G
Gordon
Oh and I forgot to add, the one-cd 25 minute install ALSO includes the
Gimp, which a large number of people rate higher than Photoshop.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Oh and I forgot to add, the one-cd 25 minute install ALSO includes the
Gimp, which a large number of people rate higher than Photoshop.
A
Alias
Gordon said:Oh and I forgot to add, the one-cd 25 minute install ALSO includes the
Gimp, which a large number of people rate higher than Photoshop.
URLS? Inquiring people want to know ;-)
Alias
Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.
A
Alias
Gordon said:Oh and I forgot to add, the one-cd 25 minute install ALSO includes the
Gimp, which a large number of people rate higher than Photoshop.
Sorry. www.ubuntu.com DUH!
Alias
Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.
H
hmmm
Jupiter said:Those with integrity comply with agreements they accept.
Those without integrity will routinely violate their agreements of many
kinds.
Like M$ and it's antitrust suits?
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
You very well know retail Microsoft software can be returned in North
America within 30 days opened, installed or not. Relatively easy to do.
What may be available in your continent is a problem you should deal with
your government about if you do not like it.
"How many people do you really think read the EULA..."
Irrelevant, but the Microsoft critics seem to like to highlight this self
imposed ignorance.
If someone accepts an agreement without informing themselves as is easy to
do, that is their problem and no one else's.
Just do not complain when the terms are unacceptable if you exercised you
choice not to read an agreement.
You can apply that to almost any agreement besides EULAs.
If you take an agreement to court, you better have more than you chose not
to read it.
America within 30 days opened, installed or not. Relatively easy to do.
What may be available in your continent is a problem you should deal with
your government about if you do not like it.
"How many people do you really think read the EULA..."
Irrelevant, but the Microsoft critics seem to like to highlight this self
imposed ignorance.
If someone accepts an agreement without informing themselves as is easy to
do, that is their problem and no one else's.
Just do not complain when the terms are unacceptable if you exercised you
choice not to read an agreement.
You can apply that to almost any agreement besides EULAs.
If you take an agreement to court, you better have more than you chose not
to read it.
A
Alias
Jupiter said:Those with integrity comply with agreements they accept.
Actually, many laws are changed by breaking them.
Those without integrity will routinely violate their agreements of many
kinds.
You mean like Rosa Parks going to the front of the bus or people who
drank during prohibition?
Software EULAs are only one type of the many agreements they may ignore.
So true. Some people actually break the sodomy laws in some states. Can
you imagine?
Alias
Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.
A
Alias
Jupiter said:You very well know retail Microsoft software can be returned in North
America within 30 days opened, installed or not.
Really? I didn't know that. How about generic OEMs? I can't get retail
where I live.
Relatively easy to do.
What may be available in your continent is a problem you should deal with
your government about if you do not like it.
I like how my government deals with MS, thank you very much.
"How many people do you really think read the EULA..."
Irrelevant, but the Microsoft critics seem to like to highlight this self
imposed ignorance.
And the reason you didn't answer the question is because you know that
most people don't read it?
If someone accepts an agreement without informing themselves as is easy to
do, that is their problem and no one else's.
Oh, and the companies that write these long, legaleze type agreements
don't know this and take complete advantage? Puleaze.
Just do not complain when the terms are unacceptable if you exercised you
choice not to read an agreement.
You can apply that to almost any agreement besides EULAs.
If you take an agreement to court, you better have more than you chose not
to read it.
MS doesn't have the balls to take anyone to court for breaching the EULA
and you know it.
Alias
Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.
B
Bruce Chambers
Truegjt said:Quick Question, I purchased a retail version of XP Home from Best Buy a few
years back. I now have it installed on a desktop I built. I was wondering
if I can install it on another desktop that I am planning on building for my
room or do I need to buy another version (ie., can it run on two machines
simultaneously or is 1 the limit?) Thanks in advance for your help!
You need to purchase a separate WinXP license for each computer on
which you install it. (As long as you have multiple identical licenses,
it doesn't matter if you use the same CD for the installations, as long
as you use a different license each time.)
Just as it has *always* been with *all* Microsoft operating
systems, it's necessary (to be in compliance with both the EULA and U.S.
copyright law http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/117.html), if not
technically) to purchase one WinXP license for each computer on which it
is installed. (Consult an attorney versed in copyright law to determine
final applicability in your locale.) The only way in which WinXP
licensing differs from that of earlier versions of Windows is that
Microsoft has finally added a copy protection and anti-theft mechanism,
Product Activation, to prevent (or at least make more difficult)
multiple installations using a single license.
