Going to War With NVIDIA

[Navid]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
New employees wouldn't get the job if they didn't have the tools required to perform the task.

Let me get this straight. If you are a heart surgeon and apply to a hospital for work, will they reject you if you do not own an electrocardiogram machine?

What if you are a pilot and apply to an airline for a job? Will they not hire you if you do not own a plane?

How about .......

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Navid

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
New employees wouldn't get the job if they didn't have the tools required to perform the task.

Let me get this straight. If you are a heart surgeon and apply to a hospital for work, will they reject you if you do not own an electrocardiogram machine?

What if you are a pilot and apply to an airline for a job? Will they not hire you if you do not own a plane?

How about .......

Yeah. Now he'll be trying to think up different ways in which to say he meant something else. We'll be hearing more BS soon enough.

 

[ND40oz]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor

If the business requires you to perform work-related tasks off-site then they should give tools to do it.

Of course. A laptop or workstation if you are an existing employee and don't have a current or capable computer.

New employees wouldn't get the job if they didn't have the tools required to perform the task.

The point is corporate licencing is for use ***within*** corporations.

FYI, our corporate license for XP and Vista allow us to run one copy per employee on their work PC and one on their home PC. Vista's a little harder to do since you have to authenticate every 180 days, but as long as you run the VPN client, you're fine. Supposedly in the near future MS will provide a way to unlock it so it no longer has to authenticate every 180 days.

 

[Smartazz]

Wouldn't this article be on daily tech if it was really for real?

 

[Gstanfor]

I would not give someone who needed to telecommute (or worse still was going to be my systems admin) if they did not have a modern PC at home (one would have to question their competence and real world experience for the role they are applying for just for starters). ND40 oz, That licence sounds a little farfetched to me. What happens when an employee ceases being an employee for instance?

Corporate licences are bought by corporations NOT by individuals and as such the expecation is they will be used upon assets OWNED by the corporation/business entity and NOT installed on private, non business related machines. Its that simple.

In bfg10k's case I'd consider his work machine a grey area (the IT department should have provided him with a non corporate version of XP) and the corporate licence on his gaming system an outright violation of the licencing contract.

 

[BFG10K]

In bfg10k's case I'd consider his work machine a grey area (the IT department should have provided him with a non corporate version of XP)

LOL, so now we can't run corporate licenses on work machines either? :roll:

My work has spare licenses under the Volume License Key (which they've paid for) but you expect them to run to the store and pick up an extra retail copy just for lil' old me? :roll:

Seriously, do you actually believe the rubbish you type?

and the corporate licence on his gaming system an outright violation of the licencing contract

Originally posted by BFG10K at 12/26/2006 01:42 PM:

I also have a legit retail boxed version of XP Pro for my home machine.

But again there are plenty of ways for someone to be running a corporate version of XP on a home machine without being an "OMG Pirate!; also launching a game doesn't render the license null and void.

I'm sorry you have difficulty accepting such a simple concept despite multiple scenarios having been presented to you.

 

[Gstanfor]

LOL, so now we can't run corporate licenses on work machines either?

You merely specified you had a work machine. You didn't specify the owner of the machine.

I checked out ND 40 oz's claims with our IT department as well as Council's. They thanked me for the festive laugh and promised to imliment it just as soon as piglets started flying south for winter.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

In bfg10k's case I'd consider his work machine a grey area (the IT department should have provided him with a non corporate version of XP)

LOL, so now we can't run corporate licenses on work machines either? :roll:

My work has spare licenses under the Volume License Key (which they've paid for) but you expect them to run to the store and pick up an extra retail copy just for lil' old me? :roll:

Seriously, do you actually believe the rubbish you type?

and the corporate licence on his gaming system an outright violation of the licencing contract

Originally posted by BFG10K at 12/26/2006 01:42 PM:

I also have a legit retail boxed version of XP Pro for my home machine.

But again there are plenty of ways for someone to be running a corporate version of XP on a home machine without being an "OMG Pirate!; also launching a game doesn't render the license null and void.

I'm sorry you have difficulty accepting such a simple concept despite multiple scenarios having been presented to you.

... are you surprised?
:Q

i'd be shocked otherwise.

