Re: removing authorization key, putting it back later

  • From: "Rick Harmon" <rharmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 00:32:56 -0500

Sorry Bruce, I stand corrected.  I didn't know about that.  Guess I should 
research before I speak.

Rick


=======

Visit my webpage at www.blind-geek-zone.net

Here you will find Audio tutorials for popular programs, blindness related 
web links, blind mailing list links and documents for various things.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bruce Toews" <DogRiver@xxxxxxxx>
To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 12:31 AM
Subject: Re: removing authorization key, putting it back later


No, actually that's not true. If you are using an organizational license,
then each licensee gets one key at any one time. I'd forgotten this.

Bruce

-- 
Bruce Toews
Skype ID: o.canada
E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: DogRiver@xxxxxxxx
LiveJournal: http://brucetola.livejournal.com
Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net
Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): http://www.ogts.net
Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com

On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Rick Harmon wrote:

> All ILM's have 3 keys.
>
> Rick
>
>
> =======
>
> Visit my webpage at www.blind-geek-zone.net
>
> Here you will find Audio tutorials for popular programs, blindness related
> web links, blind mailing list links and documents for various things.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Heim" <jheim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 9:25 PM
> Subject: Re: removing authorization key, putting it back later
>
>
> That's not true. I have never had more than one. Maybe your licensing is
> different than mine.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bruce Toews" <DogRiver@xxxxxxxx>
> To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 5:16 PM
> Subject: Re: removing authorization key, putting it back later
>
>
>> There is no reason you should be left without at least one authorization,
>> except in a very unusual situation where you would lose three in rapid
>> succession.
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>> --
>> Bruce Toews
>> Skype ID: o.canada
>> E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: DogRiver@xxxxxxxx
>> LiveJournal: http://brucetola.livejournal.com
>> Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net
>> Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): http://www.ogts.net
>> Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com
>>
>> On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, John Heim wrote:
>>
>>> Dude... It's not about knowing the rules. Even if you know the rules,
>>> they're a pain. Why should I have to anticipate blowing out a CD-ROM
>>> drive? Why should I have to *know* that I have to anticipate blowing out
>>> a CD-ROM drive?
>>>
>>> Maybe I want to swap out my CD-ROM drive every week. And my video card
>>> too. And I want to add RAM and then take it out.  I have to re-auth each
>>> time? Why? I know *technically why. I mean why should that be required?
>>>
>>> Get a donkle you say? Well, that alone is a pain. Now I have to carry a
>>> donkle around with me?  Either that or I have to have several donkles,
>>> one for each computer I use? And I have to pay $45 for each one? I have
>>> to go through the red-tape to get my employer to buy a donkle?
>>>
>>> look, *NOTHING* else is like this. Windows, magma, symantec anti-virus,
>>> cisco vpn, textpad, ultraedit, winzip... Nothing else I own a license 
>>> for
>>> is anything like this. People wouldn't put ut with it if it was like
>>> that. Nobody would buy ultraedit if you had to reauthorize every time 
>>> you
>>> added RAM. Nobody would by  winzip if you had to pay $45 for a donkle.
>>>
>>> Alright, when my CD-ROM drive died, I swapped it out. What was I 
>>> supposed
>>> to do? Admittedly, I had some vague hope that just swapping out the 
>>> drive
>>> wouldn't require re-auth. Besides, I had the 20 digit key. Is that such 
>>> a
>>> crime? Why does *that* make this whole fiasco my fault? It's absurd!
>>>
>>> Look, I'm not an unsophisticated computer user. A little lazy maybe
>>> because I didn't read the fine print on the authorization. But I'm no
>>> different in that way than 99.999% of the people on this planet. Think
>>> about what you're saying... How many people do you think would expect to
>>> lose their authorization for a piece of software if they swapped out a
>>> defective CD-ROM drive? Come on! It's absurd!
>>>
>>> I think it was reasonable for me to think the 7.1 authorization was like
>>> that of the 5.4. You can use the diskette 5 times. It doesn't matter 
>>> what
>>> you do to your machine in the mean time. I expected it to work the same
>>> way with 7.1 except instead of a diskette, you had a record in a 
>>> database
>>> on a machine at FS headquarters.
>>>
>>> From: "Rick Harmon" <rharmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 3:57 PM
>>> Subject: Re: removing authorization key, putting it back later
>>>
>>>
>>>> I actually have done that.  But when my keys get down to one I know to
>>>> call
>>>>  FS.  if that is on the weekend then I wait till monday.  I understand
>>>> his
>>>>  gripe but still one needs to know the rules of the product they are
>>>> using.
>>>>
>>>>  Rick
>>>>
>>>>  =======
>>>>
>>>>  Visit my webpage at www.blind-geek-zone.net
>>>>
>>>>  Here you will find Audio tutorials for popular programs, blindness
>>>> related
>>>>  web links, blind mailing list links and documents for various things.
>>>>
>>>>  ----- Original Message ----- From: "Blake Sinnett"
>>>>  <frequency660@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>  To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>  Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 4:44 PM
>>>>  Subject: Re: removing authorization key, putting it back later
>>>>
>>>>  I can see where he's coming from... I suppose if you want something
>>>>  without
>>>>  this problem, you'll have to get a dongle, for $45.
>>>>
>>>>  From: "John Heim" <jheim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>  Reply-To: jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>  To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>  Subject: Re: removing authorization key, putting it back later
>>>>  Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 15:28:08 -0600
>>>>
>>>>  ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Toews" <dogriver@xxxxxxxx>
>>>>  To: <jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>  Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 2:49 PM
>>>>  Subject: Re: removing authorization key, putting it back later
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> For one thing, it's not a problem. It's by design.
>>>>
>>>>  It's  a problem  for me! I don't care if it's by design.
>>>>
>>>>  My CD-ROM dies and instead of just being able to swap it out, I have 
>>>> to
>>>>  call
>>>>  FS and get reauthorized? That's bogus. Why would I care if it's a bug
