On 2/22/07, Anthony R. Gold <thinkpadlist2@ahjg.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:31:39 -0500, you wrote:
>
> > At 07:22 PM 2/22/2007 +0000, Anthony R. Gold wrote:
> >> On the contrary, IMO WinXP is vastly superior in terms of security and
> >> also materially better in terms of features.
> >
> > ...and is more bloated (space and speed), and has more tracking and
> crippling functions. Your Win2K installation isn't going to disable itself
> when you make hardware changes, or try to install it in a VM. Your WinXP,
> on the other hand, will suddenly demand "reactivation" with Microsoft.
>
> That is wrong and highly misleading. The IBM OEM version of WinXP never
> need either activation or reactivation.
>
> Tony
>
Tony -- isn't that statement only hold true if you are installing it onto
IBM hardware? (e.g. not in a VM running on any hardware - IBM or other, or
directly onto non-IBM hardware.)
I believe that is the case for other OEM versions.
-jk
_______________________________________________
Thinkpad mailing list
Thinkpad@stderr.org
http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/thinkpad
Received on Thu Feb 22 16:37:24 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Mar 02 2007 - 00:00:08 EST