 

[BFG10K]

You merely specified you had a work machine. You didn't specify the owner of the machine.

So as an example then: if my work owns the machine and I bring it home you would then agree I can run a corporate licence at home since the machine is an asset owned by the business?

I checked out ND 40 oz's claims with our IT department as well as Council's

What IT department? I thought you said you worked in a computer shop?

 

[Gstanfor]

I *own* and run the computer shop, I volunteer my time at an internet cafe that helps socially disadvantaged people (among other places) and the IT department was the local municipal council.

Yes. If your work owns the machine and you take it home (with their consent) for work related purposes (which ideally would be spelled out in your position description and duty statement), a corporate licence can then be run on it.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Gstanfor
I *own* and run the computer shop, I volunteer my time at an internet cafe that helps socially disadvantaged people (among other places) and the IT department was the local municipal council.

Yes. If your work owns the machine and you take it home (with their consent) for work related purposes (which ideally would be spelled out in your position description and duty statement), a corporate licence can then be run on it.

Would you just please stop. I am actually getting embarrassed for you. LMFAO.. Why don't you do yourself ,and us, a favor, and just call MS to alleviate your baseless concerns. So far two people have told you that 1 work and 1 home license from MS has been done for their company(s). You act like you're the one giving out the licenses and have it all worked out in your little head how it "should be" when it's nothing like that at all.

Do you just do this stuff just to have something to talk about? Even though it's most of the time, total rubbish? I mean, why waste our time?

 

[Mr Fox]

UPDATE : The Anti-Trust Price Fixing Littigation that started this overall investigation:


http://www.theinquirer.net/images/articles/nvidamd.pdf


If these companies conduct buisness in this manner nothing is beyond them.

Between the AEG/HR Viral marketing schemes. (pyramid marketing for the new millenium)

The price fixing at 400/500 Dollars.

The vendor Lock-in, feature lock out, this is an industry that is in for a wake-up call.

They have gone unchallenged for too long.

 

[jakedeez]

Originally posted by: Mr Fox
The United States Department Of Justice Antitrust Division is Investigating NVIDIA and ATI for price fixing.

Excerpted from my letter to USDOJ-ATD and Michigan Attorney General:

NVIDIA has engaged in illegal anti-competitive practices that violate Anti-trust laws.
? Because of this issue, I have no official SLI support and can only use older drivers; this limits me from upgrading to Windows Vista as I will lose SLI functionality.

? BFG Technologies has attempted in good faith to influence NVIDIA but at this point this is a political issue, and BFG Technologies hands are tied.

? I personally am at a dead end from NVIDIA?s actions when it comes to something as simple as Driver Support for SLI on anyone else?s Core Logic Chipsets.

? I have paid for the hardware and all associated rights, and am being denied proper ongoing product support and usage based upon information that was not made available during the sales phase.

Originally posted by: Mr Fox
As I was the Harbinger that Identified these issues upon Anandtech and other forum's I can tell everyone here that while my Campaign to get the word out was met with shill action, and obvious hostility from the usual malcontents....

I was trying to warn the Buying Public.... that this was not flying straight..... Even Forum Moderators were wondering what my Agenda was.... I stuck to my Guns.... and it now appears that Kate Smith is stepping up to the Microphone as we speak.....

G'Night Ladies and Germ's

R.I.P. Monarch Computer

You know man, the way you try and present your opinion as fact is really disgusting. It totally detracts from any valid point you might make. As a matter of fact, the deceptive way you present things, make me more then a little wary of listening to anything you would have to say. When I read your posts I feel like I am watching some old codger standing in his lawn, angrily shaking your rake at "those damn kids!"

I know if your reading this post, you are already itching to post a comment about how I am obviously working for nVidia and am just trying to invalidate your argument by attacking you personally... I know it is tempting, but resist. I am not saying I don't agree with you - nor however am I agreeing. I don't have an opinion about nVidia violating antitrust regulation or price fixing/collusion. My point is that I cannot agree with you! Not because you're wrong, but because the way you present your opinion as fact is such a turn off to your point.

