What would Microsoft have to do?
-
Martin, You seem a little too pro-Microsoft. Relax. Microsoft is a large coporation, not a family member or religion. They produce computer software. Computer software is a tool. Granted this tool can be used for great things, but it's that usage that is great not the software itself. 1. XP may be the most secure Microsoft OS in history, but that ain't saying much. I agree that Microsoft presents a big target for crackers and script kiddies, but they also make it way too easy. They need to tighten things up. Period! 2. No one wants to be forced to upgrade. It's just not human nature. Why pay for features that you do not want or use? If my current version does everything I require, why should I be forced to learn a new interface or re-write a procedure. Also, your internet connection theory is hogwash. What happens if I have work to do and my internet connection is down? 3. Saying "If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with product activation?" is nonsense. It's like saying, "If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with the police storming your house or bugging your telephone?" It just doesn't sit well with many people. If I spend several hundred dollars on a piece of software, I don't want big brother badgering me for product codes at two in the morning when I change out a video card. 4. Microsoft needs to look to the future. Their corporate reputation is important. If they can't publicly admit when they have a problem or show a little more compatibility and flexibility with competitors they risk alienating themselves from their customers. Look, I'm generally considered pro-Microsoft but they are not perfect and hey... you're the one who asked the question. ;)
Mike Mullikin - Sonork 100.10096 "Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." - Drew Carey
Saying "If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with product activation?" is nonsense. It's like saying, "If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with the police storming your house or bugging your telephone?" That analogy is completely incorrect. MPA is nothing like that (it is a prevention, not a detection method). ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: Do you have to resort to personal attacks? I'm sorry, I'm just amazed. I *really* thought you were joking with that last post. Do you have an actual response to the rest of my comments then ? Martin Marvinski wrote: People who do usually do it as a last resort because they know they are wrong. I use that line too, but it's not the case. I am just amazed at the ignorance of your viewpoint. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
The "EULA clause" reply was a direct reply to your "personal attack", and it is clear to me that that was not intended to be used with the initial message. You are both talking about different things, and quite probably, knowingly. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
-
peterchen wrote: Writing "M$" all the time is really cheesy, neither fun nor statement, and absolutely wimp. To be honest, I think you're all a pack of pussies for making such a fuss over it. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
To be honest, I think you are violating international trademark law. 'M$' (or to be fair, even 'MS') - given that it is intended to represent the trademark - is a violation. The law clearly states that you cannot abreviate a trademark, use it in plural form, etc, etc. I can't be bothered to search right now, but if MS is a trademark too, as I would expect since Microsoft themselves have published papers with 'MS', then they could charge you with trademark law violation. If it is not, then they are using their right not to enforce it. Damn, that's a lot of violations. ;) ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
-
****Christian Graus wrote: I've just installed Solaris, actually, and looking forward to using a compiler that supports templates properly, so I can get my hands dirty with them. I'm ordering 'Modern C++ Design' next payday, along with some cool image processing books Here I have proof that you are a *nix fanatic. This site is targeted to Windows developers. May I suggest Slashdot as a site for you? I :love: Martin Marvinski
Marvin, you're really starting to annoy the hell outa me. Windows is NOT the end all be all, and it most certainly isn't always the right OS for every possible computing job. If you had even half of a brain above your sphincter, you'd realize that we're all here because we program for Windows (or wish we could). Stop stirring shit up with your near-maniacal support for Windows. You're as bad as the idiots that think Linux is the only true OS. "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
-
Martin Marvinski wrote: Here I have proof that you are a *nix fanatic What, because as well as THREE M$ operating systems, I have *just* installed a Unix variant ? Like I said before, it's not a religion. I'm *allowed* to run something other than Windows. For the record, I program at work and home under Windows pretty muich exclusively, read my articles or the forums to see this is so. You're as likely to see me bagging out crappy M$ containers in favour of STL as you are to see me praise GDI+. That's because I'm not brainwashed either way, I evaluate things by a process I like to call thinking for myself. Martin Marvinski wrote: This site is targeted to Windows developers. Indeed it is, and you just got here. Welcome, but pull your head in as well. You might be interested to know that when the stats were there, I was by far the most prolific poster here, and while a lot of that is me just being a sucker for any argument where the other person is obviously deluded, a lot of it is also helping people with Windows programming questions. Martin Marvinski wrote: May I suggest Slashdot as a site for you? I no longer read /., it's full of people as bigotted as you, but in the other direction. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
I read slashdot, but not the "user comments". They're generally morons. Maybe we could start an alternate site called backslashdot. "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
-
It's true that the process of a monopoly was probably sped up by Microsoft's illegal practices ( like making their OS deliberately crash when a competitors office suite was run, and vice versa ) That was proved? ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
It's a long time ago, but AFAIK, yes. Christian I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
The "EULA clause" reply was a direct reply to your "personal attack", and it is clear to me that that was not intended to be used with the initial message. You are both talking about different things, and quite probably, knowingly. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
The 'EULA clause' was in response to my refering to the idea that a monopoly would lower prices is tripe, yes. I then gave him a chance to retract the statement, and he didn't. I believe he meant it. And if he can't take someone telling him that one of his statements is rubbish, why is he bothering to argue about things on the Internet ? At that point I had not made *any* personal attack, I made a comment later about him taking drugs because I was in awe of his viewpoint, and I apologised for it. It's not a personal attack if I say one of your views is rubbish, it's a personal attack if I say you have a big nose. The difference is that one is *personal*. I had fun with this today though - who would think replacing an S with a $ could upset anyone to such a degree ? Christian I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
To be honest, I think you are violating international trademark law. 'M$' (or to be fair, even 'MS') - given that it is intended to represent the trademark - is a violation. The law clearly states that you cannot abreviate a trademark, use it in plural form, etc, etc. I can't be bothered to search right now, but if MS is a trademark too, as I would expect since Microsoft themselves have published papers with 'MS', then they could charge you with trademark law violation. If it is not, then they are using their right not to enforce it. Damn, that's a lot of violations. ;) ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
M$ have violated my rights when they falsely accused me of trying to sell pirated software on ebay, with no proof ( how could there be, the software was legal, and complete in every way ). I was left with software I don't need, and apparently cannot sell, and I was left with my buyers being told by ebay that I was a pirate with no right of recourse. Which is why I'm not paying my ebay accounts. So M$ can pucker up. Christian I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
It's a long time ago, but AFAIK, yes. Christian I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
Could you supply proof? I was unable to locate anything reliable. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
-
M$ have violated my rights when they falsely accused me of trying to sell pirated software on ebay, with no proof ( how could there be, the software was legal, and complete in every way ). I was left with software I don't need, and apparently cannot sell, and I was left with my buyers being told by ebay that I was a pirate with no right of recourse. Which is why I'm not paying my ebay accounts. So M$ can pucker up. Christian I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
That surprised me coming from you of all people. Did mummy never tell you that two wrongs don't make a right? It doesn't matter what Microsoft have done, you have no legal right to violate your governing laws, whatever you may know or have perceived to know about them. If you believe they have violated your laws, then it is up to you if you wish to use all legal methods available to you to rectify this, not copy them. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
-
Saying "If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with product activation?" is nonsense. It's like saying, "If you aren't commiting a crime what is your problem with the police storming your house or bugging your telephone?" That analogy is completely incorrect. MPA is nothing like that (it is a prevention, not a detection method). ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
David Wulff wrote: That analogy is completely incorrect. MPA is nothing like that (it is a prevention, not a detection method). Yep, now that I think about it, you're probably right about my analogy, but I disagree about your prevention vs. detection statement. Let's try another analogy: You go out and buy a brand new automobile. A few weeks later you decide to add a few aftermarket options like an improved stereo and floor mats. Should you be required to go back to the automobile manufacturer and prove that you own the car?? Now, let's jump forward a few years. The car needs new tires, a brake job and an engine tune-up. Should you be required to go back to the automobile manufacturer and prove that you own the car?? I'm not anti-Microsoft by any means. I've used their products (all quite legally thank you very much) since the 80's and DOS 3.0. I've used every version of Windows since v3.0 and every version of Office since it's inception. I develop for the Microsoft platform exclusively due to market demand. I think maybe part of this goes back to Colin's rant about Americans being "suicidal". We take the "innocent until proven guilty" concept very seriously, maybe too seriously at times.