One can buy additional licenses, assuming one already has a retail
license. Naturally, Microsoft cannot sell additional OEM licenses. Be
aware, however, that you'll probably pay more this way than you would if
you were to buy a second copy of WinXP from a discount retailer;
Microsoft will only offer you a 15% discount off their MSRP.
Additional Licenses for Windows XP Home Edition
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/howtobuy/addlic.asp
Additional Licenses for Windows XP Professional
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/addlic.asp
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin
Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of
chains and slavery? .... I know not what course others may take, but as
for me, give me liberty, or give me death! -Patrick Henry
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
Yes, you know the return policy, it comes up often in threads with you
similar to this.
Since OEM is not really a Microsoft product, contact the seller for their
products.
Since you are satisfied with how your "government deals with MS", this
should not be an issue with you anyways.
Think of OEM as if it is manufactured, sold and supported by the seller with
Microsoft out of the loop.
This is the way OEM was intended from the beginning and how Microsoft still
sells OEM.
It changed somewhat when people started demanding the cheaper OEM while
ignoring the reasons OEM is cheaper.
Microsoft should do more to explain the limitations of OEM, but the sellers
are also as guilty by not informing their customers on the limitations of
their purchase.
Of course an easy and legal solution would be to eliminate OEM except where
technology binds it to a specific make of computer such as is already done
by many of the major OEMs.
I am not for that idea but it would slow buyers getting products with
limitations and other related information withheld by less than honest sales
people.
What the companies think about who reads an EULA is not relevant just as is
the % of people that do not read an EULA.
People have a choice, inform themselves on agreements they accept or not.
If they do nothing to inform themselves before agreeing, they have the
problem, no one else.
I never said anything about going to court, you just did.
I do not need a court or anyone else to tell me I should follow and
agreement I freely accepted.
similar to this.
Since OEM is not really a Microsoft product, contact the seller for their
products.
Since you are satisfied with how your "government deals with MS", this
should not be an issue with you anyways.
Think of OEM as if it is manufactured, sold and supported by the seller with
Microsoft out of the loop.
This is the way OEM was intended from the beginning and how Microsoft still
sells OEM.
It changed somewhat when people started demanding the cheaper OEM while
ignoring the reasons OEM is cheaper.
Microsoft should do more to explain the limitations of OEM, but the sellers
are also as guilty by not informing their customers on the limitations of
their purchase.
Of course an easy and legal solution would be to eliminate OEM except where
technology binds it to a specific make of computer such as is already done
by many of the major OEMs.
I am not for that idea but it would slow buyers getting products with
limitations and other related information withheld by less than honest sales
people.
What the companies think about who reads an EULA is not relevant just as is
the % of people that do not read an EULA.
People have a choice, inform themselves on agreements they accept or not.
If they do nothing to inform themselves before agreeing, they have the
problem, no one else.
I never said anything about going to court, you just did.
I do not need a court or anyone else to tell me I should follow and
agreement I freely accepted.
A
Alias
Jupiter said:Yes, you know the return policy, it comes up often in threads with you
similar to this.
Yeah, and the Microsoft OEM I bought cannot be returned if opened. This,
to me, invalidates the EULA.
Since OEM is not really a Microsoft product, contact the seller for their
products.
Funny, I just looked at the CD, little brochure and the the other slips
of paper and all of them say "Microsoft" and none of them say the name
of the store where I bought them. For a product that isn't from
Microsoft, why does it say "Microsoft" all over it? The seller did not
make that product, does not hold the copyright or anything else. How
dense can you get?
Since you are satisfied with how your "government deals with MS", this
should not be an issue with you anyways.
That I can't get my money back? Or what?
Think of OEM as if it is manufactured, sold and supported by the seller with
Microsoft out of the loop.
Why? The seller *didn't* manufacture it.
This is the way OEM was intended from the beginning and how Microsoft still
sells OEM.
Oh, now Microsoft sells OEM. Before you said the "seller" does. Which is it?
It changed somewhat when people started demanding the cheaper OEM while
ignoring the reasons OEM is cheaper.
*Most* people don't know the difference.
Microsoft should do more to explain the limitations of OEM, but the sellers
are also as guilty by not informing their customers on the limitations of
their purchase.
I repeat, in Spain you have no choice. Only OEM is available, be it with
an HP type of machine or without any hardware at all.
Of course an easy and legal solution would be to eliminate OEM except where
technology binds it to a specific make of computer such as is already done
by many of the major OEMs.
Solution to what?
I am not for that idea but it would slow buyers getting products with
limitations and other related information withheld by less than honest sales
people.
