Install Dell CD on Non-Dell Laptop

[reynald]

Hello.

I understand there is a way around this.

Can someone please tell me what the steps are to install a Dell
WindowsME cd onto a non dell computer? That is, to bypass or alter the
bios check.

Anyhelp would be appreciated.

Thanks.

7078895

[Tom Scales]

Perhaps you should do a little research before you ask people to publicly
post an illegal hack.

What you are asking violates the license agreement.

Tom
"reynald" <r_ad...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:70f243f3.02093...@posting.google.com...

[Z]

In alt.windows-me reynald <r_ad...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: Hello.

: Anyhelp would be appreciated.

Buy the right CD and stop using other people's software.

Hope this helps.

[Christopher Muto]

if you didn't cross-post i would have told you.

"reynald" <r_ad...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:70f243f3.02093...@posting.google.com...

[alpha]

r_ad...@yahoo.com (reynald) wrote in message news:<70f243f3.02093...@posting.google.com>...

One way is that you replace 3 specific Dell files with 3 from Corp XP
Pro. Or replace the 11 files that are Corp XP Pro specific, then it's
already activated. Dell versions check your bios to make sure that
you're installing on a Dell machine; but there is a "modified Dell"
version floating on the net that requires you to add the auto
activation timer reset. It's more hassle than it's worth. Download (or
go to your nearest Computer Swap meet or College Campus) Corporate XP
Pro and use XPKeyGen.exe to make your very own key. Then you don't
have to bother with asking Microsoft if you can use your own computer
as it's already pre-activated.

Before we start calling things "illegal" we need to address the
illegal (as judged by two separate federal courts) activities that
Microsoft used to control the desktop market in the first place. When
Microsoft starts following the laws of our land, so will it's
customers. Until then it appears to me that r_adolphe is simply asking
about installing the latest free "Service Pack" for his system, even
though it might be a Dell Service Pack....

[Mark Lloyd]

Strange. Download XP corp files and put them on your 'Me' installation
disk? Did you miss something in the post you're replying to?

--
86 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://go.to/notstupid
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"There's no more proof for the existence of God than there is for the existence of the
Easter Bunny. That's right. The Easter Bunny."

[reynald]

i didn't cross post.

"Christopher Muto" <mu...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:<cH6m9.1983$OB5.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...

[Robert R Kircher, Jr.]

How many NGs did you post your original message to? Looks like a bunch to
me... That's cross posting.

--

Rob

[S.Lewis]

"reynald" <r_ad...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:70f243f3.02093...@posting.google.com...

> i didn't cross post.
>

<snip>

Sure you didn't. Only five newsgroups total.

"I am not a crook." - Richard M. Nixon

"It depends on what your definition of 'is' is." - William J.B.Clinton

Stew

[Huckleberry Hoshimoto]

"Z" <zarl...@conan.ids.net> wrote in message
news:uphmgdj...@corp.supernews.com...

======> Fuck off, ya software PUSSY!
It's suckasses like you that inspire me to pass around all the pirated
software I can find!
p.s.
Drive fast - Speed kills!

*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-. .HüĐklëßëŪŪĸ-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*

[alpha]

Sure did!! Almost no one installs ME so I was caught sleeping - knee
jerk reaction was to babble on about installing XP. 99.9% of my emails
deal with making various versions of XP run on machines - so I
proceded ahead, complete with foot-in-mouth...
Alpha

Mark Lloyd <mll...@bugmail.com> wrote in message news:<e79ipus9co5qfst4i...@4ax.com>...

[S.Lewis]

"INDY4" <GunsN'Ro...@RULES.EARTH> wrote in message
news:a48kpuke4rsat40bi...@4ax.com...
> A long time ago (actually Tue, 1 Oct 2002 06:42:01 -0500),
> in a galaxy far, far away (actually alt.sys.pc-clone.dell),

> "S.Lewis" <stew...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >"I am not a crook." - Richard M. Nixon
> >
> >"It depends on what your definition of 'is' is." - William J.B.Clinton
>

> "I think we ought to look at people who are trying to avoid U.S. taxes
> as a problem. I think American companies ought to pay taxes here, be
> ... good citizens" - G. W. Bush
>

<snip>

"Don't drink and drive - don't even putt."

- Dean Martin

[Rawker]

I ran into this at work when we upgraded a number of Dells. (swapped MB, HD
etc...mainly used the case, PS and drives) I just gave up on trying....but the
software was staying with the computer....it just wouldn't give us permission to
use what we'd bought. bummer. Fortunately, they finally invested in an
enterprise license when they decided we all needed to be on 2000....

[Lareman]

Me can be downloaded on Kazaa, for a serial start with the one you have.
HTH
Larry

"reynald" <r_ad...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:70f243f3.02093...@posting.google.com...

: Hello.

[Me]

My advise to you is forget about ME. I call it Windows Many Errors. Got to
be the worst version Microsoft has put out. Stick with 98 or get yourself a
copy of XP.

"Lareman" <REMOVETHI...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:anf87n$q7d$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...

[Noel Paton]

The problem with this is that you don't know what you're going to get -
Windows ME, or WInodws/Klez/Magistr++++

Kazaa is bad enough overlaid on an OS - what an OS is like downloaded
through Kazaa, I shudder to think!

--
Noel Paton

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's

"Lareman" <REMOVETHI...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:anf87n$q7d$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...

[Calvin Crumrine]

So what do you consider 'the computer'? IMO it would be the MB-so if you
swapped it then you'd need to swap the software too for it to stay with
'the computer'. Actually I believe that it's Dell's opinion that counts
(at least short of a legal decision) and I suspect that they would say
it's the BIOS. Wonder if they provide BIOS flashes & what they do then?
(Probably their setup CD's are geared for a 'generic' Dell BIOS so it's
not a problem. Except for locking you into Dell for upgrades of course,
and that's the whole idea.)

[Viper]

Easiest way, is to install the hard drive on a dell so the bios checks. (Yes
there are adapters to connect a laptop HD to a standard IDE cable.) Install
what you want, then throw the drive back into the laptop.

"Calvin Crumrine" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
news:3D9B6585...@example.net...

[Calvin Crumrine]

As far as I can see the OP's looking to pirate the OS in the first place
so I sure as hell ain't worried if he catches a virus doing it.

[alpha]

I would agree with the previous poster about forgetting ME!! Shortly
after ME came out, we were swamped with customers that wanted to go
back to Win98SE; and I mean swamped!! ME runs great for a small
percentage of people, but in our experience we've never seen anything
like the ME fiasco. All ME has over Win98SE is a few (poor) multimedia
apps and a whole lot of 16 bit code that was converted over to 32 bits
- VERY POORLY. Microsoft has continued to try to distance itself from
ME. That should give you a hint as to what they think it's worth!!

[Viper]

Very true, ME= Microsoft's Error, but what I said holds true for any
recovery/restore CD that checks the bios, regardless of what the OS is..

