Illegal XP owners beware, Microsoft has quite a suprise planned

[Unicron80]

This is just reason #29809823 to switch over to Linux.

 

[Johnbear007]

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: Johnbear007

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: gogeeta13

Originally posted by: UberDave
i'll start purchasing an OS from Microsoft once they reduce their prices. To me it should be like $60 compared to the $150+ they've been charging.... and thats being generous.

Speaking of which, The Microsoft office is soooo expensive I have to choose from either 97 pro, which only now is affordable or Corel Wordperfect office...

$165 for OEM Office XP is "soooo expensive?"

yes, it is. 165$ is ALOT of money to me. And it probably always will be.

I'm not sure how old you are, but wait until you buy your first house and get your first summer power bill.

Im 25

I dont have a house payment, because I rent, but my rent payment before utilities is substantial.
I have had numerous summer power bills ( I have central air in my apartment)

165$ is alot of money in my opinion, in this context. Im not using that as an excuse to pirate. I buy my software, but I DO think it is expensive.

 

[Johnbear007]

I have another question about linux. I have this extra little 4gb hard drive in my machine that I use for downloads..... how hard would it be to install linux to that and dual boot with windows xp? and how woudl I go about installing? just download it to that drive and then what? install from DOS?

sorry for the confusion

 

[Miramonti]

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: Johnbear007

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: gogeeta13

Originally posted by: UberDave i'll start purchasing an OS from Microsoft once they reduce their prices. To me it should be like $60 compared to the $150+ they've been charging.... and thats being generous.

Speaking of which, The Microsoft office is soooo expensive I have to choose from either 97 pro, which only now is affordable or Corel Wordperfect office...

$165 for OEM Office XP is "soooo expensive?"

yes, it is. 165$ is ALOT of money to me. And it probably always will be.

I'm not sure how old you are, but wait until you buy your first house and get your first summer power bill.

Its all relative. M$ abused their monopoly and don't deserve the high prices that they put on their OS's. Their making a killing off these and they deserve to get reemed.

This is corporate liberation theology at its finest. They are evil, so by screwing them its only screwing evil, which is a good thing.

 

[slpaulson]

I hate this registration stuff because when I got my acedemic version of office 2000 somebody had already used my key and it was invalid when I tried to register it. I ended up calling microsoft and explaining the situation to get it worked out. The first person I talked to at ms basically told me to go to hell, but when I called back I got somebody who would give me a activation number. I also had to wait to get it activated because they weren't open when I tried calling.

Then I had to go through the same thing when I gave my computer an overhaul. Kinda like a company saying you can only play your music cd in one stereo or something.

Anyways that's the last microsoft product I've bought...

 

[Doggiedog]

I agree with you 100%.

How much harder is it to recycle old code from Office 2K and add some useless features to it to make Office XP and charge $169+ than it is to create something like Neverwinter Nights for $44? And don't give me that BS on customer service because I don't know anyone that uses CS for Office anyway.

The reason why MS gets away with it is because it is a monopoly.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: jjsole

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: Johnbear007

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: gogeeta13

Originally posted by: UberDave i'll start purchasing an OS from Microsoft once they reduce their prices. To me it should be like $60 compared to the $150+ they've been charging.... and thats being generous.

Speaking of which, The Microsoft office is soooo expensive I have to choose from either 97 pro, which only now is affordable or Corel Wordperfect office...

$165 for OEM Office XP is "soooo expensive?"

yes, it is. 165$ is ALOT of money to me. And it probably always will be.

I'm not sure how old you are, but wait until you buy your first house and get your first summer power bill.

Its all relative. M$ abused their monopoly and don't deserve the high prices that they put on their OS's. Their making a killing off these and they deserve to get reemed.

This is corporate liberation theology at its finest. They are <STRONG>evil</STRONG>, so by screwing them its only screwing evil, which is a good thing.

"deserve" has nothing to do with it. They can charge whatever they want for THEIR product. Your option is to not buy it. It's that simple.

Again, another software/music thread in which the childish and amoral sense of entitlement runs rampant. By your logic, I can steal from anyone I deem "evil" as well, right?

