Will you upgrade to Windows XP?

Perfect summary, Karl. I try to resist being too cynical about things like this, but then human nature surfaces and rains on the cake. Case in point:

Australia was one of a few testbeds for this activation scheme for Office 2000. Now I've have occasion to install Office from cold on numerous occasions, including follow-ons from "clean" Win 98 reinstallations and a similarly clean Win 2k installation. Sometimes Office took the old activation key, sometimes not. A new key was certainly needed when I changed M/board and CPU, and again when I changed to a larger pair of hard drives.

After the second of these hardware changes I was forced to get the key over the phone because on-line activation balked. The MS person I spoke to was most reluctant to give it to me, stating that "this software has already been installed on 2 computers", and then having the imperious arrogance to give me the third degree on exactly when and where I had purchased it.

I've even seen a local mag state that (it's understanding is that) MS will "allow" only three installations of a given piece of software!!!

And yet MS itself acknowledges the obvious need for occasional reinstallation: on the back of the CD jewel case, is the message --
"Don't Lose This Number! You must use it every time you install this software."
No kidding! People are needing to do this all the time, somewhere or other.

MS's holier-than-thou stance doesn't wash too well, either, when you strike something like the following happening:

At the foot of one of the Australian MS anti-piracy pages, trumpeting one of their court victories in which the sinner had been ordered to apologise to MS and promise never to do it again (I kid you not -- that was part of the deal and Chairman Mao would have been SO tickled), there was quoted, as usual, the piracy information telephone number.

On this particular page it had two digits reversed, yielding the telephone number of a small travel agency in the Whitsunday Islands. It turned out that the agency had been plagued with calls, and had been trying for over 6 months (when I called the number) to get MS to fix the Web page -- a two minute job at worst. MS never did get around to it and the page was eventually replaced, about another 6 months later, by a more up-to-date one. Such is the ease and complacency with which MS is content to trample on others' private property!!

The German company that dissected and commented on the XP activation scheme appears to think it a not unreasonable impost on the customer to go through this nonsense with every major hardware upgrade. I beg to differ.
Mike F

ktimmerman said:

Mike Salzlechner said:

Geoffrey

Thats how it was all the time. It just wasnt enforced but still
doesnt change the fact that you where ripping off a software
company for their money.

Click to expand...

True Mike, if that is what you were doing; course there are
already heavy civil and criminal sanctions in place if you were.
But sure can not remember having to give that software company the
right to scan my computer for my computer's components, or
whatever, in order to use their software, (and then rely on their
promise not to abuse the information they gather) .... especially
after they have been found guilty of illegal activities which put
them in the position of me having to use that software. Mike, the
bottom line remains the same, what MicroSoft wants to do to protect
their property interests violates my reasonable expectations of
privacy. I do not believe you would be willing to sign away one of
your most basic civil rights to ensure that MicroSoft can protect
itself from a software pirate.
Warmest Regards
ktimmerman (Karl Timmerman M.A.J.D.)

Click to expand...

Nobody said you have to use it. You can always use something else.

You mean the judge that barely made it out without being sued personally for what he did. Right

If we would invite some of our die hard MAC friends they would definately tell you that MS doesnt have a monoploy so why dont you just get a MAC or Linux.

I can just imageine your hardship when you where forced to illegally install a copy of windows (probably from a CD-R downloaded from the net) on to 10 computers.

Give me a break

If you are not happy with it dont use it. There are other choices out there. Whining doesnt help.

Mike

ktimmerman said:

Mike Salzlechner said:

Well while you may call it fair and reasonable use it is simply a
breach of a license agreement and therfor illegal.

If you are not happy with the license dont use the product.

The CD sample you bring up doesnt work as the CD can only be used
by one person at a time unless copied and then again it is an
illegal offense to do so.

I do not understand why it seems so hard to make people realize
that they do something wrong.

Click to expand...