"alpha" <mxa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12b8f566.02100...@posting.google.com...

[Mark Lloyd]

Most Me problems seem to be caused by "upgrade in place", something
you should never do, rather than getting rid of the old OS first.
Anyway, Win2000 is supposed to be better than any other Windows.

--
84 days until the winter solstice celebration

[alpha]

Actually, the problems we saw most with ME was on new systems that had
"virgin" ME installls. In those cases, installing Win98SE made the
customers happy. I might re-iterate, "only" about 30-35% of customers
experienced severe enough problems to request a Win98SE replacement.
Incidently, at that time, our shop was swamped with new HP, Dell, and
Compaq boxes especially because the oems would only allow repeated
re-installs of ME, not OS replacement. Some of the nation's largest
corporations would not purchase new systems with ME installed. That
time frame appears to be where Win2000 made it's biggest gain in
market share.

I would totally agree with you on Win2000 (unless you install SP3).
Microsoft had said that SP3 for Windows 2000 was going to be it's
last; but SP3 has so many issues that there probably will be an SP4
(or SP3b). The only advantage that XP has is that it can be used for
Games to a much greater degree - but it's appearing that XP, even with
SP1 installed, is the most "holey" of all the Windows so far - chock
full of security issues!!!.

Mark Lloyd <mll...@bugmail.com> wrote in message news:<jsenpu8cr4bgfpthi...@4ax.com>...

[Mark Lloyd]

On 3 Oct 2002 06:08:16 -0700, mxa...@yahoo.com (alpha) wrote:

>Actually, the problems we saw most with ME was on new systems that had
>"virgin" ME installls.

What I said was based on problems reported on this group soon after Me
came out. The second most common cause of problems was not installing
the correct device drivers. When I first got 'Me' I had a serious
problem. I have a Martox "dualhead" video card. When I turned on the
second video output, botting would just give "Windows Protection
Error" until I got a new driver.

> In those cases, installing Win98SE made the
>customers happy. I might re-iterate, "only" about 30-35% of customers
>experienced severe enough problems to request a Win98SE replacement.
>Incidently, at that time, our shop was swamped with new HP, Dell, and
>Compaq boxes especially because the oems would only allow repeated
>re-installs of ME, not OS replacement. Some of the nation's largest
>corporations would not purchase new systems with ME installed. That
>time frame appears to be where Win2000 made it's biggest gain in
>market share.
>
>I would totally agree with you on Win2000 (unless you install SP3).
>Microsoft had said that SP3 for Windows 2000 was going to be it's
>last; but SP3 has so many issues that there probably will be an SP4
>(or SP3b). The only advantage that XP has is that it can be used for
>Games to a much greater degree - but it's appearing that XP, even with
>SP1 installed, is the most "holey" of all the Windows so far - chock
>full of security issues!!!.
>

One of the biggest "holey" features would be "product activation" that
means you're no longer in control of what you thought was YOUR
computer. BTW, I did try the "corporate edition" of XP that's without
that "feature", I still didn't care for it.

>
>
>Mark Lloyd <mll...@bugmail.com> wrote in message news:<jsenpu8cr4bgfpthi...@4ax.com>...
>> On 2 Oct 2002 18:46:03 -0700, mxa...@yahoo.com (alpha) wrote:
>>
>> >I would agree with the previous poster about forgetting ME!! Shortly
>> >after ME came out, we were swamped with customers that wanted to go
>> >back to Win98SE; and I mean swamped!! ME runs great for a small
>> >percentage of people, but in our experience we've never seen anything
>> >like the ME fiasco. All ME has over Win98SE is a few (poor) multimedia
>> >apps and a whole lot of 16 bit code that was converted over to 32 bits
>> >- VERY POORLY. Microsoft has continued to try to distance itself from
>> >ME. That should give you a hint as to what they think it's worth!!
>>
>> Most Me problems seem to be caused by "upgrade in place", something
>> you should never do, rather than getting rid of the old OS first.
>> Anyway, Win2000 is supposed to be better than any other Windows.
>>
>> --
>> 84 days until the winter solstice celebration
>>
>> Mark Lloyd
>> http://go.to/notstupid
>> http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
>>
>> "There's no more proof for the existence of God than there is for the existence of the
>> Easter Bunny. That's right. The Easter Bunny."

--
83 days until the winter solstice celebration

[Bruce Hildebrand]

There are several reasons that many people have problems with ME:
1. they upgraded over a previous operating system (this causes problems in
WIN98 too). 40% of the time
the result is an unstable operating system. All windows operating
systems are best loaded as clean installs (XP included)

Most people also ignore the upgrade report and fail to do the
recommended items.

2. They insist on using outdated software. For example Norton 2000 products
instead of Norton 2001 or later. Software drivers from CD's that do not
contain drivers explicitly for ME.

Windows ME is more stable than Win 98 and the System Restore utility if you
make a mistake and install software not designed for ME makes it all
worthwhile.

btw: Windows XP suffers from exactly the same problems. I work in a
Computer Shop and we see this stuff all the time.
Microsoft went to a great deal of trouble to give you upgrade instructions
thet no one even reads.

The most common problems:
People don't unload their anti virus and utility software,
They forget to uninstall IE (if using a version greater than 5.0),
They forget to uninstall CD burning software
They forget to uninstall HP printer and scanner drivers.

Remember: All windows operating systems are best loaded as clean installs
(XP included)

--
Hope this helps,
--
Bruce Hildebrand
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone

"Me" <no...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:PBHm9.5803$S05.5...@newsfeed.slurp.net...

[Bruce Hildebrand]

See my previous post.

--
Hope this helps,
--
Bruce Hildebrand
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone

"alpha" <mxa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:12b8f566.02100...@posting.google.com...

[David Smith]

Hey Bruce. What are you kidding?
This is the same OS that a Microsoft Exec referred to as "A Toy Operating
System" as reported in The Register
ME was/is garbage. Professionals who choose to stick with the 9x kernel have
gone back to 98 SE a long time ago.
ME was never stable. The lucky or the techo-savvy users were able to make it
run, but I have never, ever heard ME called a "good operating system" by
anyone who has more than a little computer knowledge.
You sir are the very first one to defend ME and I suspect the last one.
And your little batch of M$ tips you supplied only a rank n00b wouldn't
know.
BTW I am referring to people more knowledgeable than myself and from the
nature of your post, you too.
"Bruce Hildebrand" <wiz...@frogpond.org> wrote in message
news:uYIi634aCHA.2104@tkmsftngp11...

[Noel Paton]

I spy Troll?

--
Noel Paton

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's

"David Smith" <crani...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:9fKn9.3923$Ag4....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...

[Mark Marklar]

HH, I was wondering if you could help. I need a file called Svctag.exe to
change/delete the service tag on a Dell Latitude CPx J. A few assholes
actually want to charge 20$ - 25$ for it!!! If I had it I'd post the damned
thing for free. Have any idea where I can snag it?

