stupid microsoft activation wants me to reactivate my computer. all i did was change my network card and cpu.
ghetto reactiviation
- Thread starter sonoma1993
- Start date
Activate it by phone. Microsoft usually understands your situation and will give u a new activation code.
it pretty stupid that id also had to reactivate microsoft office because of a network card and cpu change.
Not really. The NIC is worth 3 out of the 10 'points' used to calcuate the hardware hash used for activiation. If the NIC is changed, all seven other characteristics that make up the hash must be unchanged (unless the machine is a laptop).
Since you also changed the CPU, that is what triggered activation.
I don't have to activate with my copy.
I own a legal copy, but I install with a corporate edition that I got through work becaues I don't want to deal with the activation crap.
Sure it does. I own a license to use Windows XP on my computer. I'm using Windows XP on my computer....I'm not doing anything illegal.
Technically I believe the license we have setup at work allows employees to run one copy for a home system if it is used for working from home which I sometimes do. I'm not positive.
Either way I own a license to run Windows XP, I'm running Windows XP on this one system here...I don't see a problem.
IF your company allows you to use their volume licensed software on your personal computer, that is fine. But just having a retail copy that you paid for does not give you the right to use your company's volume license.
I did the reactivation dance as many as 3 times in a single week not long ago after buying a new video card, cpu, and some other component I can't recall right now... I couldn't get on the internet so I had to call them each time to get a new code...
Anyway, eventually I had enough of the reactivation crap and finally made the switch to Linux... I am much happier now... not only is there all the equivalent software I want under Linux, the stuff is in many cases even better than the Windows solutions I was using. MythTV is just awesome and multitasking under Linux with a 2.6.x kernel has been even smoother for me than I remembered it when I was running XP.
While I agree with you lot that owning the licence ought to be enough, I wouldn't argue with Stash about it. If I remember correctly, he works for MS, and probably knows more about that than most of us. The conditions of the licence may be unpleasant; but I bet that he knows them.
No it isn't.
What's said in the EULA goes, that's how simple it is.
I can't say I see any ethical problem with what you do, after all you did pay for the software you're using, but it may very well be breaking the EULA.
..and the moral to the story here is who gives a rat's a$$?? - the guy's got a paid-for legal copy but he's using a different serial. I'll betcha a million bucks that's not "cool" w/ the EULA but as I said/asked, who cares? I?ll betcha a zillion bucks MS has LOTS of other much bigger fish to fry than going after a single user who even though is pushing the boundaries of the EULA has never the less given them exactly what they want, $$$. It's THAT simple. - I swear, these copy-right jihadists around here give a new meaning to the term ?techie-dorks?.
Actually, it's NOT legal to use the Volume License edition of XP if you own OEM or Retail. VL has some additional restricitons on it's licensing (iirc). It's also nice that your company buys you an OS license for your home PC, but most won't.
Besides violating the EULA, ethically, I was thinking of that fact that you are stealing from your company if you don't have permission to use their volume license.
As a shareholder, I care. Sure, there are much bigger piracy fish to fry, like the millions of counterfeit crap coming out of Asia. But these other cases add up quickly, and they add up to a huge loss in potential revenue yearly.
Now I know everyone thinks "who cares, M$ has soooo much money, what difference does it make" but shareholders care about these things. Like it or not, Microsoft is a company that is in business to make money. And piracy is a huge hit to the business.
The other thing is a consistant stand. MS makes a lot of money, S/W company B does not, so that makes it OK to steal from one, but not the other?
I work in the QA industry, piracy directly affects the bottom line of my company, as increased piracy is decreased revenues, and thus less money to spend on QA for the next product. That is why I am one of those "techie dorks" who care.
I work in the QA industry, piracy directly affects the bottom line of my company, as increased piracy is decreased revenues, and thus less money to spend on QA for the next product. That is why I am one of those "techie dorks" who care.
You?re acting like this particular scenario is going to hit you in the wallet somehow.. As a shareholder are you losing money in the scenario we're talking about? No. As a shareholder, are you affected in any way, shape, fashion or form? No. As a shareholder does this scenario have any affect on the future worth/value of your stock or Microsoft in general? No. ? inconsequential fundamentalism never gets anybody anywhere.
'nuff said.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter