Thank you, Dave. For all of you out there that don't like MS, be gone!! Go. Run.
Let the rest of us who are agreeing to abide by MS restrictions deal with it in our own way. Like we have for over a decade. And I think that I have done pretty well for myself by using a "lousy, cheap, restrictive, closed, etc, etc" OS. Shame on me! Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com 702.319.4349 > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:IMail_Forum- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Maggard > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 9:14 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Windows Server 2003 Web edition debate. > > OK, I HAVE to say it. > > If you don't like the win2003 web licence agreement, DON"T BUY IT!!!!!! > If the had these restrictions on all win2003 versions I could understand > why > you would have a problem. > They don't, these restritions are ONLY on the 'economy' version. > They created web edition to be a cheap webserver OS to compete with Linux. > They are being upfront with the licence restrictions that web edition has, > no one is forcing you to buy it. > Don't like the restrictions? Buy Standard or Enterprice edition, or even > Linux. > I for one think that web edition is a nice option for many people, there > are > lots of people that only want to run a webserver, and the price for > Win2000 > server is to high for their budget, which only left linux which requires a > more knowlegable person to use. Now there is a cheap version of windows > for > just that purpose. > I personally find that requiring you to pay more for multiple processors > MUCH more of a problem than saying "We have a cheap version of windows, > but > it can only be used for......". > The usage agreement is a contract, if you don't like the terms, don't > agree > to them, that is your right, I don't think that you would say "Well I > don't > like the intrest on this loan, so I am only going to pay half that". There > are other option ranging from other windows versions to Linux/unix, or > even > writing your own OS from scratch, you DON'T have to use web edition, but > you > legally DO NOT have the option of buying web edition (it is called WEB > edition for a reason) and then violating the licence agreement. > > And the best part is, if everyone feels the same way about the > restrictions > and thus doesn't buy, guess what?, they won't do it next time. > > You can say "It's not fair that they restrict what I can do", I feel it is > unfair of people like you to take the results of the works of others and > agree to pay X amount of money for a product with the understanding that > you > will use it in the manner it was intended, then turning around and whining > aqbout how its "unfair". > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bruce Barnes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 5:12 AM > Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Windows Server 2003 Web edition debate. > > > > You are so caught up in defending Microsoft that you are mixing apples > and > > oranges. None of the items that Microsoft is attempting to prevent > people > > from using are Microsoft products. Let's look at the history of what > they > > are trying to protect. > > > > Neither WEB HOSTING, SMTP, POP3, TCP/IP, DNS, FTP nor TELNET were > invented > > by Microsoft - they are all open source code, invented by university > > students at UC Berkeley and the University of Illinois, long before > > Microsoft attempted to appropriate them as "their inventions". They > were > > originally made part of the public domain and, therefore, cannot be > > restricted in their use by any individual or company. > > > > Therefore, Microsoft CANNOT legally prevent anyone from loading any > other > > software onto a machine on which their operating system resides. That, > is > > CLEARLY restraint of trade. > > > > If I choose to download Imail Express and use it, I know that I am > > restricted by the total number of users and the fact that there is no > list > > capability. That is very clearly stated on the web site PROIOR to > anyone > > being allowed to download the product. What is also very clear is that > > Ipswitch does not levy any restrictions as to what other software can or > > cannot be loaded onto the same machine. Ipswitch is interested only in > the > > valid licensing of their own products, not anyone else's. > > > > This will not be decided by either you or me, but, ultimately, but by > the > > Justice Department and the Courts in the European Union, where the most > > recent Justice Department rulings and agreements with Microsoft are > > currently under review, and the European Union is looking at putting > > Microsoft thru an even more stringent series of court tests, and > possible > > additional changes to their code, because of some of the restrictions > that > > they have still have in even after the agreements that were effected by > the > > most recent Justice Department rulings and agreements. > > > > Bruce Barnes > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Tolmachoff > > (Lists) > > Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 19:36 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [IMail Forum] Windows Server 2003 Web edition debate. > > > > > > > Like it or not, John, we end users have to be protected against the > > > actions > > > of a company when that company begins to think of itself as god (lower > > > case > > > deliberate). If we allow Microsoft, or any other company, to become > > > overly > > > restrictive with any product, then we run the risk of them developing > a > > > product that will be further restrictive until the cycle runs full > circle > > > and we, as the end users and creators of our businesses, find > ourselves > > > beholden to a single entity who has managed to push all of the other > > > creative endeavors out of business and created a monopoly for > themselves. > > > > To bad you do not comprehend the issue at hand. > > > > A vendor has a product that sells for X amount of money. They decided to > > come out with a restricted use version for a lower cost. You expect to > be > > able to do what you want with that lower cost version instead of > purchasing > > the full version which has no restriction placed on it of what you can > > install and run on it. > > > > What you are stating is you should be able to install Imail Express for > free > > and then Ipswitch has to allow you to have the list service too. > > > > John Tolmachoff > > Engineer/Consultant/Owner > > eServices For You > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > > List Archive: http://www.mail- > archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ > > Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > > List Archive: http://www.mail- > archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ > > Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ > > > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ > Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ > --- > [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus > (http://www.declude.com)] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
