Why Only On One PC?

R. McCarty wrote:

People are just ticked that they can't buy a single copy and use it
on every PC they own, like in previous versions.

Microsoft just uses WPA/DRM to limit it's use to a single computer.
After years of a "Free Ride", many folks can't get over the end of
that. I still encounter people who won't buy/use any software that
uses "Activation".

And I think the major point of the activation system was to bring the
point home to people. Ten years ago the house with more than one
computer was a rarity. Now the house with less than two or three is
almost as rare. And people got the idea that their one copy was
available to install on every machine in sight, without realising it
wasn't. Hence WPA to bring them up short, in the belief that *most*
people are honest and will not tell deliberate lies, without any serious
inconvenience to those making legitimate changes

Which is not to say that I entirely agree with the licensing policy.
There ought to be a means for families to get multiple licences at a far
bigger discount than the derisory one offered, and without having to do
it by applying that to a purchase of a new box. This would recognise
the saving on manufacture, distribution and third party markups
(remembering that the retailers were not involved in the previous
freeloading, and got nothing out), and most importantly that the
additional licenses would carry no additional support. This I think
would make better commercial sense, too, and that is a view I have
pressed at top level - but I am not holding my breath.

--
Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
Bournemouth, U.K. (remove the D8 bit)

On 7/20/2004 7:44 PM, wrote:
Hi. Just wondering why doesn't Microsoft let you install
Windows XP and Office 2003 on two PC's? I think they
should at least let you install them on two PC's. They
let you do it for one desktop on one laptop right?
Thanks, Craig.

WRONG! Windows has been one licence *PER SYSTEM* since Windows 3.1. Office
is one desktop/laptop, unless it's OEM or STE XP.

The manufacturer of a product has a right to control the usage of
their product.
If you do not like the terms, buy from someone else.
Your comparison with bananas is ludicrous.

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


"Alias" wrote in message
...
Somehow, I don't think that every product carries rules of usage
with them.
For example, a banana. Chiquita Banana could care less if two people
eat it,
no one eats it or you use it as a dildo and then smoke the peels.
After all
you *did* pay for the product and it is therefore *yours*.
Unfortunately,
the rules of usage for an MS OS doesn't stop piracy and only gets
bonafide
customers upset with Microsoft for the inconvenience and probably
don't have
much sympathy with MS' excuse that they're "losing money to piracy"
when
their CEO is the richest man in the world.

Alias

I am a bonafide user. I'm not upset!

--
Regards:

Richard Urban

aka Crusty (-: Old B@stard :-)


"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Ken Blake" wrote

Like anyone else selling a product, they get to
set the rules for its use. Our choice is whether to buy it and
accept the rules, or decide we don't like the rules and not buy
it.
--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User

Somehow, I don't think that every product carries rules of usage with
them.
For example, a banana. Chiquita Banana could care less if two people eat
it,
no one eats it or you use it as a dildo and then smoke the peels. After
all
you *did* pay for the product and it is therefore *yours*. Unfortunately,
the rules of usage for an MS OS doesn't stop piracy and only gets bonafide
customers upset with Microsoft for the inconvenience and probably don't
have
much sympathy with MS' excuse that they're "losing money to piracy" when
their CEO is the richest man in the world.

Alias

"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote

The manufacturer of a product has a right to control the usage of
their product.

Are you sure it's a product we're buying?

Seems like we are buying the right to use something, not ownership of the
product. Gosh, that's almost as sneaky as stealing windows from Apple.

If you do not like the terms, buy from someone else.

Unfortunately for MS, there are other choices, be they using a pirated
version if you can't afford the priveledge of using the "product" or go with
an open source OS. One can only hope that the alternative OSs can not only
force MS to lower their prices and loosen their restrictions but motivate
them to put out a better product.

Your comparison with bananas is ludicrous.

Bananas are "products", are they not? Can you imagine Chiquita Banana suing
someone for not using their bananas correctly?

