| |
| |||||||
| Windows Vista Discuss the different versions of Windows Vista, Fuji, or Vienna |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| |||
| |||
| Positive vs. Negative Reward What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the installed XP copy is genuine? If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the upgrade version - meaning would spend more money. I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy and/or if one is a "thief". The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another newsgroup posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to buy a genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but as always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I suggested the OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 for that purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after reading that post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a company is fighting against piracy.      |
|
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| ||
| |
|
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows from 3.1 onward. I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 floppies, 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME CD, Windows NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD for a free copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. -- Regards, Richard Urban Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User (For email, remove the obvious from my address) Quote from George Ankner: If you knew as much as you think you know, You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message news:e3yYStlHHHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=blue] > What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the > installed XP copy is genuine? > > If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy > from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the upgrade > version - meaning would spend more money. > > I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a > positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade > version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. > > Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy > and/or if one is a "thief". > > The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated > copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current > upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. > > Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another newsgroup > posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to buy a > genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but as > always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I suggested the > OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 for that > purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after reading that > post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a company is > fighting against piracy. > > >[/color] |
|
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows from 3.1 onward. I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 floppies, 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME CD, Windows NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD for a free copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. -- Regards, Richard Urban Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User (For email, remove the obvious from my address) Quote from George Ankner: If you knew as much as you think you know, You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message news:e3yYStlHHHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=blue] > What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the > installed XP copy is genuine? > > If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy > from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the upgrade > version - meaning would spend more money. > > I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a > positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade > version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. > > Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy > and/or if one is a "thief". > > The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated > copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current > upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. > > Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another newsgroup > posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to buy a > genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but as > always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I suggested the > OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 for that > purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after reading that > post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a company is > fighting against piracy. > > >[/color] |
|
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward Oh! I forgot DOS 6.0, DOS 6.2 and DOS 6.22 -- Regards, Richard Urban Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User (For email, remove the obvious from my address) Quote from George Ankner: If you knew as much as you think you know, You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS********.com> wrote in message news:uMh0K4lHHHA.1044@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue] > Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? > > How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows > from 3.1 onward. > > I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 floppies, > 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME CD, Windows > NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD for a free > copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. > > The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. > > -- > > > Regards, > > Richard Urban > Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User > (For email, remove the obvious from my address) > > Quote from George Ankner: > If you knew as much as you think you know, > You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! > > > > "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message > news:e3yYStlHHHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=green] >> What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the >> installed XP copy is genuine? >> >> If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy >> from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the >> upgrade version - meaning would spend more money. >> >> I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a >> positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade >> version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. >> >> Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy >> and/or if one is a "thief". >> >> The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated >> copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current >> upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. >> >> Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another >> newsgroup posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to >> buy a genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but >> as always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I suggested >> the OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 for that >> purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after reading >> that post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a company is >> fighting against piracy. >> >> >>[/color] >[/color] |
|
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward Oh! I forgot DOS 6.0, DOS 6.2 and DOS 6.22 -- Regards, Richard Urban Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User (For email, remove the obvious from my address) Quote from George Ankner: If you knew as much as you think you know, You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS********.com> wrote in message news:uMh0K4lHHHA.1044@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue] > Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? > > How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows > from 3.1 onward. > > I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 floppies, > 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME CD, Windows > NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD for a free > copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. > > The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. > > -- > > > Regards, > > Richard Urban > Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User > (For email, remove the obvious from my address) > > Quote from George Ankner: > If you knew as much as you think you know, > You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! > > > > "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message > news:e3yYStlHHHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=green] >> What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the >> installed XP copy is genuine? >> >> If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy >> from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the >> upgrade version - meaning would spend more money. >> >> I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a >> positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade >> version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. >> >> Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy >> and/or if one is a "thief". >> >> The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated >> copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current >> upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. >> >> Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another >> newsgroup posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to >> buy a genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but >> as always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I suggested >> the OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 for that >> purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after reading >> that post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a company is >> fighting against piracy. >> >> >>[/color] >[/color] |
|
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward How about for a limited time everyone gets an upgrade price regardless if you have any copy of Windows. Then after that window closes it's back to the current policy. That will certainly boost sales and create market saturation, plus it would give every pirate a chance to go legal. As a legit user, I would have no problem with that as long as I got my copy discounted. Bj "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS********.com> wrote in message news:uMh0K4lHHHA.1044@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue] > Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? > > How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows > from 3.1 onward. > > I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 floppies, > 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME CD, Windows > NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD for a free > copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. > > The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. > > -- > > > Regards, > > Richard Urban > Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User > (For email, remove the obvious from my address) > > Quote from George Ankner: > If you knew as much as you think you know, > You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! > > > > "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message > news:e3yYStlHHHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=green] >> What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the >> installed XP copy is genuine? >> >> If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy >> from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the >> upgrade version - meaning would spend more money. >> >> I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a >> positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade >> version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. >> >> Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy >> and/or if one is a "thief". >> >> The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated >> copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current >> upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. >> >> Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another >> newsgroup posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to >> buy a genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but >> as always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I suggested >> the OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 for that >> purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after reading >> that post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a company is >> fighting against piracy. >> >> >>[/color] >[/color] |
|
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward How about for a limited time everyone gets an upgrade price regardless if you have any copy of Windows. Then after that window closes it's back to the current policy. That will certainly boost sales and create market saturation, plus it would give every pirate a chance to go legal. As a legit user, I would have no problem with that as long as I got my copy discounted. Bj "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS********.com> wrote in message news:uMh0K4lHHHA.1044@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=blue] > Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? > > How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows > from 3.1 onward. > > I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 floppies, > 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME CD, Windows > NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD for a free > copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. > > The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. > > -- > > > Regards, > > Richard Urban > Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User > (For email, remove the obvious from my address) > > Quote from George Ankner: > If you knew as much as you think you know, > You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! > > > > "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message > news:e3yYStlHHHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=green] >> What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the >> installed XP copy is genuine? >> >> If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy >> from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the >> upgrade version - meaning would spend more money. >> >> I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a >> positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade >> version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. >> >> Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy >> and/or if one is a "thief". >> >> The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated >> copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current >> upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. >> >> Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another >> newsgroup posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to >> buy a genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but >> as always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I suggested >> the OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 for that >> purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after reading >> that post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a company is >> fighting against piracy. >> >> >>[/color] >[/color] |
|
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward Richard Urban spewed out this bit, and i'll scatter a few bits myself: [color=blue] > The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty.[/color] A Brothel ? -- Mhzjunkie 1 PRINT "Windows XP ERROR" GOTO 1 END |
|
01-02-2007, 10:57 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward Richard Urban spewed out this bit, and i'll scatter a few bits myself: [color=blue] > The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty.[/color] A Brothel ? -- Mhzjunkie 1 PRINT "Windows XP ERROR" GOTO 1 END |
|
01-02-2007, 10:58 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward "xfile" wrote [color=blue] > What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the > installed XP copy is genuine? > > If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy > from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the upgrade > version - meaning would spend more money. > > I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a > positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade > version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. > > Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy > and/or if one is a "thief". > > The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated > copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current > upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. > > Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another newsgroup > posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to buy a > genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but as > always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I suggested the > OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 for that > purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after reading that > post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a company is > fighting against piracy.[/color] I don't understand why you would offer them a financial benefit for using pirated software. No, the person should take responsibility for what they did. |
|
01-02-2007, 10:58 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward "xfile" wrote [color=blue] > What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the > installed XP copy is genuine? > > If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy > from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the upgrade > version - meaning would spend more money. > > I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a > positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade > version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. > > Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy > and/or if one is a "thief". > > The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated > copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current > upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. > > Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another newsgroup > posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to buy a > genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but as > always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I suggested the > OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 for that > purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after reading that > post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a company is > fighting against piracy.[/color] I don't understand why you would offer them a financial benefit for using pirated software. No, the person should take responsibility for what they did. |
