Vista licence: punishment for frequent upgraders?

[John Doe]

Yes, everybody uses the term "monopoly".

For at least a decade, personal computer enthusiasts have known that
Microsoft holds monopoly power. Our courts made it official before
the turn of the eon.

Our federal district court wrote:

"Microsoft possesses monopoly power in the market for
Intel-compatible PC operating systems."

Our federal appeals court wrote:

"... we uphold the District Court's finding of monopoly power in its
entirety."


Path: newssvr12.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm05.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Tomcat (Tom)" <tom_overton_1968 yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: Vista licence: punishment for frequent upgraders?
Date: 25 Oct 2006 13:19:01 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <1161807541.287510.48740 m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
References: <lemdnRJzpOPoFKDYnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d comcast.com> <25crj2hu8cjjr1qed6apads9p1j9114ia3 4ax.com> <MPG.1fa82b09dc5aa6bb989bc2 news.individual.net> <453e3227$0$97257$892e7fe2 authen.yellow.readfreenews.net> <1161717838.637080.130620 e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com> <Xns98674B13D70AB0123456789 207.115.17.102> <4q9tm6Fm28kkU1 individual.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 72.16.236.133
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1161807546 31248 127.0.0.1 (25 Oct 2006 20:19:06 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 20:19:06 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <4q9tm6Fm28kkU1 individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
Injection-Info: m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com; posting-host=72.16.236.133; posting-account=4AfWDQwAAADZ6GojxabHfazB_tdTRheo
Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:477570

There is no 'monopoly power' while ever anyone can run linux, for free.

True and I get so sick of everybody using the word "monopoly power"
when describing Microsoft. Microsoft isn't an oil or railroad company
controlling limited resources. There are alternatives to Windows when
choosing an OS. Open source software is an alternative to MS's
products as well. Where is Microsoft controlling everything and
stifling the computer industry?

 

[John Doe]

Mike T. wrote:

Because they did this with XP and will continue to do it with
Vista. Microsoft is not trying to inconvenience the home builder
or business customer.

That sounds naïve. Maximizing profit is Microsoft's only concern.

 

[Rod Speed]

That sounds naïve.

Yours in spades.

Maximizing profit is Microsoft's only concern.

Have fun explaining what they chose to do with XP.

 

[Tomcat (Tom)]

Yes, everybody uses the term "monopoly".

For at least a decade, personal computer enthusiasts have known that
Microsoft holds monopoly power. Our courts made it official before
the turn of the eon.

Our federal district court wrote:

"Microsoft possesses monopoly power in the market for
Intel-compatible PC operating systems."

Our federal appeals court wrote:

"... we uphold the District Court's finding of monopoly power in its
entirety."

But that was a long time ago in computer industry terms. There wasn't
even much of a concept of open source software at that time. Microsoft
is extremely threatened by an emerging open source market and the
assumption that MS is still this huge all encompassing entity that
dictates the direction of the personal computer market and can put
other software companies out of business by undercutting their prices
or buying them out is way outdated. You can't compete against open
source by using your monopoly power by buying them out or out-pricing
them since they are free.

 

[Rod Speed]

Yes, everybody uses the term "monopoly".

Only the fools so stupid that they havent even noticed that there cant be
any monopoly while linux is available. In spades when linux is actually free.

For at least a decade, personal computer enthusiasts
have known that Microsoft holds monopoly power.

Only the fools so stupid that they havent even noticed that there cant be
any monopoly while linux is available. In spades when linux is actually free.

Our courts made it official before the turn of the eon.

The US legal system has been completely off the rails for CENTURYS now.

Our federal district court wrote:

"Microsoft possesses monopoly power in the
market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems."

It clearly doesnt while linux is available. In spades when linux is actually free.

Our federal appeals court wrote:

"... we uphold the District Court's finding of monopoly power in its entirety."

It clearly doesnt while linux is available. In spades when linux is actually free.

