Evan,

>Jim / all,

I guess I am one of the "all"...

>Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't get what the problem is here.

OK, I will try to clarify some of the finer points of my position...

>Microsoft creates a product, just like hundreds of thousands of other companies. Since they own this product, they have the -absolute right- to decide what customers of their product must pay for that product. They also have the -absolute right- to restrict usage of their product to those who pay for the privilege of using the product.

I totally agree with this...maybe a small niggle about them NOT actually having the right to charge whatever they want because they are a monopoly, but I am not sure we want to get into that. For simplification, let's say I totally agree with you thus far.

>If a potential customer doesn't like the terms or the price or the company or WHATEVER, they can always buy a competing product from someone else. Simple as that. Don't like SQL Server and their per-seat licensing? Oracle will be happy to help you (well, sort of -g-). Office 2002's new registration too much for you? Corel will be happy to sell you their WordPerfect suite, or maybe you can use StarOffice. Don't like something about VFP 7's new requirements? There's always Probl -- er,PowerBuilder (shudder)...

Um, What product should I buy for my desktop OS if I don't want to use Windows? Never mind that I have probably already paid for a Windows OEM license upon purchasing my PC, what OS should I use in Windows stead? When I do get a different OS and different productivity software, I will have no problem converting Word and Excel docs because they are based on open standards so I can convert them, right? Hmmm, no you say? Hm, what am I supposed to do with all of those proprietary documents, etc. so that I can keep running my business, personal finances, etc. etc.? If you have an answer I am all ears.

>Anybody remember when dBASE III from Ashton-Tate first came out? The program disk was copy-protected with a package called Prolock. You had to insert the *original* program disk (5 1/4" 360K) or the software refused to boot. Copying the original did no good -- the original had a "laser hole" in an unused sector of the disk that the Prolock software looked for, and without the hole, it considered the disk a copy and kicked you out. Yeah, some hacker defeated it in about a week...but that's not the issue.
>
>Here's the issue: the existence of the inconvenience didn't seem to stop many people (and large companies) from buying the software. Why? They were willing to put up with the inconvenience because they *wanted the product*. It did something they NEEDED.

Look, for most application software and developer tools I agree...but for the OS, no way. You will get a copy of MS even if you *don't want the product*, and you will have paid for a license even if you don't get one providing you have purchased from a big-name PC company that has OEM agreements with MS.

Most people don't buy Windows because they see an ad on TV and say "Oooohhh!!! Lookeee!!! Gotta get me some of that!". They get it because it is on the PC and because its monopoly position makes it the only viable choice.

>Another example: I don't particularly like to have strangers in my home. But I want to refinance my home, and to do that, the mortgage company requires a home inspection. Now, I have a choice: I can either (A) choose *not to buy the product*, thereby keeping my home financed the way it is, and maybe try to find someone else that doesn't require a home inspection; or (B) put up with the inconvenience because I *want the product* and the benefits that come with it.

I am not sure I see the relation here...with this example we are getting into pure, simple cause/effect...Here's an example: I don't like going to my job, but I do so to pay the bills. Now, I have a choice: I can either (A) choose *not to go to work*, thereby being able to stay home but be poor, or (B) put up with the inconvenience because I *want the money* and the benefits that come with it. OK, delightful discourse, but where is the relation to Windows?

>And, to those who have said "if I buy a box without Windows on it, Microsoft assumes I'm a pirate", try this sometime: go down to a Fry's Electronics or one of your local "no name" clone builder shops, buy the necessary parts for a new machine, and BUILD THE FOOL THING YOURSELF. It'll only take you a few hours.

Of course...and we all know that everyone in these Unitded States of America posesses the skills to go build their own PC in the event that they get fed up with MS.... Most of us aren't speaking on behalf of ourselves (at least two or three of us have completely switched to built PCs/Linux already), but are worried about how far MS is going to go as related to Joe Schmo America.

>I guarantee you that if you do that, no one will ask you if you have a license for an operating system. No one will write your name down on a list because you didn't buy XP or Win2K with that sixty-gig hard drive. No one will knock on your door and ask to see your license agreements.

Not true. MS recently announced little incentives for _anyone_ that could tell them about _any_ system being sold without an MS OS on it...if I go buy a chassis and power supply but no Windows, someone at that store could very easily call MS and tell them to increment their number. No, it's not a Big Brother scenario, but they could still inform MS about a system going out the door OS free... Where do you think MS gets a lot of their pioracy and potential piracy numbers? You think they don't use scenarios like this to pad those numbers...?

>Why? Because they don't care. The only ones that care are the major system manufacturers, who are forced by *THEIR* licensing agreements to report back to Redmond on EVERY SYSTEM THEY SELL. That's in *THEIR* contract with Microsoft. If you don't -want- to deal with it, YOU DON'T HAVE TO.

And I don't...but what choice does an "average" consumer have, honestly?

>You also don't have to buy their product(s). Nobody's forcing you. However, if you want the *benefits* of someone else's work, you should be willing to put up with the inconveniences of using their product.

I don't mind putting up with conveniences if the good outweighs them. But if I have to put up with the inconveniences because I _have no choice_, then there's the rub.

>The one who pays the piper calls the tune.

Um, OK.

JoeK