Well Mike .. I would not use the product if another was available.
But unfortunately, because MicroSoft has engaged in illegal actions
which have made them a monopoly, which by the way is res judicata
.. since a judge has already made that determination .. my options
are limited. An agreement presupposes that you have two people,
with equal bargining power negotiate an agreement: when one of the
parties has so much power that they can dictate the terms of the
agreement, there is no agreement. It is a well settled principal
of law that a contract entered into under duress is not an
enforceable contract as a matter of law. I do not, nor would I
condone the pirating of software; any reasonable person of good
will would condemn it; I do. By the same token, when or if I have
to LICENSE a copy of an OS from MS in order to have access to the
internet, now a necessity, I expect reasonable use of that product.
Reasonable use does not include having to get an access code if I
need to reformat my hard drive or change modems.
Regards
ktimmerman (Karl Timmerman M.A.J.D.)

Click to expand...

Mike Salzlechner said:

Nobody said you have to use it. You can always use something else.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, the real world says that a hell of a lot of us "have to use it", like it or not.

My interest in photography doesn't need any thing at all MS -- I have the Mac for that. But my professional activities most certainly do. The same situation countless others are in purely because that's what their clients are using and many interactions have to be platform-specific.

That's the state of the business world at large, as you'd be perfectly well aware. I'll not get into any debate here about how it got that way, or to what degree or with what intent MS was instrumental in it happening. But it's reality. For the vast majority there IS no real choice; as I said, like it or not.
MF

Dear Mike --

There are many of us who are rather perplexed by your unwillingness/inability (strike out that which does not apply -- I'm making no accusations here) to read responses containing (a) logical appraisals of situations and (b) frequently, incontovertible fact as well. I surmise that you're waiting for Karl, or I, or others who haven't yet succumbed, to descend into yet another tawdry trade of personal insults with you in this thread as has happened so often elsewhere.

The news is that it ain't going to happen. Instead, let's offer you a challenge.

Your Web site gives -- at least on the surface -- all the appearances of a tastefully and professionally conducted operation in which you would appear to play a salient role. Founder and President, yet! I'll even go so far as to say that the air of general professionalism and decorum makes one wonder if you are the same "Michael Salzlechner" at all. Could it be that assuming the less formal mantle of "Mike" causes the cork to come out and lets loose all the bubble and fizz?

BTW#1: I haven't the faintest idea what DataFlex, or virtually anything else here, actually is. But before you respond with "get a life" (or some other equally profound riposte from the Zen of StarZen), remember you've already told us all that we should look to alternative software. Problem solved in advance.

BTW#2: Your stalwart defence of Microsoft-at-all-costs has an interesting change of flavour in one of your own observations on Windows UI quirks: "Some of them can give you a good laugh and some of them can make you fear what will be next." For once we seem to be in agreement, but I'm confident you'll spare no effort to ensure that doesn't last.

Anyway, here's the challenge:

Gather up all your writings from the DPReview forums. If that's too daunting a project, then just restrict it to those that have resulted in reasonable people shutting down communications with you. Then put them all together -- you know, the "Thoughts of President Mike" sort of thing -- and publish them in a nice, philosophical Company Background-and-Makeup brochure to hand out to your prospective clients.

If you're game.

Now, was that sufficiently polite and remote from Microsoft-bashing?

Mike Fitzgerald

Mike Salzlechner said:

If we would invite some of our die hard MAC friends they would
definately tell you that MS doesnt have a monoploy so why dont you
just get a MAC or Linux.

I can just imageine your hardship when you where forced to
illegally install a copy of windows (probably from a CD-R
downloaded from the net) on to 10 computers.

Give me a break

If you are not happy with it dont use it. There are other choices
out there. Whining doesnt help.

Mike

ktimmerman said:

Mike Salzlechner said:

Well while you may call it fair and reasonable use it is simply a
breach of a license agreement and therfor illegal.

If you are not happy with the license dont use the product.

The CD sample you bring up doesnt work as the CD can only be used
by one person at a time unless copied and then again it is an
illegal offense to do so.

I do not understand why it seems so hard to make people realize
that they do something wrong.

Click to expand...

Well Mike .. I would not use the product if another was available.
But unfortunately, because MicroSoft has engaged in illegal actions
which have made them a monopoly, which by the way is res judicata
.. since a judge has already made that determination .. my options
are limited. An agreement presupposes that you have two people,
with equal bargining power negotiate an agreement: when one of the
parties has so much power that they can dictate the terms of the
agreement, there is no agreement. It is a well settled principal
of law that a contract entered into under duress is not an
enforceable contract as a matter of law. I do not, nor would I
condone the pirating of software; any reasonable person of good
will would condemn it; I do. By the same token, when or if I have
to LICENSE a copy of an OS from MS in order to have access to the
internet, now a necessity, I expect reasonable use of that product.
Reasonable use does not include having to get an access code if I
need to reformat my hard drive or change modems.
Regards
ktimmerman (Karl Timmerman M.A.J.D.)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Pasha said:

.....

i recently upgraded a company to office xp, and spend hours on the
phone with my microsoft rep to get the lowdown on the whole
activation thing...

what i heard was mirrored in this article...
http://www.hardocp.com/articles/windows/xp_piracy.html

Microsoft will unoficially give you up to 10 registrations without
any questions... each time you install any of the XP series
products a unique activation key will be generated... this key is
generated by a unique formula which takes into account pieces of
hardware installed on your machine...

Click to expand...

Sorry to blow the comforting illusion and cosy half truth (apologies to Flanders and Swann), but personal experience has shown otherwise. MS used Australia, and a few other out-of-the-way places, as guinea pigs for this scheme when Office 2000 was launched. I guess too many of us are too easy-going down here, because the uproar it deserved never ensued. Here's the story of my experiences with fully licensed MS software.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&page=1&message=1272792

MF

Not accurate!...on the contrary we are not going to upgrade to XP on our 400 plus platforms...we are staying with 2000...there is no requirement to upgrade. We see no loss of funtionality by staying with 2K.

Mike Fitzgerald said:

Mike Salzlechner said:

Nobody said you have to use it. You can always use something else.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, the real world says that a hell of a lot of us
"have to use it", like it or not.
My interest in photography doesn't need any thing at all MS -- I
have the Mac for that. But my professional activities most
certainly do. The same situation countless others are in purely
because that's what their clients are using and many interactions
have to be platform-specific.
That's the state of the business world at large, as you'd be
perfectly well aware. I'll not get into any debate here about how
it got that way, or to what degree or with what intent MS was
instrumental in it happening. But it's reality. For the vast
majority there IS no real choice; as I said, like it or not.
MF

Click to expand...

Mike

i do not defend MS in any way nor am i crazy about the new activation feature.

What i dont like is when i read a lot of these unfounded messages bashing somebody based on the crap somebody else posted here or somewhere else.

People get jealous if somebody else is very successful in doing his business and then you get stuff like that.

as for the 'UI Files' if you would have looked at them you would have realized that all but one are not from Microsoft which is a general problem people have. Software crashes and Microsoft or Windows immediatle gets blamed even though it was the darn software that crashed.

These blame/flame threads are so unproductive as they dont do anything at all. I dont actually know why i got pulled into this lately as i normally distance myself from idiotic fruitless discussion (not an attack on your or anybody's person just an attribute for the discussion itself)

**** --

Fair comment. But as it happens I agree with you 100% and I'll be also be staying with Win 2000. The point I was making was really about the way so much of the business world is tied to Windows (and Office) in general -- not anything to do with the XP upgrade question. I guess I neglected to make that clear enough since this sub-thread had got on to the activation philosophy more than Windows XP per se.

We've been stuck with the Office 2000 activation scheme in Oz now for quite a while, and that immediately struck a chord of course. I suppose I should apologise on behalf of all the wusses down here who didn't kick up nearly enough noise when Office 2k was launched here. No doubt the mild reaction helped to convince M$ that the rest of the world would wear it.

The rest of the world now needs to vote most emphatically with its feet. With Windows XP being a broader based product product than Office, I'm hoping we might wake up here as well.

