From: "Robert Comer" 

I don't think i'd agree with it being a false premise, at least for a
majority of us users out here -- products are on CD and the copy protection
is that activation crap and the product key.

Anyway, i don't see what he is saying would work either, most people don't
have the bandwidth to be downloading a CD everytime they want to do an
install...

- Bob Comer


"Rich"  wrote in message news:3e3805ce$1{at}w3.nls.net...
   From below, that installs are from CD and that the products are copy
protected.  His full rant probably contains more.

Rich

"Robert Comer"  wrote in message
news:3e378a2a$1{at}w3.nls.net...
What false premise?

- Bob Comer


"Rich"  wrote in message news:3e378899$1{at}w3.nls.net...
   The first problem with George's rant is that it is based on a false
premise.

Rich

"Antti Kurenniemi"  wrote in
message news:3e3762ee{at}w3.nls.net...
That really sounds likea a good idea. Unfortunately I think it will
probably never happen :-(


Antti Kurenniemi

"Geo."  wrote in message news:3e374ea7{at}w3.nls.net...
> yes I read all about it. It occurs to me that a big part of the
> problem with how they are dealing with this problem is
> actually related to copy protection. One of the things that
> causes all these unpatched machines to continuously be
> available is that people are always doing new
> installs/re-installs for whatever reasons. They are forced
> to use the original CD which of course contains unpatched
> code, then apply service pack and lord knows how many
> hot fixes.[snip]

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4