>>>> or
>>>>  by
>>>>  design
>>>>
>>>>> For a second thing,
>>>>> if you're going to be using it, you'd darned well better read up on
>>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>>  Who says?
>>>>
>>>>  An authorization scheme that requires you to study it is itself a
>>>> defect.
>>>>  I'm a professional programmer. And I consider it a failure on my part
>>>>  every
>>>>  time I have to explain how to use one of my programs. Sometimes it's
>>>>  impossible to have things simple enough that they need no explanation.
>>>> But
>>>>  I
>>>>  haven't had to study the authorization scheme for any other software
>>>> I've
>>>>  ever licensed. I don't lose my Windows XP authorization when i swap 
>>>> out
>>>> a
>>>>  CD-ROM drive.
>>>>
>>>>> Third, whether you or anyone else thinks it's stupid is irrelevant,
>>>>> this
>>>>> is the way it is. Ranting and stamping your foot isn't going to change
>>>>
>>>>  First of all, I'm not "ranting" nor am I "stamping my foot". I'm
>>>> stating
>>>>  my
>>>>  opinion just as you are stating yours.
>>>>  If you're questioning why I'm talking about it on this list, well, it
>>>> came
>>>>  up. Why are you talking about it?
>>>>
>>>>  But more importantly, this is how things get changed. They certainly
>>>> won't
>>>>  change if nobody complains. I told FS that I found their authorization
>>>>  scheme unacceptable. I did them a favor in doing so.
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>>  JFW related links:
>>>>  JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
>>>>  Scripting mailing list:
>>>>  http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
>>>>  JFW List instructions:
>>>>  To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>  To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to
>>>>  jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject
>>>> line.
>>>>  Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw
>>>>
>>>>  If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list,
>>>> or
>>>>  the
>>>>  way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather 
>>>> contact
>>>>  the
>>>>  list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>>  JFW related links:
>>>>  JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
>>>>  Scripting mailing list:
>>>>  http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
>>>>  JFW List instructions:
>>>>  To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>  To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to
>>>>  jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject
>>>> line.
>>>>  Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw
>>>>
>>>>  If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list,
>>>> or
>>>>  the
>>>>  way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather 
>>>> contact
>>>>  the
>>>>  list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>>  JFW related links:
>>>>  JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
>>>>  Scripting mailing list:
>>>>  http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
>>>>  JFW List instructions:
>>>>  To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>  To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to
>>>>  jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject
>>>> line.
>>>>  Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw
>>>>
>>>>  If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list,
>>>> or
>>>>  the way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather
>>>>  contact the list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> JFW related links:
>>> JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
>>> Scripting mailing list:
>>> http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
>>> JFW List instructions:
>>> To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to
>>> jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
>>> Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw
>>>
>>> If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or
>>> the way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather
>>> contact the list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> JFW related links:
>> JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
>> Scripting mailing list:
>> http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
>> JFW List instructions:
>> To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to
>> jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
>> Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw
>>
>> If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or
>> the way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather
>> contact the list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>
> --
> JFW related links:
> JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
> Scripting mailing list:
> http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
> JFW List instructions:
> To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to
> jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
> Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw
>
> If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or 
> the
> way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather contact 
> the
> list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> --
> JFW related links:
> JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
> Scripting mailing list: 
> http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
> JFW List instructions:
> To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to 
> jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
> Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw
>
> If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or 
> the way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather 
> contact the list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
--
JFW related links:
JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
Scripting mailing list: 
http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
JFW List instructions:
To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to 
jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw

If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or the 
way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather contact the 
list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

--
JFW related links:
JFW homepage: http://www.freedomscientific.com/
Scripting mailing list: 
http://lists.the-jdh.com/listinfo.cgi/scriptography-the-jdh.com
JFW List instructions:
To post a message to the list, send it to jfw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message to 
jfw-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.
Archives located at: //www.freelists.org/archives/jfw

If you have any concerns about the list, post received from the list, or the 
way the list is being run, do not post them to the list. Rather contact the 
list owner at jfw-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. jfw
  3. Archive
  4. 01-2007