|
01-02-2007, 10:58 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward Why not, thats what our Federal Government does for illegal aliens and tax cheaters. Richard Urban wrote:[color=blue] > Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? > > How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows > from 3.1 onward. > > I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 > floppies, 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME > CD, Windows NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD > for a free copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. > > The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. >[/color] |
|
01-02-2007, 10:58 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward Why not, thats what our Federal Government does for illegal aliens and tax cheaters. Richard Urban wrote:[color=blue] > Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? > > How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows > from 3.1 onward. > > I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 > floppies, 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME > CD, Windows NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD > for a free copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. > > The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. >[/color] |
|
01-02-2007, 10:58 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward I suppose looking at it from Microsoft's view, it's a case of getting another user at upgrade price as opposed to no user at all, they'll just keep on using pirated copies. Ray "BJ" <bjanow@nospam.msn.com> wrote in message news:e7UMxAmHHHA.4904@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=blue] > How about for a limited time everyone gets an upgrade price regardless if > you have any copy of Windows. Then after that window closes it's back to > the current policy. That will certainly boost sales and create market > saturation, plus it would give every pirate a chance to go legal. > > As a legit user, I would have no problem with that as long as I got my > copy discounted. > > Bj > > > "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS********.com> wrote in message > news:uMh0K4lHHHA.1044@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=green] >> Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? >> >> How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows >> from 3.1 onward. >> >> I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 >> floppies, 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME >> CD, Windows NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD >> for a free copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. >> >> The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. >> >> -- >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Richard Urban >> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User >> (For email, remove the obvious from my address) >> >> Quote from George Ankner: >> If you knew as much as you think you know, >> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! >> >> >> >> "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:e3yYStlHHHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=darkred] >>> What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the >>> installed XP copy is genuine? >>> >>> If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy >>> from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the >>> upgrade version - meaning would spend more money. >>> >>> I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a >>> positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade >>> version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. >>> >>> Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy >>> and/or if one is a "thief". >>> >>> The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated >>> copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current >>> upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. >>> >>> Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another >>> newsgroup posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to >>> buy a genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but >>> as always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I >>> suggested the OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 >>> for that purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after >>> reading that post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a >>> company is fighting against piracy. >>> >>> >>>[/color] >>[/color] > >[/color] |
|
01-02-2007, 10:58 AM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Positive vs. Negative Reward I suppose looking at it from Microsoft's view, it's a case of getting another user at upgrade price as opposed to no user at all, they'll just keep on using pirated copies. Ray "BJ" <bjanow@nospam.msn.com> wrote in message news:e7UMxAmHHHA.4904@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=blue] > How about for a limited time everyone gets an upgrade price regardless if > you have any copy of Windows. Then after that window closes it's back to > the current policy. That will certainly boost sales and create market > saturation, plus it would give every pirate a chance to go legal. > > As a legit user, I would have no problem with that as long as I got my > copy discounted. > > Bj > > > "Richard Urban" <richardurbanREMOVETHIS********.com> wrote in message > news:uMh0K4lHHHA.1044@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...[color=green] >> Reward piracy by giving the pirate a break? >> >> How about rewarding a person who has purchased every version of Windows >> from 3.1 onward. >> >> I would gladly send in the original valid hard copies of the 3.1 >> floppies, 3.11 WFWG floppies, Windows 98 CD, Windows 98se CD, Windows ME >> CD, Windows NT media, Windows 3.51 media, Windows 2000 CD, Windows XP CD >> for a free copy of Vista Ultimate Full install. >> >> The pirates can go to where it is hot and nasty. >> >> -- >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Richard Urban >> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User >> (For email, remove the obvious from my address) >> >> Quote from George Ankner: >> If you knew as much as you think you know, >> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew! >> >> >> >> "xfile" <cou-cou@remove.nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:e3yYStlHHHA.4688@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...[color=darkred] >>> What is the purpose for Vista upgrade installation to check if the >>> installed XP copy is genuine? >>> >>> If a personal is using a pirated copy now but wishes to use genuine copy >>> from now on, he/she has to buy the full version and cannot buy the >>> upgrade version - meaning would spend more money. >>> >>> I'd consider this is a "negative reward". What will be considered as a >>> positive reward is to let the person can also purchase a genuine upgrade >>> version for starting using a legitimate copy from now on. >>> >>> Let's stop the "moral" discussion for why would one use a pirated copy >>> and/or if one is a "thief". >>> >>> The issue on hand is - how to motivate a person who is using a pirated >>> copy start using a genuine copy. If this is the focus, the current >>> upgrade installation check is nothing but a negative reward. >>> >>> Note: This thought came to my mind when I read a post on another >>> newsgroup posted by a person who is using a pirated XP now but wishes to >>> buy a genuine upgrade version (obviously, price is a consideration), but >>> as always, had been voiced down by self-righteous crusaders. I >>> suggested the OP might check if it's possible to buy a copy of Win 2000 >>> for that purpose. But in any case, this thought came to my mind after >>> reading that post - it's a negative reward (a.k.a. stupid move) for a >>> company is fighting against piracy. >>> >>> >>>[/color] >>[/color] > >[/color] |
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Tax Manager - Performance & Reward - Tax Technical - LA | TPC | Tablet PC Jobs | 0 | 09-23-2008 05:50 AM |
| MS reward for finding a Vista Bug? | xiowan | Windows Vista | 18 | 03-13-2007 12:45 PM |
| Reward for testing Office 2007 | will | Windows Vista | 2 | 01-20-2007 06:00 AM |
| Here's how Microsoft could reward CPP participants! | Newsie | Windows Vista | 32 | 01-01-2007 09:25 PM |
| Turning a Negative Into A Positive | LPH | Tablet PC - In The News | 0 | 02-01-2005 08:06 AM |
| New To Technology Questions? | Do You Need Help with Your Computer or Device? | Do You Need Help with this site? |
