---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 01:39:47 -0000
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [pctoolbin] Re: WinXP etc.
Brad--
I can fully understand MS's desire to combat software piracy but I
think they're going about from the wrong end. In the last year, MS
has won court cases against three companies that were producing
counterfeit software here in the Atlanta area and 2 of them were
repeat offenders. These are the people that I think MS should go
after, not the casual user who burns a copy for his buddy. These and
the small shops that are using one copy of Windows to load all the
computers they sell, which makes price competition very difficult for
the honest shop. The reason is that the companies making counterfeit
software or loading the OS don't care about activation, they don't
even care if the product has a valid ID key. All they want to do is
sell it by the case to some schmo who turns around and sells the stuff
at some computer show or puts an add in the paper. These are the
people who are making a profit off the software.
Another point is this: When you force someone to use your product
simply because you can, you then have to maintain that monoply at all
costs because the moment an alternative becomes available, people will
leave you in droves. And many of them will leave just for spite,
because they were held captive for so long. I feel a better business
model is one where your product is widely used because people want to
use it even if there are alternatives. You get more flies with honey
than you do with vinegar.
Microsoft's new licensing schemes for business now will require them
to upgrade when Microsoft says, not when they feel a need to. Why?
Because Microsoft needs to stabilize it's revenue stream. Since all
but specialized apps will run adequately on the last generation of
computers and OS's, there is no need to use the ones available now,
much less the ones coming later this year.
And there are the points raised by Steve Gibson (and M$'s less than
adequate reply) in response to the DDoS attack on his website in May.
(If you have time, read the articles at www.grc.com and follow the
links.) Being able to spoof IP addresses, without egress filtering by
ISP's, allows the hacker to initiate a DoS attack right from his own
computer, without the bother of taking control of other machines and
creating 'bots and all that that entails. I don't know if it will be
as bad as some predict but I think it will significantly alter what
the web is and how we use it.
HEY!?! Who left that soapbox in here?? I hate when I stumble over
stuff like that.
JMHO Tom Hunt
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Brad Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> S.M.Kelly,
> >I wondering how copies can be burned and distributed of WinXP with
the
> new Activation requirements? I've been testing since Beta 1, 2, and
> now RC1 and all require activation. After you install once, every
> install after that bombs internet activation and requires a call to
MS
> to activate. (they ask you a bunch of questions regarding why they
see
> you've already installed it once.) Believe me I've been through at
> least a dozen times between WinXP and the OfficeXP copy I received
from
> MS. (snip)
>
>>>>>>>>snip
> Yeah, Linux looks mo' better every day ;) Nothing against M$
protecting
> their bottom line, but there's more than one way to skin a cat, or
do
> up a document, aye?
>
> regards,
> /b
Visit http://www.datadepo.com to purchase the world's best PC Diagnostic and Recovery
tools. Visit http://ld.net?datadepotinc for dirt-cheap long distance rates and low
prices on telecom equipment and services.
To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit
http://unsub.pcdiag.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message.
Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies.
More info can be found at;
http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html