First it was your acting as the "Harbinger that Identified these issues upon Anandtech and other forum's..." letting us know that Monarch customer service wasn't good and they didn't/don't ship things quickly! It's like we all just didn't realize that Monarch kinda sucked until you came along!?! Now you are bravley taking up the fight with high priced graphics cards! Perhaps next you can warn us all that we might not want to buy a computer on eBay from bigcooljesus!

Please Mr. Fox, I beg you, stop posting. Your tone is obtuse and your obvious lack of respect for the collective intelligence of the members of AT is insulting. It seems to me that you like the idea of being the guy to wage war on behalf of the consumer... but please understand, you will find actually doing something to help far more fulfilling then just pretending to on ATOT.

 

[jakedeez]

I still can't get over that you though you were the one who warned AT about Monarch being problematic...

 

[Mr Fox]

Originally posted by: jakedeez

Originally posted by: Mr Fox
The United States Department Of Justice Antitrust Division is Investigating NVIDIA and ATI for price fixing.

Excerpted from my letter to USDOJ-ATD and Michigan Attorney General:

NVIDIA has engaged in illegal anti-competitive practices that violate Anti-trust laws.
? Because of this issue, I have no official SLI support and can only use older drivers; this limits me from upgrading to Windows Vista as I will lose SLI functionality.

? BFG Technologies has attempted in good faith to influence NVIDIA but at this point this is a political issue, and BFG Technologies hands are tied.

? I personally am at a dead end from NVIDIA?s actions when it comes to something as simple as Driver Support for SLI on anyone else?s Core Logic Chipsets.

? I have paid for the hardware and all associated rights, and am being denied proper ongoing product support and usage based upon information that was not made available during the sales phase.

Originally posted by: Mr Fox
As I was the Harbinger that Identified these issues upon Anandtech and other forum's I can tell everyone here that while my Campaign to get the word out was met with shill action, and obvious hostility from the usual malcontents....

I was trying to warn the Buying Public.... that this was not flying straight..... Even Forum Moderators were wondering what my Agenda was.... I stuck to my Guns.... and it now appears that Kate Smith is stepping up to the Microphone as we speak.....

G'Night Ladies and Germ's

R.I.P. Monarch Computer

You know man, the way you try and present your opinion as fact is really disgusting. It totally detracts from any valid point you might make. As a matter of fact, the deceptive way you present things, make me more then a little wary of listening to anything you would have to say. When I read your posts I feel like I am watching some old codger standing in his lawn, angrily shaking your rake at "those damn kids!"

I know if your reading this post, you are already itching to post a comment about how I am obviously working for nVidia and am just trying to invalidate your argument by attacking you personally... I know it is tempting, but resist. I am not saying I don't agree with you - nor however am I agreeing. I don't have an opinion about nVidia violating antitrust regulation or price fixing/collusion. My point is that I cannot agree with you! Not because you're wrong, but because the way you present your opinion as fact is such a turn off to your point.

First it was your acting as the "Harbinger that Identified these issues upon Anandtech and other forum's..." letting us know that Monarch customer service wasn't good and they didn't/don't ship things quickly! It's like we all just didn't realize that Monarch kinda sucked until you came along!?! Now you are bravley taking up the fight with high priced graphics cards! Perhaps next you can warn us all that we might not want to buy a computer on eBay from bigcooljesus!

Please Mr. Fox, I beg you, stop posting. Your tone is obtuse and your obvious lack of respect for the collective intelligence of the members of AT is insulting. It seems to me that you like the idea of being the guy to wage war on behalf of the consumer... but please understand, you will find actually doing something to help far more fulfilling then just pretending to on ATOT.

It is as simple as this ..


It is obvious that you are biased, and attempting to get this thread locked....


I will not stoop to personal attacks.

This is serious and your belief is not relevant..



Take Care !

 

[DeathReborn]

Originally posted by: Mr Fox

Originally posted by: jakedeez

Originally posted by: Mr Fox
The United States Department Of Justice Antitrust Division is Investigating NVIDIA and ATI for price fixing.

Excerpted from my letter to USDOJ-ATD and Michigan Attorney General:

NVIDIA has engaged in illegal anti-competitive practices that violate Anti-trust laws.
? Because of this issue, I have no official SLI support and can only use older drivers; this limits me from upgrading to Windows Vista as I will lose SLI functionality.