Alias


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


"Alias" wrote in message
...
Somehow, I don't think that every product carries rules of usage
with them.
For example, a banana. Chiquita Banana could care less if two people
eat it,
no one eats it or you use it as a dildo and then smoke the peels.
After all
you *did* pay for the product and it is therefore *yours*.
Unfortunately,
the rules of usage for an MS OS doesn't stop piracy and only gets
bonafide
customers upset with Microsoft for the inconvenience and probably
don't have
much sympathy with MS' excuse that they're "losing money to piracy"
when
their CEO is the richest man in the world.

Alias

You are not buying the product, you are buying the licenced to use the
product.

--
Paul Cyr

-----

The Debate Continues... www.xvsxp.com

Protect Yourself and Others...
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/
-----

"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Ken Blake" wrote

Like anyone else selling a product, they get to
set the rules for its use. Our choice is whether to buy it and
accept the rules, or decide we don't like the rules and not buy
it.
--
Ken Blake - Microsoft MVP Windows: Shell/User

Somehow, I don't think that every product carries rules of usage with
them.
For example, a banana. Chiquita Banana could care less if two people eat
it,
no one eats it or you use it as a dildo and then smoke the peels. After
all
you *did* pay for the product and it is therefore *yours*. Unfortunately,
the rules of usage for an MS OS doesn't stop piracy and only gets bonafide
customers upset with Microsoft for the inconvenience and probably don't
have
much sympathy with MS' excuse that they're "losing money to piracy" when
their CEO is the richest man in the world.

Alias

Greetings --

This bonafide user isn't the least bit upset that Microsoft has
finally started to take steps (baby steps, with WPA, granted) to put a
stop to software piracy. I also know better than trying to compare
the license usage of copyrighted intellectual property with a banana.

Bruce Chambers
--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. - RAH


"Alias" wrote in message
...


Somehow, I don't think that every product carries rules of usage
with them.
For example, a banana. Chiquita Banana could care less if two people
eat it,
no one eats it or you use it as a dildo and then smoke the peels.
After all
you *did* pay for the product and it is therefore *yours*.
Unfortunately,
the rules of usage for an MS OS doesn't stop piracy and only gets
bonafide
customers upset with Microsoft for the inconvenience and probably
don't have
much sympathy with MS' excuse that they're "losing money to piracy"
when
their CEO is the richest man in the world.

Alias

wrote:

Hi. Just wondering why doesn't Microsoft let you install
Windows XP and Office 2003 on two PC's? I think they
should at least let you install them on two PC's. They
let you do it for one desktop on one laptop right?

Capitalism?






--
http://www.bootdisk.com/

wrote:

Just wondering why doesn't Microsoft let you install
Windows XP and Office 2003 on two PC's? I think they
should at least let you install them on two PC's. They
let you do it for one desktop on one laptop right?

The do not for Windows and never have. There is a specific concession
for *retail* copies of Office, only, to install on a desktop and that
desktop's owners' personal laptop.

As to why - that is their commercial judgement. You may not like it, or
even think it sound from their viewpoint, but you have to go along or
else not use the product


--
Alex Nichol MS MVP (Windows Technologies)
Bournemouth, U.K. (remove the D8 bit)

Adios Plato, you are a drag on this newsgroup......."PLONK"

"Plato" |@|.| wrote in message ...
Alexander Grigoriev wrote:

A private teacher gives a group lesson, and every listener pays a fixed fee.
You pay for you only, but bring another non-paying person with you (variant:
you use your phone to allow another person to listen to the lecture). Will
it be fair? The teacher doesn't overwork just because one more person is
attending. Do you think it's fair use of the lecturer?

Please crawl back into your whole.

OK.

How about example:

A private teacher gives a group lesson, and every listener pays a fixed fee.
You pay for you only, but bring another non-paying person with you (variant:
you use your phone to allow another person to listen to the lecture). Will
it be fair? The teacher doesn't overwork just because one more person is
attending. Do you think it's fair use of the lecturer?

"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Bruce Chambers" wrote

Greetings --

Ah, I see. It's an inconvenience for legitimate users simply
because _you_ say it is. How could I have been so obtuse?

Bruce Chambers

You don't get it.

Sigh.

