[fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms

Discussion in 'PC Hardware' started by Man-wai Chang ToDie, Feb 21, 2008.

    1. Advertisements

  1. Man-wai Chang ToDie

    Ed Cregger Guest


    ---------------


    It is time that the government intervened and stopped this
    monopolistic nonsense by Microsoft. I'm ready to dive into
    Linux, though I think it is overly complicated and not user
    friendly. I would love to see a competing operating system
    arise and knock the Microsoft tyrant square on its ass.

    Ed Cregger
     
    Ed Cregger, Feb 22, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  2. Man-wai Chang ToDie

    Ed Cregger Guest


    I'd rather they go back to the old days when once purchased,
    you could install it on as many devices as you pleased.

    I don't blame them for not wanting you to share it with
    friends and customers. It would be illogical to think
    otherwise, but I resent having to pay for each computer that
    I own.

    It should be easy enough for them to track a customer's
    license and ensure that that license only is submitted for
    activation from the same web address.

    Ed Cregger
     
    Ed Cregger, Feb 23, 2008
    #3
  3. Man-wai Chang ToDie

    DevilsPGD Guest

    In message <HpZvj.81049$> "Ed Cregger"
    When, exactly, were those days? They sure weren't in the old mainframes
    of the 70s, nor in the license of DOS and Windows in the 80s and 90s,
    and most definitely not in 2000.
    I happen to agree, and am gravitating heavily toward per-user licensing
    rather then per-installation. Per-user is popular on PDAs, although
    less common in the PC world.
    Web address? What exactly are you talking about?
     
    DevilsPGD, Feb 23, 2008
    #4
  4. Man-wai Chang ToDie

    Dave Guest

    Well your Compaq Tech was close. The CPU (central processing unit, or
    microprocessor) will eventually be obsolete. Truth is, it is already
    obsolete. GPUs, or graphics processing units (the microprocessor on the
    video card, some of them already built into motherboards) are getting so
    powerful that they can handle all the CPU functions (as well as GPU
    functions) quite easily. Eventually, it will be redundant to install a
    "video card" and a "CPU".

    When you only need one chip to perform both functions, what is the point of
    an expansion card to mount it on? That's why the video chip will soon be on
    the motherboard. Will it be built into the motherboard? Possibly. When
    you are upgrading the GPU and CPU (which will soon be both on one chip), the
    cost of upgrading the motherboard is negligible on top of that. So we very
    well could see motherboards with everything built into them soon. Even
    storage!!! Kiss the hard drive goodbye... solid state storage isn't cheap
    enough for mainstream yet. But it's just a matter of time.

    So your compaq tech knew half the story, but he didn't understand, or didn't
    explain, the reasoning behind the embedded video. Now you know... the CPU
    is going the way of the dinosaur. And this has nothing to do with Vista, or
    even Microsoft. The hardware is changing. GPU will replace CPU
    oon. -Dave
     
    Dave, Feb 23, 2008
    #5
  5. I am in complete agreement with you.

    I will never purchase software that requires registration or becomes
    inoperable if it is not registered. Product activation is intolerable. I
    paid for my software and as long as I limit the use of it to myself and
    those who live under my roof I will do with it whatever I dam well please.

    The courts let software makers put anything they want into the EULA and now
    we are suffering the consequences. The result is that we no longer own that
    which we have paid for.

    I am unable to understand how anyone can stomach asking Microsoft's
    permission to upgrade or modify their hardware. What if car makers limited
    how many passengers you could carry or the number of miles or where you
    could drive? It's insane.

    If current trends continue many products will contain some type of
    software. If we as consumers want to retain any of the rights that we
    traditionally associate with ownership then we must vote with our dollars
    and reject products that impose onerous and unfair terms. Microsoft
    products should be first on our list of rejects.

    I just built two identical WIN98SE PCs. I intend to find a replacement for
    Windows and still continue to use the compatiable software I currently own.
    I will eithier suceed in this goal or I will use my current machines until
    they become inoperable at which time I will cease owning computers. I am
    dead fucking serious.
     
    pcbldrNinetyEight, Feb 24, 2008
    #6
  6. Man-wai Chang ToDie

    Ed Cregger Guest

    ***I could install DOS on as many computers as I wanted.
    Legally? Well, that's a different matter. I care about the
    real world, not their legalise.
    ***
    ***All right, I used the wrong term. Why? Because I'm
    getting old and have a bad case of CRS Syndrome. There I go
    again, I can't remember the name. The identifying number for
    your account that begins with 207... Oops, just remembered
    that that changes constantly these days. I'm sure they'll
    think of something. <G>
    ***

    Ed Cregger
     
    Ed Cregger, Feb 24, 2008
    #7
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.