 

[Aquaman]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: billgates380
Another vote for Win2k, it's been better all along anyways.

Not for me...WinXP is soooooooooo much better on all fronts. I can't even go back to using Win2k on my rig...it's too counterproductive.

Agreeden

Cheers,
Aquaman

 

[pulse8]

Originally posted by: Doggiedog
I agree with you 100%.

How much harder is it to recycle old code from Office 2K and add some useless features to it to make Office XP and charge $169+ than it is to create something like Neverwinter Nights for $44? And don't give me that BS on customer service because I don't know anyone that uses CS for Office anyway.

The reason why MS gets away with it is because it is a monopoly.

Ummmm...Office XP basically has 6 programs with it.

Word
Excel
Front Page
Powerpoint
Outlook
Access

NWN is a single game.

Even if they charged $30 a program, at 6 programs that's $180. I'd say $169 isn't too bad.

 

[VFAA]

Originally posted by: VFAA
How much is a legal copy of MS Windows XP Pro Corporate and where can I buy it?

?

 

[Lucky]

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: Doggiedog
I agree with you 100%.

How much harder is it to recycle old code from Office 2K and add some useless features to it to make Office XP and charge $169+ than it is to create something like Neverwinter Nights for $44? And don't give me that BS on customer service because I don't know anyone that uses CS for Office anyway.

The reason why MS gets away with it is because it is a monopoly.

Ummmm...Office XP basically has 6 programs with it.

Word
Excel
Front Page
Powerpoint
Outlook
Access

NWN is a single game.

Even if they charged $30 a program, at 6 programs that's $180. I'd say $169 isn't too bad.

$170 is OEM. What percentage of customers are savvy enough to understand that and order from the appropriate venues? I'd have to say its a minority. Retail is a lot higher.

And why dont they charge *per* program? I only use word anyways!

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: VFAA

Originally posted by: VFAA
How much is a legal copy of MS Windows XP Pro Corporate and where can I buy it?

?

Dude, read the posts. You cannot buy it unless you are a company that buys several hundred licenses (not sure on the exact number).

 

[VFAA]

Ahhh crap.

 

[PG]

And why dont they charge *per* program? I only use word anyways!

You can get Word 2002 included in MS Works 2002, but it's $99 at places like Best Buy.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Lucky

Originally posted by: pulse8

Originally posted by: Doggiedog
I agree with you 100%.

How much harder is it to recycle old code from Office 2K and add some useless features to it to make Office XP and charge $169+ than it is to create something like Neverwinter Nights for $44? And don't give me that BS on customer service because I don't know anyone that uses CS for Office anyway.

The reason why MS gets away with it is because it is a monopoly.

Ummmm...Office XP basically has 6 programs with it.

Word
Excel
Front Page
Powerpoint
Outlook
Access

NWN is a single game.

Even if they charged $30 a program, at 6 programs that's $180. I'd say $169 isn't too bad.

$170 is OEM. What percentage of customers are savvy enough to understand that and order from the appropriate venues? I'd have to say its a minority. Retail is a lot higher.

And why dont they charge *per* program? I only use word anyways!

Have I not seen Word for sale individually?

 

[Lucky]

Have I not seen Word for sale individually?

:Q How would I know what you have not seen?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Lucky

Have I not seen Word for sale individually?

:Q How would I know what you have not seen?

Because you're special that way. Isn't that why you rode the short bus to school?

 

[vash]

The corporate blacklash and consumer backlash is just what MS needs. They are trying to stop piracy on an existing product, using the internet as their key. All in all, they can probably put all of this in place, now and we wouldn't even know it. More and more customers are upgrading aging NT4 installations to Win2k, so I am sure this will be even a better seller for Win2k and Office2k product lines.

vash

 

[Krk3561]

You can buy Word 2002 individually at office depot, but i think its $130. Why not just buy Office XP for Students and Teachers? I think it $100 at amazon.com and it comes with word, excel, powerpoint, and outlook.

 

[Electrode]

Originally posted by: Turin39789
doom3 will run on linux!????

Correct. Like all recent games developed or overseen by id Software, there will be a Linux release of Doom 3, either at the same time as, or very shortly after, the Windows release.

I have a 2 gig space on my HD and a $50 bill reserved for it.

 

[Ultima]

Amused one, do you just not reply to people when you can't think of a witty answer? For anyone else out there, I'd love to see someone look at this objectively and give their thoughts. Many of you liken piracy to material theft; I however don't see it that way:

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: ZeroBurn
have pirates ever been very hard behind, if not a few steps in front? whether it be the leaked dvd encryption or a magic marker, there'll be ways around it. if they spent more efforts on creating their actual product rather than expend resources on circumventing people, perhaps more people would be willing to purchase their products.

Let's try this another way:

Have shoplifters ever been very far behind, if not a few steps in front? Whether it be fake gift boxes with false doors or special tools to remove anti-theft tags there will always be a way around it. If stores spent more efforts on keeping better stock in their stores rather than spending resources on circumventing thieves, perhaps more people would be willing to buy clothes.

Nope, sounds pretty stupid.

Let's try it this way:

Have car thieves ever been very far behind, if not a few steps in front? Whether it be Slim jims or ignition popping tools there will always be a way around it. If car makers spent more efforts on building nicer cars rather than spending resources on circumventing thieves, perhaps more people would be interested in buying cars.

Nope, that's pretty stupid as well.

I guess this means that blaming the victim really is stupid.

One huge, gaping hole in your logic: The loss of an item of clothing or a car represents a real, tangible, physical loss to the owner. Where is the real, physical, tangible loss to Microsoft when a copy is duplicated.

Now, let's say that instead of stealing the item of clothing the "theif" instead duplicated the clothing and walked home with that item of clothing, leaving the store owner with his original item of clothing. Let's say that, instead of Joe losing his fancy new Corvette to a theif, that instead the theif somehow duplicates the Corvette and drives home with his own copy?

Don't compare apples and oranges.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Ultima
Amused one, do you just not reply to people when you can't think of a witty answer? For anyone else out there, I'd love to see someone look at this objectively and give their thoughts. Many of you liken piracy to material theft; I however don't see it that way:

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: ZeroBurn
have pirates ever been very hard behind, if not a few steps in front? whether it be the leaked dvd encryption or a magic marker, there'll be ways around it. if they spent more efforts on creating their actual product rather than expend resources on circumventing people, perhaps more people would be willing to purchase their products.

Let's try this another way:

Have shoplifters ever been very far behind, if not a few steps in front? Whether it be fake gift boxes with false doors or special tools to remove anti-theft tags there will always be a way around it. If stores spent more efforts on keeping better stock in their stores rather than spending resources on circumventing thieves, perhaps more people would be willing to buy clothes.

Nope, sounds pretty stupid.

Let's try it this way:

Have car thieves ever been very far behind, if not a few steps in front? Whether it be Slim jims or ignition popping tools there will always be a way around it. If car makers spent more efforts on building nicer cars rather than spending resources on circumventing thieves, perhaps more people would be interested in buying cars.

Nope, that's pretty stupid as well.

I guess this means that blaming the victim really is stupid.

One huge, gaping hole in your logic: The loss of an item of clothing or a car represents a real, tangible, physical loss to the owner. Where is the real, physical, tangible loss to Microsoft when a copy is duplicated.

Now, let's say that instead of stealing the item of clothing the "theif" instead duplicated the clothing and walked home with that item of clothing, leaving the store owner with his original item of clothing. Let's say that, instead of Joe losing his fancy new Corvette to a theif, that instead the theif somehow duplicates the Corvette and drives home with his own copy?

Don't compare apples and oranges.

More justification for theft.

I wonder what your reaction would be if your boss told you something like this when he refused to pay you for a days/weeks/months work?

Intellectual property is no less property than anything else. You are stealing someone's work, and using it without paying for it.

The only hole here, is in your morality.

 

[TNTrulez]

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: Ultima
Amused one, do you just not reply to people when you can't think of a witty answer? For anyone else out there, I'd love to see someone look at this objectively and give their thoughts. Many of you liken piracy to material theft; I however don't see it that way:

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: ZeroBurn
have pirates ever been very hard behind, if not a few steps in front? whether it be the leaked dvd encryption or a magic marker, there'll be ways around it. if they spent more efforts on creating their actual product rather than expend resources on circumventing people, perhaps more people would be willing to purchase their products.

Let's try this another way:

Have shoplifters ever been very far behind, if not a few steps in front? Whether it be fake gift boxes with false doors or special tools to remove anti-theft tags there will always be a way around it. If stores spent more efforts on keeping better stock in their stores rather than spending resources on circumventing thieves, perhaps more people would be willing to buy clothes.

Nope, sounds pretty stupid.

Let's try it this way:

Have car thieves ever been very far behind, if not a few steps in front? Whether it be Slim jims or ignition popping tools there will always be a way around it. If car makers spent more efforts on building nicer cars rather than spending resources on circumventing thieves, perhaps more people would be interested in buying cars.

Nope, that's pretty stupid as well.

I guess this means that blaming the victim really is stupid.

One huge, gaping hole in your logic: The loss of an item of clothing or a car represents a real, tangible, physical loss to the owner. Where is the real, physical, tangible loss to Microsoft when a copy is duplicated.

Now, let's say that instead of stealing the item of clothing the "theif" instead duplicated the clothing and walked home with that item of clothing, leaving the store owner with his original item of clothing. Let's say that, instead of Joe losing his fancy new Corvette to a theif, that instead the theif somehow duplicates the Corvette and drives home with his own copy?

Don't compare apples and oranges.

More justification for theft.

I wonder what your reaction would be if your boss told you something like this when he refused to pay you for a days/weeks/months work?

Intellectual property is no less property than anything else. You are stealing someone's work, and using it without paying for it.

The only hole here, is in your morality.

Doesn't everyone say that America is morally bankrupt? Hahah

 

[ed21x]

Fore a mere $30 entrance fee into one of those ms expos, you can easily get a free and legal copy of XP, MS C++, Office, etc legally!

 

[Ultima]

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: Ultima
Amused one, do you just not reply to people when you can't think of a witty answer? For anyone else out there, I'd love to see someone look at this objectively and give their thoughts. Many of you liken piracy to material theft; I however don't see it that way:

Originally posted by: AmusedOne

Originally posted by: ZeroBurn
have pirates ever been very hard behind, if not a few steps in front? whether it be the leaked dvd encryption or a magic marker, there'll be ways around it. if they spent more efforts on creating their actual product rather than expend resources on circumventing people, perhaps more people would be willing to purchase their products.

Let's try this another way:

Have shoplifters ever been very far behind, if not a few steps in front? Whether it be fake gift boxes with false doors or special tools to remove anti-theft tags there will always be a way around it. If stores spent more efforts on keeping better stock in their stores rather than spending resources on circumventing thieves, perhaps more people would be willing to buy clothes.

Nope, sounds pretty stupid.

Let's try it this way:

Have car thieves ever been very far behind, if not a few steps in front? Whether it be Slim jims or ignition popping tools there will always be a way around it. If car makers spent more efforts on building nicer cars rather than spending resources on circumventing thieves, perhaps more people would be interested in buying cars.

Nope, that's pretty stupid as well.

I guess this means that blaming the victim really is stupid.

One huge, gaping hole in your logic: The loss of an item of clothing or a car represents a real, tangible, physical loss to the owner. Where is the real, physical, tangible loss to Microsoft when a copy is duplicated.

Now, let's say that instead of stealing the item of clothing the "theif" instead duplicated the clothing and walked home with that item of clothing, leaving the store owner with his original item of clothing. Let's say that, instead of Joe losing his fancy new Corvette to a theif, that instead the theif somehow duplicates the Corvette and drives home with his own copy?

Don't compare apples and oranges.

More justification for theft.

I wonder what your reaction would be if your boss told you something like this when he refused to pay you for a days/weeks/months work?

Intellectual property is no less property than anything else. You are stealing someone's work, and using it without paying for it.

The only hole here, is in your morality.

assuming I'm a pirate because I hold a different viewpoint than yours.

at you thinking I condone piracy. I'm just looking at it from a more objective angle.