"Huckleberry Hoshimoto" <huckhosh-Nö§päm!@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jUhm9.26502$WI5.3...@twister.kc.rr.com...

>
> "Z" <zarl...@conan.ids.net> wrote in message
> news:uphmgdj...@corp.supernews.com...

[Viper]

Install the drive, then swap it back.

"Mark Marklar" <so...@ev1.net> wrote in message
news:upv3tbr...@corp.supernews.com...

[Me]

The only thing Bruce is right about is a clean install is best.
I feel sorry for the people that go to his computer shop for help.

"David Smith" <crani...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:9fKn9.3923$Ag4....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...

[Noel Paton]

(I'm not sure I should say this - but)
I agree with you!
(I _know_ I'm going to regret it.......)

--
Noel Paton

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's

"Me" <no...@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:HCWn9.8505$34.9...@newsfeed.slurp.net...

[Gary Woodruff]

The only difference between Millennium and any other OS that Microsoft has developed
is the Independent Driver support and other tweaks that always follow an OS's debut.
They have all had issues when first released due to hardware and driver compatibility
issues. Millennium since it was not much more then an interim release or possibly a
test base for several of the features they were working on for XP never received the
attention that any previous or present OS received. Give Millennium the same
attention with all the drivers updated and hardware tweaked for it and you would have
an OS better then Win98 and not as good as WinXP. Even then literally hundreds of
thousands of users are quietly working away on their Millennium equipped computers
having no idea what everyone in this thread is talking about. :-)

And as to Upgrading I have to take exception as well. To state categorically that a
Clean Install is Always better is fundamentally wrong. For one the vast majority of
Upgrades go with no problems and no issues. They save a tremendous amount of time by
not having to reinstall all the applications, and redoing the settings that one comes
around to over time. If you are one of the minority that has either wound up with or
selected hardware with issues with the OS you are trying to Upgrade to then you may
be better off with a Clean install. But most will be quite satisfied with an Upgrade
particularly if one does some house cleaning first which is the biggest issue with
performance problems in the first place. Also you can always try the Upgrade after
doing a complete backup of your files (WinXP's FAST Wizard does this for you) and if
it does not go well you can just do a clean install. Little ventured and possibly
much gained. But if you blindly just make the move to clean install and then find
that new drivers are not yet available or you have applications you use that you have
lost the media for or you are one of the majority that are not technically advanced
enough to handle the driver issues you are likely to come up against or any of a
dozen other reasons you may wish you had the chance to Upgrade back. Try Upgrading
first and if it turns out bad then do a Clean Install most will be glad they did
having an install that runs just fine with no fewer issues then with a Clean Install.

Millennium first and now WinXP have a much improved ability to pick and choose
between the previously used driver if none are available or if the new one is not as
capable as the already installed one. This can mean an Upgrade will allow use of
hardware that no drivers are available in any other way. So in these cases an
Upgrade will be superior to a Clean install. So there are times that Clean
installing the OS that came with your Computer and then Upgrading to the new OS after
a complete crash may be the very best way to get your computer running with little
fuss or muss and all your hardware operating. Most of the time one should seriously
consider keeping the OS the Computer arrived with anyway due to it's being the most
likely to be compatible with one's hardware so it is possible the best thing to do is
nothing by the way. As with may things involving Computing a blanket statement one
way or the other is almost definitely not a correct one. I have done hundreds of
Upgrades with not a single one requiring my doing a Clean Install. Most have worked
with no additional effort on my part other then some simple house cleaning and
preparation for the Upgrade. So do not go blindly down the Clean Install path as it
may not be the best one for you.

Suggestions for Preparing to Install WINDOWS MILLENNIUM EDITION as an UPGRADE
http://www.aumha.org/a/seupgrad.htm
Upgrading to Windows XP
http://www.aumha.org/a/xpupgrad.htm
--
Gary Woodruff
MS MVP-DTS (Win XP)

"That'll be the day" - John Wayne in The Searchers

[Joe]

"alpha" <mxa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:12b8f566.02093...@posting.google.com...

> Before we start calling things "illegal" we need to address the
> illegal (as judged by two separate federal courts) activities that
> Microsoft used to control the desktop market in the first place. When
> Microsoft starts following the laws of our land, so will it's
> customers.

Absolutely!

[Joe]

Who gives a shit?

"Tom Scales" <tom...@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:MW0m9.592$6t.1...@eagle.america.net...
> Perhaps you should do a little research before you ask people to publicly
> post an illegal hack.
>
> What you are asking violates the license agreement.
>
> Tom

[Joe]

This whole thing is a crock of shit. It's bad enough they advertise name
brand hardware components with slightly altered product names which in fact
are lower cost, watered down versions of retail products, but now you are
also paying for an operating system and other software which cannot be
transferred to another PC. There should be a law against this.

"Calvin Crumrine" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
news:3D9B6585...@example.net...

[Joe]

"Tom Scales" <tom...@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:MW0m9.592$6t.1...@eagle.america.net...
> Perhaps you should do a little research before you ask people to publicly
> post an illegal hack.
>
> What you are asking violates the license agreement.

Oh my God, Tom, are you a Microsoft kiss-ass too?? Who gives a crap about
their license agreement?

[Bally Ally]

perhaps the people who have it and don't want to give it?
"Joe" <1...@2.com> wrote in message news:ao9to0$qtm$1...@slb7.atl.mindspring.net...

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Visit http://homepage.ntlworld.com/brian.biggs/ for lots of fixes
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.401 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 09/10/2002

[Viper]

Computer A = Dell
Computer B + Whatever
Remove hard drive from computer B, and install in computer A.
Install Software
Install hard drive back into Computer B

"reynald" <r_ad...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:70f243f3.02093...@posting.google.com...

> Hello.
>
> I understand there is a way around this.
>
> Can someone please tell me what the steps are to install a Dell
> WindowsME cd onto a non dell computer? That is, to bypass or alter the
> bios check.
>
> Anyhelp would be appreciated.
>

> Thanks.
>
> 7078895

[Tom Scales]

Not in the group I frequent. You'll note the ridiculous cross-posting of
this message.

Tom
"Al" <a...@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:i5shqukfqqr4jko8v...@4ax.com...

>
> >"Tom Scales" <tom...@softhome.net> wrote in message
> >news:MW0m9.592$6t.1...@eagle.america.net...
> >> Perhaps you should do a little research before you ask people to
publicly
> >> post an illegal hack.
> >>
> >> What you are asking violates the license agreement.
>

> LOL... so does 99% of all that goes on in this news group... HELLO,
> anyone home?

[DammitJim]

"Joe" <1...@2.com> wrote in message
news:ao9to0$qtm$1...@slb7.atl.mindspring.net...
>

> Oh my God, Tom, are you a Microsoft kiss-ass too?? Who gives a crap about
> their license agreement?
>

Do you randomly decide which side of the street to drive on as well?

[Joe]

"Bally Ally" <Ball...@hotnotmail.com> wrote in message
news:QK%p9.1593$qo2.1...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...

perhaps the people who have it and don't want to give it?

