LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 08-12-2005, 02:45 PM   #1
oomfoofoo
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 34

Rep: Reputation: 15
**** Windows, Die You *******!!!


I allocated 6 gigs for windows, installed it, and it won't ******* activate. Even though I used the cd & cd-key that came with my laptop. I posted on another site and all the responses were like this "Just activate over the phone & stop ******** about it" & "are you sure it's a legal copy". Yes ************, i'm sure. I said that the point is I shouldn't have to activate over the phone if I have a legal cd & key and a working internet connection. But Microsoft keeps changing the ******* rules and people keep jumping through the hoops. The only reason I'm keeping windows on my computer is so when people call me & ask for help with their windows systems, I can boot into windows & have something to reference. If I didn't have people calling me all the time & asking for help with Windows I wouldn't have it installed at all!
 
Old 08-12-2005, 03:56 PM   #2
phil.d.g
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,272

Rep: Reputation: 154Reputation: 154
If you want to use Windows you've got to play by their rules, simple as that! Stop moaning about it

Just because your "only using it to have a reference when helping other people" doesn't give you some special sort of privilege whereby you don't have to follow those rules.

Perhaps you might like to set up a blog for these sorts of posts?
 
Old 08-12-2005, 03:56 PM   #3
Megamieuwsel
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Haarlem , the Netherlands
Distribution: VectorLinux SOHO 5.1
Posts: 470

Rep: Reputation: 35
Are these people paying callers?
If not , just follow your heart in this matter and soon the calls will stop all by themselves...

It worked for me.
 
Old 08-12-2005, 04:01 PM   #4
oomfoofoo
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2005
Posts: 34

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally posted by phil.d.g
If you want to use Windows you've got to play by their rules, simple as that! Stop moaning about it

Just because your "only using it to have a reference when helping other people" doesn't give you some special sort of privilege whereby you don't have to follow those rules.

Perhaps you might like to set up a blog for these sorts of posts?
I'm sorry, I thought this was the general forum for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics.
 
Old 08-12-2005, 04:09 PM   #5
phil.d.g
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,272

Rep: Reputation: 154Reputation: 154
It come accross as a rant to me, not a structured arguement to be debated

I have nothing against debating some aspect of Windows and depending on the topic may join in such a debate

Last edited by phil.d.g; 08-12-2005 at 04:10 PM.
 
Old 08-12-2005, 04:22 PM   #6
Haiyadragon
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Gorredijk, Netherlands
Distribution: Arch Linux
Posts: 400

Rep: Reputation: 30
Re: **** Windows, Die You *******!!!

Quote:
Originally posted by oomfoofoo
I allocated 6 gigs for windows, installed it, and it won't ******* activate. Even though I used the cd & cd-key that came with my laptop. I posted on another site and all the responses were like this "Just activate over the phone & stop ******** about it" & "are you sure it's a legal copy". Yes ************, i'm sure. I said that the point is I shouldn't have to activate over the phone if I have a legal cd & key and a working internet connection. But Microsoft keeps changing the ******* rules and people keep jumping through the hoops. The only reason I'm keeping windows on my computer is so when people call me & ask for help with their windows systems, I can boot into windows & have something to reference. If I didn't have people calling me all the time & asking for help with Windows I wouldn't have it installed at all!
Download a corporate version or whatever. Saves alot of time and frustration. No activation required whatsoever.
 
Old 08-12-2005, 04:42 PM   #7
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Debian Testing
Posts: 19,192
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 475Reputation: 475Reputation: 475Reputation: 475Reputation: 475
No don't download a corporate edition. That is known as piracy and LQ does not condone it or people advising our members to do it.
 
Old 08-12-2005, 06:41 PM   #8
stabile007
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Distribution: Ubuntu, Gentoo
Posts: 74

Rep: Reputation: 15
Well maybe you can clarify what you are trying to do. If you are using the disc and key that came with a branded laptop on a machine other then that laptop then you need to call them an activate it because you need to confirm with MS that your laptop is no logner running that same license of Windows and only whatever you are installing onto is the only machine running that license. Yeah its a pain but its their software. Liek others said if your gonna use it you need to play by the rules to stay legal.
 
