"To use this media..." a klucz? :)
Pożyczyć na czas instalacji, o ile masz od kogo
O nośnik się nie martwię, bo mam oryginalny. Problem jednak jest w samym
kluczu. Teoretycznie produkty MS starsze niż XP nie posiadały mechanizmu
aktywacji. Tym samym nie mają sprawdzania unikalności klucza.
Ale czy to znaczy, że klucz mam wziąć z tego samego oryginalnego nośnika
z którego instalować będę system? Teoretycznie tak by wskazywała logika,
ale wolę zapytać niż później się tłumaczyć (albo co gorsza łamać zasady
licencji i mieć przez to problemy).
Wiem, że jest tu kilka osób blisko związanych z MS i liczyłem iż któraś
z nich wypowie się jakie jest stanowisko MS w tej sprawie.
Jacek
AIDA32 ?
Ale nie pamietam czy byl darmowy...chyba jednak tak
psinfo.
do pewnego stopnia Microsoft Software Inventory Analyzer
Chodzilo mi o cos lekkiego i bez instalacji zadnych agentow.
Microsoft Software Inventory Analyzer
wada: sprawdza tylko soft Microsoftu
pozdrawiam
Szymon
Jak wlacze automatyczne sciaganie lat, to zaraz sciagnie mi sprawdzanie
legalnosci.
W W2k nie ma sprawdzania legalności póki co (i raczej nie będzie, bo go już
nie rozwijają).
| czym musisz posiadac tez legalny nosnik do 2000 Pro.
| A to niby czemu ?
| Bo korzystanie z prawa do downgrade zaklada posiadanie legalnego nosnika
do
| down-levelowego
| systemu operacyjnego.
Tu jest cytat z jednego z działów Questions&Answers ze strony Microsoft:
The Windows XP EULA grants you a âśdowngradeâ right, that is the right to
install and run a previous version of Microsoft Windows. However, under
the terms of the EULA, the Windows XP EULA remains applicable. In order to
downgrade, it is necessary for you to accept the terms of the Windows XP
EULA by going through the initial start-up process and accepting the
Windows XP license. Thereafter, you (or the OEM, on your behalf if
authorized) may delete Windows XP from the computer and install a prior
version of Microsoft Windows. You user may not install a prior version
unless your have deleted Windows XP from the computer system. The EULA
specifically provides that neither the OEM nor Microsoft will provide
support for the downgraded version or supply the media from which you will
copy the downgraded version. You (or the OEM on your behalf) may use the
media from any genuine Microsoft software for which it is legally licensed
to install the downgrade software, for example: Select, Open, Retail (FPP)
or system builder (E2E) media. (Note that the installation of a prior
version of Microsoft Windows using media supplied in connection with
another legally licensed computer does not affect the license status of
such other computer (i.e. You do not have to delete the earlier version
from the other PCs) â Microsoft is simply authorizing you to use this media
to accomplish the downgrade on the new computer system.)Â You retain the
right to reinstall Windows XP at any time, provided you also delete the
prior version.
| Jak wlacze automatyczne sciaganie lat, to zaraz sciagnie mi sprawdzanie
| legalnosci.
W W2k nie ma sprawdzania legalności póki co (i raczej nie będzie, bo go
już
nie rozwijają).
Hmmm. NO to ja zglupialem. M<i na kazdym W2K chche sie instalowac lata,
ktora sprawdza legalnosc systemu. Bardzo dziwne. A chce sie ladowac gdzies
od dobrego roku czasu - wtedy musiala powstac.
| | czym musisz posiadac tez legalny nosnik do 2000 Pro.
| | A to niby czemu ?
| Bo korzystanie z prawa do downgrade zaklada posiadanie legalnego
nosnika
| do
| down-levelowego
| systemu operacyjnego.
Tu jest cytat z jednego z działów Questions&Answers ze strony Microsoft:
The Windows XP EULA grants you a âśdowngradeâ right, that is the right to
install and run a previous version of Microsoft Windows. However, under
the terms of the EULA, the Windows XP EULA remains applicable. In order to
downgrade, it is necessary for you to accept the terms of the Windows XP
EULA by going through the initial start-up process and accepting the
Windows XP license. Thereafter, you (or the OEM, on your behalf if
authorized) may delete Windows XP from the computer and install a prior
version of Microsoft Windows. You user may not install a prior version
unless your have deleted Windows XP from the computer system. The EULA
specifically provides that neither the OEM nor Microsoft will provide
support for the downgraded version or supply the media from which you will
copy the downgraded version. You (or the OEM on your behalf) may use the
media from any genuine Microsoft software for which it is legally licensed
to install the downgrade software, for example: Select, Open, Retail (FPP)
or system builder (E2E) media. (Note that the installation of a prior
version of Microsoft Windows using media supplied in connection with
another legally licensed computer does not affect the license status of
such other computer (i.e. You do not have to delete the earlier version
from the other PCs) â Microsoft is simply authorizing you to use this
media
to accomplish the downgrade on the new computer system.) You retain the
right to reinstall Windows XP at any time, provided you also delete the
prior version.
No i ? Z angielskim u mnie troche na bakier - gdzie jest napisane, ze nosnik
musi byc oryginalny ?? Ja czytalem umowe po polsku i tego nie widzialem :
http://www.microsoft.com/poland/partner/download/default.mspx#EBAAA
Fantom
"License Agreement ("EULA") is a legal agreement between
you (either an individual or a single entity) and the
manufacturer ("Manufacturer") of the computer system or computer
system component ("HARDWARE") with which you acquired the
Microsoft software product(s) identified above ("SOFTWARE
PRODUCT" or "SOFTWARE"). If the SOFTWARE
PRODUCT is not accompanied by new HARDWARE, you may not use
or copy the SOFTWARE PRODUCT. [....]"
"[...] The term "COMPUTER" as used herein shall mean the
HARDWARE, if the HARDWARE is a single computer system, or
shall mean the computer system with which the HARDWARE operates,
if the HARDWARE is a computer system component.[...]"
Do tego dodam jeszcze art. 385(3) pkt 9 [oraz pkt 10 do
EULA suplementarnych] kodeksu cywilnego.
Inna sprawa, ze mam watpliwosci do do waznosci postanowien umowy
zawartej w PL w ramach obrotu konsumenckiego gdy umowa sporzadzona jest
w jezyku obcym, tu angielskim.
Jestem posiadaczem Windowsa, od dłuższczego czasu nurtuje mnie następujące
pytanie: Czy nie otwierając żadnych załączników, wchodząc tylko na zaufane
strony, nie otwieranie zadnych usług typu telnet, ftp moge narazić sie na
włamanie na mój komputer? Według mnie nie, gdyż nie daje potencajlnemu
intruzowi szansy na wykonanie jakiegoś backdoora lub trojana na moim
komputerze, ale pewnie sie myle ;( Jak intruz może zdobyć dane z mojego
systemu, kiedy wszystkie drogi są zamknięte(oczywiście zostawiając usługi
niezbędne do korzystania z internetu, sieci lokalnej etc.)
Wiesz.. to jest tak. Jeśli na tym komputerze nie masz nic dla Ciebie
ważnego, a już szczególnie poufnego, to możesz się nie przejmować..
nawet jeśli ktoś zdalnie przejmie nad nim kontrolę... to cóż.. zawsze
możesz to zaorać i postawić system od nowa.
W każdym innym przypadku polecam Google i wyszukiwanie: windows,
security itd...
Na początek polecam artykuł:
<http://www.hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm
Podoba mi się cytat:
"A government that uses Microsoft software is not an independent
government. Any government that wants to be independent of the United
States government, and any government that represents itself as
controlled by its own people, cannot use Microsoft operating systems or
other Microsoft proprietary systems. "
Pozdrawiam,
-Krzysiek
"Krzysztof Gil" <k@post.plwrote in message
| |
| ale przeciez nie zaakceptowal, odsprzedaje wiec.
No i zgoda, może to czynić...
| jak widać sam tytuł darmowego egzaminu on-line nie wystarcza :)
| "podzespół z wnętrza komputera" jest niewłaściwą definicją.
To nie był darmowy egzamin on-line, tylko poprzedzony szkoleniem w realu,
nie w Matrixie ;-) Wcześniejsze wersje OEM Windowsa (3.x, 95, 98 bez 98SE
i
ME, NT 3.x, 4.x) można było odsprzedawać z dowolnym nowym podzespołem
komputerowym, takim jak np. myszka. Uaktualniona (obecna) wersja licencji
na
Windowsy mówi wyraźnie, że wersja OEM może być odsprzedana z dowolnym
podzespołem, który montowany jest wewnątrz komputera. Np. taśma od HDD,
CD-ROM itp. Jak chcesz, mogę przeszukać szpargały i zacytować odpowiedni
podpunkt z dość obszernej książki, którą otrzymałem w trakcie kursu, a
wabi
się ona "Microsoft Software Licencing Q&A" - wydana przez Microsoft Press
;-)
4. DYSTRYBUCJA OPROGRAMOWANIA
4.1 Jeśli w zestawie producenta systemów OEM znajduje się jednostka
oprogramowania będąca komputerowym system operacyjny Microsoft, Microsoft
niniejszym udziela Licencjobiorcy niewyłączne prawo do dystrybucji każdej
takiej jednostki oprogramowania wyłącznie pod warunkiem, że jest ona
rozprowadzana albo razem z całkowicie zmontowanym systemem komputerowym,
albo ze składnikiem sprzętu komputerowego, niebędącym urządzeniem
peryferyjnym (tj. składnik ten ma być integralną częścią komputera, na
którym zostanie zainstalowana jednostka oprogramowania). W rozumieniu
niniejszej umowy, całkowicie zmontowany system komputerowy powinien składać
się przynajmniej z procesora, płyty głównej, dysku twardego, zasilacza i
obudowy.
------------------------
podsumowując,
1. Umowa OEM jest zawierana pomiędzy MS a dystrybutorem (producentem
komputera).
2. Aplikacje OEM (np. office) mogą być przez PRODUCENTA KOMPUTERA
sprzedawane wyłącznie z całkowicie zmontowanym systemem komputerowym.
3. Systemy OEM (windows) mogą być przez PRODUCENTA KOMPUTERA
sprzedawane ze składnikiem sprzętu komputerowego, niebędącym urządzeniem
peryferyjnym (tj. składnik ten ma być integralną częścią komputera, na
którym zostanie zainstalowana jednostka oprogramowania).
4. Umowa OEM nie dotyczy osoby która dane oprogramowanie nabyła.
a zarazem powołując się na biuletyn informacyjny MS (z przed około
miesiąca):
poprzez składnik sprzętu komputerowego, niebędącym urządzeniem peryferyjnym
rozumie się np. dysk twardy, pamięć, myszkę, klawiaturę,
gdyż nie są to urządzenia peryferyjne, a składniki które stanowią integralną
część komputera!
urządzeniami peryferyjnymi są np. skaner, drukarka.
gdyż nie są to elementy stanowiące integralnej części komputera.
Co prawda wyrwane z kontekstu, ale..
| plik mdb nie jest samodzielna aplikacja i bez Acc nie
|zadziala, a poza tym licencja tego nie przewiduje. Mozna to jednak, jak
|napisalem juz poprzednio, sprzedawac jako usluge na wykonanie
konkretnego |projektu.
|Sprawa pewna, konsultowana przez moja byla firme z prawnikiem.
To jakiś lewy prawnik :-)
1. MDB bez Accessa działa, wystarczy podłączyć się przez OleDB/ODBC i
masz dostęp - jak było wielokrotnie pisane MDB można rozprowadzać
wraz z pakietem MDAC
(Skoro nawet MSDE można rozprowadzać nie płacąc za to dodatkowego
haraczu dla MS !! wraz ze swoimi aplikacjami stworzonymi za pomocą
narzędzi MS, to MDB tym bardziej)
polecam:
http://www.microsoft.com/permission/copyrgt/cop-soft.htm#FreqSoft
Redistribute Files
If you are interested in redistributing software files please first
determine whether you are considering redistribution of data files (with
file extensions like .doc, .xls, .mdb, etc.) or system files (with file
extensions like .DLL, .EXE, .DVR, etc.
data files - Data files are documents which are created using a Microsoft
software application like Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, and Microsoft
Access with file extensions: .doc or .dot, .xls, or .mdb, respectively.
These file types will contain data or content created by you the end user,
and you are free to redistribute such files without written permission.
If you want your end users to be able to view or further manipulate the
data files you distribute, you will need to consider whether the end users
will be running Microsoft Office (or a specific component of Office like
Microsoft Access, Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, etc.). You may wish to
check out the following possibilities:
Redistribution of a Microsoft Viewer (see
http://www.microsoft.com/office/000/viewers.htm). Redistribute Microsoft
Office in its entirety (or a component thereof) (see
http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/ or http://www.microsoft.com/oem/).
Or, you may need a license for a Microsoft development tool which gives
you
further rights under the End User License Agreement. See
www.microsoft.com/
and click on the search tab to begin searching on Microsoft.com. Enter the
phrase: Microsoft Office Developer, and select the criteria Exact
Phrase .
Or, please contact the Microsoft Sales Line at 1-800-426-9400.
No coz w takim razie zmuszony jestem zmienic swoj poglad na ta sprawe.
Opisana przeze mnie sytuacja miala miejsce w okolicy roku 2000 wiec po
pierwsze primo od tego czasu moglo sie cos w tym temacie zmienic a po drugie
secundo, nigdy tak na prawde nie bylo mi potrzebne wiedziec co i jak, wiec
nie interesowalem sie na biezaco.
Otrzymalem takiego maila:
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
Uniwersytet Gdanski
ELMS for MSDNAA Software Center: This message has been generated
automatically from your ELMS. Please do not reply to this message
as you will not receive a response. Please click on the SUPPORT
link in your MSDNAA Online Software System for support contact
information on your campus.
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
Hello,
Welcome! You have been registered in your university/college ELMS
for MSDNAA online software system. Here you can download and
access a wide range of Microsoft developer tools, servers, and
platforms. There is no charge to download the software as long
as you are an eligible user in the System.
How Does it Work?
Your university/college is licensed under the MSDN Academic
Alliance Program which enables eligible students and faculty
members to access software available under the Program. e-academy
Inc., a partner of Microsoft, is providing ELMS for MSDNAA to you.
Simply log into the System using your username and password
included below and start browsing/ordering the software
available to you.
Your MSDNAA Online Software System can be found at:
http://msdn60.e-academy.com/ugd_mfi
Your username is : no tego nie podalm :-)
Your password is :
Technical Support
If you have any technical difficulties while downloading the
software, please go to the support section in the website and
click on Request Customer Support. Technical support is
provided by your MSDNAA Program Administrator at your school.
General Information
If you have general questions about the MSDNAA Program, who
is eligible, general rules and regulations, etc., please go
to the support section in the website for contact information.
Please keep this e-mail for future reference, as you will
need your username and password in order access the online
software system.
Remember, by accessing the Microsoft software through this
system you are stating that you are authorized, and are
agreeing to comply with all usage guidelines.
Sincerely,
ELMS for MSDNAA Staff
e-academy Inc.
Czy w momencie gdy w tym sytemie zainstaluje visuala (do komercyjnego
uzytku),
i sprzedam aolikacje , bedzie to legalne? Czy to jakas okrojona wersja?
(chodzi o licencje:)
Ktos sie w tym orientuje? Ponoc jest to XP Prof.
Normalnie z nieba mi to spadlo, nic tylko na UG studiowac :))
P.
ArtykuÂł nie jest IMHO stronniczy, przykÂład "For example, Outlook Express
was for years the very worst security hole on most PCs."
PoniÂżej wiĂŞkszy cytat z poczÂątku artykuÂłu:
I made a private bet with myself when I ran an item in my newsletter
called "Linux Hacks On The Rise". [...] Among other things, the article
said: "...more than 50% of all [CERT] security advisories ... in the
first 10 months of 2002 were for Linux and other open-source software
solutions." My only point in bringing up this issue was to show that no
operating system is immune to bugs and security issues: As Linux grows
in popularity, it will have its own full share of problems. [...]
The two most-common arguments against the report were:
1) There really aren't that many Linux/open source bugs, especially
compared with, say, Microsoft Windows. Many readers argued further that
CERT erred by counting the same bugs multiple times in different
distributions and versions of Linux or other open-source software; these
repeated bugs should have been counted as one meta-bug.
2) Open source bugs, when they do occur, aren't that big a deal anyway
because they can be fixed far faster than Windows bugs.
Trouble is, these arguments are based on old information: Yes, there
once was a time when both of the above statements were true, but in a
moment I'll show you some very current, non-CERT stats and info that
illustrate why both statements are now emphatically false. (We'll get to
the specifics in a moment.)
[...]
Linux (and the whole open source movement in general) got its reputation
for solid software and rapid fixes when this software was used mostly by
a relatively small group of extremely knowledgeable people. They knew
what they were doing, and generally ran their software on stable, proven
hardware platforms; or, when brand-new hardware was used, it was used in
fairly generic ways.
[...]
But things changed. The open source community has fragmented into myriad
competing segments, each with its own different, and increasingly
quasi-proprietary, distributions of software. Huge numbers of new users
of all skill levels have entered what once had been an experts-only
enclave. (Even Wal-Mart now sells cheap PCs with Linux and open source
applications preinstalled.) It's much harder to produce software for an
audience of all skill levels running who-knows-what hardware, than for
an audience only of experts running a limited subset of known-good
hardware.
And, not trivially, as the Linux/open source segment has grown, it's
finally attracted the attention of crackers (malicious hackers). You
see, crackers like to aim at the fat part of the bell curve because
that's where the most potential victims are. That's one of the primary
reasons why more people try to hack Microsoft software than any other:
If a malicious hacker wants fame or notoriety, Microsoft software is the
obvious target because more people use Microsoft software than any
other.
And to me, this is a key thing: When the Linux/open source community was
tiny, few hackers bothered to look for exploitable issues there. It
simply wasn't an attractive target. In other words, it wasn't so much
that Linux and similar software were truly free from exploitable holes,
but simply that no one was trying to find them.
Dalej jest porównanie RedHat 7.2 i Windows XP. Zapraszam :
B.
[End User License Agreement: By opening this message you show your
agreement to spend the rest of your life vigorously opposing the oppressive
Microsoft marketing philosophy.]
The instability of Windows Operating System, and the inability of the
operator to re-install major portions of the O/S without re-installing the
entire O/S, maintains an ever-present menace to periodically flush out
information, indescribably important to the user.
Backups are no solution in a market which produces ever-increasing hard
drive capacities when Microsoft maintains perpetually expanding products
which render the new capacities little more helpful than the older smaller
drives.
Microsoft will not include proper correctional procedures as to allow the
operator to correct the notorious anomalies which are guaranteed to crop up
in the O/S, without phone contact to Redmond Washington. Neither the demur
manual, NOR the on-line Help avails the correctional procedure to the
Operator. For example, trying to look up the word “reinstall” in the help
window yields no solution to reinstall some component of the O/S.
There is the option of calling Microsoft help personnel and paying
long-distance phone charges to have them direct the operator through the
esoteric steps of addressing the pertinent cabinet files, but this increases
the price of Windows from $89.00 retail, to something on the order of
$300.00 to $600.00 per year, to keep the O/S in its normal unstable
operability.
Microsoft offers no 800 or toll-free numbers for help. Microsoft is such an
oppressively wealthy company that it is publicly contemptuous for them to
fail to offer toll-free technical support as do much smaller vendors who are
much less able to afford this overhead. There should be an investigation to
determine any collusion between Gates or Microsoft and Telecommuications
Companies.
For Bill Gates to have $65 Billion (not a current figure) taken from
customers for the shoddy unservicable products he has sold should be legally
defined as theft. Gates’ wealth if properly distributed could more
purposely provide the new Apple “IMAC” computer to 65 million individuals.
Apple Computers with their more conscientious marketing philosophy would
more ethically deserve the business.
The Microsoft product upgrade procedure follows a successful formula of
releasing a shoddy, unreliable, unstable product, generating profound sums
of capital wealth, followed by a corrective “upgrade”, equally lucrative,
which, although it may fix some former problems, includes so much new
feature content (which will require an equally lucrative future corrective
upgrade) with commensurate shoddiness and instability, that the use of
Microsoft Software is a pattern of upgrading from one instability to
another, ostensibly for the purpose of perpetually genereating
regeneratively snowballing Income.
Microsoft products are not ingenious. They are normally complex application
softwares which are made more complex through the inclusion of protective
devices which insure the company and its founder that it will not miss a
penny. Microsoft is obviously and definitively taking advantage of a market
allegiance which exists for no other reason than that it has always released
software prematurely for the purpose of getting to market ahead of
competition. There cannot be the option of buying a shoddy product first,
and then improving with the advent of competitor’s software, due to the high
price of software, and the education curve of switching.
What is reliable in Microsoft’s products is the guarantee that you will
spend more time wiping them than you will spend in the toilet during your
lifetime. Tens of millions of users, perhaps hundreds, lose hundreds of
man-hours each year compensating for Microsoft’s marketing philosophy.
Bill Gates has visited more trouble on mankind in 20 years than millenia of
efforts by any villains, mythical or otherwise, such as Satan, Lucifer,
Beetle Juice, or Ron Hubbard. One can only hope that Gates’ damnation of
humanity will not be eternal. Like so many other consumers, I have spent a
hellfire of time compensating for a greedy marketing philosophy, oppressive
of competition. Multiply this by the hundreds of millions of computers in
existence to comprehend the extent of the inferno.
David Alexander
Cc: Earth
Joe Anstett <joe_anstett@SPAM_SUCKS_DIE_SPAMMERS_DIEemail.comwrote:
Jeaux wrote:
| Wanted: a stable O/S for Intel oriented computers which will obselete the
| Microsoft Abominations.
Linux
Solaris for x86
OS/2 (if you are daring)
BeOS
NT (better than 95 at least)
<snick
| could more
| purposely provide the new Apple “IMAC” computer to 65 million individuals.
| Apple Computers with their more conscientious marketing philosophy would
| more ethically deserve the business.
Oh please, Apple is every bit as self-righteous and self-serving as Microsoft,
if not more so. Conscientious marketing philosophy my ass. Who is feeding you
this nonsense?
I notice a tendency to confuse hardware makers with software/OS
producers. The Apple Corp. produces a proprietary machine and
software, allowing others to produce software for the machine.
Microsoft on the other hand produces a monopolistic operating sytem
but were sued by their partners at Intel for attempting to control
what hardware would be produced.
I've found IMAC advertising to be just as deceptive as Microsoft is
monopolistic. The old joke that APPLE stands for Arrogance Produces
Profit Losing Enterprise has been true more times than not.
PCs are fine machines, Apples/Macintoshes are fine machines, Amigas
are (were?) fine machines. Apple used early marketing ploys to
eliminate much of their hardware competition. Microsoft uses
marketing ploys now to strangle the competition. Imputing to them any
ethical superiority is a covert marketing strategy. But then, this
whole "Find me a stable OS" was about selling Apples, wasn't it?
| The Microsoft product upgrade procedure follows a successful formula of
| releasing a shoddy, unreliable, unstable product, generating profound sums
| of capital wealth, followed by a corrective “upgrade”, equally lucrative,
| which, although it may fix some former problems, includes so much new
| feature content (which will require an equally lucrative future corrective
| upgrade) with commensurate shoddiness and instability, that the use of
| Microsoft Software is a pattern of upgrading from one instability to
| another, ostensibly for the purpose of perpetually genereating
| regeneratively snowballing Income.
Face it. If the product were as rickety as you claim, competition would have
arisen and customers would have chosen it. Yes, I think it could be better.
But look at the facts.
DR-DOS came and got beaten.
GEM came and got beaten.
The Mac came and got beaten (though it's as much Apple's fault) though it
remains a lucrative niche.
OS/2 came and got beaten.
Linux cannot compete on a large scale and will be a niche.
I would say that OS/2 getting beaten was as more due to marketing
dollars as merits of the competition but beaten it got. Will be happy
to see Linus in an expanding niche.
<snick
| Bill Gates has visited more trouble on mankind in 20 years than millenia of
| efforts by any villains, mythical or otherwise, such as Satan, Lucifer,
| Beetle Juice, or Ron Hubbard. One can only hope that Gates’ damnation of
| humanity will not be eternal. Like so many other consumers, I have spent a
| hellfire of time compensating for a greedy marketing philosophy, oppressive
| of competition. Multiply this by the hundreds of millions of computers in
| existence to comprehend the extent of the inferno.
OK, now you're just getting ridiculous.
Joe
Peter
-- The purpose of good Role Playing is to create --
-- amusing anecdotes. Any RPG that fails to do so --
-- is lacking in design, development, or execution. --
| Nie. Nadal nie masz licencj na Office używanego przez więcej niż jednego
| użytkownika.
O to jest kontrowersyjne. Powiedzmy ze MS chcialby zeby tak bylo, jednak
zapisy w prawne nei sa tu jednoznaczne. Byla kiedys dyskusja na ten temat,
nie pamietam czy tu czy na pl.comp.networking.
tu nie. Chyba, że na starej pl.comp.os.winnt (bo był taki okres że jej
nie czytałem). Zresztą: Office 2000 SBS PL OEM-owy AFAIR miał już obostrzenia:
na jednym device (maszynie, z displayem) naraz, przez jednego użytkownika w
danej chwili (nie, nie chce mi się teraz grzebać po pawlaczu).
zresztą:
Q. How does the Microsoft applications end-user license agreement
(EULA) address a terminal server environment where the application runs
on the server and not on the client desktop?
A. Microsoft licenses its desktop application products on a
per-computer basis. Per-computer licensing means a valid license must be
obtained for each "device" (please see the device definition later in
this document) that "runs" (please see the run definition later in this
document) the product. The product may not be shared or used
concurrently by different devices. Therefore, in a terminal server
environment, you must acquire a license for all devices that will be
running a Microsoft software application product (for example, Office)
from the terminal server.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/server/howtobuy/pricing/licensof...
Nie pisz, że to nie znajduje pokrycia w prawie, bo zwracam uwagę na to
czym jest licencja (usługą) i że kupując jeden fizycznie pudełko tak
przez otworzenie jak i proces instalacji wyrażasz zgodę na warunki
umowy. Możesz się na nie nie godzić, prawda? I próbować wdrażać
OpenOffice (bo np. ja na StarOffice 5.2 For Win32 poległem, ale i za
długo nie walczyłem) lub Software602 office (to akurat mi się udało).
A i może Corel PerfectOffice też nie ma obostrzeń licencyjnych które
by zabraniały wprost używania w środowisku terminalowym na jedej
licencji?
Sam tez probowalem to wyjasnic w MS, ale tak jak juz napisalem wczesniej
wynik nie byl jednozaczny.
TTST.
Ale mysle, ze jednoznaczne jest to ze w tym konkretnym przypadku propozycja
jaka otrzymala tworczyni watku nie jest "najlepsiejsza" i najprostszym
rozwiazaniem jest zakup tylu licencji na ilu stanowiskach bedzie uzywany
Office i zainstalowanie go lokalnie na stacjach klientow.
niekoniecznie. Oczywiście to często ma sens. Ale trzeba tez tego Office
umiec zainstalować (np. wyłaczając wszelki instalowanie komponentów na
żądanie).
THE MICROSOFT SECURITY UPDATE E-MAIL ALERT
October 3, 2003
The Microsoft(R) Security Update is an e-mail alert service designed
for home users and small businesses that provides information
on important Microsoft security bulletins and virus alerts. Microsoft
also uses this service to make subscribers aware that they might need
to take action to guard against a circulating security threat.
You have received this update as a subscriber to the Microsoft
Security Update. To cancel your subscription, follow
the instructions at the bottom of this page.
________________________________________________
SECURITY BULLETIN
Please review Microsoft Security Bulletin MS03-040 (828750)
Security Update for Microsoft Internet Explorer
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=267315
WHY WE ARE ISSUING THIS UPDATE
A number of security issues have been identified in Microsoft
Internet Explorer that could allow an attacker to compromise a
Microsoft Windows(R)-based system and then take a variety of
actions. For example, an attacker could run programs on a computer
used to view the attacker's Web site. This vulnerability affects
computers that have Internet Explorer installed. You can help
protect your computer by installing this update from Microsoft.
PRODUCTS AFFECTED
Internet Explorer 5.01
Internet Explorer 5.5
Internet Explorer 6.0
________________________________________________
VIRUS ALERTS
There are no new virus alerts this week. However, we would like
to advise you that if you receive an e-mail that claims
to be distributing a Microsoft software update, it is probably
a malicious spoof trying to trick you into infecting your computer
with a virus. Microsoft never widely distributes software in e-mail.
Learn how to spot a bogus security bulletin here:
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=267316
________________________________________________
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
SECURITY AND PRIVACY WEB SITE
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=267317
VIRUS ALERTS
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=267318
SECURITY NEWSGROUPS
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=267319
________________________________________________
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.1
iQEVAwUBP34N840ZSRQxA/UrAQEE6Qf+P6CXrpZh2dbQJg0sqRlEsWvMjQtDbJFk
YBDvSJRpz22XzyygWocPmYQUoBZJE0WE4hQM05jHHKr3L1wuU+Fv0wVYp3L3oYfZ
99VamoPpTyrU9dfhMWPc2Rtf5vKfkV5/KF7sUfK+UP/+YjN1iaDJeF4AnBUwSLsx
E5D5Zmti7W+POKBNHUiBd1iuKaVMkjMLSNk4FzZsdqtZB67Ku1DA3ZDUt8QzNyIn
4NFmz3Vdsv4Mn4Sv+6ZVG51UkRjfWG2YiACcQWQizUSeqO0Io3fvZSmY9ygBooql
FJu8fCRyVLNF4Rfeyj1sv5tlY5fOFI3Bd6qHXno5ej5E4hy4aO4E9w==
=Pt2N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
To verify the digital signature on this bulletin, please download our PGP
key at http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=267313.
To cancel your subscription to this newsletter, click
mailto:1_53072_57D228FB-2CA9-4AD8-B968-F22CB3AF3432@Newsletters.Microsoft.com?subject=UNSUBSCRIBE
to send an unsubscribe e-mail.
Or you can reply to this message with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject
line.
To stop all e-mail newsletters from microsoft.com, click
mailto:2_53072_57D228FB-2CA9-4AD8-B968-F22CB3AF3432@Newsletters.Microsoft.com?subject=STOPMAIL
to send your request.
Or you can reply to this message with the word STOPMAIL in the Subject Line.
You can also unsubscribe, or manage all of your Microsoft.com communication
preferences, at http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=267314.
THIS DOCUMENT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS PROVIDED PURSUANT TO THIS PROGRAM ARE FOR
INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. The information type should not be interpreted
to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft and Microsoft cannot guarantee
the accuracy of any information presented after the date of publication.
INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED 'AS IS' WITHOUT WARRANTY
OF ANY KIND. The user assumes the entire risk as to the accuracy and the use
of this document.
microsoft.com newsletter e-mail may be copied and distributed subject to the
following conditions:
1. All text must be copied without modification and all pages must be
included
2. All copies must contain Microsoft's copyright notice and any other
notices provided therein
3. This document may not be distributed for profit
Mam na plycie glownej 2 opterony 270 w wiec
w sumie jakby 4 procesory.
Na stronach Microsoftu stoi jasno napisane, ze XP Professional
obsluguje tylko 2 procesory. Komputer sluzy jako stacja robocza
glownie do oprogramowania 3d (3dstudio itp).
Najpierw zainstalowalem XP tylko ze na starym dysku, pofragmentowanym
gdzie bylo malo wolnego miejsca. Menadzer zadan widzi 4 procesory
podczas prob renderingru w szyskie sa uzywane 100%.
Zmierzylem czasy testowych renderingow w 3dstudio.
Wtedy znajomy powiedzial ze XP nie obsluguje 4 procesorow
i nie nadaje sie dla mnie.
Potem zakupilem nowy czysty dysk i w celach testowaych
zainstalowalem na nim Win servwer 2003 64bit enterprise.
No i co sie okazalo - czas renderingow o okolo 30% szybszy
chociaz nie w kazdym programie. Na przyklad w cinebench
wynik taki sam. I teraz nie wiem czy to zasluga serwera czy nowego dysku.
Chociaz dysku chyba nie, bo zrobilem szybkie pomiary predkosci
tych dyskow i nie bylo duzej roznicy.
Jak to jest z ta obsluga 4 procesorow w XP?
To pytanie chyba wazne skoro w przyszlym roku wchodza
do sprzedazy procesory 4 - rdzeniowe a nie kazdy sie
na viste od razu rzuci.
Processor Limits by Software Product Edition
Certain Microsoft software-such as Microsoft WindowsR desktop operating
systems, Microsoft Windows ServerT 2003, Microsoft SQL ServerT, and
Microsoft BizTalkR Server-are technologically differentiated by the
number of processors that they are able to use. For example, Windows XP
Professional is designed to be used with desktops that have up to two
processors, Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition is designed to be used
with systems that have up to four processors, and SQL Server 2000
Standard Edition is designed to be used with systems that have up to
four processors.
For most currently shipping Microsoft software with processor limits,
each processor counts as a single processor regardless of the number of
cores and/or threads that the processor contains. For example, Windows
Server 2003 Standard Edition can be used on a four-processor system,
whether the processors in the system are single-core, hyperthreaded, or
multicore
Operating Systems
Software
Do technically enforced processor limits
support multicore and hyperthreaded processors?
Windows XP Home Edition
Yes
Windows XP Media Center Edition
Yes
Windows XP Professional
Yes
Windows XP Tablet PC Edition
Yes
Żródło:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/f/1/e/f1ecd771-cf97-4d98-9a1b-...
--------------------------
SYS_EnumDeviceDrivers() : List of active device drivers in the system
Comment
Please notice that SYS_EnumDeviceDrivers() operates do not work under
Windows 9x: it needs Windows NT as it uses the psapi.dll. This DLL isn't
always distributed with Windows.
You can use the DLL Help Database of Microsoft. The DLL Help exists to
assist developers, system administrators, and other IT professionals who
face file version conflicts with Microsoft software. Use DLL Help to
identify which software installed a specific version of a DLL
(http://support.microsoft.com/servicedesks/fileversion/dllinfo.asp?sd=...).
Alias
EnumDeviceDrivers()
Syntax
SYS_EnumDeviceDrivers() e szList
Parameters
nAppTypes optional parameter: 0 by default. Can be 16 if you want to
list 16-bit applications, or 32 for 32-bit applications. This parameter is
completely ignored when the function operates on the Windows NT platform.
Returns
szList list of all active tasks running on the system. Each task
is separated by each other by a caret (^) like in this example :
"KERNEL32.DLL(32-bit)^MSGSRV32(16-bit)^MPREXE.EXE(32-bit)^VSHWIN32.EXE(32-bi
t)^MMTASK(16-bit)^EXPLORER.EXE(32-bit)^POINTEXE(16-bit)^SYSTRAY.EXE(32-bit)^
SAGE.EXE(32-bit)^INTERNAT.EXE(32-bit)^FINDFAST.EXE(32-bit)^SPOOL32.EXE(32-bi
t)^INFOVIEW.EXE(32-bit)^MSVC.EXE(32-bit)^WINOLDAP(16-bit)^VFP.EXE(32-bit)^CT
CD(16-bit)^WINWORD.EXE(32-bit)"
When no parameter has been passed to the function, or when this parameter
was 0, then each process is clearly shown as a 32-bit or 16-bit process when
run under Windows 9x. When run in NT, the function does not add any process
information (16-bit or 32-bit).
Example
? SYS_Processes() under Windows 95 or Windows 98 (Windows 9x)
&& KERNEL32.DLL(32-bit)^MSGSRV32(16-bit)^MPREXE.EXE(32-bit)^VSHWIN32.EXE(32-
&& bit)^MMTASK(16-bit)^EXPLORER.EXE(32-bit)^POINTEXE(16-bit)^SYSTRAY.EXE(32-
&&
bit)^SAGE.EXE(32-bit)^INTERNAT.EXE(32-bit)^FINDFAST.EXE(32-bit)^SPOOL32.EXE(
32-
&& bit)^INFOVIEW.EXE(32-bit)^MSVC.EXE(32-bit)^WINOLDAP(16-bit)^VFP.EXE(32-
&& bit)^CTCD(16-bit)^WINWORD.EXE(32-bit)
? SYS_Processes(16) under Windows 95 or Windows 98 (Windows 9x)
&& MSGSRV32^MMTASK^POINTEXE^WINOLDAP^CTCD
? SYS_Processes(32) under Windows 95 or Windows 98 (Windows 9x)
&& KERNEL32.DLL^MPREXE.EXE^VSHWIN32.EXE^EXPLORER.EXE^SYSTRAY.EXE^SAGE.EXE^
&&
INTERNAT.EXE^FINDFAST.EXE^SPOOL32.EXE^INFOVIEW.EXE^MSVC.EXE^VFP.EXE^WINWORD.
EXE
? SYS_Processes() under Window NT (here Windows 2000 Professional)
smss.exe^winlogon.exe^services.exe^lsass.exe^svchost.exe^spoolsv.exe^svchost
.exe^mdm.exe^AMQSVC.EXE^navapsvc.exe^amqmsrvn.exe^npssvc.exe^jview.exe^regsv
c.exe^MSTask.exe^WinMgmt.exe^Explorer.EXE^amqzxma0.exe^amqxssvn.exe^amqxssvn
.exe^amqharmn.exe^amqhasmn.exe^atiptaxx.exe^POProxy.exe^Winampa.exe^internat
.exe^navapw32.exe^AcroTray.exe^amqmtbrn.exe^amqzllp0.exe^np.exe^amqrrmfa.exe
^amqzlaa0.exe^AMQPCSEA.EXE^RUNMQCHI.exe^amqxssvn.exe^RUNMQLSR.exe^amqzxma0.e
xe^amqxssvn.exe^amqxssvn.exe^amqhasmn.exe^amqzllp0.exe^amqrrmfa.exe^amqzlaa0
.exe^AMQPCSEA.EXE^RUNMQCHI.exe^RUNMQLSR.exe^alertsvc.exe^WINCMD32.EXE^WINCMD
32.EXE^psdk-x86.exe^WebSetup.exe^msiexec.exe^msiexec.exe^images2100.exe^WINC
MD32.EXE^WINWORD.EXE^VFP6.EXE
-----------------------
i jak widac mimo ze pisze ze psapi.dll jest dla NT to sa wyniki z 98 i 95.
Cikawi mnie wiec czy jest jakas wersja biblioteki dla windowsow 9x. A jesli
nie to czy te wyniki to pomys³ka??
ps. googlam jzu godzine i nie znalazlem nic z tropu psapi dla 9x
Witam,
in article 985eop$uf@news.polbox.pl, root at r@mail.bew.com.pl wrote
on 07-03-2001 14:57:
Czy zauwazyliscie zjawisko wysylania pakietu po zaladowniu IE w WinX na
jakies IP ? Po co ?
Zablowowalem na firewall te IP i jakie bylo moje zdziwienie ze IE zmienilo
sobie adres na inne IP !
Odnosze wrazenie za jestesmy caly czas "szpiegowani".
Masz bardzo sluszne wrazenie. Microsoft jako jedna z pierwszych firm branzy
IT w USA bardzo rozpoczal b. scisla i gorliwa wspolprace z tzw. agencjami
rzadowymi (NSA, CIA i inne instytucje zrzeszajace ludzi, ktorzy tak maja, ze
lubia wiedziec wszystko o innych, nawet gdy ci inni tego nie chca :-)).
Zdecydowanie wieksza czesc oprogramowania M$ zawiera backdoors lub czynnie
(np. IE praktycznie w kazdej obecnie wypuszczanej wersji) wysyla informacje
o wlascicielu komputera, na ktorym go zainstalowano, o zawartosci dysku
twardego, o odwiedzanych stronach WWW itd.
W efekcie rzady niektorych panstw wprowadzaja calkowite lub czesciowe zakazy
uzywania oprogramowania M$ w waznych dla bezpieczenstwa danego panstwa
sektorach. Przykladem moga byc tu: Rosja i Chiny. Ostatnio otrzymalem tez
taka wiadomosc z Niemiec:
Here's a short follow-up on "the price for using Micro$oft products ..."
Just listened to the prime-time news from a big german radio station ...
they stated that - due to new recommendations from a group of IT-experts
called the "ECHELON Group" (... you get the idea!) which is counseling
german government on IT issues - the Department of Defense today has
effectively banned the further use of *any* Micro$oft software products
within the german army ("Bundeswehr"). The ECHELON Group has obviously
educated our politicians that there is reliable information regarding
"hidden backdoors" for the folks of NSA/CIA and the like in almost all of
Micro$oft's software. They were cited as having said: "Continued use of
Microsoft software within highly confidential areas poses a very real
threat
to national security"!
'nuff said! Looks like these ECHELON guys are the first IT-experts
counseling german government which are really worth their money ... ;-)
Dlatego tez - jesli nie jest to konieczne - nie nalezy uzywac oprogramowania
tej firmy. Co wiecej.. przetwarzanie poufnych danych przy uzyciu tego
oprogramowania to.. samobojstwo.
Pozdrawiam,
-Krzysiek
PS.
Jesli dodamy do tego fakt, ze oprogramowanie M$ pojawia sie juz w
telefonach GSM, samochodach itd.. oraz, ze M$ ma juz wlasne satelity na
orbicie.. to wizja robi sie bardzo malo interesujaca i zaczyna to jako zywo
przypominac "Rok 1984".
[---]
More than a decade ago, IBM, Microsoft, and others had created a wide-open
market for PC applications. If a publication refused to run a misleading ad
from Ashton-Tate about its dBase product, so what? The publication would
remain filled with ads for other databases like Paradox, Dataease, Clarion,
FoxPro, Clipper, R:Base, and countless more. It was a market rich with healthy
competition.
Then came the '90s. Microsoft sold these publications a dirty bill of goods
with the promise of Windows 95. Microsoft promoted Windows 95 in such a way
that publications became positively giddy with excitement over the possible
explosion of new advertising revenue. Surely everyone would be eager to sell
their new 32-bit versions of Windows applications, hence more advertising
income would come rolling in like a tidal wave with the release of this new
32-bit version of Windows. As a result, the IT media (in general) was eager to
whip the consuming public into an orgasmic frenzy over the introduction of
Windows 95. They believed it was in their best financial interests to do so.
Except it wasn't. Instead of creating a market for a new breed of
applications, Microsoft leveraged its control over Windows 95 to eliminate all
major competing products in almost every category. By the time the media
realized this, it was too late to do anything about it. Almost all products
that competed with Microsoft products began to fail in the market, even when
the non-Microsoft products were clearly superior. With almost all competition
out of the way, Microsoft quickly became the primary source of advertising
income for the media.
That's often the reason why even reputable IT publications now run blatantly
misleading ads that claim Linux is ten times more expensive than Windows. Many
of them can't afford to offend the provider of their greatest source of
income.
[---]
Gallagher rightly points out that Microsoft built its empire on the backs of
developers. But what he fails to make clear is that these were primarily
third-party commercial software developers. When Steve Ballmer once chanted
"developers, developers, developers" to his employees, people were buying
Windows because that was the target for all the popular applications, namely
Lotus SmartSuite, Lotus Notes, Borland Paradox, WordPerfect Office, Visio,
Corel Draw, and so on. Microsoft has since eliminated, bought, or relegated
these applications to niche status.
Here's the problem. Linux and free/open source software is not going to
restore the third party Independent Software Vendor market to its former
glory. Free/open source software cannot promise to restore this market because
the best alternatives to Windows and Windows applications are free-as-in-beer,
like Linux, OpenOffice, Apache, PostgreSQL, Ximian Evolution, and so on. It is
safe to say that the demand for third-party commercial applications in the
Linux market is never going to reach the heights once enjoyed by the Windows
market.
The New Market
So here is the current state of the industry. On the one side, we have
Microsoft working toward the goal of making sure that everything you run in
the front and back office is Microsoft software. On the other side, we have
free/open source equivalent solutions to almost all of what Microsoft has to
offer. In neither case is there a promise of a revival of the third-party
commercial software market. In both cases, there is the promise of making
money by adding value to the existing solutions, or by providing vertical
commercial applications. (A vertical application is one that targets a special
market such as medical systems, etc.)
The new market is therefore comprised primarily of value add resellers (VARs),
system integrators (SI), vertical applications development, and internal
development of corporate applications.
[---]
Microsoft really is losing its developer base to free software. The Evans Data
Corporation Linux developer surveys include hard data to back up that
assertion, although it currently indicates developers are far more inclined to
use languages like Java, PHP, C/C++, and Perl rather than Python.
One of the most interesting trends in the most recent Evans survey is that the
reality of what developers are doing is beginning to match their predictions
from past surveys. With each survey, developers predicted a major shift in
their primary focus from Windows to Linux. Each new survey contained the same
predictions, but the shift was not actually occurring. That is, it didn't
occur until this latest survey.
The most recent survey shows a significant drop in developers who expect to
upgrade to Windows 2003 server. It also shows that a significant percentage of
developers are moving directly from Windows 2000 to Linux. In other words,
when taken together, several pieces of the survey indicate that developers are
finally jumping off the Windows upgrade merry-go-round. This accounts for the
fact that they are finally beginning to catch up to their prior predictions of
switching focus from Windows to Linux.
That's not to say other factors aren't involved. The most recent survey also
revealed a dramatic increase in dissatisfaction with Windows security, as a
large percentage of developers moved from ranking Windows as "somewhat less
secure" to "much less secure" than Linux.
More important than why Microsoft is losing developers to Linux is which
developers are defecting. Microsoft is losing the developer base that belongs
to the new market, not the old one. These developers are primarily VARs,
systems integrators, commercial developers of vertical applications and the
like. The glory days of selling word processors is over. The glory days of
selling custom solutions is just beginning to flourish. And Microsoft cannot
possibly compete effectively in this new market.
[---]
Jeaux wrote:
Wanted: a stable O/S for Intel oriented computers which will obselete the
Microsoft Abominations.
Linux
Solaris for x86
OS/2 (if you are daring)
BeOS
NT (better than 95 at least)
[End User License Agreement: By opening this message you show your
agreement to spend the rest of your life vigorously opposing the oppressive
Microsoft marketing philosophy.]
The instability of Windows Operating System, and the inability of the
operator to re-install major portions of the O/S without re-installing the
entire O/S, maintains an ever-present menace to periodically flush out
information, indescribably important to the user.
Agreed.
Backups are no solution in a market which produces ever-increasing hard
drive capacities when Microsoft maintains perpetually expanding products
which render the new capacities little more helpful than the older smaller
drives.
Microsoft will not include proper correctional procedures as to allow the
operator to correct the notorious anomalies which are guaranteed to crop up
in the O/S, without phone contact to Redmond Washington. Neither the demur
manual, NOR the on-line Help avails the correctional procedure to the
Operator. For example, trying to look up the word “reinstall” in the help
window yields no solution to reinstall some component of the O/S.
There is the option of calling Microsoft help personnel and paying
long-distance phone charges to have them direct the operator through the
esoteric steps of addressing the pertinent cabinet files, but this increases
the price of Windows from $89.00 retail, to something on the order of
$300.00 to $600.00 per year, to keep the O/S in its normal unstable
operability.
Have you priced the cost of other options like Sun Solaris? I don't want to
know how many hundreds of thousands of dollars my company spends on Sun support
every year. But I'll give them credit, if you have a hardware problem, they
come to the rescue in 2 seconds!
Microsoft offers no 800 or toll-free numbers for help.
Many companies don't. It isn't a Microsoft-only problem.
Microsoft is such an
oppressively wealthy company that it is publicly contemptuous for them to
fail to offer toll-free technical support as do much smaller vendors who are
much less able to afford this overhead.
By the same token they have a boatload more users with a wider array of problems
than smaller vendors do. Imagine having to provide toll free support to
hundreds of millions of users, ranging from IT experts to boobs who just bought
a machine at Sears. The question is cost per customer.
There should be an investigation to
determine any collusion between Gates or Microsoft and Telecommuications
Companies.
For Bill Gates to have $65 Billion (not a current figure) taken from
customers for the shoddy unservicable products he has sold should be legally
defined as theft. Gates’ wealth if properly distributed
Why are we worried about taking something away from someone who earned it and
giving it away to someone who didn't?
could more
purposely provide the new Apple “IMAC” computer to 65 million individuals.
Apple Computers with their more conscientious marketing philosophy would
more ethically deserve the business.
Oh please, Apple is every bit as self-righteous and self-serving as Microsoft,
if not more so. Conscientious marketing philosophy my ass. Who is feeding you
this nonsense?
The Microsoft product upgrade procedure follows a successful formula of
releasing a shoddy, unreliable, unstable product, generating profound sums
of capital wealth, followed by a corrective “upgrade”, equally lucrative,
which, although it may fix some former problems, includes so much new
feature content (which will require an equally lucrative future corrective
upgrade) with commensurate shoddiness and instability, that the use of
Microsoft Software is a pattern of upgrading from one instability to
another, ostensibly for the purpose of perpetually genereating
regeneratively snowballing Income.
Face it. If the product were as rickety as you claim, competition would have
arisen and customers would have chosen it. Yes, I think it could be better.
But look at the facts.
DR-DOS came and got beaten.
GEM came and got beaten.
The Mac came and got beaten (though it's as much Apple's fault) though it
remains a lucrative niche.
OS/2 came and got beaten.
Linux cannot compete on a large scale and will be a niche.
Microsoft products are not ingenious. They are normally complex application
softwares which are made more complex through the inclusion of protective
devices which insure the company and its founder that it will not miss a
penny. Microsoft is obviously and definitively taking advantage of a market
allegiance which exists for no other reason than that it has always released
software prematurely for the purpose of getting to market ahead of
competition. There cannot be the option of buying a shoddy product first,
and then improving with the advent of competitor’s software, due to the high
price of software, and the education curve of switching.
Well, then you are free to patronize the competition in exchange for waiting
longer for market time. Go ahead, buy Lotus Smartsuite or Corel Office. Nobody
is stopping you.
What is reliable in Microsoft’s products is the guarantee that you will
spend more time wiping them than you will spend in the toilet during your
lifetime. Tens of millions of users, perhaps hundreds, lose hundreds of
man-hours each year compensating for Microsoft’s marketing philosophy.
Bill Gates has visited more trouble on mankind in 20 years than millenia of
efforts by any villains, mythical or otherwise, such as Satan, Lucifer,
Beetle Juice, or Ron Hubbard. One can only hope that Gates’ damnation of
humanity will not be eternal. Like so many other consumers, I have spent a
hellfire of time compensating for a greedy marketing philosophy, oppressive
of competition. Multiply this by the hundreds of millions of computers in
existence to comprehend the extent of the inferno.
OK, now you're just getting ridiculous.
Joe
© 2009 Najlepszy miesiąc kawalerski w Polsce !!! - Ceske - Sjezdovky .cz. Design downloaded from free website templates