 

[Rod Speed]

Rod Speed is a common troll on USENET, frequently
spewing his silly libertarian views on wide variety of subjects.

This gutless desperately cowering ****wit wouldnt know what a troll was
if it bit it on its lard arse. In spades with what a monopoly actually is either.

 

[John Doe]

But that was a long time ago in computer industry terms.

Apparently it was a long time ago in your USENET posting history
terms. I was on USENET thrashing it out with Microsoft defenders all
day long during the big antitrust trial. I know a lot about what was
going on at that time.

There wasn't
even much of a concept of open source software at that time.

That sounds very naïve.

Microsoft
is extremely threatened by an emerging open source market

That is baseless nonsense. Nothing is threatening Microsoft's
stranglehold on personal computing.

and the
assumption that MS is still this huge all encompassing entity that
dictates the direction of the personal computer market and can put
other software companies out of business by undercutting their
prices or buying them out is way outdated.

Your idea that things have changed is absolutely baseless.

The circumstantial evidence is crystal clear. It's what we're
talking about in this thread. As I have said throughout the years,
Microsoft will continue tightening the screws.

You can't compete against open
source by using your monopoly power by buying them out or
out-pricing them since they are free.

Microsoft can't compete against doodling either, but that's
irrelevant.

 

[John Doe]

Rod Speed is a bird-brain libertarian troll spewing his idiotic
libertarian ideas on every subject however unrelated to politics.

See also:
"JohnH" <johnh jjss.com>
"Oscar Jones" <oj ojqw.com>
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa gmail.com>


Path: newssvr21.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm05.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsfeed.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp!newsfeed.icl.net!news-lond.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!colt.net!feeder.news-service.com!216.196.110.148.MISMATCH!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: Vista licence: punishment for frequent upgraders?
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 07:59:35 +1000
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <4qa52aFlsq92U1 individual.net>
References: <lemdnRJzpOPoFKDYnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d comcast.com> <25crj2hu8cjjr1qed6apads9p1j9114ia3 4ax.com> <MPG.1fa82b09dc5aa6bb989bc2 news.individual.net> <453e3227$0$97257$892e7fe2 authen.yellow.readfreenews.net> <1161717838.637080.130620 e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com> <Xns98674B13D70AB0123456789 207.115.17.102> <4q9tm6Fm28kkU1 individual.net> <1161807541.287510.48740 m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <Xns9867A78155ED70123456789 207.115.17.102>
X-Trace: individual.net VanPEvBOcljZJK17+KAU7QjhR0euOXu2PLzerm5weKBprRHKE=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:477578

John Doe <jdoe usenetlove.invalid> wrote

Yes, everybody uses the term "monopoly".

Only the fools so stupid that they havent even noticed that there cant be
any monopoly while linux is available. In spades when linux is actually free.

For at least a decade, personal computer enthusiasts
have known that Microsoft holds monopoly power.

Only the fools so stupid that they havent even noticed that there cant be
any monopoly while linux is available. In spades when linux is actually free.

Our courts made it official before the turn of the eon.

The US legal system has been completely off the rails for CENTURYS now.

Our federal district court wrote:

"Microsoft possesses monopoly power in the
market for Intel-compatible PC operating systems."

It clearly doesnt while linux is available. In spades when linux is actually free.

Our federal appeals court wrote:

"... we uphold the District Court's finding of monopoly power in its entirety."

It clearly doesnt while linux is available. In spades when linux is actually free.

 

[Rod Speed]

This desperately cowering gutless ****wit is a desperately
cowering gutless ****wit that cant even manage to work
out what a monopoly is, or anything else at all, either.

 

[Crispy Critter]

Or install software without lots of ****ing about.
Or do wireless networking.
Or find drivers.

Yea, just changing monitors on Linux is a PITA. You have to edit the
xorg.conf and change monitor type, change supported resolutions and also
generate a modeline using xvidtune or else if you are dual booting X will
shift the image over aobut 1/2". All this has to be done using a text
editor. This is not an issue for me but it is for a noob.

 

[Crispy Critter]

Pity it says nothing about motherboard upgrades.

This only applies to XP OEM as retail I can change as often as I like.
Vista EULA is closer to OEM license than XP retail license.

 

[John Doe]

your an idiot

It's "you're", troll.

where do you think we would be without MS?

Most knowledgeable personal computer enthusiasts have no problem
with Microsoft or some other single company producing the operating
system, because the operating system is a standard applications
programmers write to. I do have a problem with the operating system
maker being allowed to produce applications programs. Unlike what
Steve Ballmer claimed many years ago, there is no "Chinese wall"
between Windows and Microsoft's applications. Not that it mattered,
but later everyone realized that was a lie. Applications programmers
were sucked into Microsoft's Windows maelstrom. It's produced the
"applications barrier to entry". As Windows gained popularity,
programmers write for Windows because they make money per number of
programs sold. Consumers bought Windows because programmers wrote
for Windows. Consumers and programmers were sucked into Windows. Now
Windows massive installed base forces programmers to write for
Windows and consumers to buy Windows (unless you want to write
programs for free and forget about having a wife/spouse or
children).

The problem with allowing the operating system maker to write
applications is because it cheats. Microsoft slipstreams its
applications into Windows and rights all kinds of other underhanded
routines to make its Windows applications run better than its
competitors. You could level the applications programming playing
field by preventing Microsoft from writing applications.

Linux?

The real question is "Where would we be without Microsoft being
allowed to write applications?"

We would probably have a robust personal computer industry. Original
equipment manufacturers would be able to customize their computers
to suit their consumers desires. I think these would be much more
exciting times.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAAAAAAA

Speaking of idiots.

 

[JAD]

It's "you're", troll.

thanks that was the only thing worth while in your reply....all that BS
fact is if MS were the underdog and xinux was the monopoly you would be
chanting the same crap about them. Its a complex of some kind. Nothing to do
with monopolies and such. Thing is, most folks are short sighted, MS will be
long gone and unix of some kind will be totaly dominent. Why get your
panties in a bunch? Problem is, there is a force that keeps xinux on the
back burner and has influnced its developement for some time now. . It will
have its day, pretty hard to keep 'open source' from taking over, once
caught unto. IMO the traitors were the early developers, who were influnced,
and I say that because there are some REALLY good coders out there and it
makes no sence that linux isnt more than it is, AFTER ALL THIS TIME.
I loaded a Knoppix bootable CD recently(week or so). It did a good job on
my old pb4266. Saw everything pretty much. But as usual most drivers were
generic, however it was a 'basic' run-from-the-CD- variety,so....

However on a system that was about a year old, little less, it was not
usuable, and needed alot of 'adjusting' and suddenly I realized it was like
being back in the good-ole-days,, LINUX!.......only if......

--snipped 2k of usenet wasted space---

 

[John Doe]

thanks that was the only thing worth while in your reply....

And maybe someday you will be able to act like a grown-up.

Problem is, there is a force that keeps xinux on the back burner
and has influnced its developement for some time now. .

Yes there is. And it's something technically inclined grown-ups
understand.

It will have its day, pretty hard to keep 'open source' from
taking over, once caught unto.

Maybe, if it weren't for the applications barrier to entry and
network effects.

IMO the traitors were the early developers, who were influnced,
and I say that because there are some REALLY good coders out there
and it makes no sence that linux isnt more than it is,

The reason Linux isn't more than it is on the desktop is because
there's no money to be made. Writing applications for a platform no
one buys is a waste of time.

People like JAD who are unable to understand the problem are part of
the very reason the problem exists.

 

[Rod Speed]

It's "you're", troll.

Only trolls are stupid enough to try spelling flames, child.

Most knowledgeable personal computer enthusiasts have
no problem with Microsoft or some other single company
producing the operating system, because the operating
system is a standard applications programmers write to.

