Windows XP Issue (Activation) III

[Leythos]

As far as Kurtis being a troll, I suspect you say that because he disagrees
with you. He is, however, giving voice for a lot of people that agree with
him and he therefore serves a good purpose of telling the "rest of the
story".

If you knew anything about me you would not have put it that way - I learn
a lot when my opinions differ from other peoples and we enter into
meaningful discussion about the differences. On the other hand, I do not
respect people that exhibit trollish methods and always divert from
questions that disprove their statements.

 

[Alias]

| On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 13:51:07 +0100, Alias wrote:
|
| > As far as Kurtis being a troll, I suspect you say that because he
disagrees
| > with you. He is, however, giving voice for a lot of people that agree
with
| > him and he therefore serves a good purpose of telling the "rest of the
| > story".
|
| If you knew anything about me you would not have put it that way - I learn
| a lot when my opinions differ from other peoples and we enter into
| meaningful discussion about the differences. On the other hand, I do not
| respect people that exhibit trollish methods and always divert from
| questions that disprove their statements.
|
|
| --
| (e-mail address removed)
| remove 999 in order to email me

Fine, everyone is entitled to an opinion. What about my other points?

 

[Leythos]

| On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 13:51:07 +0100, Alias wrote: |
| > As far as Kurtis being a troll, I suspect you say that because he
disagrees
| > with you. He is, however, giving voice for a lot of people that
agree with
| > him and he therefore serves a good purpose of telling the "rest of
the | > story".
|
| If you knew anything about me you would not have put it that way - I
learn | a lot when my opinions differ from other peoples and we enter
into | meaningful discussion about the differences. On the other hand, I
do not | respect people that exhibit trollish methods and always divert
from | questions that disprove their statements. |
|

Fine, everyone is entitled to an opinion. What about my other points?

The only other point you made was "Giving voice to a lot of people that
agree with him" - Advocating theft is not what I would call giving a voice
to anyone, it's unethical at the least.

Kind of like the people that connect a cable to their neighbors cable tv
system to get free cable tv - it's not "hurting" anyone.... Same tired BS.

He didn't make any points, he only fact that he keeps spouting is that MS
has not gone after any home user for violating the EULA that we know of.

 

[Alias]

| On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:34:58 +0100, Alias wrote:
|
|
| >
| > | On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 13:51:07 +0100, Alias wrote: |
| > | > As far as Kurtis being a troll, I suspect you say that because he
| > disagrees
| > | > with you. He is, however, giving voice for a lot of people that
| > agree with
| > | > him and he therefore serves a good purpose of telling the "rest of
| > the | > story".
| > |
| > | If you knew anything about me you would not have put it that way - I
| > learn | a lot when my opinions differ from other peoples and we enter
| > into | meaningful discussion about the differences. On the other hand, I
| > do not | respect people that exhibit trollish methods and always divert
| > from | questions that disprove their statements. |
| > |
| >
| > Fine, everyone is entitled to an opinion. What about my other points?
|
| The only other point you made was "Giving voice to a lot of people that
| agree with him" - Advocating theft is not what I would call giving a voice
| to anyone, it's unethical at the least.
|
| Kind of like the people that connect a cable to their neighbors cable tv
| system to get free cable tv - it's not "hurting" anyone.... Same tired BS.
|
| He didn't make any points, he only fact that he keeps spouting is that MS
| has not gone after any home user for violating the EULA that we know of.

I meant MY points:

That still doesn't make the EULA any less of a scam. Tombraider, for
example, has no EULA, can be installed on as many computers as you like and
is one of the most successful games to ever hit the market. Same for Diablo
and Doom. If games, which are not bought by nearly as many people as an OS
can be successful without the EULA scam, why can't Microsoft? Greed? That
said, I only install legit OSs and software on my computers even though I
don't agree with the EULA.

The Mini Mac is looking better and better, however, what with MS' OSs having
to have four or five anti spyware programs, anti browser/BHO hijack
programs, a good, updated AV program, needing to delete the Java cache (I
wonder how many people get the JavaByte virus, run their anti virus, nothing
comes up, and they mistakenly think they've gotten rid of it?), Temporary
Internet cache, defragging, etc, etc. I will wait for Jaguar, though, as I
hear it is a killer OS and makes XP look like some kindergarden kid wrote
it. For example, I hear the desktop will be a cube that you can rotate and,
in effect, have four desktops. Do you think Longhorn will have that feature?

 

[Leythos]

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:57:09 +0100, Alias wrote:
[snip]

I meant MY points:

Sorry, didn't understand.

