Comments on: Sigh… Why Must Microsoft Keep Disappointing Me

By: bob

bob — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:31:44 +0000

It wont install because you had it on a dell. You could go back to Windows 2000, which doenst have all that crap, but then Windows 2000 wont work in a VM on a Mac.

That’s the price we all pay for everyone abandoning Win 2000. I’ll have to buy a XP license myself soon, because more and more apps are dropping Win2000 support, until then I keep it for all my VMs since I dont have to screw around with activation and all that other bullcrap.

By: VJ

VJ — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:42:59 +0000

Call the activation line again, give different answers…get activated.

Easy as.

By: mouzik

mouzik — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:57:20 +0000

I bought a laptop with a OEM Vista on it. I wanted XP but the drivers were only for Vista (not Microsoft’s fault I know). I installed it with the key on the sticker at the bottom of the laptop, then I used it for about a month (together with all the crapware).

Then it asked for activating, or making it genuine or something. I was like “it’s legal so go for it” and proceeded with the activation. Vista locked up. I couldn’t do anything anymore. I couldn’t even use the internet to search the phone number of the laptop manufacturer. I couldn’t even backup my files. I couldn’t do _anything_ ! Guess what I did next…

It’s sad that a Vista from TPB is easier to use than the one you actually buy.

By: simon davis

simon davis — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:59:17 +0000

“i complain about it because i really think it’s a stupid system”

Fine, I don’t have a problem with that. It is a stupid system. But that doesn’t detract from the fact that you agreed to the license and are now complaining that MS enforced the very license you agreed to.

If you can’t comprehend or get that through your skull then good luck with all the other contracts you have to deal with in life. You’re going to need all the luck you can get.

“you easily get worked up over other people’s opinions”

No, i get worked up about people’s *retarded* opinions and complete inability to work out how they got themselves into the hole that they’re in.

“So i’m pretty much fucked now”

Yes, you are. Now.

I’ve got better things to be doing. I’m off to Slashdot.

By: Davy Brion

Davy Brion — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:20:05 +0000

Ah so it’s merely the fact that i’m complaining about this that pisses you off… well yeah i complain about it because i really think it’s a stupid system. The fact that you don’t have problems with people doing the same thing (minus the bitching after getting caught) kinda backs that up. I think a lot of people think it’s a stupid system. But let’s all just break the rules _silently_ and then there’s no problem…

If you really have so much problems with the fact that i’m complaining about it, then why on earth don’t you spend your valuable time somewhere else? I already mentioned Slashdot before… you really should give it some thought: you’ve got the petty insults, the irrelevant analogies, you easily get worked up over other people’s opinions… you’d have a great time over there

By: Simon Davis

Simon Davis — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:45:23 +0000

How is that hypocritical? I wasn’t being critical about you circumventing the license. I was critical of you whingeing over the fact that once you had the license revoked you thought it was somehow your right to still have a valid license.

“How does that even make sense if you keep your own analogy in mind?”

Because i wouldn’t be whingeing like a menstruating woman if i got caught. If you broke the rules and got busted, tough.

To draw another analogy: if you had a bus pass for one route and decided to use it on another for which it was not valid and you got away with it for a month because you got on in the middle of the bus rather than having to show the pass to the driver, you’d then complain on 1 month + 1 day when a ticket inspector comes along and busts you. Your argument would be “but hey i’ve been ok doing this for a month you should just let me carry on”. Does that make even the remotest bit of sense? Because that is pretty much equivalent to your VM/Windows argument.

By: Davy Brion

Davy Brion — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 19:31:14 +0000

“as many of us do on the quiet, i don’t have problem with that”

pretty hypocritical if you ask me. You’re comparing what i did with committing crimes which is really a stretch (although i’m sure it makes you quite popular on Slashdot). Yet you also say that you have no problem with it if you do it on the quiet. How does that even make sense if you keep your own analogy in mind?

By: Simon Davis

Simon Davis — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:56:54 +0000

Ok then, replace Murder with *ANY OTHER* crime or even just a simple breaking of *ANY* contract. Surely, the analogy was not too much brain strain for you?
The simple fact is you broke a licensing agreement. Not pushed it to its limits of understanding. You broke the agreement. Whether you agree with license or no is entirely irrelevant. The license was legal and enforceable. When you purchased the laptop and started using Windows, you *agreed* to the license terms. So then you go and break the agreement (as many of us do on the quiet, i don’t have problem with that) got away with it and then then you were caught out and had the license revoked. And you then have the gall to complain about it.

The fact that you managed to activate Windows on the VM is entirely irrelevant. Infact the whole point of VM is so that it is transparent to the OS. And what would you expect MS to do. Should they go and detect every.single.VM architecture out there?

