TTF fonts

For those of us who've used MS Word over the years, you know that more
recent versions of Word have problems opening .doc files of older
versions. A PITA, IMO. ------ Geez, look at all the caps, I'm not
shouting. LOL

I'm wondering if anyone knows if the same issues exist with using older
TTF fonts/font families.

I have an old Bitstream font disk of families I'd like to install and
use in one or both OSes, and want to avoid the possibility of having to
enter some level of repair operations because of unknown to me
incompatibilities.

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 17.0.8

Ken Springer said on 12/24/2013 12:17 PM:
For those of us who've used MS Word over the years, you know that more
recent versions of Word have problems opening .doc files of older
versions. A PITA, IMO. ------ Geez, look at all the caps, I'm not
shouting. LOL

I'm wondering if anyone knows if the same issues exist with using older
TTF fonts/font families.

I have an old Bitstream font disk of families I'd like to install and
use in one or both OSes, and want to avoid the possibility of having to
enter some level of repair operations because of unknown to me
incompatibilities.

What problems? I put a ton of stuff in .doc files, and have had zero
issues with opening files. And I have 1000's of fonts I've archived for
years, just so I can pick those few I like after each reload. And
those few that never seem to be there in the latest OS upgrade, IMO.

On 12/24/13 10:35 AM, Big Al wrote:

Ken Springer said on 12/24/2013 12:17 PM:
For those of us who've used MS Word over the years, you know that more
recent versions of Word have problems opening .doc files of older
versions. A PITA, IMO. ------ Geez, look at all the caps, I'm not
shouting. LOL

I'm wondering if anyone knows if the same issues exist with using older
TTF fonts/font families.

I have an old Bitstream font disk of families I'd like to install and
use in one or both OSes, and want to avoid the possibility of having to
enter some level of repair operations because of unknown to me
incompatibilities.

What problems? I put a ton of stuff in .doc files, and have had zero
issues with opening files. And I have 1000's of fonts I've archived for
years, just so I can pick those few I like after each reload. And
those few that never seem to be there in the latest OS upgrade, IMO.

Hi, Big All,

Unknown problems with fonts at the moment. LOL As for Word files,
various features that don't get interpreted correctly, or as designed,
in the newer version of the software. Frames used to be a problem at
one time, but it's been too long to be specific. I've not used Word on
a regular basis since Word 2003, and only played with 2007.

I used to just bull ahead and install something to see if it worked, and
sometimes had to fight to get whatever it was back out of the system.
I'm trying to avoid this.

I have thousands of fonts too, most from 3rd parties, some quality and
some pieces of crap. LOL

I gather you've not run into anything other than unavoidable things like
two or more fonts with the same filename. I've found this to be an
issue with fonts that come from different versions of an OS, such as
Win95 and XP. At this point, I'm not planning on adding fonts from
other OS versions, just 3rd party sources.

What I'll do is, after the fonts I want installed are there, I'll create
a System Image, and when things go haywire, the additional fonts will be
there if I have to install the System Image. The fonts will also be in
the regular backup process too.

Clarification of the "both OSes" phrase in the 3rd paragraph. I wrote
the message to be crossposted, but news.aioe.org wouldn't let the
crosspost go through. The message was also going to a Win7 newsgroup.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 17.0.8

"Ken Springer" wrote:

For those of us who've used MS Word over the years, you know that more
recent versions of Word have problems opening .doc files of older
versions. A PITA, IMO. ------ Geez, look at all the caps, I'm not
shouting. LOL

I'm wondering if anyone knows if the same issues exist with using older
TTF fonts/font families.

I have an old Bitstream font disk of families I'd like to install and use
in one or both OSes, and want to avoid the possibility of having to enter
some level of repair operations because of unknown to me
incompatibilities.

I've got to echo the comment from Big Al: what problems?

I've used every version of WinWord that's come out, with TrueType fonts from
"the usual suspects" - Microsoft, Bitstream, Monotype, Corel, SoftCraft, and
others (including a few el-cheapo knockoffs). I also use a couple of
TrueType fonts that I personally built from scratch.

