Access 2003：“激活”??? [英] Access 2003: "Activation"???

问题描述

刚开火看看它的样子。


他们要我激活第50次使用之前的产品。

Geeze，我付了我的钱....现在他们想让我跳过他们的篮球？


带回来不愉快Intuit的QuickBooks的回忆...


MS什么时候开始这个？它不是在2000年。

2002年？


激活的事情只是为了看看会发生什么。

Not事实证明。 "注册"是一个单独的

问题和可选。


我做了什么？限制此副本/产品代码在给定的PC上工作？

赠送农场？

-

PeteCresswell

Just fired it up to see what it looked like.

They wanted me to "Activate" the product before the 50th use.
Geeze, I paid my money....now they want me to jump through their hoops?

Brings back unpleasant memories of Intuit''s QuickBooks...

When did MS start this? It''s not in 2000.
2002?

Did the activation thing just to see what would happen.
Not much, it turns out. "Registration" is a separate
issue and optional.

What did I do? Limit this copy/product code to working on a given PC?
Give away the farm?
--
PeteCresswell

推荐答案

从Office XP开始Office激活。 Windows XP还需要激活。

只有个人和小型企业才需要 - 公司

批量许可证，其中假设安装是由某些人完成的。 >
管理员通过网络，不需要它。


激活确实识别硬件 - 通过某种组合和

操纵各种硬件序列号。因此，如果你更换你的
计算机并重新安装新计算机，你可能需要向电话线另一端的'Softie'解释

情况获得一个新的

激活码。我记得，你被允许在你的固定机器和便携式机器上安装一个单独的副本

，但是不应该使用这两个副本。同时。真正抱怨的人是那些从未有过多人使用办公室的人，但过去常常在他们的办公室，家庭和笔记本电脑上安装

。


其他一些供应商因公众的不满而消除了这一点，

但不是微软（事实上，并非所有其他供应商都实施过它）。 />

有些人认为，这只是向用于软件收费的

按使用付费模式迈出的一步。我不会冒这样的猜测

微软的_intent_，除了他们所说的控制给定副本的

安装次数 ;


有趣的是，为了支持它而向我引用的所有明显额外安装的例子都是公司许可证持有者，

无论如何都不适用。


Larry Linson


"（Pete Cresswell）" < x@y.z>在消息中写道

news：u5 ******************************** @ 4ax.com ...

Office activation began with Office XP. Windows XP also requires activation.
It is only required for individuals and small businesses -- the corporate
volume license, where installation is assumed to be done by some
adminstrator via the network, doesn''t require it.

The activation does identify the hardware -- by some combination and
manipulation of various hardware serial numbers. Thus if you replace your
computer and reinstall on a new one, you will likely have to explain the
situation to a ''Softie on the other end of a phone line to get a new
activation code. You are allowed, as I recall, to install an individual copy
of Office on your fixed machine and on a portable one, but aren''t supposed
to use both at the same time. The people who really complained were those
who never had more than one person using office, but used to install on
their office, home, and notebook computers.

Some other vendors have been force by public resentment to eliminate this,
but not Microsoft (and, in fact, not all others who have implemented it).

There are some who contend that it is just a step along the way to a
pay-per-use model for charging for software. I wouldn''t hazard a guess as to
Microsoft''s _intent_, other than what they have stated "to control the
number of installations of a given copy".

It is interesting that all the examples of blatant extra installs that
''Softies quoted to me in support of it were with corporate licensees, to
whom it does not apply anyway.

Larry Linson

"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z> wrote in message
news:u5********************************@4ax.com...

刚开始看它看起来像什么。

他们想要我激活第50次使用之前的产品。
Geeze，我付了钱......现在他们想让我跳过他们的篮球？

带回Intuit的QuickBooks的不愉快的回忆。 ..

MS什么时候开始这个？它不是在2000年。
2002？

激活的事情只是为了看看会发生什么。
并不多，事实证明。 "注册"是一个单独的问题和可选的。

我做了什么？限制此副本/产品代码在特定PC上工作？
赠送农场？

-
PeteCresswell

Just fired it up to see what it looked like.

They wanted me to "Activate" the product before the 50th use.
Geeze, I paid my money....now they want me to jump through their hoops?

Brings back unpleasant memories of Intuit''s QuickBooks...

When did MS start this? It''s not in 2000.
2002?

Did the activation thing just to see what would happen.
Not much, it turns out. "Registration" is a separate
issue and optional.

What did I do? Limit this copy/product code to working on a given PC?
Give away the farm?
--
PeteCresswell

< br>

" Larry Linson" <博***** @ localhost.not>在消息中写道

新闻：SS **************** @ nwrddc02.gnilink.net ...

"Larry Linson" <bo*****@localhost.not> wrote in message
news:SS****************@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...

有些人认为，这只是向软件收费的按使用付费模式的一步。

There are some who contend that it is just a step along the way to a
pay-per-use model for charging for software.

