Activated twice on different machines!

J

Jone Doe

Alias said:
"Proper"? Defined by whom? As far as I am concerned, what would be
"proper" is to allow a family with two or more computers to install one
version of XP on all of them. That would be "proper". Eliminating the WPA
and WGA would be "proper". You are assuming that MS is "proper" in making
paying customers jump these hoops. I disagree. MS made billions with the
non activating OSs and WPA and WGA has not stopped piracy one iota. It has
only inconvenienced paying customers, as is the case of the OP.

Alias

how about:
Definitions of "proper" on the Web:

a.. marked by suitability or rightness or appropriateness; "proper medical
treatment"; "proper manners"
b.. proper(ip): limited to the thing specified; "the city proper"; "his
claim is connected with the deed proper"
c.. appropriate for a condition or purpose or occasion or a person's
character, needs; "everything in its proper place"; "the right man for the
job"; "she is not suitable for the position"; "he is not a suitable husband
for her"
d.. proper(a): having all the qualities typical of the thing specified;
"wanted a proper dinner; not just a snack"; "he finally has a proper job"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
 
M

Mistoffolees

Gary said:
Unfortunately, your "absolute" may be "absolute" to you, but it stops at the
end of your nose. Whether there was ANY wrong is questionable; he grabbed
the wrong CD, so shoot him.

Take it to a judge:

"next case, let's see, this says you were using a copy of Windows that was
still in use on another machine".

"Yes sir, I accidentally used the wrong CD from my other computer, but I
have them both here to show you that both machines had their own copies."

"Well why didn't you reinstall with the right one?

"I dunno, it was a lot of work to begin with, just seemed like a big waste
of time; they were the same, I was busy at the time, was afraid something
would go wrong and I'd have to redo the whole thing, after a while I just
forgot about it. Tried to change it to the right serial number like I would
have done with Windows 98 and it wouldn't let me."

"This is an outrage, Guilty! Ten thousand dollar fine and six months, you
low-life! I hope you learn your lesson, Mother Theresa; next case."

Somewhere along the line, hopefully you will learn what "wrong" really is,
and that a nitpicky, "minor detail only" honest mistake that harms or
endangers or inconveniences absolutely no one hardly qualifies as "Wrong".
There are enough things that are genuinely wrong without having to invent
new ones so you can add up two wrongs (incidentally, what was the second
"wrong?"). This person now knows how to fix it, comparatively complicated
as it may be. Should he choose to spend the time and effort, great, should
he choose not to, or if he never gets around to it, or does it in two years
when he reformats again, it will make absolutely no difference to you or
anyone else. MS has their money that they're entitled to; he has his
computers and OS's that he's entitled to, all is well, regardless. If it
bothers you, that's your issue, go organize your sock drawer alphabetically
and by purchase date. If the imaginary judge above was real, he'd have no
doubt dismissed it in the interest of justice.

Gary

Realize it or not, we are now in the era of "zero tolerance".
Sadly, the example you give is so real that there is no humor
in it. Judges are now required to follow mandatory sentencing
guidelines, with prescribed terms, whether the infraction is
just a teensy bit over the line or absolutely outrageous.
 
A

Alias

Jone said:
how about:
Definitions of "proper" on the Web:

a.. marked by suitability or rightness or appropriateness; "proper medical
treatment"; "proper manners"
b.. proper(ip): limited to the thing specified; "the city proper"; "his
claim is connected with the deed proper"
c.. appropriate for a condition or purpose or occasion or a person's
character, needs; "everything in its proper place"; "the right man for the
job"; "she is not suitable for the position"; "he is not a suitable husband
for her"
d.. proper(a): having all the qualities typical of the thing specified;
"wanted a proper dinner; not just a snack"; "he finally has a proper job"
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Your quoting me subjective definitions is my point. I know what "proper"
means to *me*. But let's just take the first definition for grins.
"Suitability" is a value judgment that varies from culture to culture
and, indeed, between person and person. Undefinable. Ibid "rightness"
and "appropriateness" and "manners", well ...

I think this was the definition you were trying to apply, yes? Not the
"city proper".

Now, can you get over your nitpicking and respond to the content I
posted (above).