Mike Mullikin - Sonork 100.10096 "Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." - Drew Carey
-
David Wulff wrote: That analogy is completely incorrect. MPA is nothing like that (it is a prevention, not a detection method). Yep, now that I think about it, you're probably right about my analogy, but I disagree about your prevention vs. detection statement. Let's try another analogy: You go out and buy a brand new automobile. A few weeks later you decide to add a few aftermarket options like an improved stereo and floor mats. Should you be required to go back to the automobile manufacturer and prove that you own the car?? Now, let's jump forward a few years. The car needs new tires, a brake job and an engine tune-up. Should you be required to go back to the automobile manufacturer and prove that you own the car?? I'm not anti-Microsoft by any means. I've used their products (all quite legally thank you very much) since the 80's and DOS 3.0. I've used every version of Windows since v3.0 and every version of Office since it's inception. I develop for the Microsoft platform exclusively due to market demand. I think maybe part of this goes back to Colin's rant about Americans being "suicidal". We take the "innocent until proven guilty" concept very seriously, maybe too seriously at times.
Mike Mullikin - Sonork 100.10096 "Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." - Drew Carey
Again, the analogy, though better, is still inapropriate. You "own" your car, you do not "own" the software. You own the right to use the software subject to the terms and conditions you agreed to by either purchasing, installing, or using it (depending on the EULA). However, taking on the gist of your statements: Mike Mullikin wrote: Should you be required to go back to the automobile manufacturer and prove that you own the car?? No, and you don't with MPA. I am using the 4 month trial of Windows XP, and the retail editon of Office XP Professional (both required activation). Over the Christmas period I have added a new 40GB hard drive, replaced the graphics card, added a DVD/CD-ROM drive, removed my old CD-ROM drive to make room for it, and replaced my crappy old modem (in case that was the source of my home dial-in problems). I have not had to reactivate either of them. Going back to your analogy of a car, and from my experience above, I would need to strip the car down to it's core components and replace pretty much everything. In that case, I am pretty sure you'd need to re-register ownership of the car with the relavent authorities, as it would legally be a new car. Therefore, it is no different. Mike Mullikin wrote: Now, let's jump forward a few years. The car needs new tires, a brake job and an engine tune-up. Should you be required to go back to the automobile manufacturer and prove that you own the car?? See above. The "age" factor should not have any relavence to MPA unless your license is for a fixed period. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
-
Navin wrote: . As far as backslashes for path separators, C was around before MS (I believe), which makes it MS's fault when I have to write code like this: CStirng someFile = "..\\some\\path\\file.txt"; Or access UNC paths like this: CString uncPath = "\\\\computername\\driver Those backslash characters are used as escape keys. They use them in Unix too. If you wanted to include an apostrophy you have to have it. It is not something MS created. I :love: Martin Marvinski
-
Again, the analogy, though better, is still inapropriate. You "own" your car, you do not "own" the software. You own the right to use the software subject to the terms and conditions you agreed to by either purchasing, installing, or using it (depending on the EULA). However, taking on the gist of your statements: Mike Mullikin wrote: Should you be required to go back to the automobile manufacturer and prove that you own the car?? No, and you don't with MPA. I am using the 4 month trial of Windows XP, and the retail editon of Office XP Professional (both required activation). Over the Christmas period I have added a new 40GB hard drive, replaced the graphics card, added a DVD/CD-ROM drive, removed my old CD-ROM drive to make room for it, and replaced my crappy old modem (in case that was the source of my home dial-in problems). I have not had to reactivate either of them. Going back to your analogy of a car, and from my experience above, I would need to strip the car down to it's core components and replace pretty much everything. In that case, I am pretty sure you'd need to re-register ownership of the car with the relavent authorities, as it would legally be a new car. Therefore, it is no different. Mike Mullikin wrote: Now, let's jump forward a few years. The car needs new tires, a brake job and an engine tune-up. Should you be required to go back to the automobile manufacturer and prove that you own the car?? See above. The "age" factor should not have any relavence to MPA unless your license is for a fixed period. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
