[Bush2000]

Give me a break. If I criticize some aspect of Microsoft, it doesn’t mean I have a vendetta against the company.

There are plenty of folks on FR who do qualify as bigots, however. They usually are the most prolific posters of anti-MS demagoguery. They know exactly who they are. I've made no bones in calling them out as such. I don't know enough of your views to consider you a bigot. Yet.

The bad press Microsoft has received is justified in some cases and not in others.

Here we agree.

The XP licensing issue gives the end user, especially those that constantly fiddle with hardware configuration, the feeling like Big Brother Microsoft is watching.

A feeling? A lot of people have feelings that UFOs and BigFoot exist, too. But that doesn't make their "feelings" any more true.

Those, like me, who constantly mess with hardware are put off by Microsoft’s edict to re-register their OS when the configuration limit bell rings. This is a perception that exists in several segments of the potential XP market segments including CIOs and IT groups within various companies.

Corporations with enterprise licenses don't have activation requirements. You're blowing smoke on this point.

You can scream back at these folks with an environmental activists’ intensity, like you and innocentbystander have been doing, or you can accept that there is a perception issue and deal with it by providing fact instead of name calling.

Here's the problem: Many of these people are Mac or *nix users with no vested interest in the debate other than to spew FUD. They're disruptors. They have no intention of using Windows under any circumstances. So their "perceptions" are pretty worthless. What bothers me is that they're viral advocacy has given a lot of poorly-informed folks bogus information. I have encouraged people to read the facts at http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/overviews/activation.asp and not listen to a bunch of ill-informed and paranoid Mac blowhards.

You lose credibility by labeling these folks as bigots and just dump more fuel on the fire.

These folks aren't interested in contributing. They're more interested in sowing paranoia and fear. The only way to deal with them is to call them what they are.

Do you really think you’re going to ‘fix’ these people’s perception by screaming at them?

No. You don't 'fix' a bigot's perceptions. But you can alert others to their bigotry. That is a useful function.

[js1138]

I just set up an XP system for my sister. The activation was painless. I'd prefer not to register, but then I've been known to fudge a bit on multiple installations, so I know why Microsoft (and Autodesk, and Sonic Foundry, and many others) have had it up to here with piracy.

If you have amonopoly on manufacturing hardware for your OS, you don't need to worry about piracy, but if Microsoft tried to control any aspect of manufacturing, they'd probably get a visit from the feds.

<];^)

[disclaimer]

There are plenty of folks on FR who do qualify as bigots, however. They usually are the most prolific posters of anti-MS demagoguery. They know exactly who they are. I've made no bones in calling them out as such. I don't know enough of your views to consider you a bigot. Yet.

Thanks for the reprieve on bigot label for myself. You appear like a pro-Microsoft bigot by your blanket statements. Consider this constructive criticism.

disclaimer: The XP licensing issue gives the end user, especially those that constantly fiddle with hardware configuration, the feeling like Big Brother Microsoft is watching.
Bush2000: A feeling? A lot of people have feelings that UFOs and BigFoot exist, too. But that doesn't make their "feelings" any more true.

Like I stated earlier, ‘feelings’, aka perceptions, do count in sales and politics. Any experienced salesman knows that perception is as important as the facts about an issue. You’re selling Microsoft, whether you want to admit it or not. If you want to win folks over you won’t have a chance while you’re out there calling people bigots. Makes you look like one. Microsoft delivers world-class quality product, especially considering how complex the technology is. Give the facts and time will tell. Anyone without any knowledge of the software business, and software licensing, probably view your 'in your face' replies as overly emotional shrill opinions.

Corporations with enterprise licenses don't have activation requirements. You're blowing smoke on this point.

Well, small businesses are the ones outsourcing IT by the hour and have to deal with sort of issue too. That goes for small margin manufactures with a single IT guy where an enterprise license is not practical.

Here's the problem: Many of these people are Mac or *nix users with no vested interest in the debate other than to spew FUD. They're disruptors. They have no intention of using Windows under any circumstances. So their "perceptions" are pretty worthless.

Just state the facts, you’ll win every time. It may not be painless and a lot of work, but you’ll come out of it with some credibility instead of looking just as bad as they do. Why do you bother arguing with Mac users about the licensing issue - the Mac hardware is tightly licensed and proprietary. What kind of argument can they make? They pay inflated prices on everything Mac they buy. As far as Linux goes, the market voted overwhelmingly for Windows on the desktop. Linux has a lot of catch up here, so why bother getting all emotionally worked up?

What bothers me is that they're viral advocacy has given a lot of poorly-informed folks bogus information. I have encouraged people to read the facts at http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/overviews/activation.asp and not listen to a bunch of ill-informed and paranoid Mac blowhards.

The real problem here is you underestimate the power of you own argumet using facts over emotions. You have to address emotion and provide facts to counter it, but you can’t win over closed-minded people so why get hung up on it? You can win over the readers you never hear from if you stick with the facts and lose the broad name-calling if you want credibility. If someone makes an outlandish claim, ask for information supporting their position and hold them to it.

These folks aren't interested in contributing. They're more interested in sowing paranoia and fear. The only way to deal with them is to call them what they are.…and look just like one of them to the uninformed.

Most of the folks on the FreeRepublic can reason you know - if you provide the facts. You know that China and other countries (including EU countries) are very paranoid about Microsoft products - probably with good reason. Microsoft has a lot of sensitive personal and business information pumping through them, how can the Feds ignore this potential source of information? It must be tough for Microsoft to ignore the gold mine of demographics their appilications have access to. Shouldn’t you expect some paranoia? That's the price of Microsoft's success.

disclaimer: Do you really think you’re going to ‘fix’ these people’s perception by screaming at them?
Bush2000: No. You don't 'fix' a bigot's perceptions. But you can alert others to their bigotry. That is a useful function.

You’re not performing that ‘function,’ you appear as a bigot yourself.