Pirated XP

As I have suggested before thieves steal because that is what they do.
Price is largely irrelevant.
The discounts available help support that point.
All the discounts and price breaks will not change a thieves attitude.

Cost is nothing more than a feeble excuse to justify a thieves activity.
As long as some accept and encourage that, the thieves can come to believe
they are justified and stretch the envelope further.
After all theft is being condoned for software, why stop there.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar/


"Leythos" wrote in message
...
Educational types, and Students, already get a 80+% discount on
software. My oldest son just purchased DreamWeaver 2004 with everything
they make for $200, something that normally cost way more than $1500. I
know that the students can purchase Windows XP Prof and Office 2003 for
$75 at most campus locations (a bundle that includes both of those and
more software).

As I've already posted, if you just look around you can get MS software
directly from MS, completely legit, for next to no cost - as long as you
follow the rules.

--
--

(Remove 999 to reply to me)

"Cymbal Man Freq." Don't g wrote:


45% of the local schoolworkers union get below poverty wages and have been
working without a contract for 6 months. They appear ready to go on strike.


School workers can get Microsoft software at Educational prices, with
very substantial reductions from regular retail.


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."

In my local they wanted to rob a bank. There was a barbershop in the
same minimall.

They cut a hole in the roof of the barbershop, climbed down, then
chipped a hole to the bank and got all the money from the autotellers.
Sort of like that old Clint Eastwood movie where they blasted the wall



Are you referring to Piscataway?

Sounds like "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot" to me.

Or Starsky and Hutch?

--
All the Best,
Kelly (MS-MVP)

Troubleshooting Windows XP
http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com


"Al Smith" wrote in message
...
In my local they wanted to rob a bank. There was a barbershop in the
same minimall.

They cut a hole in the roof of the barbershop, climbed down, then
chipped a hole to the bank and got all the money from the autotellers.
Sort of like that old Clint Eastwood movie where they blasted the wall



Are you referring to Piscataway?

Sounds like "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot" to me.

Now Kelly, any other MVP's that haven't given their two cents yet in this
thread. :

"Kelly" wrote in message
...
: Or Starsky and Hutch?
:
: --
: All the Best,
: Kelly (MS-MVP)
:
: Troubleshooting Windows XP
: http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com
:
:
: "Al Smith" wrote in message
: ...
: In my local they wanted to rob a bank. There was a barbershop in the
: same minimall.
:
: They cut a hole in the roof of the barbershop, climbed down, then
: chipped a hole to the bank and got all the money from the autotellers.
: Sort of like that old Clint Eastwood movie where they blasted the wall
:
:
:
: Are you referring to Piscataway?
:
: Sounds like "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot" to me.
:
:

"Leythos" wrote:

In article ,
says...
Also, due to the fact
that I originally used a pirated copy of Win95 and Office 97 which lead to
my success with my businesses, I now pay for my software. Had I just [snipped
the personal crap] used these pirated versions, I would have never been in a
position to buy software.

As I mentioned before, you didn't HAVE to use the Pirated copy to become
successful, you made the decision to use it. You could have found
alternatives to pirated software - even Linux was viable around the time
of Win 95 and Office 97. There were also things such as electronic type-
writers, library's with computers and software, and paid means that
didn't cost full retail price, if you had cared to look.

Saying that you used a pirated OS/Apps until you could afford to buy
legal copies, and that you could not have been successful without the
pirated copies is just a lame excuse for unethical actions - it's quite
telling about your character. If you had just said, "I used pirated
software in the early days, knowing it was wrong, but now I try and
maintain legal installs", without trying to make it sound that it was
justified, we might have said nothing about it.

--
--

(Remove 999 to reply to me)

There is no mistake. Microsoft wants you to steal there software. The day
they make it impossible to steal is the day that the more "elite" users move
on to a new operating system. You are all pathetic with your ideas of
righteousness

While I do agree that pirating software of any kind is not a good thing, and
obviously punishable by law, I hear entirely too much talk on these forums
of it being "immoral." Give me a break. It's software. If you want to
fight for righteousness, write your congressman and urge him to take steps
against genocide in Darfur.

