Ok, the plot gets thicker.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/10...n_to_bit-tech/

Now, this is third-hand info, so it has to be taken with a grain of salt.

And this sure as hell ain't what the License says!

-Larry

Larry wrote:
yeah, I think it's damage control by a low level spokesperson...if
those were the rules then I am fairly certain Ms would have cleared up
the vista activation outcry by clairifing things as said a while ago.
the licence aggreement is subject to chage at ms discretion so they can
do anything they want once they get enough people onboard with the new
os- but now I think it's too late, the cats out of the bag with regards
to their intentions and there are enough people who will be wary of
that to seriously affect vista sales, vista then could end up as
windows 2000 or ME and the market is prime for a competitive os, not
Linix, but probabally from apple, who have gained access to intel
processor architecture

It's still too early to know for sure but it seems MS is squirming a bit. I
hope it's along the lines mentioned in your article though because I can
live with 10 activations. I doubt Ive called MS for my own XP machine more
than 3 times in 4+ years and here we are on the doorstep of Vista. Between
disk imaging (have I recommended BartPE/DriveImage yet?) and 10 activations
even the most hardcore upgrader should be ok. Now, if you want to use the
same license on all of your computers then you will have problems (that
alone pisses many off lol). I know the guys here are all honest chaps and
would never consider stealing (and I have some ocean front property in
Arizona for sale)

What you likely didn't know was the licensed Starforce code buried deep
within Vista/DX10

Mitch



"Larry" <none (AT) none (DOT) com> wrote

I'm to the point that I am thinking.... "Who gives a shit," really? I
mean you seen the pricing vs the included versions (limitations)?
F#cking-bullcrap idea, that I would pay 200-300, for a less featured Vista
Business? 260 <upgrade> or 400 bucks for XP Pro equivalent for a "vista
ultimate" OS? I say, hell no.



Mitch_A enlightened us with:

Omitted the link I was using as the pricing guide...
http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/002683.html



Plowboy enlightened us with:

On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:14:21 -0400, Larry wrote:

I don't buy OS's based on grey area hearsay. Spell it out in black and
white in the EULA or it's a no-sale for me.

"Larry" <none (AT) none (DOT) com> wrote

Is there any real reason to get Vista? XP works fine for me.

Alanb

Technically couldn't you run 98se then? I mean that's really a non argument
and more of a geek statement

Someday you may want DX10. Though that rumor about DX10 not being
compatible with XP may be more BS than truth.

Im enjoying Vista RC2 myself. It includes many nice features but most
importantly it is really the first version of Windows to focus on security
more than backward compatibility. Its fast looks great is stable and should
help stem the tide of internet threats. The price is steep (greedy
bastards) but if you go with the upgrade version of Home Ultimate or Basic
for $99-150 it not that bad. Well worth it if you have a DX10 capable video
card (of which I don't know any) but not really before then I guess.

Mitch



"Alan Bernardo" <alan.bernardo (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in message

Mitch_A wrote:
.. The price is steep (greedy
I disaggree with your well worth it statement; maybe if it was $40 a
copy, but when driver updates or the inevitable hardware upgrade
triggers reactivation leaving you with no activations left the value of
vista really becomes a question of how much money do you have to throw
away

Alan Bernardo wrote:

If you wish to enjoy DX10-based PC games, which will eventually be all
of them, sure.