Alias
 
J

Jone Doe

Alias said:
Your quoting me subjective definitions is my point. I know what "proper"
means to *me*. But let's just take the first definition for grins.
"Suitability" is a value judgment that varies from culture to culture and,
indeed, between person and person. Undefinable. Ibid "rightness" and
"appropriateness" and "manners", well ...

I think this was the definition you were trying to apply, yes? Not the
"city proper".

Now, can you get over your nitpicking and respond to the content I posted
(above).

Alias

Proper, in this case would be what the owner of the intellectual rights to
the operataing system under question says is proper. And what they said in
many many words is "Each computer needs a separate license." The fact that
you think you should be able to buy one CD and put it on multiple computers
not withstanding.

To reply further is pointless. If you don't 'get' it now, you won't. so I'm
done.
 
M

Mobius

I am happy to report that a format-fresh install and activation with the
right CD went off successfully last night.

Updates were installed as required. I keep a USB hard drive with most
updates as well as utility applications handy, anyway. And luckily major
software applications were not installed earlier anyway before the error was
spotted, so no problem.

(Never mentioned this before but I do create Ghost images of all installs,
on DVD media, after all updates, activation and user software are installed.
The "restore" DVD for this particular computer contained a data error and
was unusable, hence the reinstall after the drive failed. As it turned out
it was done with a CD belonging to a different machine altogether! That was
what prompted me to post my initial message after discovering the error!)

Thanks for all the viewpoints - they were extremely interesting, may I add!
But the fact that Microsoft activated one CD key on two totally different
machines would perhaps remain an unexplained mystery. Not that I care now!

Regards and thanks again.

Mobius
 
J

JBM

Jone Doe said:
Proper, in this case would be what the owner of the intellectual rights to
the operataing system under question says is proper. And what they said
in many many words is "Each computer needs a separate license." The fact
that you think you should be able to buy one CD and put it on multiple
computers not withstanding.

To reply further is pointless. If you don't 'get' it now, you won't. so
I'm done.

I don't see where Alias said it was proper to buy one XP CD and install it
on two
computers.
 
S

Steve N.

Jone said:
What about proper? Will you go as far as to say "the OP has done nothing
improper. Period."?

Oh Holy Jesus! I accidentally put my underwear on inside out! Throw my
ass in jail! It's about _that_ important.

Steve N.
 
S

Steve N.

Jone said:
Proper, in this case would be what the owner of the intellectual rights to
the operataing system under question says is proper. And what they said in
many many words is "Each computer needs a separate license." The fact that
you think you should be able to buy one CD and put it on multiple computers
not withstanding.

To reply further is pointless. If you don't 'get' it now, you won't. so I'm
done.

Oh no, you are far from done, my friend. :)

Read and learn:

http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/Copyright/

Get your law degree, pass the bar exam, get a few copyright cases under
your belt, and then preach to us. Until then, you're JAAWAM (Just
Another A$$hole With A Modem). No offense indended; after all I am
JAAWAM, too.

Steve N.
 
S

Steve N.

JBM said:
I don't see where Alias said it was proper to buy one XP CD and install it
on two
computers.

No, he just said in his mind it would be "proper" for M$ to allow that,
which I agree with.

Steve
 
J

Jone Doe

JBM said:
I don't see where Alias said it was proper to buy one XP CD and install it
on two
computers.
to quote alias...>>>>"Proper"? Defined by whom? As far as I am concerned,
what would be
 
J

Jone Doe

Steve N. said:
Oh Holy Jesus! I accidentally put my underwear on inside out! Throw my ass
in jail! It's about _that_ important.

Steve N.
Last I knew, underwear manufacturers didn't have an agreement that you could
only let one person wear the underwear and then only right side out. MS on
the other hand did sell the operating system with an agreement it would be
used according to the way they requested.
 
M

Mistoffolees

Mobius said:
I am happy to report that a format-fresh install and activation with the
right CD went off successfully last night.

Updates were installed as required. I keep a USB hard drive with most
updates as well as utility applications handy, anyway. And luckily major
software applications were not installed earlier anyway before the error was
spotted, so no problem.

(Never mentioned this before but I do create Ghost images of all installs,
on DVD media, after all updates, activation and user software are installed.
The "restore" DVD for this particular computer contained a data error and
was unusable, hence the reinstall after the drive failed. As it turned out
it was done with a CD belonging to a different machine altogether! That was
what prompted me to post my initial message after discovering the error!)