? BFG Technologies has attempted in good faith to influence NVIDIA but at this point this is a political issue, and BFG Technologies hands are tied.

? I personally am at a dead end from NVIDIA?s actions when it comes to something as simple as Driver Support for SLI on anyone else?s Core Logic Chipsets.

? I have paid for the hardware and all associated rights, and am being denied proper ongoing product support and usage based upon information that was not made available during the sales phase.

Originally posted by: Mr Fox
As I was the Harbinger that Identified these issues upon Anandtech and other forum's I can tell everyone here that while my Campaign to get the word out was met with shill action, and obvious hostility from the usual malcontents....

I was trying to warn the Buying Public.... that this was not flying straight..... Even Forum Moderators were wondering what my Agenda was.... I stuck to my Guns.... and it now appears that Kate Smith is stepping up to the Microphone as we speak.....

G'Night Ladies and Germ's

R.I.P. Monarch Computer

You know man, the way you try and present your opinion as fact is really disgusting. It totally detracts from any valid point you might make. As a matter of fact, the deceptive way you present things, make me more then a little wary of listening to anything you would have to say. When I read your posts I feel like I am watching some old codger standing in his lawn, angrily shaking your rake at "those damn kids!"

I know if your reading this post, you are already itching to post a comment about how I am obviously working for nVidia and am just trying to invalidate your argument by attacking you personally... I know it is tempting, but resist. I am not saying I don't agree with you - nor however am I agreeing. I don't have an opinion about nVidia violating antitrust regulation or price fixing/collusion. My point is that I cannot agree with you! Not because you're wrong, but because the way you present your opinion as fact is such a turn off to your point.

First it was your acting as the "Harbinger that Identified these issues upon Anandtech and other forum's..." letting us know that Monarch customer service wasn't good and they didn't/don't ship things quickly! It's like we all just didn't realize that Monarch kinda sucked until you came along!?! Now you are bravley taking up the fight with high priced graphics cards! Perhaps next you can warn us all that we might not want to buy a computer on eBay from bigcooljesus!

Please Mr. Fox, I beg you, stop posting. Your tone is obtuse and your obvious lack of respect for the collective intelligence of the members of AT is insulting. It seems to me that you like the idea of being the guy to wage war on behalf of the consumer... but please understand, you will find actually doing something to help far more fulfilling then just pretending to on ATOT.

It is as simple as this ..


It is obvious that you are biased, and attempting to get this thread locked....


I will not stoop to personal attacks.

This is serious and your belief is not relevant..



Take Care !

It's a simple as nobody cares about your "crusade" or about you and it's all down to how you come across. Go buy a 680i & then you can use SLi. You obviously have the money to do so if you are intending on taking them to court.

Good day "Jack Thompson".

 

[jakedeez]

Originally posted by: Mr Fox

Originally posted by: jakedeez

Originally posted by: Mr Fox
The United States Department Of Justice Antitrust Division is Investigating NVIDIA and ATI for price fixing.

Excerpted from my letter to USDOJ-ATD and Michigan Attorney General:

NVIDIA has engaged in illegal anti-competitive practices that violate Anti-trust laws.
? Because of this issue, I have no official SLI support and can only use older drivers; this limits me from upgrading to Windows Vista as I will lose SLI functionality.

? BFG Technologies has attempted in good faith to influence NVIDIA but at this point this is a political issue, and BFG Technologies hands are tied.

? I personally am at a dead end from NVIDIA?s actions when it comes to something as simple as Driver Support for SLI on anyone else?s Core Logic Chipsets.

? I have paid for the hardware and all associated rights, and am being denied proper ongoing product support and usage based upon information that was not made available during the sales phase.

Originally posted by: Mr Fox
As I was the Harbinger that Identified these issues upon Anandtech and other forum's I can tell everyone here that while my Campaign to get the word out was met with shill action, and obvious hostility from the usual malcontents....

I was trying to warn the Buying Public.... that this was not flying straight..... Even Forum Moderators were wondering what my Agenda was.... I stuck to my Guns.... and it now appears that Kate Smith is stepping up to the Microphone as we speak.....

