No More James Bannan

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 10, 2010.

  1. Does anybody else read APC Magazine? Among their columnists they used to
    number one James Bannan, who was basically their resident Windows Fanboi.
    Only his column seems to have stopped as of the last few months.

    One of the last items I remember him doing was on the wonders of PowerShell,
    and how Microsoft has finally seen fit to provide something resembling a
    command line for Windows, which lets you execute remote commands almost as
    easily as local ones. Well, when I say “almost as easilyâ€, I mean you can do
    it. Sort of. You just have to figure out a completely different set of WMI
    commands to do it, which bear no resemblance to their local equivalents. And
    WMI is a lot more complicated and fiddly. But you can figure it out.
    Eventually.

    On the bright side, they’ve been doing a lot of Linux coverage, which seems
    to have been gradually increasing over the last several years. Judging from
    the amount of it, 5-10% of their readership must be made up of Linux users.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 10, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > On the bright side, they’ve been doing a lot of Linux coverage, which seems
    > to have been gradually increasing over the last several years. Judging from
    > the amount of it, 5-10% of their readership must be made up of Linux users.


    Going on that reasoning, a chunk of their readership are Apple iCrack
    fanbois.

    I wouldn't have minded in the least if they're hacking and/or
    jailbreaking the thing, but it's only about reviewing the latest
    official app that farts, or perhaps the latest iDildo peripheral.

    Their other changes don't make up for it (and some of the changes don't
    help either). So much so, I've transferred my remaining year and half
    subscription to a guy at work, who sold his iPhone to buy an iPad.

    I was going to email the mag to tell them, but apparently, if you don't
    create an account and post on their boards, you don't get a say. I
    think you can twitter them, but "Social networking" and computer geek
    don't mix, so screw them. I'm hoping one less person reading their
    magazine will be enough to get the message across.
    --
    Diplomacy: The patriotic art of lying for one's country.
    John Tserkezis, Oct 10, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Rod Speed Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote

    > Does anybody else read APC Magazine?


    Nope, thats why its going down the tubes.

    > Among their columnists they used to number one James Bannan,
    > who was basically their resident Windows Fanboi. Only his
    > column seems to have stopped as of the last few months.


    Because hardly anyone bothers to read that shit rag anymore.

    > One of the last items I remember him doing was on the wonders
    > of PowerShell, and how Microsoft has finally seen fit to provide
    > something resembling a command line for Windows, which lets
    > you execute remote commands almost as easily as local ones.
    > Well, when I say "almost as easily", I mean you can do it. Sort
    > of. You just have to figure out a completely different set of WMI
    > commands to do it, which bear no resemblance to their local equivalents.
    > And WMI is a lot more complicated and fiddly. But you can figure it out.
    > Eventually.


    Why bother when a decent UI works fine.

    > On the bright side, they've been doing a lot of Linux coverage, which
    > seems to have been gradually increasing over the last several years.


    It would be a fucking sight more surprising if it didnt.

    > Judging from the amount of it, 5-10% of their readership must be made up of Linux users.


    Thats a completely hopeless way of working out their readership.

    Its just a tad unlikely that many linux users bother with such dinosaur technology as a printed mag anymore.
    Rod Speed, Oct 10, 2010
    #3
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Simon Guest

    On Oct 11, 8:04 am, "Rod Speed" <> wrote:

    > Why bother when a decent UI works fine.


    Yes, but there are a few things you need to do via the command line
    because the option isn't provided in the GUI front-end, especially
    when it comes to Exchange. I find that a bit annoying.
    Simon, Oct 11, 2010
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    On 11/10/10 12:53, Simon wrote:
    > On Oct 11, 8:04 am, "Rod Speed"<> wrote:
    >
    >> Why bother when a decent UI works fine.

    >
    > Yes, but there are a few things you need to do via the command line
    > because the option isn't provided in the GUI front-end, especially
    > when it comes to Exchange. I find that a bit annoying.
    >

    Like adding 200 users for example? You can add them one by one in a GUI
    but that can rapidly become less and less fun.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

    The end excuses any evil - Sophocles
    Enkidu, Oct 11, 2010
    #5
  6. In message <4cb185f4$0$5890$>, John Tserkezis
    wrote:

    > I was going to email the mag to tell them, but apparently, if you don't
    > create an account and post on their boards, you don't get a say.


    I’ve e-mailed them lots of times, and had my letters published more than
    once, including the latest issue.

    One thing they haven’t publicly responded to as yet, is the use of OEM
    prices for Windows licences in their “Master Builder†articles. Microsoft
    doesn’t allow you to install an OEM licence for your own use, it has to be
    for an “unrelated†party. So you have to use a full-price retail licence.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 11, 2010
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Another Me Guest

    On 11/10/10 1:23 PM, Enkidu wrote:

    > Like adding 200 users for example? You can add them one by one in a GUI
    > but that can rapidly become less and less fun.