我想知道租用的软件是不是一件好事（dons asbestos

套装），在某些方面没有，认真的gals和家伙。


不仅仅是很多，但实际上我们使用的大多数东西实际上都是在某种程度上，'b $ b''租用''。买了作为服务。水，煤气，电力，电信，是显而易见的。


但是汽车也是如此。我们认为我们购买的东西，但除非我们支付各种各样的'b $ b''租赁''，汽油（汽油给你们那边的人 - >），保险，

服务（尤其是我现在正在学习的服务，这是最后一辆福特我购买，下次再回到大众）我们都知道它不是得到任何实际的

实用程序。


建筑物必须维护，机器上油等。


其实我我认为在消费者心目中更倾向于我买了这个Office 2000的盒子，而且现在它已经永远都是我的了。我希望

那些支出£xx的团队，甲骨文的xxx期望支付支持费用（

，它是如何工作的？）


看看微软。很多人，我认为我就是其中之一，认为

Office 97是他们发布的最佳版本。或者更确切地说，对于广大的用户来说，我认为没有必要升级到任何后来的任何东西，而不是Office 97.我看到很多人使用Word，Excel，访问应用程序我已经为他们写了b
$ b为了说实话我很难想到

Office 2000或更高版本中的任何新功能他们拼命地需要。但微软以某种方式获得了b $ b来赚钱，他们唯一能做到这一点的就是购买说服他们来获得新版本。


如果是租来的，可能没有''版本''。 哦，我们租用MS Office'或

''我们租用Star Office'或者其他什么。该软件公司将有一个收入

流，并将逐步开发，调试，改进产品。而不是试图考虑升级到Office 2009的50个理由或其他什么。


当然，它可能不会像那样工作所有。我们会看到的！


我的价值2便士。


Mike

I wonder whether rented software wouldn''t be a good thing (dons asbestos
suit), in some ways No, seriously gals and guys.

Not just many, but actually most things we use are actually, to some extent,
''rented''. Bought as a service. Water, gas, electric, telecomms, are the
obvious ones.

But cars too. We think we ''buy'' the thing but unless we pay the various
''rentals'', petrol (gasoline to you people over there -->), insurance,
servicing (especially servicing as I''m now learning, that''s the last Ford I
buy, back to VW for me next time) we all know it''s not got any actual
utility.

Buildings have to be maintained, machines oiled etc.

In fact I think it tends to be more in consumer''s minds that the ''I bought
this box of Office 2000 and now it''s all mine for ever'' prevails. I expect
that corps who shell out ￡xx,xxx on Oracle expect to pay support costs (is
that how it works?)

Look at Microsoft. Many people, and I think I''m one of them, think that
Office 97 was the best version they released. Or rather, for the vast
majority of users I see there is no real need to ''upgrade'' to anything later
than Office 97. I see plenty of people using Word, Excel, Access apps I''ve
written for them and to be honest I can hardly think of any new features in
Office 2000 or later that they desperately need. But Microsoft somehow has
to make money, and the only way they can do that is buy persuading them to
get the newer versions.

If it was rented there might not be ''versions''. ''Oh, we rent MS Office'' or
''we rent Star Office'' or whatever. The software company would have an income
stream and would gradually develop, debug, improve the product. Rather than
trying to think of ''50 reasons to upgrade to Office 2009'' or whatever.

Of course, it may not work like that at all. We''ll see!

My 2 pence worth.

Mike

我看到的Office盗版副本是公司版本

这是系统内在的弱点。那些

不具备相同组合的公司/个人客户的公司将会看到不同的等式。作为一名开发人员，我会很高兴看到业务量的真实估计值因为Office激活而导致MS获得（或甚至丢失）。


（大卫）

" Larry Linson" <博***** @ localhost.not>在消息中写道

新闻：SS **************** @ nwrddc02.gnilink.net ...

The pirate copies of Office I see are the corporate version
That is an inherent weakness in the system. Companies that
don''t have the same mix of corporate/personal clients would
be looking at different equation. As a developer, I would
be fascinated to see true estimates of the amount of business
MS has gained (or lost even) because of Office Activation.

(david)
"Larry Linson" <bo*****@localhost.not> wrote in message
news:SS****************@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...

Office激活开始了使用Office XP。 Windows XP还需要激活
。它仅适用于个人和小型企业 - 公司
批量许可证，其中安装假定由某些管理员通过网络完成，并不需要它。
<激活确实识别硬件 - 通过某种组合和
操纵各种硬件序列号。因此，如果您更换计算机并重新安装新计算机，则可能需要向电话线另一端的Softie解释
情况才能获得新的
激活码。我记得，你被允许在你的固定机器和便携式机器上安装一个单独的
的Office副本，但是不应该同时使用这两个。真正抱怨的人是那些从未有过多人使用办公室，但过去常常安装在办公室，家里和笔记本电脑上的人。

其他一些供应商公众的不满已经迫使消除这一点，但不是微软（事实上，并非所有其他实施过它的人）。

有些人认为它只是一个一路走到
按使用付费模式，为软件收费。除了他们所声称的控制给定副本的安装数量之外，我不会冒这个猜测，因为它只是
给微软的_intent_。
<拉里·林森

Office activation began with Office XP. Windows XP also requires activation. It is only required for individuals and small businesses -- the corporate
volume license, where installation is assumed to be done by some
adminstrator via the network, doesn''t require it.

The activation does identify the hardware -- by some combination and
manipulation of various hardware serial numbers. Thus if you replace your
computer and reinstall on a new one, you will likely have to explain the
situation to a ''Softie on the other end of a phone line to get a new
activation code. You are allowed, as I recall, to install an individual copy of Office on your fixed machine and on a portable one, but aren''t supposed
to use both at the same time. The people who really complained were those
who never had more than one person using office, but used to install on
their office, home, and notebook computers.

Some other vendors have been force by public resentment to eliminate this,
but not Microsoft (and, in fact, not all others who have implemented it).

There are some who contend that it is just a step along the way to a
pay-per-use model for charging for software. I wouldn''t hazard a guess as to Microsoft''s _intent_, other than what they have stated "to control the
number of installations of a given copy".

It is interesting that all the examples of blatant extra installs that
''Softies quoted to me in support of it were with corporate licensees, to
whom it does not apply anyway.

Larry Linson

这篇关于Access 2003：“激活”???的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！