David Wulff wrote: You "own" your car, you do not "own" the software. You own the right to use the software subject to the terms and conditions you agreed to by either purchasing, installing, or using it (depending on the EULA). Agreed. I just don't agree 100% with MPA and thus the EULA and therefore won't be using XP (Windows or Office) any time soon. If it becomes necessary for my work, maybe I'll have to reconsider. However, if enough people feel the same way that I do and stay with their old software or start evaluating Linux or Apple alternatives this only hurts Microsoft in the long run. I think Christian Grauss brought up a good point about the potential for Microsoft to start charging for XP product activation in 5-6 years when XP is old and nearly obsolete or worse yet refuse activation in order to force upgrades. I just have a nagging feeling that Microsoft is following the wrong path here.
Mike Mullikin - Sonork 100.10096 "Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." - Drew Carey
-
David Wulff wrote: You "own" your car, you do not "own" the software. You own the right to use the software subject to the terms and conditions you agreed to by either purchasing, installing, or using it (depending on the EULA). Agreed. I just don't agree 100% with MPA and thus the EULA and therefore won't be using XP (Windows or Office) any time soon. If it becomes necessary for my work, maybe I'll have to reconsider. However, if enough people feel the same way that I do and stay with their old software or start evaluating Linux or Apple alternatives this only hurts Microsoft in the long run. I think Christian Grauss brought up a good point about the potential for Microsoft to start charging for XP product activation in 5-6 years when XP is old and nearly obsolete or worse yet refuse activation in order to force upgrades. I just have a nagging feeling that Microsoft is following the wrong path here.
Mike Mullikin - Sonork 100.10096 "Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." - Drew Carey
Mike Mullikin wrote: I just don't agree 100% with MPA and thus the EULA and therefore won't be using XP (Windows or Office) any time soon. The EULA is basically the same as before, the MPA is just there to enforce parts of it. I would not base my desicion not to use Office XP purely on the fact that I didn't like activation (I cannot talk about Windows XP as I am still very much in the middle of evaulating it). I don't know if you've evaulated it, but the stability enhancements are worth the full retails cost alone, let alone an upgrade license. And the productivity enhancements are not just "bloated features", they are extremely useful. If you've ever had to fight with any form of autoformating then again Office XP is worth the license cost just for that. With all that and more, Office XP would a bargin at five times the cost. Mike Mullikin wrote: this only hurts Microsoft in the long run. I think you'll find that the vast majority of users of any of the software from any company that uses product activation, do not think like this. Mike Mullikin wrote: I think Christian Grauss brought up a good point about the potential for Microsoft to start charging for XP product activation in 5-6 years when XP is old and nearly obsolete or worse yet refuse activation in order to force upgrades. In a way you are charged for activation now - it's called the license. As to withdrawing your license in the future, they can only do that if you violate part of the EULA acording to my copy. If you do not have a time limited license then they cannot legally withdraw it in the future. As re-activation is not the aquisation of a new license, nor even the use of a current one, there are no charges involved, and they have no right under the contract to revoke your license because of your refusal to pay should they decide to charge; unless both parties agree to a new contract amending this. Mike Mullikin wrote: I just have a nagging feeling that Microsoft is following the wrong path here Many other companies have been using this aproach to license enforcement for years with no significant problems. Why should Microsof tbe any different? ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the I
-
David Wulff wrote: You "own" your car, you do not "own" the software. You own the right to use the software subject to the terms and conditions you agreed to by either purchasing, installing, or using it (depending on the EULA). Agreed. I just don't agree 100% with MPA and thus the EULA and therefore won't be using XP (Windows or Office) any time soon. If it becomes necessary for my work, maybe I'll have to reconsider. However, if enough people feel the same way that I do and stay with their old software or start evaluating Linux or Apple alternatives this only hurts Microsoft in the long run. I think Christian Grauss brought up a good point about the potential for Microsoft to start charging for XP product activation in 5-6 years when XP is old and nearly obsolete or worse yet refuse activation in order to force upgrades. I just have a nagging feeling that Microsoft is following the wrong path here.
