F
Frank
Flightless Bird
Re: MS Windows WGA/EULA upheld in court ruling...Oops!...LOL!
Alias wrote:
> Frank wrote:
>> DanS wrote:
>>>>>>> Ergo, your post is off-topic here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which means, you, who cries about Alias' post being OT because they
>>>>>>> are not about Windows 7, is also making OT posts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Conclusion, hypocrite. Plain and simple........like you.
>>>>>> You're as desperate as your butt-fucking-buddy alias. WGA is a
>>>>>> part of
>>>>>> XP, Vista, Windows 7, etc.
>>>>> Great WGA is part of XP, yeah, that doesn't preclude the fact that
>>>>> Windows7 was never mentioned in the article.
>>>>>
>>>>> WGA is not mentioned in the Windows7 EULA either....
>>>>>
>>>>> http://download.microsoft.com/documents/useterms/Windows%
>>>>> 20Vista_Ultimate_English_36d0fe99-75e4-4875-8153-889cf5105718.pdf
>>>> BTW, that is a Vista EULA and this is a Windows 7 ng.
>>>> Oops!...LOL!
>>>
>>> Yes, I see that. It was a mistake on my part....
>>>
>>> ...not me trying to spread misinformation.....
>>>
>>> ...and I'm admitting I posted the wrong URL.....
>>>
>>> But, the wrong URL only......as Alias stated, the W7 eula has not a
>>> mention of WGA or WAT either, so your point is moot...like you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> So the Judge was incorrect huh?
>> I don't think so. But you're an asshole, and that is correct.
>
> The case was about the sleazy way MS introduced WGA-N by calling it a
> "critical" update when it wasn't back in 06. With the new WAT for
> Windows 7, they at least are admitting it isn't necessary unless you
> suspect you're a thief or have been conned by a thief. Or, if you're
> like Frank, you'll download and install it and mindlessly think it won't
> come up with a false positive even though it isn't going to improve
> Windows 7 one iota.
"Confused by hatred" can be the only logical explanation for the about
rambling stupid statement.
Or you've got your panties all in a bunch because the EULA, which you
have openly challenged as being illegal, has in effect, been declared as
legal and binding by a court of law!...LOL!
Oops!
Alias wrote:
> Frank wrote:
>> DanS wrote:
>>>>>>> Ergo, your post is off-topic here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which means, you, who cries about Alias' post being OT because they
>>>>>>> are not about Windows 7, is also making OT posts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Conclusion, hypocrite. Plain and simple........like you.
>>>>>> You're as desperate as your butt-fucking-buddy alias. WGA is a
>>>>>> part of
>>>>>> XP, Vista, Windows 7, etc.
>>>>> Great WGA is part of XP, yeah, that doesn't preclude the fact that
>>>>> Windows7 was never mentioned in the article.
>>>>>
>>>>> WGA is not mentioned in the Windows7 EULA either....
>>>>>
>>>>> http://download.microsoft.com/documents/useterms/Windows%
>>>>> 20Vista_Ultimate_English_36d0fe99-75e4-4875-8153-889cf5105718.pdf
>>>> BTW, that is a Vista EULA and this is a Windows 7 ng.
>>>> Oops!...LOL!
>>>
>>> Yes, I see that. It was a mistake on my part....
>>>
>>> ...not me trying to spread misinformation.....
>>>
>>> ...and I'm admitting I posted the wrong URL.....
>>>
>>> But, the wrong URL only......as Alias stated, the W7 eula has not a
>>> mention of WGA or WAT either, so your point is moot...like you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> So the Judge was incorrect huh?
>> I don't think so. But you're an asshole, and that is correct.
>
> The case was about the sleazy way MS introduced WGA-N by calling it a
> "critical" update when it wasn't back in 06. With the new WAT for
> Windows 7, they at least are admitting it isn't necessary unless you
> suspect you're a thief or have been conned by a thief. Or, if you're
> like Frank, you'll download and install it and mindlessly think it won't
> come up with a false positive even though it isn't going to improve
> Windows 7 one iota.
"Confused by hatred" can be the only logical explanation for the about
rambling stupid statement.
Or you've got your panties all in a bunch because the EULA, which you
have openly challenged as being illegal, has in effect, been declared as
legal and binding by a court of law!...LOL!
Oops!