That still doesn't make the EULA any less of a scam. Tombraider, for

In the real world, scam or not doesn't really matter. The EULA is
something that MS (and other vendors) use to protect their designs and
ability to make money from those designs. You do not have to use their
designs if you don't agree to the EULA.

example, has no EULA, can be installed on as many computers as you like
and is one of the most successful games to ever hit the market. Same for
Diablo and Doom. If games, which are not bought by nearly as many people
as an OS can be successful without the EULA scam

This is a fallacy, many games come with EULA's and other restrictions,
take a look at Steam with Counter-Strike and other games. Doom and Diablo
were (still are) great games and did make money (we assume), but they did
not give users blanket permission to install them on other people
computers without permission. It's also a different scenario in that you,
unless you have a couple extra hands, can't play Doom on two machines at
the same time. With an OS, your second install and be running and doing
many things without being present.

why can't Microsoft?
Greed? That said, I only install legit OSs and software on my computers
even though I don't agree with the EULA.

Why is it greed to want to be paid for each installation - that's been the
way it's been since before MS started doing it. Heck, software vendors
have been doing it for a LONG time - so why pick on MS, they were not the
first. Everyone on your side of the fence states MS's Greed as an issue, I
suspect that it has nothing to do with greed, only a dislike of MS.

The Mini Mac is looking better and better, however, what with MS' OSs
having to have four or five anti spyware programs, anti browser/BHO
hijack programs, a good, updated AV program, needing to delete the Java
cache (I wonder how many people get the JavaByte virus, run their anti
virus, nothing comes up, and they mistakenly think they've gotten rid of
it?), Temporary Internet cache, defragging, etc, etc. I will wait for
Jaguar, though, as I hear it is a killer OS and makes XP look like some
kindergarden kid wrote it. For example, I hear the desktop will be a
cube that you can rotate and, in effect, have four desktops. Do you
think Longhorn will have that feature?

I've been running and designing systems since the late 70's, in all that
time, even running Windows and DOS, I've never had a single compromised
system on any network I've ever owned or managed for any client.

During the early days of Windows (post 3.11, during 95) I found that MAC's
cost more and performed worse than a Windows PC setup for the same cost -
I could out-run a MAC using PageMaker for the same hardware costs, same is
true with PhotoShop today, not to mention how much easier real networking
is on a PC than a MAC (although MAC's have come a long way in making it
easy).

Did you know that Linux already offers the 4-way-desktop, this Fedora Core
3 system I'm using right now has 4 desktops, all usable with a single
mouse click, it's not like the MAC is doing anything revolutionary. How
come you're not hammering the Apple people for ALL OF THE PROPRIETARY CRAP
they've done over the years (AND STILL DO). Apple was even worse than
Microsoft when it came to building applications to run on them.

As for addressing the security issues of Windows XP based system, there
are simple and free solutions that can ensure the security of users, but
most users are too ignorant to use them. The same is true with MAC OS/X, I
get monthly updates about new Exploits found on OS/X, actually in Linux
based systems too - the difference is that Linux and MAC based systems
constitute a smaller base/target and that Linux users are typically more
technical/savvy about their systems than the typical MS Base. There is
also the difference in the OS structure and how security was implemented
from the base, but it's still possible to compromise a Linux or Apple
system.

My mother-in-law has been using her Dell 2400 XP Prof based system without
any viruses or spyware since I rebuilt it from the base install for more
than 6 months, not one problem.

So, did I miss anything?

 

[Alias]

| On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:57:09 +0100, Alias wrote:
| [snip]
| > I meant MY points:
|
| Sorry, didn't understand.
|
| > That still doesn't make the EULA any less of a scam. Tombraider, for
|
| In the real world, scam or not doesn't really matter. The EULA is
| something that MS (and other vendors) use to protect their designs and
| ability to make money from those designs. You do not have to use their
| designs if you don't agree to the EULA.

I know.
|
| > example, has no EULA, can be installed on as many computers as you like
| > and is one of the most successful games to ever hit the market. Same for
| > Diablo and Doom. If games, which are not bought by nearly as many people
| > as an OS can be successful without the EULA scam
|
| This is a fallacy, many games come with EULA's and other restrictions,
| take a look at Steam with Counter-Strike and other games.

Aren't those games made by MS?

| Doom and Diablo
| were (still are) great games and did make money (we assume), but they did
| not give users blanket permission to install them on other people
| computers without permission. It's also a different scenario in that you,
| unless you have a couple extra hands, can't play Doom on two machines at
| the same time. With an OS, your second install and be running and doing
| many things without being present.

I can play one on one computer and my kid can play it on the other and my
wife on yet another.
|
| > why can't Microsoft?
| > Greed? That said, I only install legit OSs and software on my computers
| > even though I don't agree with the EULA.
|
| Why is it greed to want to be paid for each installation - that's been the
| way it's been since before MS started doing it. Heck, software vendors
| have been doing it for a LONG time - so why pick on MS, they were not the
| first. Everyone on your side of the fence states MS's Greed as an issue, I
| suspect that it has nothing to do with greed, only a dislike of MS.