Between my own Windows systems and the ones I use at the office I run a
mixture of Office 2007, 2010, and 2013. I've got WinWord files that use a
variety of odd and old TrueType fonts, dating back into the 1990s that I
occasionally need to pull up, and I have yet to encounter problems that have
any suggestion of being related to the TrueType fonts. Formatting problems,
yes...but those are generally documented as resulting from feature changes
in Word.

If you've encountered font problems, are you certain that the problem isn't
caused by errors in the TrueType font file programming that might not have
been noticed in the version of Word and/or the operating system when the
font was released? Users certainly see this problem with products like
device drivers, which can get away with violating the device driver API
specs on one version of Windows but which fail on the next version because
of better design in the driver interface implemented in Windows.

Two disclosures: over the years I've collected enough high-quality TT fonts
from brand-name foundries that I seldom need to use the old el-cheapo ones,
and the vast majority of my environments use PostScript printers (including
at home). Either of these could be significant in comparing my experience
with yours.

Joe

Ken Springer said on 12/24/2013 1:06 PM:
On 12/24/13 10:35 AM, Big Al wrote:

Ken Springer said on 12/24/2013 12:17 PM:
For those of us who've used MS Word over the years, you know that more
recent versions of Word have problems opening .doc files of older
versions. A PITA, IMO. ------ Geez, look at all the caps, I'm not
shouting. LOL

I'm wondering if anyone knows if the same issues exist with using older
TTF fonts/font families.

I have an old Bitstream font disk of families I'd like to install and
use in one or both OSes, and want to avoid the possibility of having to
enter some level of repair operations because of unknown to me
incompatibilities.

What problems? I put a ton of stuff in .doc files, and have had zero
issues with opening files. And I have 1000's of fonts I've archived for
years, just so I can pick those few I like after each reload. And
those few that never seem to be there in the latest OS upgrade, IMO.

Hi, Big All,

Unknown problems with fonts at the moment. LOL As for Word files,
various features that don't get interpreted correctly, or as designed,
in the newer version of the software. Frames used to be a problem at
one time, but it's been too long to be specific. I've not used Word on
a regular basis since Word 2003, and only played with 2007.

I used to just bull ahead and install something to see if it worked, and
sometimes had to fight to get whatever it was back out of the system.
I'm trying to avoid this.

I have thousands of fonts too, most from 3rd parties, some quality and
some pieces of crap. LOL

I gather you've not run into anything other than unavoidable things like
two or more fonts with the same filename. I've found this to be an
issue with fonts that come from different versions of an OS, such as
Win95 and XP. At this point, I'm not planning on adding fonts from
other OS versions, just 3rd party sources.

What I'll do is, after the fonts I want installed are there, I'll create
a System Image, and when things go haywire, the additional fonts will be
there if I have to install the System Image. The fonts will also be in
the regular backup process too.

Clarification of the "both OSes" phrase in the 3rd paragraph. I wrote
the message to be crossposted, but news.aioe.org wouldn't let the
crosspost go through. The message was also going to a Win7 newsgroup.


I've stopped migrating word/office and stopped at 2007, only cause
that's the last legal copy I have, and I'm getting away from pirate
software. I use Kingsoft Ofice now, as it's free, and seems to
read/write all word & Excel docs well. Open office did not format as
well, and probably its some of what you see. Not sure. Then too it's
possible that I don't make as complex documents as you do thus not
pushing the envelope, mine work well. It's hard like Joe said to
compare apples and oranges.

On 12/24/13 12:59 PM, Joe Morris wrote:
"Ken Springer" wrote:

For those of us who've used MS Word over the years, you know that more
recent versions of Word have problems opening .doc files of older
versions. A PITA, IMO. ------ Geez, look at all the caps, I'm not
shouting. LOL

I'm wondering if anyone knows if the same issues exist with using older
TTF fonts/font families.

I have an old Bitstream font disk of families I'd like to install and use
in one or both OSes, and want to avoid the possibility of having to enter
some level of repair operations because of unknown to me
incompatibilities.

I've got to echo the comment from Big Al: what problems?