G'Night Ladies and Germ's

R.I.P. Monarch Computer

You know man, the way you try and present your opinion as fact is really disgusting. It totally detracts from any valid point you might make. As a matter of fact, the deceptive way you present things, make me more then a little wary of listening to anything you would have to say. When I read your posts I feel like I am watching some old codger standing in his lawn, angrily shaking your rake at "those damn kids!"

I know if your reading this post, you are already itching to post a comment about how I am obviously working for nVidia and am just trying to invalidate your argument by attacking you personally... I know it is tempting, but resist. I am not saying I don't agree with you - nor however am I agreeing. I don't have an opinion about nVidia violating antitrust regulation or price fixing/collusion. My point is that I cannot agree with you! Not because you're wrong, but because the way you present your opinion as fact is such a turn off to your point.

First it was your acting as the "Harbinger that Identified these issues upon Anandtech and other forum's..." letting us know that Monarch customer service wasn't good and they didn't/don't ship things quickly! It's like we all just didn't realize that Monarch kinda sucked until you came along!?! Now you are bravley taking up the fight with high priced graphics cards! Perhaps next you can warn us all that we might not want to buy a computer on eBay from bigcooljesus!

Please Mr. Fox, I beg you, stop posting. Your tone is obtuse and your obvious lack of respect for the collective intelligence of the members of AT is insulting. It seems to me that you like the idea of being the guy to wage war on behalf of the consumer... but please understand, you will find actually doing something to help far more fulfilling then just pretending to on ATOT.

It is as simple as this ..


It is obvious that you are biased, and attempting to get this thread locked....


I will not stoop to personal attacks.

This is serious and your belief is not relevant..



Take Care !

I am not trying to get the thread locked, I am trying to get you to go away. And Mr. Fox, this thread, (also your efforts, and even you personally) is anything but serious.

 

[Keysplayr]

I'd ask Mr. Fox to divert his energies to house and feed the homeless and hungry here in the states. But. There's no money in it. And before any soapbox is mounted, I do what little I can for them with very small donations here and there.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I'd ask Mr. Fox to divert his energies to house and feed the homeless and hungry here in the states. But. There's no money in it. And before any soapbox is mounted, I do what little I can for them with very small donations here and there.

we all do what we believe we must do ....

and we all could do "more"

irrelevant to the 'issue' here

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I'd ask Mr. Fox to divert his energies to house and feed the homeless and hungry here in the states. But. There's no money in it. And before any soapbox is mounted, I do what little I can for them with very small donations here and there.

we all do what we believe we must do ....

and we all could do "more"

irrelevant to the 'issue' here

Actually apoppin, it's more relevant than you realize. It is my belief that Mr. Fox is here to try to cash in. I'm willing to wager he may be an attorney looking to start a class action suit of some sort. I merely stated this kind of gung ho energy can be better placed. Why else would he start this topic at at least three separate forums that I have seen? The more clients, the more cash. Voila. I know you're not naive pop, I know you should be able to see this. So, at the very least, the motive for starting this thread in various places on the web should be addressed, and is relevant to why this thread was started.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I'd ask Mr. Fox to divert his energies to house and feed the homeless and hungry here in the states. But. There's no money in it. And before any soapbox is mounted, I do what little I can for them with very small donations here and there.

we all do what we believe we must do ....

and we all could do "more"

irrelevant to the 'issue' here

Actually apoppin, it's more relevant than you realize. It is my belief that Mr. Fox is here to try to cash in. I'm willing to wager he may be an attorney looking to start a class action suit of some sort. I merely stated this kind of gung ho energy can be better placed. Why else would he start this topic at at least three separate forums that I have seen? The more clients, the more cash. Voila. I know you're not naive pop, I know you should be able to see this. So, at the very least, the motive for starting this thread in various places on the web should be addressed, and is relevant to why this thread was started.

actually Keys, it's less relevant then you may realize.

you are questioning "motivation" ... i am just looking at the Facts.

isn't Mr Fox a lawyer?
:Q

... and believe that IS what he is attempting to do

IF the case has merit it may stand ... if not, i seriously doubt the DoJ will proceed.

