R
Rod Speed
Desperately cowering gutless ****wit that cant even manage
something as basic as what a monopoly actually is.
something as basic as what a monopoly actually is.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
C
Conor
Oh God, I'm not going to go googling for it - it was a good few yearsYay! Really? Link?
ago.
--
Conor
I'm really a nice guy. If I had friends, they would tell you.
Earn commission on online purchases, £2.50 just for signing up:
http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm
C
Crispy Critter
Pity about when there is no case, ****wit.
Then you are required to stick it on your forehead besides the dumbass
sticker.
Take note in the below where it says "motherboard".
http://www.techspot.com/news/23342-microsoft-explains-activation-with-windows-vista.html
"That won't help those who reinstall every 3 months or change motherboards
all the time"
R
Rod Speed
Crispy Critter said:Rod Speed wrote
Take note in the below where it says "motherboard".
"That won't help those who reinstall every 3
months or change motherboards all the time"
Pity about the rest of it
In those cases, Microsoft would have to be contacted directly.
At that point they can activate your machine again at their
discretion, or choose not to.
They wont be stupid enough to refuse when their nose is rubbed in the law.
C
Crispy Critter
They wont be stupid enough to refuse when their nose is rubbed in the law.
Yea, I'm looking forward to the fist test case. Screw their EULA.
R
Rod Speed
Crispy Critter said:Rod Speed wrote
Yea, I'm looking forward to the fist test case.
There wont be one, MS aint that stupid.
That bit of the EULA is pure bluff, and MS knows that.
It does work with the legally pig ignorant.
Screw their EULA.
They say the same thing about you for some reason.
C
Crispy Critter
There wont be one, MS aint that stupid.
Yes, they are. There is already a couple of court cases in the pipleine
over WGA. I know of one person who was denied reactivation of his OEM copy
of XP, he just called back and talked to someone else but they will play
nasty so don't think you are all safe and will be able to install Vista at
your whim.
They say the same thing about you for some reason.
That's ok as we are about to part company, been eyeing up Macs just today.
Need to buy some sandals too now. I ain't buying shit from that freak
Ballmer.
C
Crispy Critter
It does work with the legally pig ignorant.
Ah, so you're saying Microsoft likes to play mind games in order to fleece
gullible customers by saying in the Vista EULA that you can only transfer
it to one PC. You actually support a company with that mindset? So long as
it's them being fleeced and not you you don't give a ****. Right?
R
Rod Speed
Crispy Critter said:Rod Speed wrote
Yes, they are.
Nope.
There is already a couple of court cases in the pipleine over WGA.
Different matter entirely.
I know of one person who was denied reactivation of his OEM
copy of XP, he just called back and talked to someone else
So that aint even court case.
but they will play nasty
There wont be one, MS aint that stupid.
so don't think you are all safe and will
be able to install Vista at your whim.
That aint what was being discussed.
That's ok as we are about to part company,
I dont expect to see any reports of MS suits pouring from
their windows like lemmings as soon as they read your post.
Cant imagine why for the life of me.
been eyeing up Macs just today.
More fool you.
Need to buy some sandals too now.
Its sack cloth and ashes that you need.
I ain't buying shit from that freak Ballmer.
I dont expect to see any reports of MS suits pouring from
their windows like lemmings as soon as they read your post.
Cant imagine why for the life of me.
R
Rod Speed
Crispy Critter said:Rod Speed wrote
Ah, so you're saying Microsoft likes to play mind games
in order to fleece gullible customers by saying in the
Vista EULA that you can only transfer it to one PC.
Yep, just like they did previous with stupid
claims they made about OEM 'licenses'
You actually support a company with that mindset?
Nope, I just rub their noses in the law if they are stupid enough to try that.
So long as it's them being fleeced and not you you don't give a ****. Right?
Wrong, as always.
J
JAD
Crispy Critter said:Ah, so you're saying Microsoft likes to play mind games in order to fleece
gullible customers by saying in the Vista EULA that you can only transfer
it to one PC. You actually support a company with that mindset? So long as
it's them being fleeced and not you you don't give a ****. Right?
they don't play mind games, they are in YOUR FACE, unlike the oil
companies- grocery industry- waste management- power.......
whole lot of attitude about nothing. There is one piece of tech that I wish
they would create, the -put you in high profile, world changing positions to
see what you would do- technology. Wonder what would have happened if the
Dictator decided that MS, internet and computers in the home, were a
national security issue. I have also noticed that there is an 'envy' thing
going on when Gates is discussed over the pond.
C
Crispy Critter
Nope, I just rub their noses in the law if they are stupid enough to try that.
Until someone challenges the EULA it stands and is enforcable.
R
Rod Speed
Crispy Critter said:Rod Speed wrote
Until someone challenges the EULA it stands
No it doesnt, that bit has always been pure bluff.
and is enforcable.
Like hell that bit is.
M
Matt
JAD said: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. .
Please expound on that ("force") if you can. I might become convinced
that some force has kept it in the back room and off the desktop (if
that's what you mean), but it needs more explanation, especially
regarding motives ...
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.
Well, fascinating ... I thought it was pretty standard that MS's
monopoly position ("dominant market position" if you prefer) was enough
to explain the slow advance of Linux.
T
Tomcat (Tom)
Matt said:Please expound on that ("force") if you can. I might become convinced
that some force has kept it in the back room and off the desktop (if
that's what you mean), but it needs more explanation, especially
regarding motives ...
I think that "force" that is keeping Linux off the desktop is that its
supporters are geeks that don't care to make it user friendly for a
broad base of users. They are actually proud of the fact you have to
have a slightly above average IQ to install and configure it.
J
J. Conners
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:17:56 +0000, Matt wrote:
DOS was first. It became the dominant OS for IBM PCs. The price for
the hardware was right so most folks bought IBM clones. DOS got stronger.
Then came the next evolutionary step. Windows. All or most of the DOS
people migrated to Windows. As you say, Microsoft achieved "dominant
market position" and that's where we are presently.
However, Linux has come a long long way. I've used it for years (ever
since it was just as cryptic as DOS). Last week I installed the latest
version of Ubuntu (sensibly named Xubuntu) using the xfce user interface.
I popped in the CD and sat back and let it install. The only interaction
I had was when it was unsure of the onboard graphics card. It presented
me with a list of graphics cards and asked me to choose. All other
hardware was automatically detected and it even set up and
connected me to the 2 Windows machines on my network automatically.
Painless. For the first time.
All I can say to 'Redmond' is, 'move over', there's a new kid on the block
and it has become every bit as easy to use and is easily as powerful as
Windows XP. Be prepared to see it pre-loaded on a lot more of newer
equipment rather than the new and supposedly improved 'Windows Vistabloat'
which requires 16 tons of memory and formula-1 CPUs and, if it runs true
to form, will require patching every second day or so.
Heavy-duty gameplayers may just as well ignore Linux at present. This OS
is for working not for playing high end popular games. At least for the
present and near future.
IMO, open architecture *is* here to stay.
--
___________________________________________________________________
Jack Conners
Linux *is* User-Friendly. It just isn't Idiot-Friendly or Stupid-Friendly!!!
XUbuntu 6.10
'Linux for Human Beings'
Well, fascinating ... I thought it was pretty standard that MS's
monopoly position ("dominant market position"("dominant market
position"("dominant market position" if you prefer) was enough to
explain the slow advance of Linux.
DOS was first. It became the dominant OS for IBM PCs. The price for
the hardware was right so most folks bought IBM clones. DOS got stronger.
Then came the next evolutionary step. Windows. All or most of the DOS
people migrated to Windows. As you say, Microsoft achieved "dominant
market position" and that's where we are presently.
However, Linux has come a long long way. I've used it for years (ever
since it was just as cryptic as DOS). Last week I installed the latest
version of Ubuntu (sensibly named Xubuntu) using the xfce user interface.
I popped in the CD and sat back and let it install. The only interaction
I had was when it was unsure of the onboard graphics card. It presented
me with a list of graphics cards and asked me to choose. All other
hardware was automatically detected and it even set up and
connected me to the 2 Windows machines on my network automatically.
Painless. For the first time.
All I can say to 'Redmond' is, 'move over', there's a new kid on the block
and it has become every bit as easy to use and is easily as powerful as
Windows XP. Be prepared to see it pre-loaded on a lot more of newer
equipment rather than the new and supposedly improved 'Windows Vistabloat'
which requires 16 tons of memory and formula-1 CPUs and, if it runs true
to form, will require patching every second day or so.
Heavy-duty gameplayers may just as well ignore Linux at present. This OS
is for working not for playing high end popular games. At least for the
present and near future.
IMO, open architecture *is* here to stay.
--
___________________________________________________________________
Jack Conners
Linux *is* User-Friendly. It just isn't Idiot-Friendly or Stupid-Friendly!!!
XUbuntu 6.10
'Linux for Human Beings'
J
John Doe
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:17:56 +0000, Matt wrote:
<snipped>
As a server operating system.
But Microsoft is working on that too.
However, Linux has come a long long way.
As a server operating system.
Last week I installed the latest version of Ubuntu
Painless. For the first time.
On a particular machine.
Heavy-duty gameplayers may just as well ignore Linux at present.
This OS is for working not for playing high end popular games. At
least for the present and near future.
What amazes me is the persistent blindness about the subject,
steadfastly denying reality. It's like some people never go to a
store and look at the software section. It's not just games, it's
practically every application there is for a personal computer. It's
been that way for over 10 years, the only thing that's changed in
that time is a major decrease in Apple software.
T
Tomcat (Tom)
John said:What amazes me is the persistent blindness about the subject,
steadfastly denying reality. It's like some people never go to a
store and look at the software section. It's not just games, it's
practically every application there is for a personal computer. It's
been that way for over 10 years, the only thing that's changed in
that time is a major decrease in Apple software.
It's not being blind to reality that is the problem, it's about
disagreement on reason for why things are the way they are and what
needs to be done about it. Everybody knows MS has a dominant position
on the desktop. The question is do they have this position due to
abusing their monopoly power or is the competition just bad at
marketing their product to the extent it can't compete? I think it's
the latter. Maybe 10 years ago MS abused it's power with Netscape and
others to the extent they couldn't compete equally with MS software but
that's just not happening today. And computer makers are free to ship
machines with Linspire on them instead of Windows if they please,
nobody is stopping them. It's all about demand and consumer
preferences, not monopoly power.
J
J. Conners
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:46:41 +0000, John Doe wrote:
"What amazes me is the persistent blindness" and inability of people like
you to maintain an open mind.
Whenever someone mentions Linux, you belch out the same unqualified drivel
much like some drone who has never had an self-originating thought in his
life.
I would imagine you have always driven automobiles made by the same
manufacturer as well.
I *look* a lot. Microsoft stuff is way out of my league when it comes to
price.
That's true. However, that's because Linux software is found online
(free), not in the store where it costs tons.
That may be so in your world, so carry on with your new heavy-duty Windows
Vistabloat because when it comes to Linux? You have no idea what you're
talking about. You just rattle off the same crap you have for years.
The one true sign of a closed and brittle mind.
--
___________________________________________________________________
Jack Conners
Linux *is* User-Friendly. It just isn't Idiot-Friendly or Stupid-Friendly!!!
XUbuntu 6.10
'Linux for Human Beings'
What amazes me is the persistent blindness about the subject,
steadfastly denying reality.
"What amazes me is the persistent blindness" and inability of people like
you to maintain an open mind.
Whenever someone mentions Linux, you belch out the same unqualified drivel
much like some drone who has never had an self-originating thought in his
life.
I would imagine you have always driven automobiles made by the same
manufacturer as well.
It's like some people never go to a store and look at the software section.
I *look* a lot. Microsoft stuff is way out of my league when it comes to
price.
It's not just games, it's practically every application there is for a
personal computer.
That's true. However, that's because Linux software is found online
(free), not in the store where it costs tons.
It's been that way for over 10 years, the only thing
that's changed in that time is a major decrease in Apple software.
That may be so in your world, so carry on with your new heavy-duty Windows
Vistabloat because when it comes to Linux? You have no idea what you're
talking about. You just rattle off the same crap you have for years.
The one true sign of a closed and brittle mind.
--
___________________________________________________________________
Jack Conners
Linux *is* User-Friendly. It just isn't Idiot-Friendly or Stupid-Friendly!!!
XUbuntu 6.10
'Linux for Human Beings'
J
John Doe
It's not being blind to reality that is the problem, it's about
disagreement on reason for why things are the way they are and
what needs to be done about it. Everybody knows MS has a dominant
position on the desktop. The question is do they have this
position due to abusing their monopoly power or is the competition
just bad at marketing their product to the extent it can't
compete?
Oh brother.
Microsoft doesn't have to abuse its monopoly power, that power by
itself is what keeps Linux off of the desktop. The power to exclude
competition is part of the definition.
You keep fishing.