The fact that it is an established procedure doesn't not make it a scam. I
don't see anything wrong with a family not having to pay three or four times
for the same thing, do you? Now, copying and selling, I agree, is not right,
nor is it right for a company to multi install without paying. The latter
two cases involve financial gain, a family installing OSs on their computers
usually does not.
|
| > The Mini Mac is looking better and better, however, what with MS' OSs
| > having to have four or five anti spyware programs, anti browser/BHO
| > hijack programs, a good, updated AV program, needing to delete the Java
| > cache (I wonder how many people get the JavaByte virus, run their anti
| > virus, nothing comes up, and they mistakenly think they've gotten rid of
| > it?), Temporary Internet cache, defragging, etc, etc. I will wait for
| > Jaguar, though, as I hear it is a killer OS and makes XP look like some
| > kindergarden kid wrote it. For example, I hear the desktop will be a
| > cube that you can rotate and, in effect, have four desktops. Do you
| > think Longhorn will have that feature?
|
| I've been running and designing systems since the late 70's, in all that
| time, even running Windows and DOS, I've never had a single compromised
| system on any network I've ever owned or managed for any client.
|
| During the early days of Windows (post 3.11, during 95) I found that MAC's
| cost more and performed worse than a Windows PC setup for the same cost -
| I could out-run a MAC using PageMaker for the same hardware costs, same is
| true with PhotoShop today, not to mention how much easier real networking
| is on a PC than a MAC (although MAC's have come a long way in making it
| easy).
|
| Did you know that Linux already offers the 4-way-desktop, this Fedora Core
| 3 system I'm using right now has 4 desktops, all usable with a single
| mouse click, it's not like the MAC is doing anything revolutionary. How
| come you're not hammering the Apple people for ALL OF THE PROPRIETARY CRAP
| they've done over the years (AND STILL DO). Apple was even worse than
| Microsoft when it came to building applications to run on them.
|
| As for addressing the security issues of Windows XP based system, there
| are simple and free solutions that can ensure the security of users, but
| most users are too ignorant to use them. The same is true with MAC OS/X, I
| get monthly updates about new Exploits found on OS/X, actually in Linux
| based systems too - the difference is that Linux and MAC based systems
| constitute a smaller base/target and that Linux users are typically more
| technical/savvy about their systems than the typical MS Base. There is
| also the difference in the OS structure and how security was implemented
| from the base, but it's still possible to compromise a Linux or Apple
| system.
|
| My mother-in-law has been using her Dell 2400 XP Prof based system without
| any viruses or spyware since I rebuilt it from the base install for more
| than 6 months, not one problem.
|
| So, did I miss anything?

I still may get a Mini Mac just to play with it ;-)

 

[Leythos]

| On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 15:57:09 +0100, Alias wrote:
| [snip]
| > I meant MY points:
|
| Sorry, didn't understand.
|
| > That still doesn't make the EULA any less of a scam. Tombraider, for
|
| In the real world, scam or not doesn't really matter. The EULA is
| something that MS (and other vendors) use to protect their designs and
| ability to make money from those designs. You do not have to use their
| designs if you don't agree to the EULA.

I know.

| > example, has no EULA, can be installed on as many computers as you like
| > and is one of the most successful games to ever hit the market. Same for
| > Diablo and Doom. If games, which are not bought by nearly as many people
| > as an OS can be successful without the EULA scam
|
| This is a fallacy, many games come with EULA's and other restrictions,
| take a look at Steam with Counter-Strike and other games.

Aren't those games made by MS?

Nope, and a lot of games with EULA are not made by MS.

| Doom and Diablo
| were (still are) great games and did make money (we assume), but they did
| not give users blanket permission to install them on other people
| computers without permission. It's also a different scenario in that you,
| unless you have a couple extra hands, can't play Doom on two machines at
| the same time. With an OS, your second install and be running and doing
| many things without being present.

I can play one on one computer and my kid can play it on the other and my
wife on yet another.

Actually, in most cases, this is not permitted, DOOM II was not licenses
for multiple users at the same time with only a single purchase.

| > why can't Microsoft?
| > Greed? That said, I only install legit OSs and software on my computers
| > even though I don't agree with the EULA.
|
| Why is it greed to want to be paid for each installation - that's been the
| way it's been since before MS started doing it. Heck, software vendors
| have been doing it for a LONG time - so why pick on MS, they were not the
| first. Everyone on your side of the fence states MS's Greed as an issue, I
| suspect that it has nothing to do with greed, only a dislike of MS.

The fact that it is an established procedure doesn't not make it a scam. I
don't see anything wrong with a family not having to pay three or four times
for the same thing, do you? Now, copying and selling, I agree, is not right,
nor is it right for a company to multi install without paying. The latter
two cases involve financial gain, a family installing OSs on their computers
usually does not.

Here is the acid test to me: If you violate the EULA and install an
unlicensed copy of ANYTHING, did the vendor realize a loss of revenue? In
all cases, if you are using an unlicensed copy which was not paid for
according to the license, then the answer is YES.

It doesn't make any difference if the unlicensed copy was sold to you from
another thief, or if a company installs 80 copies and only has licenses
for 79, or if you install a second copy without a license for it, it's
still one less (or more) sale that the vendor gets.

| > The Mini Mac is looking better and better, however, what with MS' OSs
| > having to have four or five anti spyware programs, anti browser/BHO
| > hijack programs, a good, updated AV program, needing to delete the Java
| > cache (I wonder how many people get the JavaByte virus, run their anti
| > virus, nothing comes up, and they mistakenly think they've gotten rid of
| > it?), Temporary Internet cache, defragging, etc, etc. I will wait for
| > Jaguar, though, as I hear it is a killer OS and makes XP look like some
| > kindergarden kid wrote it. For example, I hear the desktop will be a
| > cube that you can rotate and, in effect, have four desktops. Do you
| > think Longhorn will have that feature?
|
| I've been running and designing systems since the late 70's, in all that
| time, even running Windows and DOS, I've never had a single compromised
| system on any network I've ever owned or managed for any client.
|
| During the early days of Windows (post 3.11, during 95) I found that MAC's
| cost more and performed worse than a Windows PC setup for the same cost -
| I could out-run a MAC using PageMaker for the same hardware costs, same is
| true with PhotoShop today, not to mention how much easier real networking
| is on a PC than a MAC (although MAC's have come a long way in making it
| easy).
|
| Did you know that Linux already offers the 4-way-desktop, this Fedora Core
| 3 system I'm using right now has 4 desktops, all usable with a single
| mouse click, it's not like the MAC is doing anything revolutionary. How
| come you're not hammering the Apple people for ALL OF THE PROPRIETARY CRAP
| they've done over the years (AND STILL DO). Apple was even worse than
| Microsoft when it came to building applications to run on them.
|
| As for addressing the security issues of Windows XP based system, there
| are simple and free solutions that can ensure the security of users, but
| most users are too ignorant to use them. The same is true with MAC OS/X, I
| get monthly updates about new Exploits found on OS/X, actually in Linux
| based systems too - the difference is that Linux and MAC based systems
| constitute a smaller base/target and that Linux users are typically more
| technical/savvy about their systems than the typical MS Base. There is
| also the difference in the OS structure and how security was implemented
| from the base, but it's still possible to compromise a Linux or Apple
| system.
|
| My mother-in-law has been using her Dell 2400 XP Prof based system without
| any viruses or spyware since I rebuilt it from the base install for more
| than 6 months, not one problem.
|
| So, did I miss anything?

I still may get a Mini Mac just to play with it ;-)

Download Fedora Core 3, it's free and has supported all the systems I've
installed it on, painless, simple, easy, works great. I don't have a clue
as to maintaining a Linux system, but I had to start somewhere.

 

[kurttrail]

You don't need to use bad words to get your point across

But it pisses off the religious kooks. And any opportunity I get to
piss them off, I will.

Even on my Appalachian Trail web page, the slideshow of my hike starts
with this warning:

"Warning! Some of the material contain in this slideshow may not be
suitable for: Children, Christians, Republicans, Born-again
Non-smokers, DEA Agents, any member of 'the Partnership for a drug-free
America,' or anyone who has a stick up his and/or her ass!"

Even Geocities/Yahoo didn't have a problem with my so-called "bad words"
when I used them.

I've always been of the opinion that no word is bad, just some people
have deluded themselves in believing that certain words are bad. They
never understood the meaning of "sticks and stones may break my bones,
but words will never hurt me."

But the world is full of narrowminded people, who think that words do
hurt, and it's usually those that want everyone to believe as they do,
and are intolerant of the opinions of others.

I am actual surprised your host would allow bad words.

LOL! You know, free speech is still legal in the US. Think of the
internet as cable TV, not broadcast TV. There is no arbitrary FCC-type
"Decency" rules for the internet.

Actual I would like to know who your host is. So, I could a set up a
listing of all possible bad software. Since your host is not picky
it would allow me to include all software including software from the
x sights. Where most people get the bad software from.

I'm sending you links to both my web hosts to your hotmail account. But
if you are giving out links to illegal software, these hosts will cancel
your account out.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

Yes, I believe Microsoft has a right to prevent or restrict people
form using the oses on more than one machine.


I do believe Activation and Genuine windows advantage is an
inconvenience . That have improved the activation problem with xp
sp2


I do need to correct you on a point. The enforcement of the eula for
consumers have not be proven yet.


Kurt claim of the Fair Use.
If only part may be used. If that is actual the case. He could only
half install windows on other computers. I would like to seen him try
½ even ¼ install of xp. I wish there was a custom install of xp.

When "fair use" is used in the public, then only you are only allowed to
use a part of the copyrighted material, but in private non-commercial
uses, "fair use" allows for using the entire copyrighted material.

I am surprised he is spending money on his website instead of
challenge the eula in court if he feels that strong about it.

I spent around $50 dollars a year on the web site greg. And it ain't up
to me to prove my "fair use" is legally valid, it is up to the copyright
owner to dispute my "fair use" if they don't feel my interpretation of
it is valid.

I mean no derogatory comments toward Microsofts or Kurt. These are
just my opinions

For my part, no offense was taken by your comments. You are entitled to
your opinion, as much as I am, or even Microsoft. The only difference
between me and Microsoft is that I don't use PA to try to force people
into believing my unsubstantiated opinion, and MS does use PA to force
people to believe their unsubstantiated opinion.

Until MS is will to legally prove their word is law in the privacy of
people's homes, people have the right to do whatever they want with the
MS products they buy for their own private non-commercial use, and it is
not immoral or illegal until MS proves otherwise in a real court of law.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

I meant MY points:

That still doesn't make the EULA any less of a scam. Tombraider, for
example, has no EULA, can be installed on as many computers as you
like and is one of the most successful games to ever hit the market.
Same for Diablo and Doom. If games, which are not bought by nearly as
many people as an OS can be successful without the EULA scam, why
can't Microsoft? Greed? That said, I only install legit OSs and
software on my computers even though I don't agree with the EULA.

The Mini Mac is looking better and better, however, what with MS' OSs
having to have four or five anti spyware programs, anti browser/BHO
hijack programs, a good, updated AV program, needing to delete the
Java cache (I wonder how many people get the JavaByte virus, run
their anti virus, nothing comes up, and they mistakenly think they've
gotten rid of it?), Temporary Internet cache, defragging, etc, etc. I
will wait for Jaguar, though, as I hear it is a killer OS and makes
XP look like some kindergarden kid wrote it. For example, I hear the
desktop will be a cube that you can rotate and, in effect, have four
desktops. Do you think Longhorn will have that feature?

And it's funny how MS grew their monopoly and became one of the biggest
corporations in the world before ever introducing PA. MS gets there
paying customers to cover what has been pirated by 10 fold, yet keeps
adding hurdles for using MS software, and yet the price of Windows is
still the same or even greater than it was before MS introduced PA.

The paying MS customer gets all the screwing from REAL & imaginary
piracy, not MS!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Greg R]

I'm sending you links to both my web hosts to your hotmail account. But
if you are giving out links to illegal software, these hosts will cancel
your account out.

It is not illegal software. It software that causes spyware and
adware. I would just list the file names. Not the weblinks.



Greg R

 

[Guest]

After re-reading this junk (XP EULA and Title 17) I have to admit that you
are both right. While Title 17 is kind of vague as to what single use might
be defined as I think it is probably that way on purpose to allow a broad
interpretation by the courts. (Typical lawyer crap)

I also have to reiterate that I do not think that EULA for windows is done
well. I can understand why a company wants to protect their intellectual
property and make money from their product, that is the point after all, but
MS has some pretty crappy things tucked inside the EULA for XP. I esspecially
like the bit about only allowing 10 devices access to the licensed system.

And if I don't agree with the EULA then I don't have to use their product.
Fair enough, but in this business if you don't sell, install and support MS
products you won't make much of a living. So I deal with MS and all of it's
stupid little hoops. I don't like it much but there it is. I guess I get bent
when I am working hard to stay in compliance with all of this crap and other
folk just wave it off.

I miss the days when we used to swap software like trading cards.

(BTW, the bit about B.G. being satan I thought was pretty funny.)

 

[Guest]

Oh, BTW Title 17; Sections 1201 - 1204 describe the circumvention of
copyright protection systems like XP's activation feature and the possible
civil and criminal penalties for same. While the sound pretty nasty they do
seem aimed mostly at the corp. world. It would take one pissed off
prossecutor do indict an individual for same although technically they could
if they wanted too.

 

[kurttrail]

After re-reading this junk (XP EULA and Title 17) I have to admit
that you are both right. While Title 17 is kind of vague as to what
single use might be defined as I think it is probably that way on
purpose to allow a broad interpretation by the courts. (Typical
lawyer crap)

I also have to reiterate that I do not think that EULA for windows is
done well. I can understand why a company wants to protect their
intellectual property and make money from their product, that is the
point after all, but MS has some pretty crappy things tucked inside
the EULA for XP. I esspecially like the bit about only allowing 10
devices access to the licensed system.

And if I don't agree with the EULA then I don't have to use their
product. Fair enough, but in this business if you don't sell, install
and support MS products you won't make much of a living. So I deal
with MS and all of it's stupid little hoops. I don't like it much but
there it is. I guess I get bent when I am working hard to stay in
compliance with all of this crap and other folk just wave it off.

I miss the days when we used to swap software like trading cards.

See, I agree with MS that people shouldn't "share" their software with
other people outside of their homes, and I also believe that their EULAs
are perfectly valid commercial use contracts. My beef is when it comes
to private non-commercial use in the home. Personally if MS and the
other members of the BSA would license software to the individual and
not to the machine for private non-commercial use, I'd have no problem
jumping through PA hoops every once in a while. That would both help
control the spread of illegal software, while giving individuals the
freedom to do what they want with the very expensive software that they
use in their homes.

This would be a true balance of the rights of the copyright owner and
the rights of the individual to use the products they buy as they see
fit in the PRIVACY of their own homes. And by tying the software to the
individual and not the machine, would create an atmosphere where people
would be less willing to causul copy software with friends and
acquaintances, the supposed goal of PA.

MS's draconian methods of trying to control how individuals use the
software they buy for use in the privacy of their homes WILL bite them
in the ass if there is ever a consumer & computer moron friendly version
of Linux, that will run software developed for MS OSs. And if there is
a company that develops this version of Linux before MS releases
Longhorn, MS will rue the day that they ever started this EULA war with
their private non-commercial customer.

No monopoly lasts forever, especially one that tries so hard to piss off
its customers.

(BTW, the bit about B.G. being satan I thought was pretty funny.)

Thanks. Most people get pretty wigged out by the "forbidden fruit" part
of the story.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Guest]

I suppose I would perfer non-commercial users to have the ability to share
again. Certainly I once partook of "shared" software. Probably all
technicians have at one point or another. MS just got really bent and is
taking it out on all of us. Unfortunatly since I am a "partner" with MS I
have to abide by their silly rules. I beleive completely that the OP of this
string will probably NOT get nailed by MS, but by the same token it would be
just my luck if I went that way that I would. So I preach against EULA
violation, simply CYA tactics. As I said, I miss the days of trading card
software.

As to forbidden fruit, I'm not much of a religous radical. I belong to the
Curch of the 7 Day Recreationalists. Our founding is premise is "F**k it!
pass me a beer."

 

[kurttrail]

I suppose I would perfer non-commercial users to have the ability to
share again. Certainly I once partook of "shared" software. Probably
all technicians have at one point or another. MS just got really bent
and is taking it out on all of us. Unfortunatly since I am a
"partner" with MS I have to abide by their silly rules. I beleive
completely that the OP of this string will probably NOT get nailed by
MS, but by the same token it would be just my luck if I went that way
that I would. So I preach against EULA violation, simply CYA tactics.
As I said, I miss the days of trading card software.

As a business, you really do have to CYA, the BSA has nothing better to
do than extort large settlements from businesses that don't play by the
rules. But what the OP did for his mom is not likely at all to cause
any problem for him or his mom.

As to forbidden fruit, I'm not much of a religous radical. I belong
to the Curch of the 7 Day Recreationalists. Our founding is premise
is "F**k it! pass me a beer."

ROFL!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

Oh, BTW Title 17; Sections 1201 - 1204 describe the circumvention of
copyright protection systems like XP's activation feature and the
possible civil and criminal penalties for same. While the sound
pretty nasty they do seem aimed mostly at the corp. world. It would
take one pissed off prossecutor do indict an individual for same
although technically they could if they wanted too.

TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 12 > § 1201 (c) (c) Other Rights, Etc., Not
Affected.-(1) Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies,
limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use,
under this title.

While this wouldn't protect someone in business, or someone who purchase
the software, it would protect those that did purchase copy-protected
software and circumvented the copy-protection for their private
non-commercial use, especially if the court followed the Supreme Court
precedent that, "Any individual may reproduce a copyrighted work for a
"fair use"; the copyright owner does not possess the exclusive right to
such a use."

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Leythos]

if there is ever a consumer & computer moron friendly version
of Linux, that will run software developed for MS OSs. And if there is
a company that develops this version of Linux before MS releases
Longhorn, MS will rue the day that they ever started this EULA war with
their private non-commercial customer.

Now, here you've got a good new topic. Since we're not going to agree on
the validity of the EULA, lets address the above question:

About two months ago I started reviewing many different versions of
alternative OS's, I narrowed it down to primary testing of SUSE 9.1
Personal, Mandrake 10.0 Official, and RedHat Fedora Core 3. SUSE I started
with a Laptop (P3/600/512MB), 3 small workstations (P3/833/256) and a
single Dual (P3/1g/2g RAM) as my test cases. SUSE 9.1 Personal installed
on all systems and found and setup all hardware, but the KDE desktop
(Window manager) was slow. Mandrake 10.0 Official also installed and found
all the hardware, but the desktop didn't detect the video resolutions
properly and I had to edit the KDE configuration file. Fedora Core 3
installed and worked perfectly, as did ALL of the applications and servers
it installed. On FC3 I selected the GNOME window manager (very windows
like) and have been able to manage ALL of the resources via graphical
interfaces, the only command line I've used is to PING systems.

At this point I've wiped the SUSE and MKD systems and started using FC3 on
them for testing and learning - I'm using one of the P3's right now to
type this.

Now, it took 90 minutes to install the 3 CD's, but that included all the
office apps, editors, servers (HTTP, Mail, FTP, and others), it then took
about 2 hours to download all the updates (much like SP2 and Office 2003
SP) much the same as Windows does for a fully installed machine.

For those people using Exchange servers, well, not to fret, Evolution is a
Outlook like product that will work with Exchange (and does all the
Outlook things, contacts, calendar (and it looks like Outlooks), tasks,
email, etc..) as well as working with POP accounts and IMAP.

So, what was the reason for this? Simple, I've run into to many home users
that have compromised machines and don't know if they have an alternative,
and I didn't know either. I've found that FC3 provides a great FREE
platform with simple to use instructions for installation, great tools for
editing documents and email and browsing the web, and even has about 20
cheap games installed for people that want it. Oh, it also works with my
Phaser 8400B color wax/thermal laser and my HP 1300 and my HP 1200.

The difference between Windows XP (and version) and FC3 - FC3 comes with
servers (web, FTP, file sharing - SAMBA), comes with Office capable
applications (Write = Word, Calc = Excel, DIA = cheap visio, Impress =
Power Point, and Math which I've not looked at).

As for reliability of the platform - I did have one crash, when it
upgraded the (and it has a little automatic update tool that lets you know
when updates are ready) kernel from 2.6.9-1.667 to 2.6.10-1.741, it would
not boot and I don't know enough to fix it. I wiped and reinstalled and
did the update and all is working perfectly. Some updates to the kernel
require rebooting the entire system no matter what linux zealots tell you.

I have this system on a port of my desktop KVM and my Win XP Prof SP2
machine on the other, and with the exception of needing use XP to manage
the firewall (I run a WatchGuard Firebox that uses a Win based GUI tool)
I've not used my XP Prof box for almost 3 days now.

There are some difficulties - I've been unable to get R/W access to my
Windows 2000/2003 servers for file access, but I've not put a lot of
effort into it yet.

So, aside from MAC, which is now running a variant of BSD, there is a
viable, real, working, full featured, simple to install, easy to use,
alternative for the masses of non-technical home users, and it's free and
can be installed on as many machines as the user wants

 

[Alias]

| On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 14:14:16 -0500, kurttrail wrote:
|
| > if there is ever a consumer & computer moron friendly version
| > of Linux, that will run software developed for MS OSs. And if there is
| > a company that develops this version of Linux before MS releases
| > Longhorn, MS will rue the day that they ever started this EULA war with
| > their private non-commercial customer.
|
| Now, here you've got a good new topic. Since we're not going to agree on
| the validity of the EULA, lets address the above question:
|
| About two months ago I started reviewing many different versions of
| alternative OS's, I narrowed it down to primary testing of SUSE 9.1
| Personal, Mandrake 10.0 Official, and RedHat Fedora Core 3. SUSE I started
| with a Laptop (P3/600/512MB), 3 small workstations (P3/833/256) and a
| single Dual (P3/1g/2g RAM) as my test cases. SUSE 9.1 Personal installed
| on all systems and found and setup all hardware, but the KDE desktop
| (Window manager) was slow. Mandrake 10.0 Official also installed and found
| all the hardware, but the desktop didn't detect the video resolutions
| properly and I had to edit the KDE configuration file. Fedora Core 3
| installed and worked perfectly, as did ALL of the applications and servers
| it installed. On FC3 I selected the GNOME window manager (very windows
| like) and have been able to manage ALL of the resources via graphical
| interfaces, the only command line I've used is to PING systems.
|
| At this point I've wiped the SUSE and MKD systems and started using FC3 on
| them for testing and learning - I'm using one of the P3's right now to
| type this.
|
| Now, it took 90 minutes to install the 3 CD's, but that included all the
| office apps, editors, servers (HTTP, Mail, FTP, and others), it then took
| about 2 hours to download all the updates (much like SP2 and Office 2003
| SP) much the same as Windows does for a fully installed machine.
|
| For those people using Exchange servers, well, not to fret, Evolution is a
| Outlook like product that will work with Exchange (and does all the
| Outlook things, contacts, calendar (and it looks like Outlooks), tasks,
| email, etc..) as well as working with POP accounts and IMAP.
|
| So, what was the reason for this? Simple, I've run into to many home users
| that have compromised machines and don't know if they have an alternative,
| and I didn't know either. I've found that FC3 provides a great FREE
| platform with simple to use instructions for installation, great tools for
| editing documents and email and browsing the web, and even has about 20
| cheap games installed for people that want it. Oh, it also works with my
| Phaser 8400B color wax/thermal laser and my HP 1300 and my HP 1200.
|
| The difference between Windows XP (and version) and FC3 - FC3 comes with
| servers (web, FTP, file sharing - SAMBA), comes with Office capable
| applications (Write = Word, Calc = Excel, DIA = cheap visio, Impress =
| Power Point, and Math which I've not looked at).
|
| As for reliability of the platform - I did have one crash, when it
| upgraded the (and it has a little automatic update tool that lets you know
| when updates are ready) kernel from 2.6.9-1.667 to 2.6.10-1.741, it would
| not boot and I don't know enough to fix it. I wiped and reinstalled and
| did the update and all is working perfectly. Some updates to the kernel
| require rebooting the entire system no matter what linux zealots tell you.
|
| I have this system on a port of my desktop KVM and my Win XP Prof SP2
| machine on the other, and with the exception of needing use XP to manage
| the firewall (I run a WatchGuard Firebox that uses a Win based GUI tool)
| I've not used my XP Prof box for almost 3 days now.
|
| There are some difficulties - I've been unable to get R/W access to my
| Windows 2000/2003 servers for file access, but I've not put a lot of
| effort into it yet.
|
| So, aside from MAC, which is now running a variant of BSD, there is a
| viable, real, working, full featured, simple to install, easy to use,
| alternative for the masses of non-technical home users, and it's free and
| can be installed on as many machines as the user wants
|
| --
| (e-mail address removed)
| remove 999 in order to email me