I've used every version of WinWord that's come out, with TrueType fonts from
"the usual suspects" - Microsoft, Bitstream, Monotype, Corel, SoftCraft, and
others (including a few el-cheapo knockoffs). I also use a couple of
TrueType fonts that I personally built from scratch.

Between my own Windows systems and the ones I use at the office I run a
mixture of Office 2007, 2010, and 2013. I've got WinWord files that use a
variety of odd and old TrueType fonts, dating back into the 1990s that I
occasionally need to pull up, and I have yet to encounter problems that have
any suggestion of being related to the TrueType fonts. Formatting problems,
yes...but those are generally documented as resulting from feature changes
in Word.

If you've encountered font problems, are you certain that the problem isn't
caused by errors in the TrueType font file programming that might not have
been noticed in the version of Word and/or the operating system when the
font was released? Users certainly see this problem with products like
device drivers, which can get away with violating the device driver API
specs on one version of Windows but which fail on the next version because
of better design in the driver interface implemented in Windows.

Two disclosures: over the years I've collected enough high-quality TT fonts
from brand-name foundries that I seldom need to use the old el-cheapo ones,
and the vast majority of my environments use PostScript printers (including
at home). Either of these could be significant in comparing my experience
with yours.

We're going down the wrong road here, Joe. No problems yet, I haven't
installed any of the old fonts I have.

I posted the question to see if anyone has encountered problems, so that
I can hopefully avoid them. :-)

In alt.windows7.general, using a font management program was suggested,
and I like that idea. I'm going to check it out.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 17.0.8

On 12/24/13 2:38 PM, Big Al wrote:

Ken Springer said on 12/24/2013 1:06 PM:
On 12/24/13 10:35 AM, Big Al wrote:

Ken Springer said on 12/24/2013 12:17 PM:
For those of us who've used MS Word over the years, you know that more
recent versions of Word have problems opening .doc files of older
versions. A PITA, IMO. ------ Geez, look at all the caps, I'm not
shouting. LOL

I'm wondering if anyone knows if the same issues exist with using older
TTF fonts/font families.

I have an old Bitstream font disk of families I'd like to install and
use in one or both OSes, and want to avoid the possibility of having to
enter some level of repair operations because of unknown to me
incompatibilities.

What problems? I put a ton of stuff in .doc files, and have had zero
issues with opening files. And I have 1000's of fonts I've archived for
years, just so I can pick those few I like after each reload. And
those few that never seem to be there in the latest OS upgrade, IMO.

Hi, Big All,

Unknown problems with fonts at the moment. LOL As for Word files,
various features that don't get interpreted correctly, or as designed,
in the newer version of the software. Frames used to be a problem at
one time, but it's been too long to be specific. I've not used Word on
a regular basis since Word 2003, and only played with 2007.

I used to just bull ahead and install something to see if it worked, and
sometimes had to fight to get whatever it was back out of the system.
I'm trying to avoid this.

I have thousands of fonts too, most from 3rd parties, some quality and
some pieces of crap. LOL

I gather you've not run into anything other than unavoidable things like
two or more fonts with the same filename. I've found this to be an
issue with fonts that come from different versions of an OS, such as
Win95 and XP. At this point, I'm not planning on adding fonts from
other OS versions, just 3rd party sources.

What I'll do is, after the fonts I want installed are there, I'll create
a System Image, and when things go haywire, the additional fonts will be
there if I have to install the System Image. The fonts will also be in
the regular backup process too.

Clarification of the "both OSes" phrase in the 3rd paragraph. I wrote
the message to be crossposted, but news.aioe.org wouldn't let the
crosspost go through. The message was also going to a Win7 newsgroup.


I've stopped migrating word/office and stopped at 2007, only cause
that's the last legal copy I have, and I'm getting away from pirate
software. I use Kingsoft Ofice now, as it's free, and seems to
read/write all word & Excel docs well. Open office did not format as
well, and probably its some of what you see. Not sure. Then too it's
possible that I don't make as complex documents as you do thus not
pushing the envelope, mine work well. It's hard like Joe said to
compare apples and oranges.