Mike Mullikin - Sonork 100.10096 "Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." - Drew Carey
In addition to my previous reply:- Mike Mullikin wrote: However, if enough people feel the same way that I do and stay with their old software or start evaluating Linux or Apple alternatives Nobody should use that as a basis to evaulate alternatives. There is no excuse for not doing so as part of your general IT evaulation process. If you stick with one product "because it works" and ignore the rest, you could be missing out on something better. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: I just don't agree 100% with MPA and thus the EULA and therefore won't be using XP (Windows or Office) any time soon. The EULA is basically the same as before, the MPA is just there to enforce parts of it. I would not base my desicion not to use Office XP purely on the fact that I didn't like activation (I cannot talk about Windows XP as I am still very much in the middle of evaulating it). I don't know if you've evaulated it, but the stability enhancements are worth the full retails cost alone, let alone an upgrade license. And the productivity enhancements are not just "bloated features", they are extremely useful. If you've ever had to fight with any form of autoformating then again Office XP is worth the license cost just for that. With all that and more, Office XP would a bargin at five times the cost. Mike Mullikin wrote: this only hurts Microsoft in the long run. I think you'll find that the vast majority of users of any of the software from any company that uses product activation, do not think like this. Mike Mullikin wrote: I think Christian Grauss brought up a good point about the potential for Microsoft to start charging for XP product activation in 5-6 years when XP is old and nearly obsolete or worse yet refuse activation in order to force upgrades. In a way you are charged for activation now - it's called the license. As to withdrawing your license in the future, they can only do that if you violate part of the EULA acording to my copy. If you do not have a time limited license then they cannot legally withdraw it in the future. As re-activation is not the aquisation of a new license, nor even the use of a current one, there are no charges involved, and they have no right under the contract to revoke your license because of your refusal to pay should they decide to charge; unless both parties agree to a new contract amending this. Mike Mullikin wrote: I just have a nagging feeling that Microsoft is following the wrong path here Many other companies have been using this aproach to license enforcement for years with no significant problems. Why should Microsof tbe any different? ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the I
David Wulff wrote: As to withdrawing your license in the future, they can only do that if you violate part of the EULA acording to my copy. If you do not have a time limited license then they cannot legally withdraw it in the future. As re-activation is not the aquisation of a new license, nor even the use of a current one, there are no charges involved, and they have no right under the contract to revoke your license because of your refusal to pay should they decide to charge; unless both parties agree to a new contract amending this. I find it curious that a man such as yourself who openly hates Americans trusts and defends an American corporation so vigorously. Would you be so trusting of BT??
Mike Mullikin - Sonork 100.10096 "Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." - Drew Carey
-
David Wulff wrote: As to withdrawing your license in the future, they can only do that if you violate part of the EULA acording to my copy. If you do not have a time limited license then they cannot legally withdraw it in the future. As re-activation is not the aquisation of a new license, nor even the use of a current one, there are no charges involved, and they have no right under the contract to revoke your license because of your refusal to pay should they decide to charge; unless both parties agree to a new contract amending this. I find it curious that a man such as yourself who openly hates Americans trusts and defends an American corporation so vigorously. Would you be so trusting of BT??