Nobody's forcing you to share a file. But please don't drown us in any more
hypocritical, pseudo-moralistic lectures about legalities and ethics. As far
as Microsoft is concerned, people should do whatever they feel like with
their products so long as they use some common sense precautions not to get
caught.

I'm not an anrchist or anything like that, but I have no sympathy whatsoever
for Microsoft and their lackeys.

[Joe]

"DammitJim" <Xavier_...@example.net> wrote in message
news:aobs8...@enews4.newsguy.com...

I'm not against rules in general. All I'm saying is that when it comes to
ruthless, unethical, and criminal organizations like Microsoft, I have
better things to do that worry about violating their terms. I wouldn't go
around trying to sell bootleg copies of their software, but if someone needs
a free copy of something by Microsoft and I can provide it at no risk to
myself, then I will very happily provide it.

Same goes for the music industry.

[Joe]

I think this entire concept of binding software to a particular piece of
hardware is ludicrous and insulting to consumers. It was all fine and dandy
when they originally said you could only use one copy of their software at a
time, but for them to now forbid you from TRANSFERRING software from one PC
to another, that's outrageous.

"Calvin Crumrine" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
news:3D9B6585...@example.net...
> So what do you consider 'the computer'? IMO it would be the MB-so if you
> swapped it then you'd need to swap the software too for it to stay with
> 'the computer'. Actually I believe that it's Dell's opinion that counts
> (at least short of a legal decision) and I suspect that they would say
> it's the BIOS. Wonder if they provide BIOS flashes & what they do then?
> (Probably their setup CD's are geared for a 'generic' Dell BIOS so it's
> not a problem. Except for locking you into Dell for upgrades of course,
> and that's the whole idea.)
>
> Rawker wrote:
> > I ran into this at work when we upgraded a number of Dells. (swapped MB,
HD
> > etc...mainly used the case, PS and drives) I just gave up on
trying....but the
> > software was staying with the computer....it just wouldn't give us
permission to
> > use what we'd bought. bummer. Fortunately, they finally invested in an
> > enterprise license when they decided we all needed to be on 2000....
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 23:11:09 -0000, Z <zarl...@conan.ids.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>In alt.windows-me reynald <r_ad...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >>: Hello.

> >>
> >>: I understand there is a way around this.
> >>
> >>: Can someone please tell me what the steps are to install a Dell
> >>: WindowsME cd onto a non dell computer? That is, to bypass or alter the
> >>: bios check.
> >>
> >>: Anyhelp would be appreciated.
> >>

[Joe]

I download my share of stuff from Kazaa, but I think I'd draw the line at
security and OS software...

"Lareman" <REMOVETHI...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:anf87n$q7d$1...@nyytiset.pp.htv.fi...
> Me can be downloaded on Kazaa, for a serial start with the one you have.
> HTH
> Larry
>

> "reynald" <r_ad...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:70f243f3.02093...@posting.google.com...

> : Hello.
> :
> : I understand there is a way around this.
> :
> : Can someone please tell me what the steps are to install a Dell
> : WindowsME cd onto a non dell computer? That is, to bypass or alter the
> : bios check.
> :
> : Anyhelp would be appreciated.

> :
> : Thanks.
> :
> : 7078895
>
>

[wszsr]

Dishonest people always try to justify their dishonest actions.

"Joe" <1...@2.com> wrote in message

news:aofguq$29o$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...

[Bally Ally]

You asked who gives a crap, I told you. No need for all the verbal diarrhoea
trying to justify your lack of honesty.

[Jupiter Jones]

If you think it is ludicrous, don't buy it.
You must be ludicrous for buying it yourself.
Or are you nothing more than a thief by using stolen goods.

--
Jupiter Jones
Check the following link for some great problem solving newsgroups.
http://support.microsoft.com/newsgroups/default.aspx
Please respond to newsgroup only. Everyone can benefit from the
message.

"Joe" <1...@2.com> wrote in message

news:aofh6q$384$1...@slb4.atl.mindspring.net...

[Joe]

Whatever.

As an example, I admire and respect Adobe for their excellent products and
true innovation. They sell their software the old fashioned way - by
including truly useful features that their customers want - not be using
aggressive marketing tactics to kill competitors and force customers to buy
what they don't want.

I happily pay for all my Adobe software as I feel they deserve it.

As for your comment, I accept it so long as you acknowledge that it applies
to Microsoft's actions as much or more than it applies to those of
consumers.

"wszsr" <willia...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ZSHq9.33850$OB5.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...

[Joe]

Now that's a really stupid comment. Would it make you happier if they were
Evangelical Christian Fundamentalist crooks?

No need to downplay a true comment (the music industry is comprised of a
bunch of thieves and liars) with a dumb racial slur.

"No Body" <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:kjtmqu8rl4tn0rjpk...@4ax.com...
> yea......fuck those jewboys in the music industry!

[Joe]

I don't buy it. I get bootleg copies, which I help I distribute in bulk to
everyone I know.

For others, though, not much choice considering Microsoft's illegal
monopoly. We do NOT have a choice.

"Jupiter Jones" <jones_...@hotnomail.com> wrote in message
news:lNIq9.17731$ER5.1...@news2.telusplanet.net...

[Bob Levine]

Forwarded to ab...@infoave.net

No Body wrote:
> yea......fuck those jewboys in the music industry!
>
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:40:05 -0400, "Joe" <1...@2.com> wrote:
>
>

[Calvin Crumrine]

Of course they could always embed the OS in the firmware. Radio Shack
did that with at least one of their TRS models-don't remember which one
as it didn't sell very well. I don't work on Macs but IIRC Apple was
reported to have done that with them as well-at least at one time.

I could agree with you if it weren't for the cost difference between the
OEM licenses & the retail (transferrable) licenses. You get what you pay
for.

Now I *do* agree with you that the retail Windows packages are
over-priced, but that doesn't justify dishonesty. As long as Microsoft
owns Windows they're free to charge whatever they want for it-just like
everybody else is with whatever they own. There are several things they
*aren't* free to do with it (use it to crush products that compete with
Internet Explorer & Office, for example) but they are free to charge
whatever they think they can get for it.

Personally, I think the answer is to make the 'base' version of Windows
public domain. Right of eminent domain comes to mind although I'm not
totally certain it would apply to intellectual property. In any case
we'd need to define what the base version of Windows is & how much
compensation Microsoft should get if we take ownership of it away from
them. Important questions, but it would certainly open up alternatives
that currently don't exist.

[Joe]

"Calvin Crumrine" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message

news:3DAC3CCD...@example.net...

> Of course they could always embed the OS in the firmware. Radio Shack
> did that with at least one of their TRS models-don't remember which one
> as it didn't sell very well. I don't work on Macs but IIRC Apple was
> reported to have done that with them as well-at least at one time.