I will confess to pirate software, but what I did was download very old,
unhacked, copies of XP. Then used it to install on computers that had a
valid Product ID sticker so I could salvage the computer for the owner
or donate it to a local social agency. Using pirated software in this
manner, namely the Product ID label/sticker, doesn't bother me. OTOH,
those that hack the program, or generate false/fake product ID numbers,
get no respect for me. Common thieves, IMO.

I liked using Kingsoft Office until I discovered you can't sort data in
a table. That's a feature I like. You have to export to a spreadsheet,
sort, then import back into Kingsoft. I'm now trying Textmaker, part of
SoftMaker Office 2012, http://www.softmaker.com/english/ofwtm_en.htm.
It does sort tables, but I haven't tested it yet.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 17.0.8

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:06:29 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

I will confess to pirate software, but what I did was download very old,
unhacked, copies of XP. Then used it to install on computers that had a
valid Product ID sticker so I could salvage the computer for the owner
or donate it to a local social agency. Using pirated software in this
manner, namely the Product ID label/sticker, doesn't bother me.

Do you run afoul of the OS license when you donate a system that way?

OTOH,
those that hack the program, or generate false/fake product ID numbers,
get no respect for me. Common thieves, IMO.

s/for/from

On 12/25/13 11:39 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:06:29 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

I will confess to pirate software, but what I did was download very old,
unhacked, copies of XP. Then used it to install on computers that had a
valid Product ID sticker so I could salvage the computer for the owner
or donate it to a local social agency. Using pirated software in this
manner, namely the Product ID label/sticker, doesn't bother me.

Do you run afoul of the OS license when you donate a system that way?

It's possible, but I don't worry about it, or lose any sleep over it.
MS has been paid once for the license, so there's no money lost at their
end. The people who end up with the computers can't afford a computer,
so MS wouldn't be making a sale to them anyway. Again no money lost.
If for some reason, MS made an issue, there's more negative for MS than
positive. I could have put Linux on them, but while a possibly viable
option (hardware issues, which I did run into), no one that would likely
be helping the end recipient is likely to have even heard of Linux. And
it would be a negative for MS. If MS were to make an issue, their
financial cost would likely be more than anything they would recoup.

Maybe... 15 computers over 3+ years? All are XP, which MS doesn't want
anyone to use any longer. Forcing these folks out of XP gains MS
nothing. Refer back to the user can't afford a computer. We aren't
talking something massive like Chinese hacking.

The computers always were complete systems, including a monitor,
keyboard, mouse, printer, and anything else like a scanner I happened to
have at the time. And I included free and/or open source software like
Libre Office, Irfanview, etc. so it was more than just a running doorstop.

IIRC, the only time(s) (2, maybe 3 times) I used a pirated copy was when
my retail copy would not accept the product ID. The copy if XP I used
was pre SP1.

And they always activated.

As I said, no sticker, no install. So, I sleep just fine.

Would I use a hacked/cracked copy of anything? Nope. Would I use a
demo that was legal for X amount of time? Nope.

I did it for the fun and enjoyment of installing and tweaking an OS
install. And others, like single parent families on welfare, food
stamps, etc., got a benefit by having something required my contemporary
society needed for job hunting, education, etc.

Anyone who would complain about my situation cares more about legal
technicalities than a fellow human being. If they care that much, they
could just buy a system now and again and donate it. And, acknowledge
they are related to Ebeneezer Scrooge.

those that hack the program, or generate false/fake product ID numbers,
get no respect for me. Common thieves, IMO.

s/for/from

Yep, from.

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 17.0.8

On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 01:47:16 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 12/25/13 11:39 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:06:29 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

I will confess to pirate software, but what I did was download very old,
unhacked, copies of XP. Then used it to install on computers that had a
valid Product ID sticker so I could salvage the computer for the owner
or donate it to a local social agency. Using pirated software in this
manner, namely the Product ID label/sticker, doesn't bother me.

Do you run afoul of the OS license when you donate a system that way?

It's possible, but I don't worry about it, or lose any sleep over it.

I only mentioned it because you said you had no respect for common thieves,
and then...this. It seems ironic. :-)

MS has been paid once for the license, so there's no money lost at their
end. The people who end up with the computers can't afford a computer,
so MS wouldn't be making a sale to them anyway. Again no money lost.

I'm guessing that Microsoft, and any business in their shoes, would like to
reserve that decision for themselves. It's very possible that these people
would never buy Windows, but by giving them a free copy you've effectively
shut the door, and that might be something that would bother MS or cause a
person to think twice.

Maybe... 15 computers over 3+ years? All are XP, which MS doesn't want
anyone to use any longer. Forcing these folks out of XP gains MS
nothing. Refer back to the user can't afford a computer. We aren't
talking something massive like Chinese hacking.

Sounds like an attempt at justification, but it really doesn't change
anything, does it?

The computers always were complete systems, including a monitor,
keyboard, mouse, printer, and anything else like a scanner I happened to
have at the time. And I included free and/or open source software like
Libre Office, Irfanview, etc. so it was more than just a running doorstop.

Oops, more of the same. snip

Personally, I've always found the EULA language to be somewhat confusing and
overly complicated, but I *think* what you're doing might be wrong, even
though you have the best intentions.

On 12/26/13 11:18 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 01:47:16 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 12/25/13 11:39 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:06:29 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

I will confess to pirate software, but what I did was download very old,
unhacked, copies of XP. Then used it to install on computers that had a
valid Product ID sticker so I could salvage the computer for the owner
or donate it to a local social agency. Using pirated software in this
manner, namely the Product ID label/sticker, doesn't bother me.

Do you run afoul of the OS license when you donate a system that way?

It's possible, but I don't worry about it, or lose any sleep over it.

I only mentioned it because you said you had no respect for common thieves,
and then...this. It seems ironic. :-)

MS has been paid once for the license, so there's no money lost at their
end. The people who end up with the computers can't afford a computer,
so MS wouldn't be making a sale to them anyway. Again no money lost.

I'm guessing that Microsoft, and any business in their shoes, would like to
reserve that decision for themselves. It's very possible that these people
would never buy Windows, but by giving them a free copy you've effectively
shut the door, and that might be something that would bother MS or cause a
person to think twice.

Maybe... 15 computers over 3+ years? All are XP, which MS doesn't want
anyone to use any longer. Forcing these folks out of XP gains MS
nothing. Refer back to the user can't afford a computer. We aren't
talking something massive like Chinese hacking.

Sounds like an attempt at justification, but it really doesn't change
anything, does it?

The computers always were complete systems, including a monitor,
keyboard, mouse, printer, and anything else like a scanner I happened to
have at the time. And I included free and/or open source software like
Libre Office, Irfanview, etc. so it was more than just a running doorstop.

Oops, more of the same. snip

Personally, I've always found the EULA language to be somewhat confusing and
overly complicated, but I *think* what you're doing might be wrong, even
though you have the best intentions.

I've read lots of posts speculating EULA's were not legal or
enforceable. I dunno.

Also, the last time I read a EULA, I think it was an XP EULA, it
specified that when the original purchaser sold the computer, the OS
license had to go with the computer. After that, it didn't have to. So
the 2nd owner should remove the sticker and the OS when selling the
hardware, IMO. But do they????? Who knows.

But, how many people even read them, and as you noted, they are somewhat
confusing.

And as just posted in alt.windows7.general, the discussion we're having
on this has nothing to do the TTF question.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 17.0.8

On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 11:56:21 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:


Personally, I've always found the EULA language to be somewhat confusing and
overly complicated, but I *think* what you're doing might be wrong, even
though you have the best intentions.

I've read lots of posts speculating EULA's were not legal or
enforceable. I dunno.


I dunno either. And as far as I know, it's never been tested in
court.

But if it ever came to that, Microsoft can probably afford better
lawyers than I can. I wouldn't want to be their adversary in court.

I will confess to pirate software, but what I did was download very old,
unhacked, copies of XP. Then used it to install on computers that had a
valid Product ID sticker so I could salvage the computer for the owner
or donate it to a local social agency.

