Re: [fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms
- From: DevilsPGD <spam_narf_spam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 16:06:24 -0700
In message <HpZvj.81049$Mu4.18695@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> "Ed Cregger"
<ecregger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'd rather they go back to the old days when once purchased,
you could install it on as many devices as you pleased.
When, exactly, were those days? They sure weren't in the old mainframes
of the 70s, nor in the license of DOS and Windows in the 80s and 90s,
and most definitely not in 2000.
I don't blame them for not wanting you to share it with
friends and customers. It would be illogical to think
otherwise, but I resent having to pay for each computer that
I own.
I happen to agree, and am gravitating heavily toward per-user licensing
rather then per-installation. Per-user is popular on PDAs, although
less common in the PC world.
It should be easy enough for them to track a customer's
license and ensure that that license only is submitted for
activation from the same web address.
Web address? What exactly are you talking about?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms
- From: Ed Cregger
- Re: [fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms
- References:
- [fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms
- From: Man-wai Chang ToDie
- Re: [fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms
- From: Ian D
- Re: [fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms
- From: Ed Cregger
- [fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms
- Prev by Date: Re: 85% "Skulltrail" for $2550
- Next by Date: Re: New Vi$ta licensing terms
- Previous by thread: Re: [fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms
- Next by thread: Re: [fw] New Vi$ta licensing terms
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