Mike Mullikin - Sonork 100.10096 "Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." - Drew Carey
Note, when I state "you" I am referring to the reader, whomever you may be. Mike Mullikin wrote: I find it curious that a man such as yourself who openly hates Americans trusts and defends an American corporation so vigorously. I fail to see how my comments could have provoked this question, but, I am not defending where I do not deem defense is due. Microsoft may have legal obligations to you, but you also have legal obligations to them. You can't go around stating that Microsoft should be more concious of the legality of their products and business practises if you yourself do not abide by the same laws that are there to govern you and your practises. Mike Mullikin wrote: Would you be so trusting of BT?? I will trust that any individual (be that a corporation or a human being) will stand by their word and abide by applicable laws, just as they would expect me to do the same. If a company breaches this trust with me then it will lower my trust in them. To date Microsoft have not used their monopoly (be it legal or not) in any way that has directly and negatively affected myself or my business - but rather are responsible for my income and thus everything I have to my name short of my education - whereas British Telecom are abusing their monopoly in a way that directly affects their customers - not just me, but many, many more - which degrades the entire telecomunications industry in the United Kingdom (and possibly abroad). I lost my trust in BT enrirely when they decided that they way to get out of their debt was by milking their customers for services they are not receiving. If Microsoft make me shell out £500 a year for a piece of software that is never delivered, and did nothing about it, I would lose faith in them as well, as I would with anybody. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
-
Note, when I state "you" I am referring to the reader, whomever you may be. Mike Mullikin wrote: I find it curious that a man such as yourself who openly hates Americans trusts and defends an American corporation so vigorously. I fail to see how my comments could have provoked this question, but, I am not defending where I do not deem defense is due. Microsoft may have legal obligations to you, but you also have legal obligations to them. You can't go around stating that Microsoft should be more concious of the legality of their products and business practises if you yourself do not abide by the same laws that are there to govern you and your practises. Mike Mullikin wrote: Would you be so trusting of BT?? I will trust that any individual (be that a corporation or a human being) will stand by their word and abide by applicable laws, just as they would expect me to do the same. If a company breaches this trust with me then it will lower my trust in them. To date Microsoft have not used their monopoly (be it legal or not) in any way that has directly and negatively affected myself or my business - but rather are responsible for my income and thus everything I have to my name short of my education - whereas British Telecom are abusing their monopoly in a way that directly affects their customers - not just me, but many, many more - which degrades the entire telecomunications industry in the United Kingdom (and possibly abroad). I lost my trust in BT enrirely when they decided that they way to get out of their debt was by milking their customers for services they are not receiving. If Microsoft make me shell out £500 a year for a piece of software that is never delivered, and did nothing about it, I would lose faith in them as well, as I would with anybody. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
David Wulff wrote: To date Microsoft have not used their monopoly (be it legal or not) in any way that has directly and negatively affected myself or my business - but rather are responsible for my income and thus everything I have to my name short of my education You're kidding, right? What if IBM had never developed its PC or killed the project early on. What if Compaq had never cloned the BIOS? What if Seattle Software refused to sell QDOS to Microsoft? If any of these scenarios had taken place it's extremely doubtful that Microsoft would have become anything near what it is today. There is even an excellent chance that Microsoft would have been nothing but a footnote in the history of personal computers and an excellent chance that Apple would have thrived and become today's Microsoft. Do you mean to tell me that in Microsoft's absence you would have been unable use Apple's development tools and API's to create your applications? I think you give Microsoft too much credit. They were in the right place at the right time, led by an incredible businessman and have developed into a master in marketing, but they really haven't yet developed anything so revolutionary that we can't believe that someone else wouldn't have done roughly the same thing.
Mike Mullikin - Sonork 100.10096 "Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar." - Drew Carey
-
Could you supply proof? I was unable to locate anything reliable. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I wrote a program in Visual C++ that allows me to send over 5,000 GIGABYTES of Video to every computer and TV Set connected to the Internet in "0" SECONDS (YES! ZERO seconds!)" - Bill SerGio, Professional W*nker
Yeah, I have the source code on my other HDD. Obviously I have no *proof*, to be honest, I was under the impression it was commonly known and had been proven. However if the books which made this claim were exaggerating the degree to which it was definite fact then I guess I'd better not refer to it again... Christian I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now