Your argument is not just stupid. It shows how entirely unprepared you are to meet the consequences of your actions. Your license got busted because *you* broke it. Get the hell over it and stop whingeing like a 4 year old.

By: Alexey Bobyakov

Alexey Bobyakov — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:28:57 +0000

I agree with Bryce Fischer, Apple license policies are restricted, too. Maybe there is no activation but they can always sue you if you install Apple software on an operating system other than Mac OS. Safari EULA, Mac OS X EULA, iPhone NDA, Psystar, anyone? So much for the consumer-friendly OS…

By: Davy Brion

Davy Brion — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 06:26:17 +0000

the restrictions on OS X installation CD’s that come with Macs are pretty different… they only install on the same kind of apple model they came with, but other than that, there is no activation or any other check or whatever and you can install it as much as you like

By: Bryce Fischer

Bryce Fischer — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 03:48:43 +0000

Wow, just take your Mac OS to another machine, like your old Dell laptop… Yea.. even more restrictive eh?

Wow, you mac fans are such sheep!

By: andhapp

andhapp — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:41:00 +0000

Its a blessing in disguise for you to move away from Visual Studio…

By: LinuxFTW

LinuxFTW — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:36:39 +0000

If you switched to Java for development and Linux for OS then you wouldn’t have to worry about Jobs and Ballmer trying to buttsecks you everytime you need to do some work.

By: Davy Brion

Davy Brion — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:31:27 +0000

i dunno… i might get away with calling them back and just telling them i’m reinstalling it on the original pc. Honestly, i no longer care about it… i think their whole system is completely fucked up. I’ve got a working system right now, and i can run Visual Studio… which is all i need so i’m not wasting any more time on this.

By: Kris

Kris — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:19:37 +0000

Ever considering calling back and telling them you’re installing it back on the original hardware?

I too worry about running into this problem, as I have an OEM version of Vista on a custom build computer. Because I swap out hardware frequently, I worry one day they will tell me my computer doesn’t match the original computer. What is the defination of a computer really when all the pieces inside are swapable? At what point would an old computer become a new one?

By: Davy Brion

Davy Brion — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:18:15 +0000

you’re comparing getting away with murder to installing a windows version with an OEM license on a different machine… and i’m the one with the twisted logic? right…

By: Simon Davis

Simon Davis — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:51:05 +0000

“hell, if i could install it _and activate it_ on a virtual machine instead of on the original laptop then the whole “you’re not allowed to do that” argument is just pointless. They allowed me to activate it in the first place you know”

So if you kill someone and get away with it for the first year afterwards, and are then caught, you’d complain that because you got away with it for a year before it should be ok?

That’s pretty much your logic. That just because you could circumvent the license in the first instance, that you should be able to carry on doing so…

It should have been blindlgly obvious that given you had an OEM license that once you transferred the OS to a VM you effectively voided that license. I can’t believe you’re even complaining about it.

By: Davy Brion

Davy Brion — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 18:32:00 +0000

I do know what OEM is, i just think it’s total BS… hell, if i could install it _and activate it_ on a virtual machine instead of on the original laptop then the whole “you’re not allowed to do that” argument is just pointless. They allowed me to activate it in the first place you know…

Since Parallels doesn’t have anything to do with Apple, i fail to see what Apple has to do with this situation… But Parallels’ hardware config indeed changed quite a lot apparantly, which triggered the “oh no, you can’t use this operating system anymore” response that XP gave me. Is it Microsoft’s ‘fault’? Is it Parallels’ ‘fault’? I don’t really think of it that way… i just think the whole Windows licensing approach is terrible. If they don’t want you to install Windows on a machine you’re not allowed to run it on, then they should just figure out a way to make it impossible to install on that machine. But allowing you to install it and activate it, and then later on taking away your right to use it is just ridiculous.

By: Filip Duyck

Filip Duyck — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 18:20:09 +0000

So you use an OEM version of an OS you got for a specific laptop (you do know what OEM is, right?), Apple apparently hosed Parallel’s hardware config during the upgrade, and somehow you figure this is Microsoft’s fault?

By: Davy Brion

Davy Brion — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:32:30 +0000

@Josh

It’s not that i don’t want to pay… i always pay for software that i like using, unless the company which is producing it treats me like shit.

In this case, we’re talking about an expensive Operating System which i pretty much only use as a shell to run Visual Studio in. There’s no way in hell i’m paying for a new license, even if i wasn’t allowed to use the old license on a virtual machine in the first place.

@Ben

Yeah i have backups, but i already payed for this new version of Parallels, which is great so far, so i don’t want to go back to the previous version. And thanks for the offer, but you can keep your evaluation copy of Vista