Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.microsoft.windows > #1181 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-02-20 16:33 +0000 |
| Last post | 2022-02-22 10:30 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 166 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.microsoft.windows
If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-20 16:33 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2022-02-20 16:38 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-20 16:58 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-20 12:09 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-20 13:05 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-20 20:37 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-20 21:38 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 04:16 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 04:38 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-21 08:05 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-21 08:38 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-21 08:55 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Wolffan <akwolffan@zoho.com> - 2022-02-21 09:27 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-21 11:32 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-21 13:25 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 15:16 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 02:30 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 10:29 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-28 05:44 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 15:14 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-21 21:16 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-22 05:27 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 10:09 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 12:43 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 13:37 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 15:01 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-22 16:44 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 19:36 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-22 21:14 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-23 07:58 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-23 09:01 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-23 09:27 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@R04.CH> - 2022-02-23 03:26 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 02:30 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 10:22 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 12:43 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 15:11 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-21 15:23 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-22 05:32 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2022-02-22 09:37 -0600
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 11:12 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-21 21:14 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-22 05:44 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 10:15 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 12:43 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 13:39 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 15:01 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-22 16:31 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 19:36 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-22 21:05 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-23 07:58 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-23 08:53 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-21 08:38 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 15:20 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-21 21:17 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-22 05:56 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 10:18 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 02:30 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 10:25 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 12:43 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 13:53 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-22 15:01 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-22 16:31 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-13 19:47 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-08-13 15:08 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-13 22:25 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-08-13 18:07 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 04:32 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-08-14 06:41 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 14:50 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-08-14 10:25 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 16:08 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-08-14 12:45 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Sail Fisherman <sailfisherman@sailfisherman.com> - 2022-08-15 02:07 +0900
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-08-14 12:05 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com> - 2022-08-14 10:30 -0600
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-08-14 12:39 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? "Rick" <rick@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 10:26 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-08-14 11:04 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 16:28 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Silvano <Silvano@noncisonopernessuno.it> - 2022-08-14 17:31 +0200
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-08-14 12:05 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-08-14 11:47 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 17:22 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-08-14 13:01 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 18:26 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? CDB <bellemarecd@gmail.com> - 2022-08-14 13:31 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Arlen Holder <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 22:15 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2022-08-15 15:07 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-08-15 13:09 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-08-15 17:14 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2022-08-16 18:59 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2022-08-16 18:57 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? YK <youkidding@yahoo.com> - 2022-08-15 11:14 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-08-15 13:18 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2022-08-15 13:34 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? YK <youkidding@yahoo.com> - 2022-08-16 17:04 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 16:19 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Arlen Holder <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 22:16 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? "Rick" <rick@nospam.com> - 2022-08-17 11:41 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-08-14 12:05 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-08-14 17:49 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@R04.CH> - 2022-08-14 10:31 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-08-14 12:05 -0400
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> - 2022-08-14 11:09 -0600
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Wolffan <akwolffan@zoho.com> - 2022-02-21 09:23 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-21 11:12 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-21 11:32 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 15:26 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-21 21:19 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-20 20:54 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-20 16:06 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2022-02-21 00:28 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-20 21:57 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 04:46 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-21 08:08 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2022-02-21 07:41 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-21 08:34 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Peter <occassionally-confused@nospam.co.uk> - 2022-02-22 05:18 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2022-02-22 07:37 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-22 08:32 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 09:43 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2022-02-23 09:53 +1300
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Peter <occassionally-confused@nospam.co.uk> - 2022-02-23 17:10 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2022-02-24 05:39 +1100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2022-02-26 11:19 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Peter <occassionally-confused@nospam.co.uk> - 2022-02-26 16:34 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-26 11:45 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-27 16:03 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? "Jacob Jones" <jkj33@gmail.com> - 2022-02-27 07:10 +1100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-26 16:09 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2022-02-27 10:25 +1300
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-27 10:22 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-28 15:28 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2022-02-23 09:04 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@R04.CH> - 2022-02-23 03:24 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Peter <occassionally-confused@nospam.co.uk> - 2022-02-23 17:05 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2022-02-24 05:34 +1100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2022-02-23 19:25 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@R04.CH> - 2022-02-23 16:06 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? allen <allen@spam.com> - 2022-02-23 15:22 -0800
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2022-02-24 10:42 +1300
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Peter <occassionally-confused@nospam.co.uk> - 2022-02-23 16:59 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@R04.CH> - 2022-02-23 12:13 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Peter <occassionally-confused@nospam.co.uk> - 2022-02-23 17:39 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-23 21:58 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2022-02-24 07:19 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-24 01:33 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-24 17:04 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2022-02-24 12:40 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2022-02-21 07:46 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-20 21:47 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2022-02-21 07:43 +0100
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 21:39 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 04:19 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-20 13:01 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-20 20:44 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-20 21:42 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 04:54 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-21 08:09 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-21 21:34 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> - 2022-02-21 21:27 -0500
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2022-02-22 08:02 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-02-22 08:42 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2022-02-22 09:14 +0000
Re: If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> - 2022-02-22 10:30 -0500
Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-20 16:33 +0000 |
| Subject | If Apple can permanently lock your hardware for not logging into it - why can't Microsoft do it too? |
| Message-ID | <sutqgo$2tt$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
This is an adult question, not of whether M$ "will" do it; but of whether Microsoft even "can" permanently lock up your investment in PC hardware (now that they're forcing a login in order to access your operating system). Can they? -- Certainly Apple can and does if you don't log into iOS for two years. <https://i.postimg.cc/LXzB3Lc0/appleid01.jpg> Apple _forces_ a log in! <https://i.postimg.cc/g008YhxP/appleid02.jpg> Apple _forces_ a lock out! <https://i.postimg.cc/q75t7MSk/appleid03.jpg> Apple _disables_ your acct! <https://i.postimg.cc/8zSvshQf/appleid04.jpg> Apple _locks_ you out! <https://i.postimg.cc/SKGfmgnK/appleid05.jpg> Apple won't let you back in!
