Ronnie Vernon MVP said:
CS
Give us a break and try to have at least one coherent thought before
posting!
What has the installed operating system have to do with being responsible
for a lost computer? Maybe McAfee and Norton should share the
responsibility, if their software was on that system.
<sheesh>
--
Ronnie Vernon
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User
Perhaps if you put as much effort into reading posts as you do thinking up
highly impressive titles to put on your newsgroup posts you would find
things easier to comprehend.
However, in the interest of public service, I will try to make my posts
easier to understand. Please, read slowly and carefully.
Microsoft has implimented an activation scheme to keep people from copying
and using their latest Windows OS. Should two (possibly more) computers log
on to the internet to activate the OS using the same key, Microsoft can and
will refuse to activate OS's attempting to use that key.
Still with me?
This being the case, it would be a very minor effort to refuse to activate
that key, and even remove the activation of the OS, for other
transgressions, such as a stolen computer, on which only that key will work.
This would have the effect of reducing the value of the stolen item, so that
1) thieves would realize a smaller profit from selling it, 2) thieves would
be unable to use it without aquiring another OS, creating more effort on
their part, and 3) making the item in question a less attractive target.
Granted, this wouldn't be as nifty as having the thieves go to prison,
having the computer returned to it's rightful owner, and a shower of fresh
roses cascading over a waterfall.
It would be better than the present system, where the thieves, as well as
those who receive the stolen goods, continue to benefit from patches, fixes,
and upgrades, as well as continued full use of the product they aquired
illegally.
Certainly, it would cost Microsoft a little extra to add the code and the
resources to make this system work, but since crooks are typically lazy, and
thus are unlikely to have the desire to install and learn linux, DR DOS,
Unix, or some other funky OS, they're desire to steal something they can't
use or easily sell may very well be reduced to a point where we see a
decrease in theft of computers, most notably laptops.
Even if it didn't work as well as I describe, Microsoft would be able to use
this system in their sales brochures, possibly increasing their profit.
There are systems very much like this in other areas, such as cell phones
and modern police radios. If either of these get stolen, the cell phone
company or dispatcher/repeater operator, respectively, can disable said item
remotely, making it nothing more than a chunk of useless hardware.
Since Microsoft doesn't worry about theft and loss, unless it's theft and
loss from Microsoft, they haven't bothered to emplace a system such as this.
This is why I suggested the OP post the Windows key around the internet.
Let everybody have it. After all, he (or his friend) paid for it. Other
people will use it, either through piracy or because they lost their's, and
eventually Microsoft will kill it, so that the thieves will at least be
inconvenienced to some extent.
The idea here is that, while it won't make a profound change in lifestyle to
the crooked souls, it would, at a minimum, reduce their ill-gotten gains by
some degree, which is better than nothing.
As for Mcafee and Norton, I'd be pleased as punch if they would remember
their software is meant to be used as a utility, so that other work may be
performed on computers. Seems they believe the only reason people buy
computers is to run their bloated, try-to-do-everything-but-nothing-well
software.
More to the point, Microsoft's software is required for the vast majority of
PC users, while Mcafee's and Norton's is most certainly not.
Was that coherent enough for you, or should I send some pictures, graphs,
and a Powerpoint presentation?
;-)
CS
