Re: The Product Key used to install Windows is invalid ....
On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 20:24:34 -0700, "Jupiter Jones [MVP]"
<jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote:
>No one needs to.
>It is possible the OP was not aware the OS is pirated.
>I do not make the assumption you did.
>Many buy used computers at a good price not realizing until later why it
>came with Windows XP so cheap.
>There are also other possibilities.
>
>The price is only an excuse people use to justify theft.
I never said theft was ok. I am saying this. A person can buy and
build a fair computer for around $600 these days. Why should the OS
cost 1/6th the total price of an entire computer?
A house is nice at $100,000 each. Imagine paying 1/6th the price of
the home for electricity or something else like phone service?
All I'm saying is that a higher price tends to lead people to theft.
If you doubt this then why do banks get robbed more often than the
dollar store?
The bank has cold hard cash but the dollar store has trinkints so
worthless that a trunk full of merchandise would yeild at most $500.
Like I said, I do not and am not advocating theft of any product or
service. But I do not BUY into the theory that the price of an item
has nothing to do with the rate of it's theft.
>Thieves will steal regardless the price.
>Otherwise there would be little or no theft of the lower priced shareware
>etc.
Shareware? Most of the shareware has the person being told they can
donate money if they want to. Most shareware doesn't require some
payment. Also, many people program and update software they have
offered to the public for far less than $5 per copy. And even then
it's voluntary at best.
>If they can afford the computer, they can afford the OS usually less than
>the cost you suggest.
At 1/6th of the cost of the entire computer? For a corporation that
might be sustainable, but for a home user that will not work very
long.
Google spends a LOT of money for what it offers for free. Yes they
make money off of advertising but they charge nothing up front. Is
their business model flawed? Is their $400 per share stock price the
result of a failed business model?
Just asking.
>Or just as well, stay with whatever they currently have on the computer
>until they can afford the asking price.
>There are a lot of things priced higher than I feel appropriate.
>At that point I make a choice:
>1. Steal...Out of the question
>2. Buy it anyway
UH, you know some people don't make $50K per year and can only buy a
computer every 3 or 4 years at most. I suppose someone with a good
paying job would pay MORE than $200 for an OS. But the other 99% would
either wait or steal it. And "NO" I am not advocating someone steal
anything at all, not at all.
>3. Buy another product
Which OS would that be exactly? Linux? It's free btw. And when
application/game developers code things they try to cater to what they
know most people are using as an OS. That is why people are literally
forced to by a MS OS. Choices? Hardly.
>4. Do without.
>There may also be other options, most are better than stealing.
Yes, for the 197th time, stealing is wrong. I agree. However if MS
continues to make more and more expensive OS's and APP's then they
before do something about that price.
Reminds me of those $399 computers for sale at places like walmart,
and they include a monitor. I will be you money that walmart or hp
didn't $100 per copy on each of those computers?
I just say if sales drop or piracy becomes a problem, perhaps look
around and see if perhaps the price is steep?
And no, again, let me be clear, in no way whatsoever do I advocate or
support the theft or piracy of software.
Cell Phones reviews
12-17-05, 09:13 PM
Linear Mode