Thanks for all the viewpoints - they were extremely interesting, may I add!
But the fact that Microsoft activated one CD key on two totally different
machines would perhaps remain an unexplained mystery. Not that I care now!

Regards and thanks again.

Mobius

Even with a 25-character product key, it is not unique to
each and every Windows XP cdrom that is issued. Depending
on how the calculation algorithm was set up to allow for
WPA, there is a finite number of activations that can be
allowed for each working product key. And next, calculate
the probability for the frequency of that particular key
appearing during a specific time interval (also possibly
linked to release date of the WinXP distribution cdrom plus
the 120-day PK cycle), activation on 2 different machines
is certainly a statistical possibility. IOW, a specific PK
should only appear so many times within the 120-day range
as well as within any specified time frame.
 
S

Steve N.

Jone said:
Last I knew, underwear manufacturers didn't have an agreement that you could
only let one person wear the underwear and then only right side out. MS on
the other hand did sell the operating system with an agreement it would be
used according to the way they requested.

Like I said earlier, become a recognized expert in such matters or keep
pissing into the wind. People are going to do what _they_ deem "proper"
whether _you_ or _M$_ happen to like it or not. Until some _real_
authority (and _not _Micro$oft_, the only thing they're experts on is
stealing, copyright infringement, theft of intellectual property, lying
and spreading FUD) says otherwise, who the hell are you to decide what's
right for someone else? are you a lawyer? are you a judge? Another big
nobody, that's who. Such arrogance.

Shrink-wrapped, on-line, after-installation EULA's that you don't get to
see until after it's too frikkin late are a bunch of contrived bullshit
are there _are_ legal actions pending against such things. Do some
frikkin homework, then spout off.

Steve N.
 
A

Alias

Jone said:
Proper, in this case would be what the owner of the intellectual rights to
the operataing system under question says is proper. And what they said in
many many words is "Each computer needs a separate license." The fact that
you think you should be able to buy one CD and put it on multiple computers
not withstanding.

No, that's MS' definition of proper. They are not god, you know. I said
it would be proper, not that I think MS would think it proper. For your
information, all three of my computers have their own, paid for, XP, one
Spanish Home, a Spanish Pro and an English Pro. That doesn't mean I like
it or consider it to be "proper".
To reply further is pointless. If you don't 'get' it now, you won't. so I'm
done.

Yes, you sure are.

Alias
 
A

Alias

Jone said:
Last I knew, underwear manufacturers didn't have an agreement that you could
only let one person wear the underwear and then only right side out. MS on
the other hand did sell the operating system with an agreement it would be
used according to the way they requested.

Not true. You agree to the EULA after you've bought the product, when
you cannot get a refund. The agreement the seller and the customer had
was more mundane: you give me the money, I'll give you the CD.

Alias
 
S

Steve N.

Mistoffolees said:
Even with a 25-character product key, it is not unique to
each and every Windows XP cdrom that is issued. Depending
on how the calculation algorithm was set up to allow for
WPA, there is a finite number of activations that can be
allowed for each working product key. And next, calculate
the probability for the frequency of that particular key
appearing during a specific time interval (also possibly
linked to release date of the WinXP distribution cdrom plus
the 120-day PK cycle), activation on 2 different machines
is certainly a statistical possibility. IOW, a specific PK
should only appear so many times within the 120-day range
as well as within any specified time frame.

I've activated and validated the self same OEM CD and product key
several times well within a single 120 day period. I'd trust in the
Infinite Probability Drive far more than M$'s WPA crap.

steve
 
G

GHalleck

Steve said:
I've activated and validated the self same OEM CD and product key
several times well within a single 120 day period. I'd trust in the
Infinite Probability Drive far more than M$'s WPA crap.

steve

And that is exactly what should be happening with any valid
Microsoft product key. That is, any key that has not been used
abusively and identified as such in the product activation
database. But there is a fine line between randomness of an
act and deliberate abuse. Any good mathematician should be
able to create the algorithm to differentiate the two. And
one should have better luck with MS's WPA crap than the crap
tables in Las Vegas. Imagine what are the odds of getting a
pair of 6's the hard way, consecutively versus activating twice.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top