    You can add multiple users into a Windows Domain using the GUI, why
    would you do them one by one?
    Another Me, Oct 11, 2010
    #7
  8. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    will s Guest

    "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in message
    news:i8tva4$28g$...
    > In message <4cb185f4$0$5890$>, John Tserkezis
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I was going to email the mag to tell them, but apparently, if you don't
    >> create an account and post on their boards, you don't get a say.

    >
    > I’ve e-mailed them lots of times, and had my letters published more than
    > once, including the latest issue.
    >
    > One thing they haven’t publicly responded to as yet, is the use of OEM
    > prices for Windows licences in their “Master Builder†articles. Microsoft
    > doesn’t allow you to install an OEM licence for your own use, it has to be
    > for an “unrelated†party. So you have to use a full-price retail licence.
    >



    so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because its on an OEM
    version and they dont work\\\bugger
    will s, Oct 11, 2010
    #8
  9. In message <4cb29567$0$29868$c3e8da3$>, will s
    wrote:

    > In message <i8too0$u0u$>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>
    >> Microsoft doesn’t allow you to install an OEM licence for your own use,
    >> it has to be for an “unrelated†party. So you have to use a full-price
    >> retail licence.

    >
    > so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because its on an OEM
    > version and they dont work\\\bugger


    So you’ve just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence for
    your own use, in contravention of Microsoft’s licensing terms?
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 11, 2010
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Rod Speed Guest

    Stop molesting the followups without mentioning that.

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
    > will s wrote
    >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote


    >>> Microsoft doesn't allow you to install an OEM licence for your own
    >>> use, it has to be for an "unrelated" party. So you have to use a
    >>> full-price retail licence.


    >> so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because
    >> its on an OEM version and they dont work\\\bugger


    > So you've just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence
    > for your own use, in contravention of Microsoft's licensing terms?


    Nope, he never signed up for any purported 'licensing terms' with an OEM product.
    Rod Speed, Oct 11, 2010
    #10
  11. In message <>, Rod Speed wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
    >
    >> will s wrote
    >>
    >>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote

    >
    >>>> Microsoft doesn't allow you to install an OEM licence for your own
    >>>> use, it has to be for an "unrelated" party. So you have to use a
    >>>> full-price retail licence.

    >
    >>> so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because
    >>> its on an OEM version and they dont work\\\bugger

    >
    >> So you've just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence
    >> for your own use, in contravention of Microsoft's licensing terms?

    >
    > Nope, he never signed up for any purported 'licensing terms' with an OEM
    > product.


    If he never agreed to the licence, then he has no permission to use the
    software, since the licence is the only thing giving such permission.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 11, 2010
    #11
  12. In message <>, The Old Bloke
    wrote:

    > On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 19:04:12 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    > <_zealand> wrote:
    >
    >>So youÂ’ve just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence for
    >>your own use, in contravention of MicrosoftÂ’s licensing terms?

    >
    > Maybe you should read up on Aus law. MS Terms and Conditions do not
    > override Aus law.


    One basic universal fact of copyright is that you cannot have a copy of the
    copyrighted item without permission (hence “copyright†= “right to copyâ€).
    The licence is what gives that permission. So if you don’t abide by the
    licence, then it doesn’t apply. Fine. Which means you have no permission.
    Which means that your copy of the software is infringing copyright. QED.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 11, 2010
    #12
  13. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Rod Speed Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
    > Rod Speed wrote
    >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
    >>> will s wrote
    >>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote


    >>>>> Microsoft doesn't allow you to install an OEM licence for your own
    >>>>> use, it has to be for an "unrelated" party. So you have to use a
    >>>>> full-price retail licence.


    >>>> so all my PC's dont work and I am not typing this because
    >>>> its on an OEM version and they dont work\\\bugger


    >>> So you've just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence
    >>> for your own use, in contravention of Microsoft's licensing terms?


    >> Nope, he never signed up for any purported 'licensing terms' with an OEM product.


    > If he never agreed to the licence, then he has no permission to use
    > the software, since the licence is the only thing giving such permission.


    Wrong, as always. Its the retail sale that legally allows you to use the OS that you bought with the hardware.

    And you are massively confusing the purported 'licence' conditions anyway.

    With an OEM 'licence', thats between the operation that packages the PC
    with PCs that are sold with an OS included, or with the operation that bought
    the OEM OSs from Microsoft when a small operation assembles a PC from
    parts and includes an OEM OS with the PC, not the end user.

    You havent got a clue about even the most basic consumer law.
    Rod Speed, Oct 11, 2010
    #13
  14. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Rod Speed Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
    > The Old Bloke wrote
    >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote


    >>> So you’ve just publicly admitted to installing an OEM Windows licence
    >>> for your own use, in contravention of Microsoft’s licensing terms?