If what you meant by "a valid product ID sticker" is that it has its own
COA (certificate of authenticity) and product number, I don't think it's
pirated.

From what I can see is that you are using a different installation
media with the *same* license comes with the computer.

But I am not a lawyer.



On 12/25/2013 12:06, Ken Springer wrote:
On 12/24/13 2:38 PM, Big Al wrote:

Ken Springer said on 12/24/2013 1:06 PM:
On 12/24/13 10:35 AM, Big Al wrote:

Ken Springer said on 12/24/2013 12:17 PM:
For those of us who've used MS Word over the years, you know that more
recent versions of Word have problems opening .doc files of older
versions. A PITA, IMO. ------ Geez, look at all the caps, I'm not
shouting. LOL

I'm wondering if anyone knows if the same issues exist with using
older
TTF fonts/font families.

I have an old Bitstream font disk of families I'd like to install and
use in one or both OSes, and want to avoid the possibility of
having to
enter some level of repair operations because of unknown to me
incompatibilities.

What problems? I put a ton of stuff in .doc files, and have had zero
issues with opening files. And I have 1000's of fonts I've archived
for
years, just so I can pick those few I like after each reload. And
those few that never seem to be there in the latest OS upgrade, IMO.

Hi, Big All,

Unknown problems with fonts at the moment. LOL As for Word files,
various features that don't get interpreted correctly, or as designed,
in the newer version of the software. Frames used to be a problem at
one time, but it's been too long to be specific. I've not used Word on
a regular basis since Word 2003, and only played with 2007.

I used to just bull ahead and install something to see if it worked, and
sometimes had to fight to get whatever it was back out of the system.
I'm trying to avoid this.

I have thousands of fonts too, most from 3rd parties, some quality and
some pieces of crap. LOL

I gather you've not run into anything other than unavoidable things like
two or more fonts with the same filename. I've found this to be an
issue with fonts that come from different versions of an OS, such as
Win95 and XP. At this point, I'm not planning on adding fonts from
other OS versions, just 3rd party sources.

What I'll do is, after the fonts I want installed are there, I'll create
a System Image, and when things go haywire, the additional fonts will be
there if I have to install the System Image. The fonts will also be in
the regular backup process too.

Clarification of the "both OSes" phrase in the 3rd paragraph. I wrote
the message to be crossposted, but news.aioe.org wouldn't let the
crosspost go through. The message was also going to a Win7 newsgroup.


I've stopped migrating word/office and stopped at 2007, only cause
that's the last legal copy I have, and I'm getting away from pirate
software. I use Kingsoft Ofice now, as it's free, and seems to
read/write all word & Excel docs well. Open office did not format as
well, and probably its some of what you see. Not sure. Then too it's
possible that I don't make as complex documents as you do thus not
pushing the envelope, mine work well. It's hard like Joe said to
compare apples and oranges.

I will confess to pirate software, but what I did was download very old,
unhacked, copies of XP. Then used it to install on computers that had a
valid Product ID sticker so I could salvage the computer for the owner
or donate it to a local social agency. Using pirated software in this
manner, namely the Product ID label/sticker, doesn't bother me. OTOH,
those that hack the program, or generate false/fake product ID numbers,
get no respect for me. Common thieves, IMO.

I liked using Kingsoft Office until I discovered you can't sort data in
a table. That's a feature I like. You have to export to a spreadsheet,
sort, then import back into Kingsoft. I'm now trying Textmaker, part of
SoftMaker Office 2012, http://www.softmaker.com/english/ofwtm_en.htm. It
does sort tables, but I haven't tested it yet.

Ken Springer wrote, On 12/26/2013 1:56 PM:
On 12/26/13 11:18 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 01:47:16 -0700, Ken Springer

wrote:

On 12/25/13 11:39 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 21:06:29 -0700, Ken Springer

wrote:

I will confess to pirate software, but what I did was download very
old,
unhacked, copies of XP. Then used it to install on computers that
had a
valid Product ID sticker so I could salvage the computer for the owner
or donate it to a local social agency. Using pirated software in this
manner, namely the Product ID label/sticker, doesn't bother me.