Alias

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. - RAH


"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Bruce Chambers" wrote
Greetings --

No, I don't work for Microsoft. I'm vehemently opposed to the
piracy of ANY software maker's products.

You still have not bothered to demonstrate how WPA
inconveniences
anyone _but_ the "wannabe" casual pirate. Until you can
substantiate
this claim, you might as well stop mindlessly repeating yourself.


Bruce Chambers

Both the Internet and the phone activation is an inconvenience that
users of
cracked software do not have to deal with. They also don't have to
click on
the little "x" to get rid of the "you've got x days to activate" box
that
pops up everytime you reboot. Users of cracked software do not have
to call
MS when they decide to upgrade their hardware. Got it now?

Alias

Alexander Grigoriev wrote:

A private teacher gives a group lesson, and every listener pays a fixed fee.
You pay for you only, but bring another non-paying person with you (variant:
you use your phone to allow another person to listen to the lecture). Will
it be fair? The teacher doesn't overwork just because one more person is
attending. Do you think it's fair use of the lecturer?

Please crawl back into your whole.

"Unknown" wrote in message
gy.com...
By the way, automobile license plates are a product maufactured in most
states
by the prison population. Do you transfer the plate to multiple cars?

Using your comparision, the driver would be the computer and yes, more than
one person can drive a car.

Alias
"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Unknown" wrote in message
gy.com...
You are doing nothing but arguing semantics. Do you buy one automobile
license
and use it on several cars?

A car is a product. MS says their software is a product. Automobile
licenses
are not products.

Alias
"Alias" wrote in message
...

"Jone Doe" wrote

gigantic snip of whining

Windows XP operating system is not like an orange, or a banana to
use
one
of
the more ridiculous examples from an earlier post. It is an
operating
system, an intellectual property that is not sold per se, but
rented
or
leased to be used in one system. If you don't like the terms of
use
of
the
system, don't use it. Get with Al Gore, who invented the internet
after
all, and come up with a system that uses binary codes of zeros and
ones to
do something useful, copyright it, and sell it.

Then why does Microsoft call it a "product"??? A banana is a
product,
isn't
it? One pays for a product and one can do whatever one wants to
unless
it's
computer software? And don't tell me they don't call their software
a
product rather than a license because I just read on my legitimate
copy
of
XP Pro where there is an email for *product* support, not *rental*
support.

No wonder MS has never taken anyone to court; they'd lose.

Alias

This scumbag {Jupiter Jones [Most Valuable Pirate]}said: "You agree to the
terms or return the product" Unfortunately, you can't return the product
once you have opened it. Therefore, M$ is at fault for not bringing the
terms to my attention before the contract for sale was agreed i.e. before
I parted with my hard earned do$h! I can use the product on as many PCs I
want as the terms of the contract were not brought to my attention. I m
doing exactly that at present!!!!! Hooray!!! Activation is a joke!!!!!!!




"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

In this case you do not purchase Windows.
You purchase the license to use Windows according to the EULA.
You agree to the terms or return the product.

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

"Woody" wrote in message
...
NO more than you're telling us "The manufacturer of a product has a
right to
control the usage of
their product."

since when has the manufacturer of any product been able to tell us
what we
do with any product after we purchase it ?

or was that you peeking into my bedroom window last nite ?

This scumbag {Jupiter Jones [Most Valuable Pirate]}said: "You agree to the
terms or return the product" Unfortunately, you can't return the product
once you have opened it. Therefore, M$ is at fault for not bringing the
terms to my attention before the contract for sale was agreed i.e. before
I parted with my hard earned do$h! I can use the product on as many PCs I
want as the terms of the contract were not brought to my attention. I m
doing exactly that at present!!!!! Hooray!!! Activation is a joke!!!!!!!




"Jupiter Jones [MVP]" wrote:

In this case you do not purchase Windows.
You purchase the license to use Windows according to the EULA.
You agree to the terms or return the product.

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

"Woody" wrote in message
...
NO more than you're telling us "The manufacturer of a product has a
right to
control the usage of
their product."

since when has the manufacturer of any product been able to tell us
what we
do with any product after we purchase it ?

or was that you peeking into my bedroom window last nite ?