Cheers,
Mike

**** said:

Mike Fitzgerald said:

Mike Salzlechner said:

Nobody said you have to use it. You can always use something else.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, the real world says that a hell of a lot of us
"have to use it", like it or not.
My interest in photography doesn't need any thing at all MS -- I
have the Mac for that. But my professional activities most
certainly do. The same situation countless others are in purely
because that's what their clients are using and many interactions
have to be platform-specific.
That's the state of the business world at large, as you'd be
perfectly well aware. I'll not get into any debate here about how
it got that way, or to what degree or with what intent MS was
instrumental in it happening. But it's reality. For the vast
majority there IS no real choice; as I said, like it or not.
MF

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Mike Salzlechner said:

I can just imageine your hardship when you where forced to
illegally install a copy of windows (probably from a CD-R
downloaded from the net) on to 10 computers.

Mike

Click to expand...

Mike: I was actually referencing the Court of Appeals wihich upheld the trial courts decision. But, Mike, you personally now have a problem. The above statement accuses me of a federal crime. As a lawyer I can share with you, even in the State of Florida, wrongfully accusing a person of a crime and publishing that accusation is called "Libal". You published your accusation and the accusation is false. Because you accused me of committing a crime, that is called "Libel Per Se", meaning, should I chose to sue you here in Kansas City in Federal Court, I would not have to prove that your libalous statement caused me any financial damage but you would have to prove that your accusation is true. As with any of our civil rights, "free speech" also has a componant that holds you accountable for that speech. This is probably one of the reasons intelligent persons refrain from publishing ad hominum attacks when their position lacks a logical basis. Having read a log of your posts, (which are somewhat light on logic and heavy with acrimonious attacks), I must admit a strange desire to lay down a filing fee and compell you to hire a lawyer to accompany you to Kansas City and defend your accusations against me in Federal Court. However, assuming that your accusation was made without malice and in frustration because of your inablilty to respond logically, a simple apology will suffice me.
Karl H. Timmerman M.A.J.D.
Attorney at Law

Ben said:

Does anyone plan on upgrading from either Windows 2000 0r Windows
Me to Windows XP when it is released?

Click to expand...

I have been using XP for over 6 months now as an MS beta (and alpha) tester and am now running RC1. After using the OS for so long you realize how improved it's UI and usability is over WIN 2K, an WIN 9x. So much so that working on a non XP system is painfull.

It has all of the stability of Win 2k (and greatly improved memory management and multi-tasking over Win 9x) with the hardware support of Win 9x (and then some). The usability improvements for RW-CD, removable media and multi-media are a joy to use. The whole UI is much cleaner and the whole system is much more user friendly.

I would wager that 90% of you on this thread would move to XP if you used it for a few weeks and would never look back.

On the issue of the requirement that the user has to activate the OS...

this is extremly easy to do and has been designed to prevent casual copying of the OS. Contrary to media reports, no personal data is sent to MS and you are able to make hardware changes without having to re activate the OS. I think those of you that are averse to this requirement are either brain washed by the media or hate the fact that you cannot copy the OS.

This is the best OS for the PC bar none!

rbimages said:

..... Contrary to media reports, no personal data is
sent to MS

Click to expand...

A lot of people are missing the point that any unique PC hardware "signature", even if it is a conglomerate or checksum type string derived from various hardware sybsystems, is personal data simply because, like a personal signature, it is unique to the owner.

rbimages said:

and you are able to make hardware changes without having
to re activate the OS.

Click to expand...

As a general statement -- not so. Even Microsoft itself is admitting that hardware changes of sufficient magnitude will require reactivation. The following appeared in ZDNet News, containing a verbatim quote from a Microsoft spokesman -- i.e. not media flavoured:
---------------------------------

' Tom Bailey, Microsoft's lead product for Office, acknowledged this scenario can happen.

' "In order for the activation to take, it identifies a wide variety of components in your system," he explained. "If a certain number of components change over time--for example, you get a new video card, add memory, this, that or the other thing to that PC--it will ask you to reactivate." '
---------------------------------

And MS's attitude when this is required? Here's how I was treated (take particular note that a new activation key was necessary):
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&page=1&message=1272792

Australians and New Zealanders were too small of voice to offer any real resistance to this scheme. One can only hope that by applying it worldwide, the sheer volume of the inevitable reactivation traffic will compel MS to cry Uncle sooner or later.

What is insulting to the customer, to the point of obscenity, is that MS is one of the major driving forces in this crazy hardware/software upgrade cycle that has ensnared the world's personal computer users, while having the gall to treat hardware replacements as a low-key, side issue.

rbimages said:

I think those of you that are averse to this
requirement are either brain washed by the media or hate the fact
that you cannot copy the OS.

Click to expand...

That invites the equally logical (or illogical, if you prefer) response that those who condone it have perhaps been brainwashed by the "Microsoft is Good for You" propaganda.
MF

As a casual observer and not a participant in the disussion. It would almost be worth going to Kansas City just to watch the judge laugh that out of court. I think you'd have a really difficult time making a libel charge out of that statement.

But mind you, I'm a pilot, not a M.A.J.D. (but my son is)

Jim

ktimmerman said:

Mike Salzlechner said:

I can just imageine your hardship when you where forced to
illegally install a copy of windows (probably from a CD-R
downloaded from the net) on to 10 computers.

Mike

Click to expand...

Mike: I was actually referencing the Court of Appeals wihich
upheld the trial courts decision. But, Mike, you personally now
have a problem. The above statement accuses me of a federal crime.
As a lawyer I can share with you, even in the State of Florida,
wrongfully accusing a person of a crime and publishing that
accusation is called "Libal".

Click to expand...

Mike Salzlechner said:

.....
as for the 'UI Files' if you would have looked at them you would
have realized that all but one are not from Microsoft which is a
general problem people have. Software crashes and Microsoft or
Windows immediatle gets blamed even though it was the darn software
that crashed.

Click to expand...

I did, as it happens, look through all your 'UI Files'. And it didn't escape me that they represented mainly third party software. My point was simply this:

'The Windows UI-files'

• your heading, at the top of the page
• your bold red formatting
• your upper case 'W'

Any sane reader of this page is going to take it as lampooning the MS product. The possibility that s/he mightn't appreciate the contextual significance of 'Windows UI' -- at least to begin with -- is secondary.
See what I mean about logic?

MF

Jim Dawson said:

But mind you, I'm a pilot, not a M.A.J.D. (but my son is)

Jim

Click to expand...

Ah .. proves my belief, Jim, that some folks don't steer their children to higher callings

Maybe so .. maybe not. Guess you'd have to go to court and find out. I have no real desire to do so ... otherwise I would have filed an action today. Point being: there is no substitute for civility when exchanging differing view points; isn't exchanging differing view points the purpose of any discussion?
Regards Karl

Mike

I'm in Australia, I have tasted the pain of activation with front page xp, since I had to reformat my hard disk 3 times to fix a small problem & the problem hasn't fixed yet, & God know how many times I have to do it again, since all new MS software are going to be activated, Hope I don't need anymore MS softwares (that if it is possible), but I don't want to go in more argument, all what I can say that for someone who doesn't believe in piracy can easly be treated as one, since this activating scheam arrived.

every time you call you start wondering what are they going to think now, specially when someone like me who changes hardwares so much, & a clean installation every 4 ro 5 months.

it's Pain_

David

Mike Fitzgerald said:

rbimages said:

..... Contrary to media reports, no personal data is
sent to MS

Click to expand...

A lot of people are missing the point that any unique PC hardware
"signature", even if it is a conglomerate or checksum type string
derived from various hardware sybsystems, is personal data simply
because, like a personal signature, it is unique to the owner.

Mike Fitzgerald said:

and you are able to make hardware changes without having
to re activate the OS.

Click to expand...

As a general statement -- not so. Even Microsoft itself is
admitting that hardware changes of sufficient magnitude will
require reactivation. The following appeared in ZDNet News,
containing a verbatim quote from a Microsoft spokesman -- i.e. not
media flavoured:
---------------------------------
' Tom Bailey, Microsoft's lead product for Office, acknowledged
this scenario can happen.

' "In order for the activation to take, it identifies a wide
variety of components in your system," he explained. "If a certain
number of components change over time--for example, you get a new
video card, add memory, this, that or the other thing to that
PC--it will ask you to reactivate." '
---------------------------------

And MS's attitude when this is required? Here's how I was treated
(take particular note that a new activation key was necessary):
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&page=1&message=1272792

Australians and New Zealanders were too small of voice to offer any
real resistance to this scheme. One can only hope that by applying
it worldwide, the sheer volume of the inevitable reactivation
traffic will compel MS to cry Uncle sooner or later.
What is insulting to the customer, to the point of obscenity, is
that MS is one of the major driving forces in this crazy
hardware/software upgrade cycle that has ensnared the world's
personal computer users, while having the gall to treat hardware
replacements as a low-key, side issue.

Mike Fitzgerald said:

I think those of you that are averse to this
requirement are either brain washed by the media or hate the fact
that you cannot copy the OS.

Click to expand...

That invites the equally logical (or illogical, if you prefer)
response that those who condone it have perhaps been brainwashed by
the "Microsoft is Good for You" propaganda.
MF

Click to expand...

David_oz said:

..... someone who doesn't believe in piracy can easly be
treated as one, since this activating scheam arrived.
every time you call you start wondering what are they going to
think now .....

Click to expand...

David, you've made a very important point about the way society is heading, one of the more insidious aspects of it being the way corporate entities are putting themselves on pedestals above the individual. I've lost count of the number of stores "requiring" that customers -- chiefly targeting teenage kids -- leave their bags at the front of the store or even outside. They are paranoid about their own Holy Dollar while not giving a fig about their own customers' equal entitlement to personal property security.

Hands up anyone who hasn't at some time been made to feel awkward -- even guilty -- about taking goods in a carrybag into, say, a supermarket that carries similar products, only because doing so saves an otherwise long and inconvenient extra trip to the car en route.

Yes, street crime and theft of all kinds are indeed on the up and up. But it's society's problem as a whole. As a member of society I'll take my share of the responsibility by trying my darnedest to instill decent attitudes into my kids, by taking realistic precautions re home and vehicle security and not bitching about the expense of doing so, and by copping the occasional loss, vandalism etc. without too much whining as a side effect of our age.

But I will not accept that it is reasonable for corporations, that are likewise members of that same society and, moreover, owe their livelihood to it, to polish their halos while transferring the entire risk and inconvenience -- not to mention "Usual Suspect" status -- over to the private citizen.

Steve Jobs, cracking the whip over his developers, once calculated that a 5 second reduction in boot time for a personal computer woud save an aggregate time, each day, equal to one person's productive lifetime across a nominal user base. Has anyone stopped to estimate the dollar value that Microsoft's new convoluted security measures alone are going to cost the business world over the typical life of each of its products -- time for which the customer pays entirely, but for Microsoft's sole benefit ?

Dave52127 said:

specially when someone like me who changes hardwares so
much, & a clean installation every 4 ro 5 months.

Click to expand...

Yes, procedures which you are categorically entitled to carry out, at your absolute discretion -- quite aside from what you are forced into by crashes and other major disruptive problems.
MF

Windows? Isn't this a pro forum? I thought all true pros use Mac, at least all the professionals I know do. And I know a lot of them. Not sure why you cna't afford to spend a couple of dollars more when your livelhood relies on a machine that can do what it's designed to do, one that is designed around the user (as the Mac is), not the machine (the Wintel box). Who wants a crappy screen gamma, one that will spend a lot of time blue anyway, and an OS that still isn't right, much less aesthetically pleasing.

-Norm

Norman Ginear said:

Windows? Isn't this a pro forum? I thought all true pros use Mac,
at least all the professionals I know do. And I know a lot of them.
Not sure why you cna't afford to spend a couple of dollars more
when your livelhood relies on a machine that can do what it's
designed to do, one that is designed around the user (as the Mac
is), not the machine (the Wintel box). Who wants a crappy screen
gamma, one that will spend a lot of time blue anyway, and an OS
that still isn't right, much less aesthetically pleasing.

-Norm

Click to expand...

Ohh No, not this war again....
David

Depends on what the verdict is on the final release. I know one thing, I won't be the first on the block.

Jim C.

Ben said:

Does anyone plan on upgrading from either Windows 2000 0r Windows
Me to Windows XP when it is released?

Click to expand...