When it really becomes user friendly -- your description leads me to believe
it isn't yet -- MS may have to (gasp!) change its EULA and lower prices.
Doing that now would be a very smart move on MS' part. Waiting would not be
very smart.

 

[kurttrail]

Now, here you've got a good new topic. Since we're not going to agree
on the validity of the EULA, lets address the above question:

About two months ago I started reviewing many different versions of
alternative OS's, I narrowed it down to primary testing of SUSE 9.1
Personal, Mandrake 10.0 Official, and RedHat Fedora Core 3. SUSE I
started with a Laptop (P3/600/512MB), 3 small workstations
(P3/833/256) and a single Dual (P3/1g/2g RAM) as my test cases. SUSE
9.1 Personal installed on all systems and found and setup all
hardware, but the KDE desktop (Window manager) was slow. Mandrake
10.0 Official also installed and found all the hardware, but the
desktop didn't detect the video resolutions properly and I had to
edit the KDE configuration file. Fedora Core 3 installed and worked
perfectly, as did ALL of the applications and servers it installed.
On FC3 I selected the GNOME window manager (very windows like) and
have been able to manage ALL of the resources via graphical
interfaces, the only command line I've used is to PING systems.

At this point I've wiped the SUSE and MKD systems and started using
FC3 on them for testing and learning - I'm using one of the P3's
right now to type this.

Now, it took 90 minutes to install the 3 CD's, but that included all
the office apps, editors, servers (HTTP, Mail, FTP, and others), it
then took about 2 hours to download all the updates (much like SP2
and Office 2003 SP) much the same as Windows does for a fully
installed machine.

For those people using Exchange servers, well, not to fret, Evolution
is a Outlook like product that will work with Exchange (and does all
the Outlook things, contacts, calendar (and it looks like Outlooks),
tasks, email, etc..) as well as working with POP accounts and IMAP.

So, what was the reason for this? Simple, I've run into to many home
users that have compromised machines and don't know if they have an
alternative, and I didn't know either. I've found that FC3 provides a
great FREE platform with simple to use instructions for installation,
great tools for editing documents and email and browsing the web, and
even has about 20 cheap games installed for people that want it. Oh,
it also works with my Phaser 8400B color wax/thermal laser and my HP
1300 and my HP 1200.

The difference between Windows XP (and version) and FC3 - FC3 comes
with servers (web, FTP, file sharing - SAMBA), comes with Office
capable applications (Write = Word, Calc = Excel, DIA = cheap visio,
Impress = Power Point, and Math which I've not looked at).

As for reliability of the platform - I did have one crash, when it
upgraded the (and it has a little automatic update tool that lets you
know when updates are ready) kernel from 2.6.9-1.667 to 2.6.10-1.741,
it would not boot and I don't know enough to fix it. I wiped and
reinstalled and did the update and all is working perfectly. Some
updates to the kernel require rebooting the entire system no matter
what linux zealots tell you.

I have this system on a port of my desktop KVM and my Win XP Prof SP2
machine on the other, and with the exception of needing use XP to
manage the firewall (I run a WatchGuard Firebox that uses a Win based
GUI tool) I've not used my XP Prof box for almost 3 days now.

There are some difficulties - I've been unable to get R/W access to my
Windows 2000/2003 servers for file access, but I've not put a lot of
effort into it yet.

So, aside from MAC, which is now running a variant of BSD, there is a
viable, real, working, full featured, simple to install, easy to use,
alternative for the masses of non-technical home users, and it's free
and can be installed on as many machines as the user wants

I'm sorry, but didn't you Plonk me?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"