Show me one web site that doesn't say Windows is software for sale and
I'll show you a thousand that do, all reputable.
What the companies think about who reads an EULA is not relevant just as is
the % of people that do not read an EULA.
And MS et al bank on that.
People have a choice, inform themselves on agreements they accept or not.
Windows is a monopoly for most non geek people who wouldn't know how to
find drivers for their hardware if they went with Linux.
If they do nothing to inform themselves before agreeing, they have the
problem, no one else.
If one wants to use a computer and one isn't rich enough to buy a Mac or
geek enough to use Linux, one has to use Windows. Being informed on an
EULA will not help that.
I never said anything about going to court, you just did.
I do not need a court or anyone else to tell me I should follow and
agreement I freely accepted.
I said it to show the non validity of th EULA.
Alias
Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.
V
Vagabond Software
Alias said:Yeah, and the Microsoft OEM I bought cannot be returned if opened. This,
to me, invalidates the EULA.
Funny, I just looked at the CD, little brochure and the the other slips of
paper and all of them say "Microsoft" and none of them say the name of the
store where I bought them. For a product that isn't from Microsoft, why
does it say "Microsoft" all over it? The seller did not make that product,
does not hold the copyright or anything else. How dense can you get?
It doesn't matter that the seller didn't make the product. Ford didn't make
the transmission on my car, but if it goes bad; I have to either take it
back to Ford for (hopefully) warranty service or have the transmission
repaired/replaced at retail cost.
The operating system of a computer is no different. If you want more
service for your operating system, you should either buy from an OEM that
stands behind their products or buy a retail version. Here is the blurb
that I give folks that buy systems from me.
http://home.san.rr.com/vagabondia/topics/oemxp_topic.htm
carl
A
Alias
Vagabond said:It doesn't matter that the seller didn't make the product. Ford didn't make
the transmission on my car, but if it goes bad; I have to either take it
back to Ford for (hopefully) warranty service or have the transmission
repaired/replaced at retail cost.
Um, bad comparison. MS made the entire CD, no separately built
transmissions involved.
The operating system of a computer is no different.
Obviously it is.
If you want more
service for your operating system, you should either buy from an OEM that
stands behind their products or buy a retail version. Here is the blurb
that I give folks that buy systems from me.
http://home.san.rr.com/vagabondia/topics/oemxp_topic.htm
carl
MS made the product. The OEM distributes the Microsoft product. The fact
that MS is unwilling to support a product they made but is willing to
make the rules on how you can use it writes more volumes than I have
time for here.
Alias
Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.
V
Vagabond Software
Alias said:MS made the product. The OEM distributes the Microsoft product. The fact
that MS is unwilling to support a product they made but is willing to make
the rules on how you can use it writes more volumes than I have time for
here.
Alias
Actually, the "rules" were probably made by the OEMs. They don't want to
provide support for the operating system they integrated into their product,
long after the hardware has failed.
The comparison I made is spot on, in that regard. If the operating system
isn't part of the OEM product, then they should just ship their systems
without an operating system at all or perhaps with a Linux distribution
installed.
carl
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
"This, to me, invalidates the EULA"
Not really relevant again.
What do the laws of your country say? That is far more relevant.
"Funny, I just looked at the CD...
What did the seller say when you asked this question?
How about when you asked details about their agreement with Microsoft"
The product is from Microsoft to the store. From where did YOU purchase the
product? Did you get it directly from Microsoft?
Your not subtle insult show your limitations on this issue since you seem to
now need to go that route instead of the issue at hand.
What do your laws say about getting your money back?
Apparently mine are better than yours.
Again, that is an issue you should take with your government.
Whether the seller manufacturer it or not is not relevant, the seller
accepts all warranty responsibility.
If the seller choose to have little or no warranty, that is the sellers
choice.
"Why? The seller *didn't* manufacture it."
But they did sell it to you.
What do they say when you ask them?
What do your laws say?
"Oh, now Microsoft sells OEM. Before you said the "seller" does. Which is
it?"
Both, if you had read my post, you would know that.
Who sold you the product? Contact the seller with your issue.
If that is unsatisfactory, take it up with your government to get your laws
changed to your satisfaction.
"in Spain you have no choice"
Why?
What have retailers in Spain said when you asked for retail?
Is there a law against retail in Spain?
Is Spain against the customer having a choice and thus keeps that option
from the customer?
What are the details of your research here?
Solution to what?
Your and others confusion about OEM.
"And MS et al bank on that"
Possibly, but that does not remove the responsibility from that choose to
remain ignorant when the option to inform themselves is literally in front
of them to read.
"non geek people"
Many of those should purchase a system locally or from a major OEM.
Looking for drivers would not be an issue if they used reasonable judgement
as they should with any product purchased.
Locally is not necessarily limited to Windows.
"Being informed on an EULA will not help that."
Informing themselves helps prevent problems caused by self imposed
ignorance.
Consumers should strive to inform themselves particularly when their limited
resources are concerned.
"I said it to show the non validity of th EULA"
Your statement does nothing of the kind.
To repeat what I already said:
"I do not need a court or anyone else to tell me I should follow and
agreement I freely accepted."
Do you?
If so and you can not understand agreements, perhaps you should consult a
lawyer before entering into agreements.
But I doubt you need to.
Microsoft sells OEM to the OEM distributor, not to the end user (you)
Your concerns about OEM go to the reseller and not Microsoft.
If that is not acceptable, OEM software is also not acceptable to you.
In that case the obvious decision is to buy retail or buy an OEM system
supported by the OEM on terms acceptable to you.
You make all the choices, not Microsoft or the OEM.
You choose where you dedicate your resources.
Then you live with the advantages and limitations of your choice.
Not really relevant again.
What do the laws of your country say? That is far more relevant.
"Funny, I just looked at the CD...
What did the seller say when you asked this question?
How about when you asked details about their agreement with Microsoft"
The product is from Microsoft to the store. From where did YOU purchase the
product? Did you get it directly from Microsoft?
Your not subtle insult show your limitations on this issue since you seem to
now need to go that route instead of the issue at hand.
What do your laws say about getting your money back?
Apparently mine are better than yours.
Again, that is an issue you should take with your government.
Whether the seller manufacturer it or not is not relevant, the seller
accepts all warranty responsibility.
If the seller choose to have little or no warranty, that is the sellers
choice.
"Why? The seller *didn't* manufacture it."
But they did sell it to you.
What do they say when you ask them?
What do your laws say?
"Oh, now Microsoft sells OEM. Before you said the "seller" does. Which is
it?"
Both, if you had read my post, you would know that.
Who sold you the product? Contact the seller with your issue.
If that is unsatisfactory, take it up with your government to get your laws
changed to your satisfaction.
"in Spain you have no choice"
Why?
What have retailers in Spain said when you asked for retail?
Is there a law against retail in Spain?
Is Spain against the customer having a choice and thus keeps that option
from the customer?
What are the details of your research here?
Solution to what?
Your and others confusion about OEM.
"And MS et al bank on that"
Possibly, but that does not remove the responsibility from that choose to
remain ignorant when the option to inform themselves is literally in front
of them to read.
"non geek people"
Many of those should purchase a system locally or from a major OEM.
Looking for drivers would not be an issue if they used reasonable judgement
as they should with any product purchased.
Locally is not necessarily limited to Windows.
"Being informed on an EULA will not help that."
Informing themselves helps prevent problems caused by self imposed
ignorance.
Consumers should strive to inform themselves particularly when their limited
resources are concerned.
"I said it to show the non validity of th EULA"
Your statement does nothing of the kind.
To repeat what I already said:
"I do not need a court or anyone else to tell me I should follow and
agreement I freely accepted."
Do you?
If so and you can not understand agreements, perhaps you should consult a
lawyer before entering into agreements.
But I doubt you need to.
Microsoft sells OEM to the OEM distributor, not to the end user (you)
Your concerns about OEM go to the reseller and not Microsoft.
If that is not acceptable, OEM software is also not acceptable to you.
In that case the obvious decision is to buy retail or buy an OEM system
supported by the OEM on terms acceptable to you.
You make all the choices, not Microsoft or the OEM.
You choose where you dedicate your resources.
Then you live with the advantages and limitations of your choice.
C
capitan
Jupiter said:Those with integrity comply with agreements they accept.
But this would not inclde MS because they break Antitrust agreements alot.
Those without integrity will routinely violate their agreements of many
kinds.
Just like MS does.
Software EULAs are only one type of the many agreements they may ignore.
Juniper seems to have a very narrow view of this whole situation. For
example, it is not possible that one might disagree with the post sale
shrink wrap license thing (where you don't get to see exactly what you
are agreeing to until you install it, but you are agreeing to it when
you open the shrink wrap of the box before being able to read it, as you
cannot return it to a retailer after that). But you use the software
anyway because you spent all this money on it and you can't return it
now that it is open, and you use it the way you feel is fair to use it
for non-commercial purposes, which may not be in full compliance with
the shrink wrap eula.
Or mabey it is possible that you purchase it then use it not in
compliance with the eula for non- commercial purposes in the privacy of
your own home as a protest to the crappy, underhanded, sneaky means in
which MS tries to force their eula on you, waiting for them to take you
to court. After all, it must be criminal to disagree with MS's eula for
Windows and to protest it infringing on your fair use rights.
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
"Just like MS does."
That is your opinion.
If that how you feel, stay away from Microsoft products.
Organizations that have practices I disagree, do not get my business.
It is not relevant if that choice costs me more $.
I also will not use unethical practices of an organization as justification
for being unethical.
When someone does that, they become what they are complaining about.
A recent addition to this list of mine:
http://www.islandinkjet.com/
I feel they have been less than honest with me and others, so they no longer
get my business.
They also failed to adequately respond when I asked them.
$ savings is not an issue, it is their integrity that I weigh most heavily.
You and anyone else is free to do the same with Microsoft or any other
organization.
That is your opinion.
If that how you feel, stay away from Microsoft products.
Organizations that have practices I disagree, do not get my business.
It is not relevant if that choice costs me more $.
I also will not use unethical practices of an organization as justification
for being unethical.
When someone does that, they become what they are complaining about.
A recent addition to this list of mine:
http://www.islandinkjet.com/
I feel they have been less than honest with me and others, so they no longer
get my business.
They also failed to adequately respond when I asked them.
$ savings is not an issue, it is their integrity that I weigh most heavily.
You and anyone else is free to do the same with Microsoft or any other
organization.
V
Vagabond Software
Jupiter Jones said:"Just like MS does."
That is your opinion.
If that how you feel, stay away from Microsoft products.
Organizations that have practices I disagree, do not get my business.
It is not relevant if that choice costs me more $.
I also will not use unethical practices of an organization as
justification for being unethical.
When someone does that, they become what they are complaining about.
A recent addition to this list of mine:
http://www.islandinkjet.com/
I feel they have been less than honest with me and others, so they no
longer get my business.
They also failed to adequately respond when I asked them.
$ savings is not an issue, it is their integrity that I weigh most
heavily.
You and anyone else is free to do the same with Microsoft or any other
organization.
--
It's funny you metion this because it is exactly that kind of decision
making that drives me to use more and more Microsoft products even though
they may be more expensive.
For example, I was a big WordPerfect user until they wanted to charge me $50
to patch my current Windows 3.1 version of WordPerfect to work on Windows
95, and that wouldn't even be the Windows 95 version or WordPerfect. I went
out and bought Word that night and have never looked back.
I used to be a Netscape Navigator user until they did their bait-n-switch
and started charging for it, then I switched to IE and have never looked
back.
I used to be a paying RealNetworks customer until they began taking
liberties with my privacy, so I switched to Media Player and have never
looked back. Sure, there is some media that is only viewable by RealPlayer,
but I don't need to see or hear anything that bad.
These are just a few examples, but I can't understand why people who feel so
strongly about Microsoft's unethical practices continue to use their
products.
carl
C
capitan
Jupiter said:"Just like MS does."
That is your opinion.
If that how you feel, stay away from Microsoft products.
Organizations that have practices I disagree, do not get my business.
It is not relevant if that choice costs me more $.
I also will not use unethical practices of an organization as justification
for being unethical.
When someone does that, they become what they are complaining about.
A recent addition to this list of mine:
http://www.islandinkjet.com/
I feel they have been less than honest with me and others, so they no longer
get my business.
They also failed to adequately respond when I asked them.
$ savings is not an issue, it is their integrity that I weigh most heavily.
You and anyone else is free to do the same with Microsoft or any other
organization.
Well Juniper, I see it as standing up for my fair use rights, standing
up for what I believe in. Again, how is peaceful protest an unethical
practice?
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
Nothing wrong with a peaceful protest.
But if you agree to something and deliberately go back on your word...
That is not a peaceful protest, that is lying.
Lying is not the option I choose because it makes me worse than them.
Of course, you are free to lower yourself to that level.
But if you agree to something and deliberately go back on your word...
That is not a peaceful protest, that is lying.
Lying is not the option I choose because it makes me worse than them.
Of course, you are free to lower yourself to that level.
A
Alias
Jupiter said:Nothing wrong with a peaceful protest.
But if you agree to something and deliberately go back on your word...
That is not a peaceful protest, that is lying.
Lying is not the option I choose because it makes me worse than them.
Of course, you are free to lower yourself to that level.
Are you up for sainthood yet?
Alias
Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.