That was a long time ago and it wasn't really feasible to install one OS on
a different platform. It's a very different situation today. Besides, we're
not just talking about the OS here, as many OEMs are now selling various
software with their PCs that cannot be installed on any other computer. Some
of this software is sold for a fee, and some is supposedly "free."

> I could agree with you if it weren't for the cost difference between the
> OEM licenses & the retail (transferrable) licenses. You get what you pay
> for.

Cost difference for whom? For the OEMs maybe, but not necessarily for the
consumer. I have yet to see a verified, believable cost breakdown on the
price of a PC. Do you think if Dell gets a $20 discount on Windows tomorrow
that we'll see a corresponding drop in the price of their PCs?

Also, as with some OEM hardware, the OEMs will advertise a name brand
product as being included in the package, leading the prospective customer
to assume it's the full product and assign it a value equal to its street
price when making a purchase decision. But only later does the customer
realize that what he got was a stripped down, restricted version the
product. This is deceptive and misleading.

For instance, I purhcased a Sony VAIO notebook computer a couple of years
ago. I selected this model due in no small part to the fact that it included
a copy of Adobe Premiere. Only later did I realize that this software could
not be installed on another PC, nor was it eligible for upgrade pricing from
Adobe. In addition, neither Sony nor Adobe would offer technical support for
it.

> Now I *do* agree with you that the retail Windows packages are
> over-priced, but that doesn't justify dishonesty.

No? Well the way I see it, for Microsoft dishonesty is a core value and
strategic principle. After years of getting railroaded by this behemoth and
their abusive and illegal business practices, I feel no guilt whatsoever
stealing back from them when the opportunity arises.

As I remarked before, if you read that a habitual neighborhood burgler got
mugged in the park, would you really feel sorry for him?

> As long as Microsoft
> owns Windows they're free to charge whatever they want for it-just like
> everybody else is with whatever they own. There are several things they
> *aren't* free to do with it (use it to crush products that compete with
> Internet Explorer & Office, for example) but they are free to charge
> whatever they think they can get for it.

Microsoft has an illegally and unethically established a monopoly over
desktop operating systems and they have illegally leveraged this monopoly to
destroy competitors and abuse their customers, as well as to illegally
establish monopolies in other areas as well, such as the internet browser,
in brazen defiance of previous court orders.

Yes, a company is free to charge whatever it wants for its products and to
use whatever aggressive tactics it wants to further its business, UNLESS
they have a monopoly, in which case they fall under the restrictions of the
Sherman Antitrust Act.

After many years of new laws designed exclusively to protect copyright
holders, including software companies, I think we're long overdue for a long
list of new laws to protect consumers. There should be a law that guarantees
a user's right to "fair use" of a software license, including making a copy
for backup purposes and transferring the license from one PC to another.

> Personally, I think the answer is to make the 'base' version of Windows
> public domain.

Personally I think that we're all screwed because Microsoft already has most
of the government in their back pocket. The way they managed to water down
the outcome of years of litigation against them, in which it was firmly
established that they had repeatedly engaged in illegal, predatory business
practices, even in defiance of the courts, shows that our legal and
legislative system has been totally compromised by rich and powerful
companies.

If that's not reason enough to engage in consumer vigilantism, I don't know
what is.

If I'm going to be lectured on the morality of this thinking, then let it
come from a clergyman with impecable morals and reputation - certainly not
from Microsoft or their supporters.

> Right of eminent domain comes to mind although I'm not
> totally certain it would apply to intellectual property. In any case
> we'd need to define what the base version of Windows is & how much
> compensation Microsoft should get if we take ownership of it away from
> them. Important questions, but it would certainly open up alternatives
> that currently don't exist.

I think that Microsoft should have been split into three companies: one for
the Windows OS, one for their Office application suite, and another for
everything else. This would have been the single, most effective way to
break up their power base and stranglehold over the PC industry.

[Calvin Crumrine]

Joe wrote:
> "Calvin Crumrine" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message
> news:3DAC3CCD...@example.net...
>
>>Of course they could always embed the OS in the firmware. Radio Shack
>>did that with at least one of their TRS models-don't remember which one
>>as it didn't sell very well. I don't work on Macs but IIRC Apple was
>>reported to have done that with them as well-at least at one time.
>
>
> That was a long time ago and it wasn't really feasible to install one OS on
> a different platform. It's a very different situation today. Besides, we're
> not just talking about the OS here, as many OEMs are now selling various
> software with their PCs that cannot be installed on any other computer. Some
> of this software is sold for a fee, and some is supposedly "free."

It wasn't? I did it all the time back then. We're talking straight
MS-DOS (3.3 IIRC), not some arcane OS. And it doesn't really matter
whether it was a long time ago or not. Those who refuse to learn from
history are condemned to repeat it.

As for the other software, I'll bet that the same cost consideration
applies to them-but without examples I obviously can't refute your
arguments. Maybe that's why you didn't give any?

>
>
>
>
>>I could agree with you if it weren't for the cost difference between the
>>OEM licenses & the retail (transferrable) licenses. You get what you pay
>>for.
>
>
> Cost difference for whom? For the OEMs maybe, but not necessarily for the
> consumer. I have yet to see a verified, believable cost breakdown on the
> price of a PC. Do you think if Dell gets a $20 discount on Windows tomorrow
> that we'll see a corresponding drop in the price of their PCs?

No, but I can pretty much guarantee that you'd see an increase in the
price of their PCs if they had to pay the $400/copy price of the retail
version of Windows. Either that or they'd start selling PC's without an OS.

>
> Also, as with some OEM hardware, the OEMs will advertise a name brand
> product as being included in the package, leading the prospective customer
> to assume it's the full product and assign it a value equal to its street
> price when making a purchase decision. But only later does the customer
> realize that what he got was a stripped down, restricted version the
> product. This is deceptive and misleading.
>

Caveat emptor. I've not seen a verified example where the seller hasn't
disclosed the product version, e.g. LE or SE. If the buyer doesn't pay
attention then the buyer gets rooked. Happens in every field. You want
to change human nature? Good luck.

> For instance, I purhcased a Sony VAIO notebook computer a couple of years
> ago. I selected this model due in no small part to the fact that it included
> a copy of Adobe Premiere. Only later did I realize that this software could
> not be installed on another PC, nor was it eligible for upgrade pricing from
> Adobe. In addition, neither Sony nor Adobe would offer technical support for
> it.
>
>
>
>
>>Now I *do* agree with you that the retail Windows packages are
>>over-priced, but that doesn't justify dishonesty.
>
>
> No? Well the way I see it, for Microsoft dishonesty is a core value and
> strategic principle. After years of getting railroaded by this behemoth and
> their abusive and illegal business practices, I feel no guilt whatsoever
> stealing back from them when the opportunity arises.

But we're not talking about Microsoft's dishonesty here-we're talking
about yours.

>
> As I remarked before, if you read that a habitual neighborhood burgler got
> mugged in the park, would you really feel sorry for him?

I didn't see that remark earlier-but I'll answer it here. I wouldn't
feel sorry for the burglar-nor do I feel sorry for Microsoft-but I would
hope that the cops arrest & a jury convicts the mugger before he mugs
somebody else, maybe me. Do you think that a dishonest person really
limits his dishonesty only to 'appropriate' victims? Read your
history-particularly regarding vigilante movements.

>
>
>
>
>
>>As long as Microsoft
>>owns Windows they're free to charge whatever they want for it-just like
>>everybody else is with whatever they own. There are several things they
>>*aren't* free to do with it (use it to crush products that compete with
>>Internet Explorer & Office, for example) but they are free to charge
>>whatever they think they can get for it.
>
>
> Microsoft has an illegally and unethically established a monopoly over
> desktop operating systems and they have illegally leveraged this monopoly to
> destroy competitors and abuse their customers, as well as to illegally
> establish monopolies in other areas as well, such as the internet browser,
> in brazen defiance of previous court orders.
>
> Yes, a company is free to charge whatever it wants for its products and to
> use whatever aggressive tactics it wants to further its business, UNLESS
> they have a monopoly, in which case they fall under the restrictions of the
> Sherman Antitrust Act.
>
> After many years of new laws designed exclusively to protect copyright
> holders, including software companies, I think we're long overdue for a long
> list of new laws to protect consumers. There should be a law that guarantees
> a user's right to "fair use" of a software license, including making a copy
> for backup purposes and transferring the license from one PC to another.

Fine. So lobby for those laws. But IMO your belief that 'there oughta be
a law' doesn't justify your decision to ignore the laws that *do* exist.

>
>
>
>
>>Personally, I think the answer is to make the 'base' version of Windows
>>public domain.
>
>
> Personally I think that we're all screwed because Microsoft already has most
> of the government in their back pocket. The way they managed to water down
> the outcome of years of litigation against them, in which it was firmly
> established that they had repeatedly engaged in illegal, predatory business
> practices, even in defiance of the courts, shows that our legal and
> legislative system has been totally compromised by rich and powerful
> companies.
>
> If that's not reason enough to engage in consumer vigilantism, I don't know
> what is.
>
> If I'm going to be lectured on the morality of this thinking, then let it
> come from a clergyman with impecable morals and reputation - certainly not
> from Microsoft or their supporters.

You could certainly use a visit from a clergyman-but I doubt if you'll
seek one out. As for being a Microsoft supporter, I'm hardly that. In
case you couldn't tell from my earlier proposal (somehow I've come to
doubt your reasoning ability) I truly dislike Microsoft. Just like I
suspect that most of their users do. I don't believe that disliking my
neighbor (or even any wrongdoing on their part) justifies my own
wrongdoing. And that's all we're talking about here-not whether or not
Microsoft has done anything wrong, but whether or not you have.
Wrongdoing is in the act, not in who (whom?) the act is perpetrated
against. (Circumstances can affect this, e.g. self-defense can justify
killing. But it's a lot less convincing to use self-defense to justify
an execution. The same act, but one is based on circumstances in which
it's done & the other is based on the person to whom it's done. Probably
a far-off analogy, but it's the first one that came to my mind.)

>
>
>
>
>>Right of eminent domain comes to mind although I'm not
>>totally certain it would apply to intellectual property. In any case
>>we'd need to define what the base version of Windows is & how much
>>compensation Microsoft should get if we take ownership of it away from
>>them. Important questions, but it would certainly open up alternatives
>>that currently don't exist.
>
>
> I think that Microsoft should have been split into three companies: one for
> the Windows OS, one for their Office application suite, and another for
> everything else. This would have been the single, most effective way to
> break up their power base and stranglehold over the PC industry.

I've never been convinced that this would do much good. Or at least it
would take a long time to do any good. The 3 companies would be composed
of the same executives that currently make up Microsoft. Those
executives have learned how powerful they are when they work together so
I doubt if the fact that they would be in separate companies would
change that attitude.

If Windows is considered essential for the public good then IMO it
should be publicly owned. Much like police & fire protection services.
But this is just a 'base' level. There's still a thriving market for
burglar & fire alarms as well as private security services. But the
existence of publicly owned basic police & fire protection has mostly
eliminated the 'private army' type of force that used to be employed by
the rich. Similarly IMO public ownership of a basic version of Windows
would eliminate the overwhelming force that Microsoft can bring to bear
on OEMs without eliminating its market for Internet Explorer (unless
that's considered part of the basic Windows-and if it is then it'll be
because Microsoft drove to make it so. Just desserts.) and Office, etc.

Anyway, your message seems to have 3 areas:

1) Microsoft's wrongdoing. We're agreed on that.
2) Appropriate punishment for the above. We disagree on that, but both
agree that some punishment is needed.
3) Your wrongdoing. We disagree on that. Good luck.

[Joe]

"Calvin Crumrine" <nos...@example.net> wrote in message

news:3DAC56DB...@example.net...

> >>I could agree with you if it weren't for the cost difference between the
> >>OEM licenses & the retail (transferrable) licenses. You get what you pay
> >>for.
> >
> >
> > Cost difference for whom? For the OEMs maybe, but not necessarily for
the
> > consumer. I have yet to see a verified, believable cost breakdown on the
> > price of a PC. Do you think if Dell gets a $20 discount on Windows
tomorrow
> > that we'll see a corresponding drop in the price of their PCs?
>
> No, but I can pretty much guarantee that you'd see an increase in the
> price of their PCs if they had to pay the $400/copy price of the retail
> version of Windows. Either that or they'd start selling PC's without an
OS.

That would be best. That way we could pick up whichever version of whichever
operating system we wanted while seeing the actual price of a PC. Actually,
that way we could reuse one of the many old copies of Windows we already own
but no longer use because the original computer was long since dsicarded or
given away. Also, this way we'd be entitled to tech support, albeit for a
limited time, directly from a Microsoft rep in Redmond instead of from
someone named Hadji in Punjabi.

> > Also, as with some OEM hardware, the OEMs will advertise a name brand
> > product as being included in the package, leading the prospective
customer
> > to assume it's the full product and assign it a value equal to its
street
> > price when making a purchase decision. But only later does the customer
> > realize that what he got was a stripped down, restricted version the
> > product. This is deceptive and misleading.
> >
>
> Caveat emptor. I've not seen a verified example where the seller hasn't
> disclosed the product version, e.g. LE or SE. If the buyer doesn't pay
> attention then the buyer gets rooked. Happens in every field. You want
> to change human nature? Good luck.

The whole SE and LE thing was introduce as a scam, since the customer did
not know what the difference was and they couldn't go to a retail store and
compare prices. You and I may know what they mean, but most newbies just
read "Sound Blaster Live" and either ignore the "Value" or assume it's a
premium version bundled with extras.

> > For instance, I purhcased a Sony VAIO notebook computer a couple of
years
> > ago. I selected this model due in no small part to the fact that it
included
> > a copy of Adobe Premiere. Only later did I realize that this software
could
> > not be installed on another PC, nor was it eligible for upgrade pricing
from
> > Adobe. In addition, neither Sony nor Adobe would offer technical support
for
> > it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>Now I *do* agree with you that the retail Windows packages are
> >>over-priced, but that doesn't justify dishonesty.

Quid pro quo. What comes around goes around. People who live in glass houses
should not throw stones. Take your pick, I've got a million of them...

It'll be a cold day in hell before I hold myself up to some high moral
standard while all these companies break laws and crap on the meaning of
ethics and try to screw me at every turn. Treat me right, and I'll treat you
right.

> > No? Well the way I see it, for Microsoft dishonesty is a core value and
> > strategic principle. After years of getting railroaded by this behemoth
and
> > their abusive and illegal business practices, I feel no guilt whatsoever
> > stealing back from them when the opportunity arises.
>
> But we're not talking about Microsoft's dishonesty here-we're talking
> about yours.

No, we're talking about both. Microsoft runs it's business as if it were a
military campaign against competitors and consumers, so it's only fair that
I take the role of the guerilla freedom fighter. :-)

If tomorrow companies started behaving like human beings I would respond in
kind.

> > As I remarked before, if you read that a habitual neighborhood burgler
got
> > mugged in the park, would you really feel sorry for him?
>
> I didn't see that remark earlier-but I'll answer it here. I wouldn't
> feel sorry for the burglar-nor do I feel sorry for Microsoft-but I would
> hope that the cops arrest & a jury convicts the mugger before he mugs
> somebody else, maybe me. Do you think that a dishonest person really
> limits his dishonesty only to 'appropriate' victims? Read your
> history-particularly regarding vigilante movements.

I can only speak for myself and I can say with a clear conscience that I
treat everyone with the same honesty and respect that they treat me. In most
cases this means we treat each other well.

For instance, I love Adobe, their products, and their customer service. I
admire their business practices, which consists of thriving in the market by
producing excellent products, not by cheating and scamming competitors out
of business. As such, I happily pay for Photoshop, Illustrator, and
LiveMotion, three programs that deserve every penny. I could go into a P2P
program and get their stuff for free but I don't.

I don't really care about your opinion.

You talk a lot about ethics, but you betray your prejudice in favor of large
companies by focusing your lectures at consumers and not at them.

Lobbying is a joke from a consumer's point of view. Only big business has
the money it takes to do that.

Right. So you're the "turn the other cheek" type.

I'm not.

I'm more of the "you punch me in the face for no reason and I'll whack you
on the head with a two by four type" - figuratively speaking. Evil people
only respond to force. By your thinking, perhaps the US should have
unilaterally disarmed back during the Cold War. When you're being attacked
(physically, financially, or otherwise) you either fight back or you get
beat up.

Interesting disclaimer - I am not a Republican and I do not support our
appointed, semi-retarded President's attempt to distract attention from our
horrendous economy by entering into a war at the wrong time and in the wrong
way.

> And that's all we're talking about here-not whether or not
> Microsoft has done anything wrong, but whether or not you have.
> Wrongdoing is in the act, not in who (whom?) the act is perpetrated
> against. (Circumstances can affect this, e.g. self-defense can justify
> killing. But it's a lot less convincing to use self-defense to justify
> an execution. The same act, but one is based on circumstances in which
> it's done & the other is based on the person to whom it's done. Probably
> a far-off analogy, but it's the first one that came to my mind.)

So during US colonial times, you would have taken the moral high ground and
advocated obedience and subservience to the British because retaliation and
breaking of laws are wrong?

> >>Right of eminent domain comes to mind although I'm not
> >>totally certain it would apply to intellectual property. In any case
> >>we'd need to define what the base version of Windows is & how much
> >>compensation Microsoft should get if we take ownership of it away from
> >>them. Important questions, but it would certainly open up alternatives
> >>that currently don't exist.
> >
> >
> > I think that Microsoft should have been split into three companies: one
for
> > the Windows OS, one for their Office application suite, and another for
> > everything else. This would have been the single, most effective way to
> > break up their power base and stranglehold over the PC industry.
>
> I've never been convinced that this would do much good. Or at least it
> would take a long time to do any good. The 3 companies would be composed
> of the same executives that currently make up Microsoft. Those
> executives have learned how powerful they are when they work together so
> I doubt if the fact that they would be in separate companies would
> change that attitude.

No, not the same executives, because they would be separate companies with
separate executives, each trying to thrive on its own on Wall Street. The
Office group would no longer have any incentive to cater only to Windows
while shunning Linux, for example.

> If Windows is considered essential for the public good then IMO it
> should be publicly owned. Much like police & fire protection services.

And we all know how efficient and incorruptible our government is, right?

[dyslexicbob]

Blah Blah Blah,,,You can all say what you want about microsoft, but
they have not created a monopoly in the pc market. A monopoly consists
of a person or company having the only available product. They do not
have the only OS, they just have the most used and most recognized.
There are people all over the world that swear by their macs. You have
linux, OS/2, now Lindows (which I have tried and like), and the list
goes on. There are all kinds of alternate choices out there, so use
them if you do not like microsoft. But stop the god damn whinning.
Microsoft has done something that few other companies in the world
have ever achieved, they have created a product that is accepted by a
very diverse audience. All over the world people use and recognize
their products. I can not believe that users of a forum such as this
one would actually think that they should have broken up microsoft. If
you went to the store and bought a package of hot dogs, and the
company also had a baking division and for every package of hot dogs
that you purchased, they gave you a bag of hot dog buns, would you sue
to have that baking division split from the parent company? NO, you
would appreciate that someone is giving you a more complete package at
no extra cost to you.
You all know as well as I do that you do not have to use internet
explorer. It was not the first internet browser on the market. You can
always use Netscape. Microsoft intergrates their browser into their OS
to give consumers a more complete product. And let's face facts, most
people would be so incredibly lost if they had to go out and find a
browser on their own.
I have 5 machines in my office, and none of them use the same OS,
only one of them has a microsoft OS on it and only one of them has
internet explorer on it. So until you can code something comparable, I
would suggest that you reformat and install another OS, or stop
complaining about it.

"Joe" <1...@2.com> wrote in message news:<aokkoo$lhc$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>...

[Joe]

> Blah Blah Blah,,,You can all say what you want about microsoft, but
> they have not created a monopoly in the pc market. A monopoly consists
> of a person or company having the only available product. They do not
> have the only OS, they just have the most used and most recognized.

So back when Standard Oil controlled the oil and gas market, you would argue
that they didn't have a monopoly because consumers could always use coal as
an alternative, right?

For all intents and purposes Microsoft is the only game in town. You can't
buy a Dell and run Mac OS on it. For that matter, you can't buy a Dell at
all without also paying for a copy of Windows, whether you want it or not.
The same can be said for most major PC vendors.

The vast majority of hardware and software on the market is for Windows.
Most corporations use Windows. To select another platform is to shut
yourself off from the majority of available services and products on the
market. This situation is the result of two things, Microsoft riding on the
IBM compatible bandwagon, and Microsoft using ruthless practices to wipe out
competitors and pressure vendors and developers to cater to Windows.

It has already been established in courts that MS has an effective monopoly
over desktop OS, that they acquired that monopoly through unethical
practices, and that they have repeatedly protected, expanded, and exploited
that monopoly, in flagrant violation US anti-trust laws and several court
orders.

> But stop the god damn whinning.

Go fuck yourself. Microsoft has taken what used to be an exciting and
innovative industry and turned it into a vicious and unproductive battlezone
where profits and market share are acquired not through innovation and
quality products and services, but by strongarming consumers and running
competitors out of business.

> Microsoft has done something that few other companies in the world
> have ever achieved, they have created a product that is accepted by a
> very diverse audience. All over the world people use and recognize
> their products.

Bill Gates was smart and lucky enough to be at the right place and time to
jump on the PC clone bandwagon and ride IBM's laurels into stardom. If it
weren't for IBM's stupidity in licensing Gates' OS software (instead of
buying it outright or seeking an alternative), this would never have
happened. They offered an unstable, inferior product (compared to Apple OS
for example) but they succeded due to the enormous economies of scale of the
massive IBM user base. Later, they largely abandoned real product
development and focused their efforts on strategic campaigns to obliterate
competitors and to pressure customers into using only their products -
eating away little by little at consumers' expectations for quality,
service, reliability, innovation, and choice.

> I can not believe that users of a forum such as this
> one would actually think that they should have broken up microsoft. If
> you went to the store and bought a package of hot dogs, and the
> company also had a baking division and for every package of hot dogs
> that you purchased, they gave you a bag of hot dog buns, would you sue
> to have that baking division split from the parent company?

If we were to apply your moronic analogy to the hot dog business, it would
look more like this...

Microsoft would produce 90% of the world's hot dogs, which could only be
cooked on Microsoft grills, served with Microsoft buns, and seasoned with
Microsoft Ketshup and Mustard. Competing products could only be purchased in
expensive little gourmet stores, or by standing in line at a free soup
kitchen.

Most people would buy Microsoft hotdogs, even though they preferred other
brands, because unlike in the good old days when there was a large
selection, the other brands were now hard to find, and they couldn't be
cooked on the now ubiquitous Microsoft grills or served with Microsoft buns
or condiments.

Most restaurants would serve only Microsoft hotdogs and related foods, again
because of pressure from the company, in spite of many customers' preference
for other brands. They would be bound by contract to only use Microsoft
cooking equipment and supplies.

Whenever a competing company created a new and popular hotdog, Microsoft
would start giving away their own inferior hotdogs for free until the other
company went out of business, and then return their prices to their usual
high and ever increasing levels. Eventually, everyone realized that it was
impossible to succeed in the hotdog business regardless of how good your
hotdog might be.

Another popular tactic useful on gullible customers was the addition of
questionable features to their hotdogs, such as built-in ketchup, mustard,
buns, and later, beverages, toothpaste, and breath mints. Most people agreed
that these extra products did not belong bundled inside hotdogs, that they
didn't work as they should, and that they simply tasted awful, but the
supermarkets and restaurants were pressured to buy and sell them through
corporate arm-twisting and massive marketing campaigns.

MS would demand that supermarkets sell only their hotdogs and buns, or else
risk losing their wholesale pricing on their products, and also risk
receiving these products after all the other supermarkets, after the hotdogs
and buns were already going stale.

For as long as they could remember, hotdog buyers had expected to receive
frequent-buyer and discount coupns on their hotdog purchases. But later,
with MS citing the desire for smoother cash flow patterns, they would
require hotdog buyers to commit to buying their hotdogs at regular intervals
for at least two years. Anyone who didn't agree to this would have to pay a
ridiculously high price for their hotdogs in the future and would not be
eligible for the usual coupons and discounts that had been standard in the
food industry for ages.

I could go on and on with this...

> NO, you
> would appreciate that someone is giving you a more complete package at
> no extra cost to you.

Nobody is giving anything away for free. These are just stupid and
manipulative marketing gimmicks. It's like those "As Seen on TV" ads for
crappy products. They'll say you're getting this carpet cleaner, a $90
value, for only $19.95... but wait! there's more!!! Act now and get an extra
bottle for free!!

Any reasonably intelligent person realizes that you're really just being
forced to buy two bottles at $10 a piece, when in fact they may be worth
less than half that much and probably don't work at all.

Money back guarantee!!! Yes, minus the $10 shipping and handling charge,
plus shipping cost to return the product.

You're either extremely stupid and naive, or you think that everyone reading
this is.

> You all know as well as I do that you do not have to use internet
> explorer. It was not the first internet browser on the market. You can
> always use Netscape.

Netscape was one of the first browsers. Microsoft came into the game, with a
horrendous IE, light on features and heavy on bugs. But they gave it away
for free, thereby slicing Netscape's throat. Then little by little, they
added features and functionality to IE, while Netscape could no longer
afford to keep up since they could no longer make money on their browser.
Microsoft then incorporated IE into Windows, adding to the OS' already
massive level of bloat, but creating the illusion of speed by having key
parts of the browser load automatically on bootup. They also made changes to
the OS that made Netscape increasingly unreliable. Eventually, the Netscape
browser became a small-time has-been. Once they were wiped out, Microsoft
ceased development of IE for the most part, leaving users with a stagnant
and buggy browser - only adding "features" that Microsoft intended to use to
further other MS services and products.

> > >

[dyslexicbob]

Joe,,I think you have some Microsoft issues that you need to work out.
Might I suggest a counselor? Just make sure it is one that uses a Mac.
For someone that is so set against big business you sure are angry.
Did Bill Gates fire you????
Ramble in all you want about how terrible they are but the fact is
they are here to stay. And if you are so worried about Dell and other
companies like them pushing Microsoft products, then for god sakes
build your own and put in the OS that you want. YOU DO HAVE A
CHOICE!!! If you can't do that then maybe you should not be posting in
a group like this with such authority. Thank you and
remember,,,,,Where do yo want to go today Joe???????

"Joe" <1...@2.com> wrote in message news:<aoprag$es4$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net>...

[k c]

After 2 years of faithful service my laptop keys are getting dingy
looking...........
Can someone here suggest the best cleaning solution for my keys? Plain
water doesn't help,but I am wary of getting the wrong chemicals in the wrong
places...would I be better off pulling the keyboard and cleaning it ?
If so how do I safely remove it? Nothing obvious about it to my
un-trained eye. TIA 45nut
--
"a vote is like a rifle:it's usefulness depends
on the character of the user"

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.394 / Virus Database: 224 - Release Date: 10/3/2002

[Me]

Isn't that backwards???

"Viper" <no...@never.net> wrote in message
news:JL2q9.766$UA4.7...@news.alltel.net...