Old 08-12-2005, 07:47 PM   #9
floppywhopper
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2004
Location: Western Australia
Distribution: Mageia , Centos
Posts: 643
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 136Reputation: 136
quote
I'm sorry, I thought this was the general forum for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics.

floppy say
it is
ask, moan or rant to your hearts content

If people come here ( LQ ) and ask windows questions - great
they're asking in the right place
Windows is the question
Linux is the answer

floppy
 
Old 08-13-2005, 02:45 AM   #10
Haiyadragon
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Gorredijk, Netherlands
Distribution: Arch Linux
Posts: 400

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by XavierP
No don't download a corporate edition. That is known as piracy and LQ does not condone it or people advising our members to do it.
Ok, sorry. But I wish people would stop calling it piracy. Any sane person can tell the difference between clicking a few buttons and raping, killing and plundering.

Anyway, Windows activation is a bitch only hindering the honest buyers, this was kinda my point.
 
Old 08-13-2005, 02:57 AM   #11
vharishankar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2003
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 3,178
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 138Reputation: 138
Yes, Microsoft's policy is to put its genuine paying customers to a lot of hassle just to verify whether they bought a new computer or not.

Everyone should have the ability to change their hardware without asking the OS vendor permission to reinstall/reactivate it. Simple as that. I don't care what "technology" they use to track this, but I am totally against this in principle in any form whatsoever.

Till Microsoft adopts a more customer-friendly attitude, I'm afraid that the so-called "piracy" will continue...
 
Old 08-13-2005, 03:46 AM   #12
SlackerLX
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Herzliyya, Israel
Distribution: SuSE 10.1; Testing Distros
Posts: 1,832

Rep: Reputation: 47
Why FREE?

Owners make several kinds of arguments for giving them the power to control how we use information:
Name calling.
Owners use smear words such as ``piracy'' and ``theft'', as well as expert terminology such as ``intellectual property'' and ``damage'', to suggest a certain line of thinking to the public---a simplistic analogy between programs and physical objects.
Our ideas and intuitions about property for material objects are about whether it is right to take an object away from someone else. They don't directly apply to making a copy of something. But the owners ask us to apply them anyway.
Exaggeration.
Owners say that they suffer ``harm'' or ``economic loss'' when users copy programs themselves. But the copying has no direct effect on the owner, and it harms no one. The owner can lose only if the person who made the copy would otherwise have paid for one from the owner.
A little thought shows that most such people would not have bought copies. Yet the owners compute their ``losses'' as if each and every one would have bought a copy. That is exaggeration---to put it kindly.
The law.
Owners often describe the current state of the law, and the harsh penalties they can threaten us with. Implicit in this approach is the suggestion that today's law reflects an unquestionable view of morality---yet at the same time, we are urged to regard these penalties as facts of nature that can't be blamed on anyone.
This line of persuasion isn't designed to stand up to critical thinking; it's intended to reinforce a habitual mental pathway.
It's elementary that laws don't decide right and wrong. Every American should know that, forty years ago, it was against the law in many states for a black person to sit in the front of a bus; but only racists would say sitting there was wrong.
Natural rights.
Authors often claim a special connection with programs they have written, and go on to assert that, as a result, their desires and interests concerning the program simply outweigh those of anyone else---or even those of the whole rest of the world. (Typically companies, not authors, hold the copyrights on software, but we are expected to ignore this discrepancy.)
To those who propose this as an ethical axiom---the author is more important than you---I can only say that I, a notable software author myself, call it bunk.
But people in general are only likely to feel any sympathy with the natural rights claims for two reasons.
One reason is an overstretched analogy with material objects. When I cook spaghetti, I do object if someone else eats it, because then I cannot eat it. His action hurts me exactly as much as it benefits him; only one of us can eat the spaghetti, so the question is, which? The smallest distinction between us is enough to tip the ethical balance.
But whether you run or change a program I wrote affects you directly and me only indirectly. Whether you give a copy to your friend affects you and your friend much more than it affects me. I shouldn't have the power to tell you not to do these things. No one should.
The second reason is that people have been told that natural rights for authors is the accepted and unquestioned tradition of our society.
As a matter of history, the opposite is true. The idea of natural rights of authors was proposed and decisively rejected when the US Constitution was drawn up. That's why the Constitution only permits a system of copyright and does not require one; that's why it says that copyright must be temporary. It also states that the purpose of copyright is to promote progress---not to reward authors. Copyright does reward authors somewhat, and publishers more, but that is intended as a means of modifying their behavior.
The real established tradition of our society is that copyright cuts into the natural rights of the public---and that this can only be justified for the public's sake.
Economics.
The final argument made for having owners of software is that this leads to production of more software.
Unlike the others, this argument at least takes a legitimate approach to the subject. It is based on a valid goal---satisfying the users of software. And it is empirically clear that people will produce more of something if they are well paid for doing so.
But the economic argument has a flaw: it is based on the assumption that the difference is only a matter of how much money we have to pay. It assumes that ``production of software'' is what we want, whether the software has owners or not.
People readily accept this assumption because it accords with our experiences with material objects. Consider a sandwich, for instance. You might well be able to get an equivalent sandwich either free or for a price. If so, the amount you pay is the only difference. Whether or not you have to buy it, the sandwich has the same taste, the same nutritional value, and in either case you can only eat it once. Whether you get the sandwich from an owner or not cannot directly affect anything but the amount of money you have afterwards.
This is true for any kind of material object---whether or not it has an owner does not directly affect what it is, or what you can do with it if you acquire it.
But if a program has an owner, this very much affects what it is, and what you can do with a copy if you buy one. The difference is not just a matter of money. The system of owners of software encourages software owners to produce something---but not what society really needs. And it causes intangible ethical pollution that affects us all.
 