Some would prefer a formally standardised API instead.

I do have a problem with the operating system maker
being allowed to produce applications programs.

More fool you. Fortunately we dont live in a police state where
the govt gets any say what so ever on something like that.

Unlike what Steve Ballmer claimed many years ago, there is no
"Chinese wall" between Windows and Microsoft's applications.

Like it or lump it, child.

Not that it mattered, but later everyone realized that was a lie. Applications
programmers were sucked into Microsoft's Windows maelstrom.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

It's produced the "applications barrier to entry".

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

As Windows gained popularity, programmers write for Windows
because they make money per number of programs sold.

Or they have enough of a clue to realise what the market is using.

Consumers bought Windows because programmers wrote for Windows.

Nope, they bought Win because thats what came with the
hardware they bought and its what they were familiar with.

Consumers and programmers were sucked into Windows.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

Now Windows massive installed base forces programmers to write
for Windows and consumers to buy Windows (unless you want to write
programs for free and forget about having a wife/spouse or children).

Have fun explaining all those free apps for linux and Win.

The problem with allowing the operating system
maker to write applications is because it cheats.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

Microsoft slipstreams its applications into Windows

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

What it actually does is include more stuff in the OS.

and rights all kinds of other underhanded routines

Another absolute classic, its 'writes' trollchild.

to make its Windows applications run better than its competitors.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

That isnt the reason most with a clue prefer MS Office over the alternatives.

You could level the applications programming playing
field by preventing Microsoft from writing applications.

Fortunately we dont live in a police state where the
govt gets any say what so ever on something like that.

The real question is "Where would we be without
Microsoft being allowed to write applications?"

Precisely where we are today.

We would probably have a robust personal computer industry.

We have just that thanks.

Original equipment manufacturers would be able to customize
their computers to suit their consumers desires.

They've been doing that fine for decades.

I think these would be much more exciting times.

Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of thought, trollchild.

 

[Rod Speed]

Rod Speed wrote

This only applies to XP OEM

Wrong again. There is no difference with XP between OEM and retail.

as retail I can change as often as I like.

Legally you can with OEM too.

Vista EULA is closer to OEM license than XP retail license.

Irrelevant to what is being discussed, what the
law has to say about motherboard upgrades.

All EULAs are completely irrelevant on that.

 

[John Doe]

Below you will find Rod Speed the troll spewing his idiotic
libertarian ideals about the law just like he does in the USENET
group (aus.legal) and annoying everyone in that group.


Path: newssvr12.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm05.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: Vista licence: punishment for frequent upgraders?
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:41:55 +1000
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <4qaljlFmcs7hU1 individual.net>
References: <lemdnRJzpOPoFKDYnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d comcast.com> <7umdncI-hpW6AaPYnZ2dnUVZ_tudnZ2d comcast.com> <453f5116$0$97274$892e7fe2 authen.yellow.readfreenews.net> <MPG.1fa9782bc71e65b5989bd7 news.individual.net> <453f7933$0$97244$892e7fe2 authen.yellow.readfreenews.net> <wm3c3pt0sw5g$.1d1r5vilg3qh$.dlg 40tude.net> <4q9ufdFman5qU1 individual.net> <12zigp95fl70q.4o4fwdltqxoq.dlg 40tude.net>
X-Trace: individual.net rD2mLGvCAVEXRDnPvzCm6AyZ5edcymorbfEDxJF2MJYQh5FpI=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:477601

Crispy Critter <not for.email> wrote

Rod Speed wrote

This only applies to XP OEM

Wrong again. There is no difference with XP between OEM and retail.

as retail I can change as often as I like.

Legally you can with OEM too.

Vista EULA is closer to OEM license than XP retail license.

Irrelevant to what is being discussed, what the
law has to say about motherboard upgrades.

All EULAs are completely irrelevant on that.