    >> Maybe you should read up on Aus law. MS Terms and Conditions do not override Aus law.


    > One basic universal fact of copyright is that you cannot
    > have a copy of the copyrighted item without permission


    But the retail sale is what gives that permission.

    > (hence "copyright" = "right to copy").


    The retail sale is what gives that permission.

    > The licence is what gives that permission.


    Nope, the retail sale does. There is no 'licence' with most copyrighted
    material like a book or a music CD or movie DVD etc etc etc.

    > So if you don't abide by the licence, then it doesn't apply.


    Wrong. With an OEM product, any purported agreement is between
    MS and the assembler of the hardware, not the end user.

    > Fine. Which means you have no permission.


    Wrong, as always.

    > Which means that your copy of the software is infringing copyright. QED.


    Wrong, as always.
    Rod Speed, Oct 11, 2010
    #14
  15. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    On 11/10/10 15:07, Another Me wrote:
    > On 11/10/10 1:23 PM, Enkidu wrote:
    >
    >> Like adding 200 users for example? You can add them one by one in a GUI
    >> but that can rapidly become less and less fun.

    >
    > You can add multiple users into a Windows Domain using the GUI, why
    > would you do them one by one?
    >

    Because they are all different. Adding 200 users, setting passwords,
    adding them to different OUs, giving them diffferent permissions, adding
    them to different groups would take all day. I had some scripts built
    around the 'addusers.exe' command and a spreadsheet to take the drudgery
    out of it.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

    The end excuses any evil - Sophocles
    Enkidu, Oct 11, 2010
    #15
  16. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Another Me Guest

    On 12/10/10 9:16 AM, Enkidu wrote:

    > Because they are all different. Adding 200 users, setting passwords,
    > adding them to different OUs, giving them diffferent permissions, adding
    > them to different groups would take all day. I had some scripts built
    > around the 'addusers.exe' command and a spreadsheet to take the drudgery
    > out of it.



    How is that any different than importing the spreadsheet into the
    Windows side of things? Or are you justifying having to write some scripts?
    Another Me, Oct 11, 2010
    #16
  17. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    On 12/10/10 09:25, Another Me wrote:
    > On 12/10/10 9:16 AM, Enkidu wrote:
    >
    >> Because they are all different. Adding 200 users, setting
    >> passwords, adding them to different OUs, giving them diffferent
    >> permissions, adding them to different groups would take all day. I
    >> had some scripts built around the 'addusers.exe' command and a
    >> spreadsheet to take the drudgery out of it.

    >
    > How is that any different than importing the spreadsheet into the
    > Windows side of things? Or are you justifying having to write some
    > scripts?
    >

    Which version are you talking about? 2000 and 2003 didn't have that ability.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    The ends justifies the means - Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli.

    The end excuses any evil - Sophocles
    Enkidu, Oct 12, 2010
    #17
  18. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Another Me Guest

    On 12/10/10 8:05 PM, Enkidu wrote:

    > Which version are you talking about? 2000 and 2003 didn't have that
    > ability.


    I don't which version, I just remember when they moved to Windows
    servers at a place I worked they imported all the users, OUs etc etc
    from a spreadsheet.

    Doing a search on batch windows users imports returns a lot of MS pages
    on their free tools for doing so
    Another Me, Oct 12, 2010
    #18
  19. In message <>, Rod Speed wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote
    >
    >> The licence is what gives that permission.

    >
    > Nope, the retail sale does.


    The retail sale commits nobody to anything. That’s why Microsoft’s licence
    says if you don’t agree to the terms, you can take the software back to
    where you obtained it for a full refund.

    > There is no 'licence' with most copyrighted material like a book or a
    > music CD or movie DVD etc etc etc.


    In fact there is. It’s printed on the CD cover, inside the book, etc.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 13, 2010
    #19
  20. In message <>, The Old Bloke
    wrote:

    > On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 23:33:45 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    > <_zealand> wrote:
    >
    >>If he never agreed to the licence, then he has no permission to use the
    >>software, since the licence is the only thing giving such permission.

    >
    > Easy to see that you have no legal training


    Easy to see you have never heard a qualified lawyer discuss the subject
    <http://lwn.net/Articles/61292/>.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 13, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. slumpy

    My name is Bond....James Bond

    slumpy, Apr 20, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    555
    slumpy
    Apr 20, 2004
  2. DVD Verdict
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    467
    DVD Verdict
    Sep 3, 2003
  3. Gret
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    914
    Joshua Zyber
    Mar 4, 2005
  4. DVD Verdict
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    561
    DVD Verdict
    Jun 6, 2005
  5. richard
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    488
    richard
    Oct 14, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page