Do you run afoul of the OS license when you donate a system that way?

It's possible, but I don't worry about it, or lose any sleep over it.

I only mentioned it because you said you had no respect for common
thieves,
and then...this. It seems ironic. :-)

MS has been paid once for the license, so there's no money lost at their
end. The people who end up with the computers can't afford a computer,
so MS wouldn't be making a sale to them anyway. Again no money lost.

I'm guessing that Microsoft, and any business in their shoes, would
like to
reserve that decision for themselves. It's very possible that these
people
would never buy Windows, but by giving them a free copy you've
effectively
shut the door, and that might be something that would bother MS or
cause a
person to think twice.

Maybe... 15 computers over 3+ years? All are XP, which MS doesn't want
anyone to use any longer. Forcing these folks out of XP gains MS
nothing. Refer back to the user can't afford a computer. We aren't
talking something massive like Chinese hacking.

Sounds like an attempt at justification, but it really doesn't change
anything, does it?

The computers always were complete systems, including a monitor,
keyboard, mouse, printer, and anything else like a scanner I happened to
have at the time. And I included free and/or open source software like
Libre Office, Irfanview, etc. so it was more than just a running
doorstop.

Oops, more of the same. snip

Personally, I've always found the EULA language to be somewhat
confusing and
overly complicated, but I *think* what you're doing might be wrong, even
though you have the best intentions.

I've read lots of posts speculating EULA's were not legal or
enforceable. I dunno.

Also, the last time I read a EULA, I think it was an XP EULA, it
specified that when the original purchaser sold the computer, the OS
license had to go with the computer. After that, it didn't have to. So
the 2nd owner should remove the sticker and the OS when selling the
hardware, IMO. But do they????? Who knows.

But, how many people even read them, and as you noted, they are somewhat
confusing.

And as just posted in alt.windows7.general, the discussion we're having
on this has nothing to do the TTF question.



EULA's can be confusing. Unless those posts speculating about the
legality or enforceability of a EULA are from the source (program, o/s
owner/creator) then in most forms unless quoted it would still be
speculation.

Just an fyi...during the XP support era (mainstream) iso's or recovery
cd's were available from MSFT or the OEM manufacturer for a nominal fee
to users and system builders in most cases via phone call. In fact,
regional MSFT offices were capable upon request of providing o/s (and
key) for hardware when the end user of the rebuilt hardware was a
charitable organization but the conditions became tighter with the
advent of Win7 where the end user was the sole recipient. For Vista and
Win7 the iso's (without key) were available from MSFT's digital distributor.

While use of pirated o/s' would appear (and most likely) to be
interpreted as violation of the EULA possibly the more prominent
violation would be distribution of MSFT property (the o/s license is for
use of property not ownership)

There are some organizations and system builders (usually in major
metropolitan areas) that can act as intermediary for legal distribution
of old hardware (system or components with an o/s legal license) to
other charitable and social organizations ensuring compliance for all
involved.

As we've all learned and discussed for years...technically feasible and
legality are two entirely different things.

I do commend anyone that has social and charitable organizations in mind
when considering them as the recipient of used hardware and software.

--
...winston
msft mvp consumer apps

xfile wrote:
I will confess to pirate software, but what I did was download very old,
unhacked, copies of XP. Then used it to install on computers that had a
valid Product ID sticker so I could salvage the computer for the owner
or donate it to a local social agency.

If what you meant by "a valid product ID sticker" is that it has its own
COA (certificate of authenticity) and product number, I don't think it's
pirated.

From what I can see is that you are using a different installation
media with the *same* license comes with the computer.

But I am not a lawyer.


As noted previously, EULA is one form of compliance, distribution is
another.
- i.e. the source of the license may be valid or invalid, distribution
of either could be legal or illegal.

Additionally, the presence of a COA and product key doesn't necessarily
permit a legfal transfer of the product (license and/or hardware).
Transfer rights are traditionally detailed in the EULA...though if one
never looks, ignorance isn't necessarily a defend-able strategy.

Correct, some are lawyers, some are not.



--
....winston
msft mvp consumer apps