 

[John Doe]

Below you will find Rod Speed, the odd troll from Australia, spewing
his idiotic libertarian views. Anything that is true for him should
be true for everyone in the world. Most notable is his bizarre
arguments like "I don't suffer from repetitive strain injury (RSI),
therefore you shouldn't either". Rod speed has no scruples
whatsoever, he will say anything, he will deny anything in front of
your face (at least over the Internet or telephone), no matter how
obviously wrong he is.


Path: newssvr12.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm05.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm04.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: Vista licence: punishment for frequent upgraders?
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:39:04 +1000
Lines: 112
Message-ID: <4qalecFm4pu0U1 individual.net>
References: <lemdnRJzpOPoFKDYnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d comcast.com> <25crj2hu8cjjr1qed6apads9p1j9114ia3 4ax.com> <MPG.1fa82b09dc5aa6bb989bc2 news.individual.net> <453e3227$0$97257$892e7fe2 authen.yellow.readfreenews.net> <1161717838.637080.130620 e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com> <Xns98674B13D70AB0123456789 207.115.17.102> <glL%g.51$3v4.27 newsfe04.lga> <Xns9867CD66A3D5A0123456789 207.115.17.102>
X-Trace: individual.net 4URq4KffPoLUx7kqRMGFZwU7J7WphhXwh5hj0z3ghGvDug8sM=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:477600

John Doe <jdoe usenetlove.invalid> wrote

JAD <kapasitor earthcharter.net> wrote

It's "you're", troll.

Only trolls are stupid enough to try spelling flames, child.

Most knowledgeable personal computer enthusiasts have
no problem with Microsoft or some other single company
producing the operating system, because the operating
system is a standard applications programmers write to.

Some would prefer a formally standardised API instead.

I do have a problem with the operating system maker
being allowed to produce applications programs.

More fool you. Fortunately we dont live in a police state where
the govt gets any say what so ever on something like that.

Unlike what Steve Ballmer claimed many years ago, there is no
"Chinese wall" between Windows and Microsoft's applications.

Like it or lump it, child.

Not that it mattered, but later everyone realized that was a lie. Applications
programmers were sucked into Microsoft's Windows maelstrom.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

It's produced the "applications barrier to entry".

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

As Windows gained popularity, programmers write for Windows
because they make money per number of programs sold.

Or they have enough of a clue to realise what the market is using.

Consumers bought Windows because programmers wrote for Windows.

Nope, they bought Win because thats what came with the
hardware they bought and its what they were familiar with.

Consumers and programmers were sucked into Windows.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

Now Windows massive installed base forces programmers to write
for Windows and consumers to buy Windows (unless you want to write
programs for free and forget about having a wife/spouse or children).

Have fun explaining all those free apps for linux and Win.

The problem with allowing the operating system
maker to write applications is because it cheats.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

Microsoft slipstreams its applications into Windows

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

What it actually does is include more stuff in the OS.

and rights all kinds of other underhanded routines

Another absolute classic, its 'writes' trollchild.

to make its Windows applications run better than its competitors.

Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasys.

That isnt the reason most with a clue prefer MS Office over the alternatives.

You could level the applications programming playing
field by preventing Microsoft from writing applications.

Fortunately we dont live in a police state where the
govt gets any say what so ever on something like that.

The real question is "Where would we be without
Microsoft being allowed to write applications?"

Precisely where we are today.

We would probably have a robust personal computer industry.

We have just that thanks.

Original equipment manufacturers would be able to customize
their computers to suit their consumers desires.

They've been doing that fine for decades.

I think these would be much more exciting times.

Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of thought, trollchild.

 

[JAD]

that 'child' crap is ridiculous...



BTW spell checker for a newsgroup, is a piss poor choice of a career
move..

 

[JAD]

Below you will find Rod Speed the troll spewing his idiotic
libertarian ideals about the law just like he does in the USENET
group (aus.legal) and annoying everyone in that group.



Irrelevant to what is being discussed, what the
law has to say about motherboard upgrades.

what f 'n 'law' would that be?