Old 08-13-2005, 09:55 AM   #13
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Debian Testing
Posts: 19,192
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 475Reputation: 475Reputation: 475Reputation: 475Reputation: 475
Quote:
Originally posted by Haiyadragon
Ok, sorry. But I wish people would stop calling it piracy. Any sane person can tell the difference between clicking a few buttons and raping, killing and plundering.

Anyway, Windows activation is a bitch only hindering the honest buyers, this was kinda my point.
Whatever name you wish to give it, it is still illegal and LQ still does not condone it. If you don't want to activate software, use an earlier version which does not require it. Or don't use it.
 
Old 08-13-2005, 09:58 AM   #14
XavierP
Moderator
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: Kent, England
Distribution: Debian Testing
Posts: 19,192
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 475Reputation: 475Reputation: 475Reputation: 475Reputation: 475
Re: Why FREE?

Quote:
Originally posted by SlackerLX
Words
Whatever title you wish to give it, it still hurts people. The creator of the software, the ones who choose to sell proprietary closed source software, have a legitimate excuse to up the price. They can say that they use the extra money for anti-copying measures and research and whatever.

This means that the people who choose to buy it legitimately have to pay the higher price.

Dress it up all you want, but copying software hurts people (and don't forget that some poor sod who has written a program in his bedroom and wants to start something from the money raised won't get paid).
 
Old 08-13-2005, 10:05 AM   #15
trickykid
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,149

Rep: Reputation: 269Reputation: 269Reputation: 269
Quote:
Originally posted by Haiyadragon
Ok, sorry. But I wish people would stop calling it piracy. Any sane person can tell the difference between clicking a few buttons and raping, killing and plundering.

Anyway, Windows activation is a bitch only hindering the honest buyers, this was kinda my point.
Crying isn't going to help you. Your complaining like an old whiny woman standing in line at the DMV with a thousand illegal immigrants trying to get a green card. Perhaps you need to start worrying about other things instead of one company that has outrageous prices for their software. Don't like the prices, don't buy it or use it. It's a simple choice really. It's not like Bill is putting a gun to your head.

So be the old whiny women and stand in line to get your drivers license without bitching or do us all a favor and don't drive, the roads would probably be better off!
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Die Miva, Die! Apache Woes, Cannot kill Miva linchat Linux - Software 3 09-16-2005 08:03 PM
Die hard windows user, needs help with debian firersa Linux - Newbie 26 07-13-2005 02:27 PM
When a process just won't die DJOtaku Linux - Software 3 05-11-2005 02:46 PM
Die, lotus notes, die (sorry for ranting) slackist General 10 01-10-2005 10:42 AM
Die Caps lock Die! tfdml37 Linux - General 1 06-26-2004 02:00 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration