Are you kidding me???

[Zepper]

I'm still using Win2k when necessary. None of that activation crap at all and it runs all the software I need. And if I ever need to up to XP, I have a friend with an unlimited license... No activation there either.

Nothing to put up with with most distros of Linux either.

.bh.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: Zepper
I'm still using Win2k when necessary. None of that activation crap

Same here. Very little loss. Drivers for newer ati gpu's don't support w2k. Some development tools whine about GetModuleHandleEx not found - some continue, some don't. MS has officially discontinued support but continues to update it somewhat.

Nothing to put up with with most distros of Linux either.

Are there any linux distros with copy protection? With the latest Windows incarnation, I've been seriously considering going to linux.

 

[Zepper]

Some like Xandros and Linspire include proprietary add-ons that aren't supposed to be "shared", but you can usually get free versions of them that lack the proprietary stuff.

.bh.

 

[Old Hippie]

I'm still using Win2k when necessary.

I have no problem supporting a superior product, but next to XP, it's not. Every system I've changed to XP from Win2k, has run smoother with many less problems. I suppose it's just those crazy fools who want to run the newer hardware and programs fault. :laugh:
Admittedly, non of these users were running a server, just plain old normal users.

Doesn't this belong in the software forum?

 

[Zepper]

Yes, it does belong in the OS section.

.bh.

 

[seemingly random]

I didn't notice any claim that w2k was superior to xp. For myself, w2k is good enough and it doesn't have copy protection. I would certainly select a legitimate copy of xp without cp above w2k. I have several purchased copies of xp on various pc's but for some reason always end up on the one that has w2k.

I'm probably not the average user, at least in the general population, in that I frequently swap/add/remove parts from pc's and sometimes this entails reloading the os. The idea of being restricted in the usage of a legitimately purchased item grates. Having to deal with the cp is, at a minimum, inconvenient and can be a pita. Having to keep track of which cd has been installed on which pc is time consuming.

Don't know why I'm going on like this since, for the most part, I'm probably singing to the choir. I've just never expressed it before - so there it is. I guess I'm tired of being made to feel like a criminal when I'm not.

 

[Old Hippie]

I didn't notice any claim that w2k was superior to xp.

I guess you haven't been here long enough, many times it's inferred.

For myself, w2k is good enough and it doesn't have copy protection. I would certainly select a legitimate copy of xp without cp above w2k.

I'm gonna suggest you get with the times. XP has no copy/DRM protection that I know of. You can't copy the program and expect it to work......but if that's what you're talking about please check yur facts before you speak.

 

[seemingly random]

I guess you haven't been here long enough, many times it's inferred.

Well that's silly [trying to be diplomatic]. I can't imagine why someone would consider w2k better than xp.

XP has no copy/DRM protection that I know of. You can't copy the program and expect it to work

I'm not quite sure what this means or if I said something confusing (always a possibility). The physical cd doesn't have cp or one wouldn't be able to slipstream from it to another with updates as I've done in the past. It does have "copy protection" in the form of a 30 day countdown to register the activation code with MS. This pertains to the retail version. I've got a couple of Dells with xp that have been reloaded several times - and from a single cd - that don't require activation.