions" they

> made, they lost, what, 2 or 3 hundred thousand? -)

>

>

 

Compare that to the ongoing activation costs like the seats in India,

all the activation servers. The WPA and WGA programmers, etc. and you're

better off assuming your customers are honest.

 

Alias

here@home.again wrote:

> "Alias" blurted out...

>> here@home.again wrote:

>>> "Frank" pointed out...

>>>> Legitimate users will become "casual pirates" when they "loan" their

>>>> copy of Windows OS to a family member, friend or acquaintance.

>>>> This obviously happens rather frequently and is the main target of

>>>> activation and easiest to deter.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Too true! They just never bother to read the EULA, ever. Windows has

>>> always been licensed, not sold, since early DOS, and we only buy

>>> permission to use it on one computer. How many offices installed the same

>>> copy of '95 or '98 on over twenty systems? How many times has someone

>>> with a CD-R bootlegged a dozen 'free' copies for their closest friends?

>>> It may sound penny-ante but it's really nickle 'n diming. I'll explain

>>> that to any of you children out there too young to get it.

>> With your logic, Microsoft, Adobe, etc. would have gone out of business

>> years ago. Reality check: they made billions because most people --

>> maybe not the people you know -- are honest.

>>

>> Alias

>

>

> Who said anything about going out of business? For those "billions" they

> made, they lost, what, 2 or 3 hundred thousand? -)

>

>

 

Compare that to the ongoing activation costs like the seats in India,

all the activation servers. The WPA and WGA programmers, etc. and you're

better off assuming your customers are honest.

 

Alias

Alias wrote:

>>

>

> Compare that to the ongoing activation costs like the seats in India,

> all the activation servers. The WPA and WGA programmers, etc. and you're

> better off assuming your customers are honest.

>

> Alias

 

Brilliant!

Now you're making business decisions for one of the most successful

corporations in the world.

Absolutely brilliant!

Frank

Alias wrote:

>>

>

> Compare that to the ongoing activation costs like the seats in India,

> all the activation servers. The WPA and WGA programmers, etc. and you're

> better off assuming your customers are honest.

>

> Alias

 

Brilliant!

Now you're making business decisions for one of the most successful

corporations in the world.

Absolutely brilliant!

Frank

GO wrote:

> I'm curious, do you actually doubt the logic here? The loss due to casual

> piracy is a drop in the bucket compared to the money they are making

I'm assuming you'll agree to that

 

Who cares what I say or agree to as obviously the bean counters and

management at MS don't think so.

 

 

.. Out of that same group of "pirates" there

> will be a group of those that will not buy the software regardless. This is

> money that MS will never see regardless of what schemes they develop.

 

No company has 100% market share.

 

As

> far as I can see that leaves you with one type of pirate that MS is trying

> to regain costs from:

 

regain cost...? No, its to stop the bleeding in the form of two types of

piracy, casual, which is now proly under control and commercial, where

"cracked" versions, volume keys, etc., are available.

 

those that are ignorant (ie they do not realize what

> they are doing is wrong). So rather than having a system that is

> continually accusing that their honest customers are crooks,

 

Most people don't agree with that thinking at all. I certainly don't

consider myself a thief just because I have to activate my software.

That thought would never even enter my mind!

Better get used to it though cause most software from all major

companies is headed that way. MS is not the only software company to

require activation...far from it!

 

and all the

> initial/ongoing costs of WPA/WGA why not implement something simpler.

 

The recording industry and the movie industry are just two more examples

of industries headed towards some type of piracy protection. There is

simply too much money involved not to.

 

Like

> a one-time activation upon installation or simply just educating the user.

 

Activation one one machine produces a "hash"...when something on that

machine is changed so will the "hash" and it thinks the machine is

different...which...technically speaking it is...therefore sometimes

re-activation is required..which is nothing more than a few min phone call.

It is, what it is.

Frank

>

>

GO wrote:

> I'm curious, do you actually doubt the logic here? The loss due to casual

> piracy is a drop in the bucket compared to the money they are making

I'm assuming you'll agree to that

 

Who cares what I say or agree to as obviously the bean counters and

management at MS don't think so.

 

 

.. Out of that same group of "pirates" there

> will be a group of those that will not buy the software regardless. This is

> money that MS will never see regardless of what schemes they develop.

 

No company has 100% market share.

 

As

> far as I can see that leaves you with one type of pirate that MS is trying

> to regain costs from:

 

regain cost...? No, its to stop the bleeding in the form of two types of

piracy, casual, which is now proly under control and commercial, where

"cracked" versions, volume keys, etc., are available.

 

those that are ignorant (ie they do not realize what

> they are doing is wrong). So rather than having a system that is

> continually accusing that their honest customers are crooks,

 

Most people don't agree with that thinking at all. I certainly don't

consider myself a thief just because I have to activate my software.

That thought would never even enter my mind!

Better get used to it though cause most software from all major

companies is headed that way. MS is not the only software company to

require activation...far from it!

 

and all the

> initial/ongoing costs of WPA/WGA why not implement something simpler.

 

The recording industry and the movie industry are just two more examples

of industries headed towards some type of piracy protection. There is

simply too much money involved not to.

 

Like

> a one-time activation upon installation or simply just educating the user.

 

Activation one one machine produces a "hash"...when something on that

machine is changed so will the "hash" and it thinks the machine is

different...which...technically speaking it is...therefore sometimes

re-activation is required..which is nothing more than a few min phone call.

It is, what it is.

Frank

>

>

Frank wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>>>

>>

>> Compare that to the ongoing activation costs like the seats in India,

>> all the activation servers. The WPA and WGA programmers, etc. and

>> you're better off assuming your customers are honest.

>>

>> Alias

>

> Brilliant!

> Now you're making business decisions for one of the most successful

> corporations in the world.

> Absolutely brilliant!

> Frank

 

I'm curious, do you actually doubt the logic here? The loss due to casual

piracy is a drop in the bucket compared to the money they are making I'm

assuming you'll agree to that. Out of that same group of "pirates" there

will be a group of those that will not buy the software regardless. This is

money that MS will never see regardless of what schemes they develop. As

far as I can see that leaves you with one type of pirate that MS is trying

to regain costs from: those that are ignorant (ie they do not realize what

they are doing is wrong). So rather than having a system that is

continually accusing that their honest customers are crooks, and all the

initial/ongoing costs of WPA/WGA why not implement something simpler. Like

a one-time activation upon installation or simply just educating the user.

Frank wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>>>

>>

>> Compare that to the ongoing activation costs like the seats in India,

>> all the activation servers. The WPA and WGA programmers, etc. and

>> you're better off assuming your customers are honest.

>>

>> Alias

>

> Brilliant!

> Now you're making business decisions for one of the most successful

> corporations in the world.

> Absolutely brilliant!

> Frank

 

I'm curious, do you actually doubt the logic here? The loss due to casual

piracy is a drop in the bucket compared to the money they are making I'm

assuming you'll agree to that. Out of that same group of "pirates" there

will be a group of those that will not buy the software regardless. This is

money that MS will never see regardless of what schemes they develop. As

far as I can see that leaves you with one type of pirate that MS is trying

to regain costs from: those that are ignorant (ie they do not realize what

they are doing is wrong). So rather than having a system that is

continually accusing that their honest customers are crooks, and all the

initial/ongoing costs of WPA/WGA why not implement something simpler. Like

a one-time activation upon installation or simply just educating the user.

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 18:43:34 -0500, "GO"

<aa533@remove.this.chebucto.ns.ca> wrote:

>Frank wrote:

>> Alias wrote:

>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> Compare that to the ongoing activation costs like the seats in India,

>>> all the activation servers. The WPA and WGA programmers, etc. and

>>> you're better off assuming your customers are honest.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>> Brilliant!

>> Now you're making business decisions for one of the most successful

>> corporations in the world.

>> Absolutely brilliant!

>> Frank

>

>I'm curious, do you actually doubt the logic here? The loss due to casual

>piracy is a drop in the bucket compared to the money they are making I'm

>assuming you'll agree to that. Out of that same group of "pirates" there

>will be a group of those that will not buy the software regardless. This is

>money that MS will never see regardless of what schemes they develop. As

>far as I can see that leaves you with one type of pirate that MS is trying

>to regain costs from: those that are ignorant (ie they do not realize what

>they are doing is wrong). So rather than having a system that is

>continually accusing that their honest customers are crooks, and all the

>initial/ongoing costs of WPA/WGA why not implement something simpler. Like

>a one-time activation upon installation or simply just educating the user.

 

You'll have better luck trying to reason with some doorknob than

Frankie.

 

I've seen several studies covering two areas were "pirating" is

common, software and music. The studies conclude that the piracy has a

slight impact all right... it INCREASES sales in the long run. Not

surprising Bill Gates is on record approving of the Chinese masses

stealing Windows, arguing that if they're going to steal any OS they

should steal Windows reasoning some day hopefully they will be able to

afford to buy a copy.

On Mon, 23 Jul 2007 18:43:34 -0500, "GO"

<aa533@remove.this.chebucto.ns.ca> wrote:

>Frank wrote:

>> Alias wrote:

>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> Compare that to the ongoing activation costs like the seats in India,

>>> all the activation servers. The WPA and WGA programmers, etc. and

>>> you're better off assuming your customers are honest.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>> Brilliant!

>> Now you're making business decisions for one of the most successful

>> corporations in the world.

>> Absolutely brilliant!

>> Frank

>

>I'm curious, do you actually doubt the logic here? The loss due to casual

>piracy is a drop in the bucket compared to the money they are making I'm

>assuming you'll agree to that. Out of that same group of "pirates" there

>will be a group of those that will not buy the software regardless. This is

>money that MS will never see regardless of what schemes they develop. As

>far as I can see that leaves you with one type of pirate that MS is trying

>to regain costs from: those that are ignorant (ie they do not realize what

>they are doing is wrong). So rather than having a system that is

>continually accusing that their honest customers are crooks, and all the

>initial/ongoing costs of WPA/WGA why not implement something simpler. Like

>a one-time activation upon installation or simply just educating the user.

 

You'll have better luck trying to reason with some doorknob than

Frankie.

 

I've seen several studies covering two areas were "pirating" is

common, software and music. The studies conclude that the piracy has a

slight impact all right... it INCREASES sales in the long run. Not

surprising Bill Gates is on record approving of the Chinese masses

stealing Windows, arguing that if they're going to steal any OS they

should steal Windows reasoning some day hopefully they will be able to

afford to buy a copy.