Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Technology
Reload this Page >

Reactivation Issue: Microsoft Must Burn in Hell!

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Reactivation Issue: Microsoft Must Burn in Hell!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 20, 2007, 11:12 pm
  #61  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 37,486
Originally Posted by murphy
I'm with you. Why continue to do business with a company that treats you like a criminal? Windows product activation isn't particularly effective in preventing piracy. It does a great job at getting in the way of legitimate users though.
It won't stop the diehard pirates and the vast majority of Asian store-in-a-shack resellers, but it will stop the casual copiers, the kind of mom and pop pirates that pick up a copy from the guy at the office who always has a stack of CD-R's in his drawer.

The days where you could install anything from Microsoft with a simple 111-11111 key are long gone, and every pirate they stop is at least one more.

It is amazing how people view software piracy when it's the big bad Microsoft that is being screwed over.

Instead of complaining about how bad Windows is, you should be calling your software vendor demanding a version for the Mac.
ScottC is offline  
Old Jan 20, 2007, 11:52 pm
  #62  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, AA Executive Platinum
Posts: 1,932
Originally Posted by ScottC
It is amazing how people view software piracy when it's the big bad Microsoft that is being screwed over.
Who in this thread has been sympathetic to software pirates? I'm against piracy whether it's big bad MS, big bad RIAA, big bad MPAA, or anyone else. I don't think people should steal Windows - I think they should use a better OS.

Instead of complaining about how bad Windows is, you should be calling your software vendor demanding a version for the Mac.
Are you still talking to me? I agree 100%. I think it's a shame that so many people get frustrated with MS and continue to give them business. I understand that there's a lot of lockin - replacing your hardware and software to get away from MS can be a big nut for some people, or can even be impossible. With boot camp and/or virtualization software, though, people can start to make the move slowly. When it's time to replace your computer, buy a Mac, and install your current version of Windows on it. Instead of upgrading windows and apps, begin replacing them with Mac apps. You'll be windows-free before you know it. The windows install onto boot camp will be your last MS product activation.
murphy is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 12:44 am
  #63  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by bluemonq
iPod? Hmm... unless he's talking about Boot Camp... but Apple doesn't officially support that, do they?

Careful - nowhere did I suggest running an emulator. I suggested WINE, whose recursive acronym happens to be, "Wine Is Not an Emulator." It allows you to access Windows API while using some FreeBSD, Solaris, or - the best part - your favorite flavor of Linux. In real-world usage, as long as the program wasn't designed too shodily, there isn't much of a performance difference, assuming it runs, of course. WINE plays decently well with DirectX; with other drivers, YMMV.

In case you're interested: WINE HQ
I had looked at the website -- I hadn't heard of WINE before. The software I run isn't shoddily written, but it is "optimized," meaning it needs to be on a very compatible system -- there are PC/Windows systems on which it won't run. "Not much performance difference," could also translate into a considerable performance difference when you're talking about working with video.

BTW, what video editing suite are you running?
Premiere Pro 1.5, AfterEffects 6.5, Encore for authoring, Audition for audio, tmpgenc for transcoding, and a variety of single-task programs for specific effects, e.g. Particle Illusion, Cool 3d Edit, various morphing programs and things like that. Also PhotoShop CS2, a variety of stitching programs, Scenealyzer and Scenealyzer Live and some other programs I'm probably not remembering at the moment.
PTravel is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 12:55 am
  #64  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by phlflyer927
I don't know if you've looked at this page http://www.microsoft.com/technet/pro...e/xpactiv.mspx , It may answer a few questions of why certain things trigger re-activation etc.
I don't care about what things trigger reactivation. I installed the new NIC because I needed it -- I'm not going to forgo a legitimate and licensed change to my computer because Microsoft, by virtue of its monopoly position, thinks its okay to put viruses on my machine.

Low-tier support for a lot of companies, and in this case MS, has suffered greatly with the shifts to offshore support. I did note that you mentioned actually going through a US call center, and aside from just bad luck, I can't explain it away.
I've already explained it. I've dealt with Microsoft a lot, not just as a customer, but as a lawyer involved in half-a-dozen or more lawsuits. Microsoft has a corporate aesthetic which is unique -- I've never encountered it when litigating against any other major company. The short version is, Microsoft regards itself as a sovereign nation, rather than a corporate citizen, and litigating against them is more like going to war with a small, but very well-armed country, than going to court against a hostile business entity.

You probably just got someone who just didn't know how to fix your probem as they don't see a high volume of activation problems.
I spoke to a total of 8 people over the course of an hour and a half. Only the last one understood the issue AND was willing to provide a solution without forcing me to disclose personal information that is none of Microsoft's business.

Since the activation wizard will direct you to call a specific phone number, those calls don't go through the general support queue.
Yeah -- that would have been nice, had there been an activation wizard where Microsoft said it was supposed to be.

Hopefully if you run into a similar problem in the future, you can have it resolved quicker in this way.
I'm sure it will, but not the way you think. Had this happened on a weekday, instead of a Friday night, I would have called Microsoft's outside counsel and discussed the license violation.

Just as a side note. If anyone pissed at dealing with activations in WinXP, you're going to hate Vista. Several of the licensing methods will cause it to activate frequently, not just when you make hardware changes. Known pirated keys will be deactivated in a more aggressive manner than how they are handled currently.
Note that we're talking apples and oranges -- the presence of a pirated key provides a reasonable basis for de-activating a Windows installation. The substitution of a gigabit NIC for a 100 mbps NIC does not. Coincidentally, I was reading a test evaluation of Vista by PC World tonight. According to them, Vista exacts a significant performance hit, even on systems that are designed to accept it. To get almost the same level of performance, you need a Core 2 Duo CPU and at least 2 gigabytes of RAM, as well as a fast, dedicated graphics card. On the laptop side, it sounds like the Vaio SZ is the only machine that will give satisfactory (meaning equivalent) performance.

If you like/need the OS, it's just the sort of thing you have to live with. Personally I'll use just about any OS (anyone remember BeOS, I still have it), but I actually like Windows the most.
I muck around in Linux a bit because I have a Tivo that I've hacked. Though I'd hardly consider myself a Linux expert, I definitely like what I've seen -- lightening multitasking on far less powerful CPUs with nary a crash.
PTravel is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 12:56 am
  #65  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by ScottC
Never, not once have I been asked for any kind of personal information when re-installing XP. Like I said earlier, I have one key here that has been activated over and over again (my test key). The only question they ever ask is whether the old machine it was installed on will not be used with that key, I tell them that the old machine has been erased and that this is the only machine the key is being used on.

Never had a single problem.
So what's your point, Scott? It's never happened to you, therefore it hasn't happened? I really don't understand your positions in this thread. Do you work for Microsoft, or do you simply like to disagree with me (past history would seem to suggest the latter)?
PTravel is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 1:07 am
  #66  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SJC
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 3,686
Originally Posted by PTravel
The motherboard, CPU, and support chips didn't change, and those would be far more indicative of installation on another computer than a NIC, hard drives, graphics cards, or other readily- and often-upgraded components.
Unfortunately, the NIC is the only thing there that has a guaranteed unique serial number which is determinable in a very standard manner. And the truth is, most folks don't actually change the NIC all that often -- these days, they are built into the motherboard, which has become the broad definition of 'system.'

Steve
sllevin is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 3:35 am
  #67  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Central Florida
Programs: Bonvoy-Gold, HH-Gold, UA-Gold, *A-Gold
Posts: 2,043
Christ, I must be lucky...I upgraded my computer 1.5 years ago...I was running an old P3-866 running a store bought Full Version of XP Pro.

I designed a brand new box with a P4-3.0 and just took the hard drive from the old box and stuck it in the new one (I know it was bad form, but I had some software that I DID NOT want to bother reinstalling and some stuff which I have lost the disks)...

Well XP Pro booted (after some hardware updates) FINE. No new activation...at least to my recollection....I even changed the NIC at one point....

Maybe because it was an old Ver 1 version of XP Pro and it didn't have some of the fancy stuff yet.... I don't know and I don't care!

- HF
HobokenFlyer is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 7:17 am
  #68  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,481
Originally Posted by PTravel
... I would have called Microsoft's outside counsel and discussed the license violation.

....
The request for the personal information in order to re-activate was in conflict with the EULA, but other than that was there really any other violation of the EULA (I cant see one)? If you did sue or otherwise approach MSFT counsel what would you ask for ... 90 minutes billed at your rate ... or would you honor the EULA yourself and only ask for the original purchase price of the software?

Seriously, I can understand the aggravation, but what are you really wanting at this point? Just to rant? (I can certainly understand that .... I probably would too).
muddy is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 7:37 am
  #69  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by muddy
The request for the personal information in order to re-activate was in conflict with the EULA, but other than that was there really any other violation of the EULA (I cant see one)?
As I've explained several times, here in California (and in most other jurisdictions) there is a warranty of merchantability and a couple of other implied warranties. The EULA, itself, is a license to use the software. By de-activating the software without reason, Microsoft has breached that license. By demanding personal information to un-de-activate the software, Microsoft has breached that license.

If you did sue or otherwise approach MSFT counsel what would you ask for ... 90 minutes billed at your rate ... or would you honor the EULA yourself and only ask for the original purchase price of the software?
If I did sue, it would either be in small claims court for fraud (for which punitive damages are available), or as a class action suit.

Seriously, I can understand the aggravation, but what are you really wanting at this point? Just to rant? (I can certainly understand that .... I probably would too).
Well, of course I want to rant. That's why I wrote the OP and put it between \rant and \rant-off. You're kidding, right?
PTravel is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 7:54 am
  #70  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,481
Originally Posted by PTravel
As I've explained several times, here in California (and in most other jurisdictions) there is a warranty of merchantability and a couple of other implied warranties. The EULA, itself, is a license to use the software. By de-activating the software without reason, Microsoft has breached that license. By demanding personal information to un-de-activate the software, Microsoft has breached that license.

If I did sue, it would either be in small claims court for fraud (for which punitive damages are available), or as a class action suit.

Well, of course I want to rant. That's why I wrote the OP and put it between \rant and \rant-off. You're kidding, right?
Not trying to be argumentative, but this has truly piqued my curiosity. I am especially interested in your line of thinking in the matter since you are an attorney.

I'd agree on 1 out of three of your points (the one demanding personal info to reactivate) but the EULA explcitly states there is a possibility of a reactivation requirement after hardware changes. How do you see any fraud in any of this? Some sort of MSFT conspiracy to boost sales through deactivation? ... do you really think that is sellable?

The comments I made about ranting were an attempt to soften the post so I wouldnt appear confrontational ... you know .... I didnt want to appear to be being an ... ...
muddy is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 8:01 am
  #71  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Programs: Hyatt Globalist, AA Executive Platinum
Posts: 1,932
Originally Posted by PTravel
I had looked at the website -- I hadn't heard of WINE before. The software I run isn't shoddily written, but it is "optimized," meaning it needs to be on a very compatible system -- there are PC/Windows systems on which it won't run. "Not much performance difference," could also translate into a considerable performance difference when you're talking about working with video.

Premiere Pro 1.5, AfterEffects 6.5, Encore for authoring, Audition for audio, tmpgenc for transcoding, and a variety of single-task programs for specific effects, e.g. Particle Illusion, Cool 3d Edit, various morphing programs and things like that. Also PhotoShop CS2, a variety of stitching programs, Scenealyzer and Scenealyzer Live and some other programs I'm probably not remembering at the moment.
WINE isn't going to work for you. And, there's no current version of Premier for the Mac - Adobe killed it when Apple bought their own video editing software. All of that software would run at the same speed in Boot Camp as it does on your Windows machine now. Since Adobe is bringing Production Studio back to Macs, you could buy the Mac version when you upgrade, and you'd be done with Windows. The next version of Parallels is supposed to support hardware video acceleration. If it does, then all that software should be usable under Parallels, making a switch much easier.

I understand you don't have much interest in doing this, and I don't blame you. It would be somewhat painful. I sometimes put up with some pain in order to avoid companies I don't like. If you feel the same, switching is an option, and many Mac users would be willing to help you. It's something to think about before shelling out for Vista.
murphy is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 8:01 am
  #72  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,038
Originally Posted by muddy
Not trying to be argumentative, but this has truly piqued my curiosity. I am especially interested in your line of thinking in the matter since you are an attorney.

I'd agree on 1 out of three of your points (the one demanding personal info to reactivate) but the EULA explcitly states there is a possibility of a reactivation requirement after hardware changes. How do you see any fraud in any of this? Some sort of MSFT conspiracy to boost sales through deactivation? ... do you really think that is sellable?

The comments I made about ranting were an attempt to soften the post so I wouldnt appear confrontational ... you know .... I didnt want to appear to be being an ... ...
I think he is saying that if the licensing agreement disagrees with California law, California law prevails. And the inactivation violates the California requirements.
GadgetFreak is online now  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 8:05 am
  #73  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,481
Originally Posted by GadgetFreak
I think ... the inactivation violates the California requirements.
Wow! If thats true I would be shocked.
muddy is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 8:05 am
  #74  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 37,486
Originally Posted by ScottC
Out of curiosity, when you turned the machine back on after installing the new nic, did you install the new NIC drivers BEFORE attempting to activate it?

I have a sneaking feeling that you turned it on and tried the activation before the new nic was correctly installed. It is (to me) the only way to describe the faliure of the activation wizard. If the machine can't contact the internet then it makes sense that the activation will fail.
Any answer on this one? I'm curious whether the NIC was working (with correct drivers) when you tried to reactivate.
ScottC is offline  
Old Jan 21, 2007, 8:09 am
  #75  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 37,486
Originally Posted by GadgetFreak
I think he is saying that if the licensing agreement disagrees with California law, California law prevails. And the inactivation violates the California requirements.
Based on what? Let's not pretend Microsoft suddenly decided to deactivate a perfectly working machine, they deactivated a machine that in their eyes had undergone a significant hardware change.

I'm (seriously) very interested in learning how California law can invalidate an EULA that applies to the rest of the world. If Microsoft were randomly turning off machines for the fun of it then I'd be in line to sue them, but the user is on record explaining what he did to make it deactivate itself.
ScottC is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.