OT: Re: windows SUCKS!!!

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 16:27 -0700, Jason Spatafore wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-07-04 at 15:11 -0700, keith smith wrote:
> > 
> > So if someone decides not to go with windows and use Linux, is there
> > not a learning curve there also.
> > 
> > What about the cost of learning a new programming language every 6 to
> > 10 years?  Is there a cost to that?
> > 
> > Writing and re-wringing software is there not a cost to that also?
> > Writing an app for DOS then migrating it to Windows, then more
> > windows... then making it web based or browser based.  What next?
> > Doesn't this cost too?
> > 
> > What if we were still with DOS?  WOW most of us would not have a
> > job.  
> > 
> 
> Keith,
> 
> I respect your view here. But I must ask you...why are you comparing
> apples to oranges? Activation has absolutely no bearing on making a
> product better nor does it have a bearing on *advancing technology*. It
> was implemented to *reduce costs* and has not done so. I made no attack
> on progress...I made an attack on wastefulness. Windows Activation is
> 100% waste. (Much like any activation.) 
> 
> If people want to steal, they will steal your product. Windows XP SP3 is
> on it's way out....$20.00 says pirates have activation disabled within a
> week of release. Don't punish your users for the immorality of a few. 
----
honestly, after reading your earlier diatribe, I couldn't help but
wonder what it has to do with Linux - after all, this is a Linux list.

Yes, Microsoft, like other companies is heavily invested in technologies
that seek to tie usage to a valid sale and they engage in this because
they believe it to be a worthwhile strategy. I fail to see how/why this
is of interest to a Linux mail list though.

I find some of their other tactics such as their restrictive EULA, their
active efforts into DRM at the expense of access to devices and
documents are far more egregious than the activation scheme that you are
railing about. Personally, I found it easy enough to just enter the
installation codes after a sysprep install (in fact, you can automate
the installation code process of sysprep).

I would suppose that an argument could be made that by purchasing
proprietary software, the purchaser has a vested interest in the
economic viability in the company that makes the software and thus would
want that company to maximize its revenues which at least on some level,
imperils your arguments about activation requirements and the
'immorality of a few.' The level of impairment, like the suitability of
activation requirements of Windows itself though really is of minimal
interest to the list.

Craig