 

[Mr Fox]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I'd ask Mr. Fox to divert his energies to house and feed the homeless and hungry here in the states. But. There's no money in it. And before any soapbox is mounted, I do what little I can for them with very small donations here and there.

we all do what we believe we must do ....

and we all could do "more"

irrelevant to the 'issue' here

Actually apoppin, it's more relevant than you realize. It is my belief that Mr. Fox is here to try to cash in. I'm willing to wager he may be an attorney looking to start a class action suit of some sort. I merely stated this kind of gung ho energy can be better placed. Why else would he start this topic at at least three separate forums that I have seen? The more clients, the more cash. Voila. I know you're not naive pop, I know you should be able to see this. So, at the very least, the motive for starting this thread in various places on the web should be addressed, and is relevant to why this thread was started.

I think that it is clear that I'm serious about this.

And by unifying seperate voices into one strong voice it sends a message... To NVIDIA

The Motive is simple the same one that warned the people about Monarch Computer.

There is no money to be made in this kind of action... just the satisfaction of forcing change. If NV and ATI get forced to support their product across all compliant chipsets... we win as consumers... They(NV/ATI) get woke-up that they must not try to screw with their customers... and hopefully figure out another way of doing buisness.

Anti-Trust is as low as Viral Marketing.

The consumers can effect them by unification on the issues...

You may not like my methods... you don't have to... but they are effective.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I'd ask Mr. Fox to divert his energies to house and feed the homeless and hungry here in the states. But. There's no money in it. And before any soapbox is mounted, I do what little I can for them with very small donations here and there.

we all do what we believe we must do ....

and we all could do "more"

irrelevant to the 'issue' here

Actually apoppin, it's more relevant than you realize. It is my belief that Mr. Fox is here to try to cash in. I'm willing to wager he may be an attorney looking to start a class action suit of some sort. I merely stated this kind of gung ho energy can be better placed. Why else would he start this topic at at least three separate forums that I have seen? The more clients, the more cash. Voila. I know you're not naive pop, I know you should be able to see this. So, at the very least, the motive for starting this thread in various places on the web should be addressed, and is relevant to why this thread was started.

actually Keys, it's less relevant then you may realize.

you are questioning "motivation" ... i am just looking at the Facts.

isn't Mr Fox a lawyer?
:Q

... and believe that IS what he is attempting to do

IF the case has merit it may stand ... if not, i seriously doubt the DoJ will proceed.

Cmon, it's not like none of us can put together a system that we can be very happy with. Because SLI'd Geforces doesn't work on a particular platform doesn't mean it won't on another. Same with Crossfired Radeons. As it stands, there is a lot to choose from when selecting components to build a rig.

Anti-Trust, price fixing. Things that definately should be addressed. As for the lockouts? and system wide compatability? Well, I believe companies have the right to say what their hardware can and cannot run on. If nvidia locks out Crossfire on an Nforce board and only allows SLI, then you don't buy the Nforce board. You buy a board that allows you to run your Crossfire. And vice versa. I'm no lawyer, and have no idea what is or is not allowed and what standards have to be followed, so what will be will be.

As far as the prices these products debut at, well, look what goes into the products to create them. And prices always fall as time passes. I don't think I have ever seen you purchase a high end vid card at it's debut when the cost was highest. It is your option to wait for the prices to lower and deals to be had. Any level headed consumer would do the same.

If Mr. Fox just wants to get a message out to ATI and Nvidia, that is fine. Nothing wrong with that. If it turns out that capitalism is the ignition spark for this issue, then I condemn it.

 

[apoppin]

as i said ... Mr Fox' *motivation* ... is not my issue ...

clearly there is some "principle" involved and he feels strongly



he also claims there is no money to be made here

so ... we need to look at the "endgame" ...
i can't [and won't] judge now.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: apoppin
as i said ... Mr Fox' *motivation* ... is not my issue ...

clearly there is some "principle" involved and he feels strongly



he also claims there is no money to be made here

so ... we need to look at the "endgame" ...
i can't [and won't] judge now.

Ok, sounds good. :thumbsup: