Topic: If its good enough for Microsoft ...

[Nemesis]

I have 3 computers, and a laptop in my house and for some unfathomable reason i am required to have 4 copies of XP.

Why can i not have 1 licence which allows me to install XP onto any computer that is mine, or my familys?

Its pure greed on MS's part, that is all.

When you have problems with the systems what do you do?  Do you search the Microsoft site and download patches?  With 4 computers you are 4 times as likely to do that and it costs Microsoft money when you do.   Why should you not pay extra to Microsoft when typically people with more than one computer cost Microsoft more in support than do those with one computer?

I do think that Microsoft and their 80% profit margin on Windows and office are overcharging.   They also don't make any real effort to tell the general public about their discounted 5 pack (which I believe would be cheaper for you than your 4 copies) where they provide one copy and 5 serial numbers. 

My response to Microsofts intrusive ways is to cease to buy Microsoft products (except the laptop came with XP - no one locally sells Windows free laptops that I am aware of).  It does mean that gaming is something that I am slowly abandoning as there aren't as many games on Linux but sometimes you must make sacrifices for your principles.

You object to Microsofts behaviour?  Fine.  Cease to be their customer.  Don't pirate their products, move away from them.  No Windows.  No MS Office.   No XBox.  You may have to give up things you don't want to but freedom has a price.

If you can't (or won't) move away then pay the price of being their captive.

[prometheus]

you open the door for everyone to put as many copies of windows on as many computers as they like.

That sounds fair to me... One license for one person...  You speak as if that is something wrong...

[Nemesis]

That sounds fair to me... One license for one person...  You speak as if that is something wrong...

My mothers computer is used by 6 or 7 people should they each have to have their own license to use it?  Is it one license per person?  Per family?  (Define family for this case).  Or 1 / computer?  Where exactly is the line?

[Nemesis]

If you don't like Microsoft don't steal from them, use Linux or Mac.  Using Linux or Mac actually hurts them more than piracy does so if you really dislike them and want to hurt them that is the better way to do it.  It is not only being more effective, it is also morally, ethically and legally superiour.

To hurt Microsoft:
1/ Don't use their software.
2/ Either buy a MAC or build your own computer (to avoid the Microsoft tax)
3/ Tell/help others to do the same migration
4/ Watch Microsoft tighten their grip (WGA anyone?) on their captive audience while more and more fall between the fingers and follow your trail.

As long as they are going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade."

5/ Gloat as you and others foul up his evil plans.

[Mr_Tricorder]

I'm still working on step 1 as I still have to rely on Windows for some things, but I've gotten all of the other steps down pretty well.

[Nemesis]

I'm still working on step 1 as I still have to rely on Windows for some things, but I've gotten all of the other steps down pretty well.

The underground railroad from Redmond has room for all, climb aboard.

[prometheus]

That sounds fair to me... One license for one person...  You speak as if that is something wrong...

My mothers computer is used by 6 or 7 people should they each have to have their own license to use it?  Is it one license per person?  Per family?  (Define family for this case).  Or 1 / computer?  Where exactly is the line?

I think a bit of common sense would tell you that is not what I meant...  If I have licensed a copy of XP, it stands to reason that I should have the right to let whom I want have the use of my computer(s)...

[Nemesis]

That sounds fair to me... One license for one person...  You speak as if that is something wrong...

My mothers computer is used by 6 or 7 people should they each have to have their own license to use it?  Is it one license per person?  Per family?  (Define family for this case).  Or 1 / computer?  Where exactly is the line?

I think a bit of common sense would tell you that is not what I meant...  If I have licensed a copy of XP, it stands to reason that I should have the right to let whom I want have the use of my computer(s)...

Then define your terms.  You said one license per person now your saying thats not what you meant.  So what do you actually mean? 

One per household perhaps?  What do you do when the household splits?  Child goes to college/university or sets up own home?  Divorce perhaps?  Who gets custody of the license and how do you ensure that it is followed?

What about support?  Those with multiple computers cost Microsoft more in support than those with 1 computer.

[prometheus]

That sounds fair to me... One license for one person...  You speak as if that is something wrong...

My mothers computer is used by 6 or 7 people should they each have to have their own license to use it?  Is it one license per person?  Per family?  (Define family for this case).  Or 1 / computer?  Where exactly is the line?

I think a bit of common sense would tell you that is not what I meant...  If I have licensed a copy of XP, it stands to reason that I should have the right to let whom I want have the use of my computer(s)...

Then define your terms.  You said one license per person now your saying thats not what you meant.  So what do you actually mean? 

One per household perhaps?  What do you do when the household splits?  Child goes to college/university or sets up own home?  Divorce perhaps?  Who gets custody of the license and how do you ensure that it is followed?

What about support?  Those with multiple computers cost Microsoft more in support than those with 1 computer.

Well personally I think all intellectual property should be distributed under a GNU style system, but I think our society will need to evolve a little further before we can go with that...

1) I think it is essential that all Operating Systems should be open sourced in that the source code sbould be available so it can be modified.  This does not necessarily mean that one should be a allowed to make copies of the installation disks and give them away to their mates for free without having made any meaningful fixes or changes, but this way advances can be brought to the table without personal greed and petty territorial instincts getting in the way.  An epsidoe of TNG I recently watched springs to mind...  "So you're Geordie La'Forge, the man who's been fouling up my engine designs?"

It is absurdly selfish and narrow minded to be so precious about your intellectual property that you won't let anyone else build on it...

2) I think that one license should cover all my computers, and anyone who wishes to use one or more of said computers with my permission, and if a household splits up it stands to reason that the lisence would go wherever the installation disk does, which would presumably be with the person who paid for it unless they wish to give it away...

[Mr_Tricorder]

How would you plan on enforcing a GNU-style OS license for every OS?  Most, if not all of us here live in countries that have a relatively loose hand on business practices and commerce.  Companies are free to place certain restrictions on their products and we are free to chose whether or not to buy those products.  If M$ doesn't want to open-source it's software, then it doesn't have to and has every right not to.  I agree with you that it would be better for everyone involved, but I understand and respect the decision for any software company to keep its software closed-source.

I agree with Nemesis about the license issue.  One computer/one license sounds reasonable to me and clearly defines what is and isn't a legal installation.  However, I think that license should be transferrable from computer to computer when you upgrade your system.  This is my biggest problem with Vista and it's motherboard=computer and "if motherboard=computer then new_motherboard=new_computer=new_license_needed" nonsense.

[E_Look]

I used to believe that it should be, at least for private customers, one license per household.  Then I realized some households are, well, huge.

I think it may be fairer that Microsoft, for example out of all software, especially OS writing companies, should allow up to two or three installations per CD purchased, like with the Student and Teacher edition of MS Office.  I think they did the right thing there.

Consider that a man with a wife and say two kids has to buy the same software FOUR TIMES; when added up after a while, it isn't exactly cheap.

I am literally still smarting over having bought Win XP TWICE because I built each of my kids a computer.  Each of those times, I don't recall any discounts or sales or specials.  I personally was fortunate enough that another family member, a bit of a computer enthusiast, had an extra real, legal copy that was just gathering dust, so he gave it to me (that guy sometimes has extras of video cards, even hard drives; man!).  I was already scanning the onlne vendor sites and various real stores for lowest prices on Win XP.  Otherwise, I would have bought it three times.

In those days that way predate Wintel-GUI systems, people lent out their DOS installation disks, antivirus programs (McAfee gave them out free), even Norton Utilities (when it was really great software) would be shared in the same house.  And I am from those days, so I suppose my views are colored by them.

Maybe PCs aren't really the way to go:
I should have bought a VAX or something and set up terminals all over my house.  At least the kids might learn the meaning of sharing.  They definitely won't from today's software purveyors.

[Nemesis]

They definitely need to promote the 5 pack.  They also need to set things up so you can download the patches and distribute them around your network without needing to download patches per machine.  I'm on dialup if I were patching all 4 machines on Win XP how long would it take and how much internet usage would I get in the meantime?

[E_Look]

Five!

I'd take it!

[Javora]

The last time I checked into the extra licences, each extra licence costs about $200USD for the WinXP Pro edition.  That is about a $100USD savings over the boxed edition.  Not a huge bargin IMHO but better than nothing at all.

[Just plain old Punisher]

Eh, each computer is getting the use of an operating system. So you should pay for each use

[Nemesis]

Eh, each computer is getting the use of an operating system. So you should pay for each use

Or use a free (and legal) Operating System.

[Just plain old Punisher]

Yup pretty much. Look, for 100 bucks or so you're getting the complete and total use of a computer operating system for as long as you like.

That's really not a bad deal. I've seen XP Home edition for 89 bucks.

People just don't want to pay for each license. They invent all sorts of excuses, but really when you're paying for that software you're paying for usage on that single computer.

Now, now one is gonna stop you from installing it on other computers, you just won't be able to get updates from Microsoft due to the fact that you used the one license key on multiple computers.

[Nemesis]

Yup pretty much. Look, for 100 bucks or so you're getting the complete and total use of a computer operating system for as long as you like.

Or at least until you need to reinstall and they have turned off the activation servers.  Then if you want to continue to use it you must do an illegal (in the U.S. under the DMCA) hack to continue to use the software that you bought and paid for.

[Just plain old Punisher]

Really? All I had to do was enter in my license key. What if you don't have an internet connection?

[E_Look]

They do have a 800 number...