«

Why am I prompted every time I want to download a hot fix etc to validate
windows?, sure the first time I do this is adequate enough?

Personally, I agree. But this appears to something MS is going to do, and
it's not anything we're likely to change, so I don't fight about it. I save
my fights for things where I think I have a chance of winning.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel


"Clayton" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> Why am I prompted every time I want to download a hot fix etc to validate
> windows?, sure the first time I do this is adequate enough?
>
>
>

Just another annoyance to add to my list


"Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
news:EB163A65-A002-45B8-A7DE-...
> Personally, I agree. But this appears to something MS is going to do, and
> it's not anything we're likely to change, so I don't fight about it. I
> save my fights for things where I think I have a chance of winning.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>
>
> "Clayton" <> wrote in message
> news:%...
>> Why am I prompted every time I want to download a hot fix etc to validate
>> windows?, sure the first time I do this is adequate enough?
>>
>>
>>
>

"Clayton" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> Just another annoyance to add to my list
>
>
> "Charlie Russel - MVP" <> wrote in message
> news:EB163A65-A002-45B8-A7DE-...
>> Personally, I agree. But this appears to something MS is going to do, and
>> it's not anything we're likely to change, so I don't fight about it. I
>> save my fights for things where I think I have a chance of winning.
>>
>> --
>> Charlie.
>> http://msmvps.com/xperts64
>> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
>>
>>
>> "Clayton" <> wrote in message
>> news:%...
>>> Why am I prompted every time I want to download a hot fix etc to
>>> validate windows?, sure the first time I do this is adequate enough?

Don't feel bad Clayton, I was asked to re-activate my copy of Vista within
the first week. I added some more ram and plugged in a hard drive (that
wasn't formatted). Apparently this was considered enough to warrant
flagging me as some kind of evil pirate attempting to run this copy of Vista
on a different machine. To their credit M$ gave me a new activation code,
however all my queries regarding the frequency of having to re-activate were
met with topic changes. Huzzah for call-centre scripts. I signed off the
call with "talk to you next time I add a hard drive!"

--
A: because it breaks the flow of conversation
Q: why is top-posting bad?

You are right, but activation and validation are two completely different
issues - and none of them is a registration!

Activation is trivial - you are not suspected of anything. You press a
button and you're done.

There still are limits to software intelligence and in your case the
software considered your system to be a new system.


Tony. . .

But surely if you make enough changes to your hardware that warrants
"Activation" what has that got to do with "Validation" if your systems has
been Activated why Validate over and over?

Pointless if you ask me


"Tony Sperling mail.dk>" <tony.sperling@db<REMOVE> wrote in message
news:%...
> You are right, but activation and validation are two completely different
> issues - and none of them is a registration!
>
> Activation is trivial - you are not suspected of anything. You press a
> button and you're done.
>
> There still are limits to software intelligence and in your case the
> software considered your system to be a new system.
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
>

Provided we talk of the same 'Validation' - like I said, they are completely
different issues. The Activation is ty'ing the OS to the Hardware it runs
on, while the Validation is confirming that your OS is a valid copy - which,
obviously, is something that they want you to do but specifically with
certain types of downloads that wouldn't make any sense being broadcast to
the general public. Beyond that, I imagine, for things like Beta's and
Pre-views and Hotfixes there are lots of good reasons why you wouldn't want
to lay them out for a public download.

The 'funny' thing is, the validation seems to be recognized for multiple
downloads during the same session, but come back later, and you'll have to
do it again. O.K. it's irritating, but not really any big deal when you
think about it. If you can be expected to want more of these within a short
time-span, I'd suggest doing them all in one session. To the best of my
knowledge, it will ease your experience somewhat. Microsoft seems to be
particularly squirmish about hotfixes, probably because the download can be
tied to the bugtracking. After all, these are candidates for inclusion in
the next Service-Pack, and it is rather non-trivial wether or not they do in
fact fix the issues they target.

The Validation, really is one issue where I think a major manufacturer like
MS is commendable for showing a bit of paranoia - because in this particular
instance the paranoia follows the product and not the user. In the end it
will come back as value for the user. As for the activation, this is a
non-issue, for me, it is too trivial to spend time about. I've developed a
spinal reaction and just press the button.


Tony. . .




"Clayton" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> But surely if you make enough changes to your hardware that warrants
> "Activation" what has that got to do with "Validation" if your systems has
> been Activated why Validate over and over?
>
> Pointless if you ask me
>
>
> "Tony Sperling mail.dk>" <tony.sperling@db<REMOVE> wrote in message
> news:%...
>> You are right, but activation and validation are two completely
>> different issues - and none of them is a registration!
>>
>> Activation is trivial - you are not suspected of anything. You press a
>> button and you're done.
>>
>> There still are limits to software intelligence and in your case the
>> software considered your system to be a new system.
>>
>>
>> Tony. . .
>>
>>
>