"amicus_curious" <ACDC@xxxxxxx> wrote in
news:46506804$0$15296$ec3e2dad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>
> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1470803.B1eO5KMHWP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> What's wrong with Microsoft Windows Vista?
>>
> It seems to me that the blogger wants something for nothing and is
> trying to drum up a chanting chorus to make it sound louder. That
> seems so typical of the OSS fans in general. Could this spread to
> other venues? Take for example, the compliant:
>
> "If your copy of Vista came with the purchase of a new computer, that
> copy of Vista may only be legally used on that machine, forever. "
>
> Maybe if I buy a bleacher seat ticket to the ballgame I should be
> allowed to sit in a box seat instead without having to pay more. Of
> if I get a cheap fare on an airline, I should be given a first class
> seat without having to pay more. I don't see what the fellow's logic
> is here, but he is not alone in never seeming to explain, simply
> insisting that it is a freedom denied.
>
Your examples are not analogous. It's more like you buy a new CD player
which comes with some free CD's, but these CD's will only play on that
one player. You're not allowed to take them with you and play them in
the car, you're not allowed to play them in the player in your bedroom.
Personally, I'd reject the deal, I'd buy a different player, even if it
didn't come with any CD's. I'd then buy CD's separately, ones that I
could play wherever I want.
Basicly, I already do that with computers, I buy parts and build my own
sans OS, then install an OS that I can legally use anywhere, on any
computer and on as many computers as I care to.
Why would anyone think that's a bad idea?
|
|