Bill Gates and Co. don't need your help to stay rich.

--LB

"Anthony" wrote in message
...


"Leythos" wrote:

In article ,
says...
Also, due to the fact
that I originally used a pirated copy of Win95 and Office 97 which
lead to
my success with my businesses, I now pay for my software. Had I just
[snipped
the personal crap] used these pirated versions, I would have never
been in a
position to buy software.

As I mentioned before, you didn't HAVE to use the Pirated copy to become
successful, you made the decision to use it. You could have found
alternatives to pirated software - even Linux was viable around the time
of Win 95 and Office 97. There were also things such as electronic type-
writers, library's with computers and software, and paid means that
didn't cost full retail price, if you had cared to look.

Saying that you used a pirated OS/Apps until you could afford to buy
legal copies, and that you could not have been successful without the
pirated copies is just a lame excuse for unethical actions - it's quite
telling about your character. If you had just said, "I used pirated
software in the early days, knowing it was wrong, but now I try and
maintain legal installs", without trying to make it sound that it was
justified, we might have said nothing about it.

--
--

(Remove 999 to reply to me)

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:53:02 -0800, "Anthony"
wrote:



"Leythos" wrote:

In article ,
says...
Also, due to the fact
that I originally used a pirated copy of Win95 and Office 97 which lead to
my success with my businesses, I now pay for my software. Had I just [snipped
the personal crap] used these pirated versions, I would have never been in a
position to buy software.

As I mentioned before, you didn't HAVE to use the Pirated copy to become
successful, you made the decision to use it. You could have found
alternatives to pirated software - even Linux was viable around the time
of Win 95 and Office 97. There were also things such as electronic type-
writers, library's with computers and software, and paid means that
didn't cost full retail price, if you had cared to look.

Saying that you used a pirated OS/Apps until you could afford to buy
legal copies, and that you could not have been successful without the
pirated copies is just a lame excuse for unethical actions - it's quite
telling about your character. If you had just said, "I used pirated
software in the early days, knowing it was wrong, but now I try and
maintain legal installs", without trying to make it sound that it was
justified, we might have said nothing about it.


Open Office and Abiword are both open source (free and you can
download the source code, if not the ability to read the source code,
like Firefox) and are available for Windows, Linux, Mac, et alia.

I don't know if they are as good as the Microsoft products but most
people who use MS Office don't use or even know about many if not most
of the features. So I'm sure many if not most of the people who use MS
Office could get just as much use out of these programs. I should
think the biggest problem would be support. Not that Microsoft gives
very good support for its products but it's a lot easier to find free
or pay support for the most used program.

There is no mistake. Microsoft wants you to steal there software. The day
they make it impossible to steal is the day that the more "elite" users move
on to a new operating system. You are all pathetic with your ideas of
righteousness

It is amazing how many self-righteous hypocrites there are in this
group, isn't it? All these idiots who scream "thief, thief" don't
even know what theft means. Making a copy of software isn't
stealing, since nothing is taken away from the source, and no one
is deprived of anything by the act. It is an infringement of the
terms in the EULA, nothing more. Many, including myself, would
argue that the Windows EULA isn't even a legal contract.

And I ask you, how many of those who criticize the use of
duplicated software have listened to downloaded mp3s of popular
songs, or watched DVD copies of movies, or played copies of games?
Yeah, that's right, all of them. Hypocrites.

Dude, you completely missed my point. I don't argue that it's not wrong,
I'm just saying when people on these NGs call it "immoral" or "unethical,"
they're stepping over a line. I know I'm arguing semantics here, but to
pretend like installing an illegal copy of Windows XP is tantamount to
murder or rape (or anything else that actually *could* be argued is immoral)
is just pure myopia.

If you want to argue that it's illegal, I ain't arguing. If you want to
argue that it's unethical, then I have a bone to pick. I'm just saying.

--LB


"Leythos" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
While I do agree that pirating software of any kind is not a good thing,
and
obviously punishable by law, I hear entirely too much talk on these
forums
of it being "immoral." Give me a break. It's software. If you want to
fight for righteousness,

I take it that you don't really work for a living, that you've never
sold a product that you owned or made yourself.

Wait till you start spreading that BS thinner and applying it to other
things - software is a work, so is a car, so is a house, so is a watch
or a ring. There is no real difference in stealing from a big company
than a little company.

--
--

(Remove 999 to reply to me)

I suppose the jist of the conversation is indeed that ethics are subjective.
And if you think that using a copy of a piece of software is unethical, then
no amount of arguing the point on my part is going to change your mind (not
that that's really the point, here). I liked the way you put it, that "use
may not constitute theft." I happen to agree with you on that point, that
use does, in fact, constitute theft; I just feel that there are many, many
(MANY) worse things than theft from Microsoft. There was another thread
concerning licensing in windowsxp.general not too long ago that just got way
out of hand, and I get kind of sick of self-righteous MVPs (not to
generalize or anything) talking about morality in software where it pertains
to Microsoft.

I guess the other thing, for me, anyway, is that I have a great deal of
trouble feeling sorry for Microsoft losing out on their profits. Those
profits will go towards developing new versions of Windows with the implied
goal of enlarging their already 95% market share. If I was talking about
one man's life's work, some piece of software that he had labored over for
years, then I would likely feel differently, but the money we're talking
about goes toward pushing Microsoft's stock price higher and fattening the
pocketbooks of their shareholders.

Now, of course, regardless of how *I* feel about it, you're right that
stealing is stealing, if you choose to interpret it that way. But I just
can't view the world through a black and white filter -- to me, context is
everything.

--LB

ps -- "separation of church and software" cracked me up.

"Leythos" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...
Dude, you completely missed my point. I don't argue that it's not
wrong,
I'm just saying when people on these NGs call it "immoral" or
"unethical,"
they're stepping over a line. I know I'm arguing semantics here, but to
pretend like installing an illegal copy of Windows XP is tantamount to
murder or rape (or anything else that actually *could* be argued is
immoral)
is just pure myopia.

If you want to argue that it's illegal, I ain't arguing. If you want to
argue that it's unethical, then I have a bone to pick. I'm just saying.

Unethical is exactly what it is, but I don't put Unethical and
rape/murder in the same light. Ethics are a personal thing based on
norms surrounding your area/culture. What might be ethical for you could
easily be unethical for many others. Now, moral, that's got no place in
a discussion like this - I think there are laws about separation of
Church and Software.

If I believe that use of an unlicensed copy of any software that
requires a license is Unethical, and it fits the norm for my cultural
surroundings, then it's unethical. While use may not constitute theft in
every country, that doesn't make it ethical to everyone either.

Sure, there are many people with lowered ethical standards than others,
but it's subjective and even funnier to watch someone steal from one of
the people that uses unlicensed software and them complain about having
something stolen from them.

The simple test is something like this - does the software being used
against the license rules pay for (in any manner) the designers
use/promotion/wants/needs,etc... If the designers make money off of the
software and use that money for any reason, then using an unlicensed
copy of the software would be unethical to most people, and stealing to
many of us.

Try looking at it from the point of a developer (and not as MS products)
that markets his own software - just once - take a look at it from the
side of someone that invests their life into making a product, expecting
to realize some gain for it, and having it used against the licensing
for free with no recourse to the designer.


--
--

(Remove 999 to reply to me)

"Joel Rubin" wrote in message
ink.net...
| On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 10:53:02 -0800, "Anthony"
| wrote:
|
|
|
| "Leythos" wrote:
|
| In article ,
| says...
| Also, due to the fact
| that I originally used a pirated copy of Win95 and Office 97 which
lead to
| my success with my businesses, I now pay for my software. Had I just
[snipped
| the personal crap] used these pirated versions, I would have never
been in a
| position to buy software.
|
| As I mentioned before, you didn't HAVE to use the Pirated copy to
become
| successful, you made the decision to use it. You could have found
| alternatives to pirated software - even Linux was viable around the
time
| of Win 95 and Office 97. There were also things such as electronic
type-
| writers, library's with computers and software, and paid means that
| didn't cost full retail price, if you had cared to look.
|
| Saying that you used a pirated OS/Apps until you could afford to buy
| legal copies, and that you could not have been successful without the
| pirated copies is just a lame excuse for unethical actions - it's quite
| telling about your character. If you had just said, "I used pirated
| software in the early days, knowing it was wrong, but now I try and
| maintain legal installs", without trying to make it sound that it was
| justified, we might have said nothing about it.
|
|
| Open Office and Abiword are both open source (free and you can
| download the source code, if not the ability to read the source code,
| like Firefox) and are available for Windows, Linux, Mac, et alia.

These were available back in 97? Erm, don't think so.
|
| I don't know if they are as good as the Microsoft products

They aren't

| but most
| people who use MS Office don't use or even know about many if not most
| of the features.

Speak for yourself.

| So I'm sure many if not most of the people who use MS
| Office could get just as much use out of these programs.

Sounds like you are *not* sure but guessing and neither program was
available during the time under discussion.

| I should
| think the biggest problem would be support. Not that Microsoft gives
| very good support for its products but it's a lot easier to find free
| or pay support for the most used program.

The biggest problem is the cost of Microsoft products, not their quality.
--
Alias

Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.

"Leythos" wrote in message
...
| In article ,
| says...
| While I do agree that pirating software of any kind is not a good thing,
and
| obviously punishable by law, I hear entirely too much talk on these
forums
| of it being "immoral." Give me a break. It's software. If you want to
| fight for righteousness,
|
| I take it that you don't really work for a living, that you've never
| sold a product that you owned or made yourself.
|
| Wait till you start spreading that BS thinner and applying it to other
| things - software is a work, so is a car,

More than one person can use the same car and you own it, not have a licence
to use it.

| so is a house,

See above.

| so is a watch
| or a ring.

See above, all are absurd comparisons. When we can really buy the software
and use it as we see fit, your comparisons are valid.

| There is no real difference in stealing from a big company
| than a little company.
|
| --
| --
|

Really? How about BUYING the product and using it on all of one's computers.
How is that stealing, using your examples above? Requiring licenses is
stealing and a complete bait and switch, aka a SCAM.
--
Alias

Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.

Alias, you are needlessly confrontational, but you have a good point --
buying one copy of the OS and installing it on all five of my hypothetical
computers at home is doing Microsoft no harm whatsoever.

Wish I'd thought of that in my previous posts with Leythos...

--LB

ps - bait and switch? scam? melodrama, my friend... melodrama.

"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Leythos" wrote in message
...
| In article ,
| says...
| While I do agree that pirating software of any kind is not a good
thing,
and
| obviously punishable by law, I hear entirely too much talk on these
forums
| of it being "immoral." Give me a break. It's software. If you want
to
| fight for righteousness,
|
| I take it that you don't really work for a living, that you've never
| sold a product that you owned or made yourself.
|
| Wait till you start spreading that BS thinner and applying it to other
| things - software is a work, so is a car,

More than one person can use the same car and you own it, not have a
licence
to use it.

| so is a house,

See above.

| so is a watch
| or a ring.

See above, all are absurd comparisons. When we can really buy the software
and use it as we see fit, your comparisons are valid.

| There is no real difference in stealing from a big company
| than a little company.
|
| --
| --
|

Really? How about BUYING the product and using it on all of one's
computers.
How is that stealing, using your examples above? Requiring licenses is
stealing and a complete bait and switch, aka a SCAM.
--
Alias

Use the Reply to Sender feature of your news reader program to email me.
Utiliza Responder al Remitente para mandarme un mail.