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-20 16:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j7f93iF4etoU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #1181 |
Andy Burnelli wrote: > <https://i.postimg.cc/SKGfmgnK/appleid05.jpg> Apple won't let you back in! It's traditional on a login screen, to NOT give any clues why the login was unsuccessful, don't want to help the bad guys know the difference between non-existent/locked-out/wrong-password etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-20 16:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <suts0h$rdj$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #1182 |
Andy Burns wrote: >> <https://i.postimg.cc/SKGfmgnK/appleid05.jpg> Apple won't let you back in! > > It's traditional on a login screen, to NOT give any clues why the login was > unsuccessful, don't want to help the bad guys know the difference between > non-existent/locked-out/wrong-password etc. Hi Andy, Thanks for trying to advise me but I already know why Apple locked me out. I was _testing_ what Apple would do if I logged in using VPN. (Just like I've tested what Google GMail does when you log in on VPN.) The question here is whether Microsoft _can_ do the same things to you. Now that Microsoft is _forcing_ a login/password into their servers. Rest assured I _know_ why Apple locked me out (as I was testing what they'd do when I used VPN, from Russia no less!) when forced to _re_ validate my identity. Bear in mind there's _nothing_ wrong with my login. Nothing wrong with my password. Apple knows this. Apple let's me use the App Store every day. I even loaded the latest operating system just a week ago. There's nothing wrong with my login nor with my password. And that's my point. For whatever reason, Apple wants me to _re_ validate who I am. Every single day. *Can Microsoft do the same thing?* That. That is the question. This is an _important_ question about Microsoft - not about Apple. The only reason for bringing up Apple is that Apple _does_ lock you out. Hence the question is whether Microsoft can. Given this is a question about Microsoft, please don't get me wrong as I am rather intelligent, as are you, but it's not obvious my question is about the _power_ that Microsoft attains when they now _force_ a login. Apple forces the same login. Worse - Apple forces a periodic _validation_ of your login. Even worse, if you refuse to _re_ validate - Apple cripples your device! Don't get me wrong as I'm not complaining about Apple. I was _testing_ Apple by not logging into my iPad for four years (even as I used it daily). Every day for the latter two years, Apple nagged me to "re" verify. Not verify. But _re_ verify. (as in verify again) Bear in mind the facts that Apple lets me install apps on the App Store which requires a valid login, so Apple has no problem with my login. Bear in mind Apple lets me delete Siri recordings so Apple has no problem collecting my Siri recordings (and allowing me to delete collected data). Bear in mind Apple even let me install the latest new operating system. So there is _nothing_ wrong with the forced login account, of itself. What's "wrong" is that for whatever reason, Apple wants me to _re_ verify. I refuse to _re_ verify (as a test of what Apple would do). I found out that Apple has the power to permanently lock up your device. Sure, they probably did that because I used a VPN to _re_ verify. But that isn't my point as I was _testing_ what Apple would do. The fact is Apple did it. [See proof in sig where you know I'm intelligent.] Apple unilaterally permanently _locked_ me out of my own hardware. OK. No big deal. That's what I get for _testing_ what Apple will do. I'm not complaining. What I'm _asking_ here is whether Microsoft "can" do the same thing to you? Can they? -- Want proof? 1. Apple "ID Verification" prompts come up ten, twenty or more times a day. <https://i.postimg.cc/LXzB3Lc0/appleid01.jpg> 2. Apple "Sign-in to iCloud" prompts come up a dozen or more times a day. <https://i.postimg.cc/Y9kkj19v/appleid12.jpg> 3. Apple won't let you sign in even with the _correct_ login & password. <https://i.postimg.cc/8zSvshQf/appleid04.jpg> 4. The Apple web site is so poorly designed it doesn't even tell you why. <https://i.postimg.cc/SKGfmgnK/appleid05.jpg> 5. Eventually, as it did with one of my iPads already, Apple destroys it. <https://i.postimg.cc/g008YhxP/appleid02.jpg> <https://i.postimg.cc/q75t7MSk/appleid03.jpg> 6. On my 2nd iPad, the Apple apps stop working (but everything else works!) <https://i.postimg.cc/hhFNJ5mq/appleid010.jpg> 7. Every single day, many times a day, you're confronted with tracking crap such as this "Some account services require you to sign in again" <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg> 8. Interestingly, you can update your iOS (which I almost never do) as shown here where I updated this week from iOS 13 to iOS 15 (and it let me). <https://i.postimg.cc/nLjqk2HD/osupdate03.jpg> 9. And you can wipe out your Siri recordings (due to the recent zero-day). <https://i.postimg.cc/sfZ0XP71/osupdate02.jpg> 10. Yet Apple tracking servers still require "Apple ID Verification" <https://i.postimg.cc/gj0r2cBP/osupdate01.jpg> 11. And, you can install an app, but if you delete it, you can't re-install. <https://i.postimg.cc/bJPKDSZ1/osupdate04.jpg> <https://i.postimg.cc/ZR5mZ287/appleid07.jpg> 12. In the end, if you attempt that forced validation on VPN, Apple unilaterally destroys your investment by locking you out of it forever! <https://i.postimg.cc/q75t7MSk/appleid03.jpg> 13. All because Apple tracking servers _require_ periodic ID verification. <https://i.postimg.cc/8k3GQyj4/appleid09.jpg> <https://i.postimg.cc/q75t7MSk/appleid03.jpg>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-20 12:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <200220221209295032%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #1183 |
In article <suts0h$rdj$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote: > Rest assured I _know_ why Apple locked me out (as I was testing what they'd > do when I used VPN, from Russia no less!) when forced to _re_ validate my > identity. bullshit you were testing, but regardless, you locked yourself out by your own actions and want to blame others. the same would happen if you tried to connect to google, banks and many other companies from a russia vpn, or even a local vpn. some companies take security very seriously. > Bear in mind there's _nothing_ wrong with my login. > Nothing wrong with my password. except for it being disposable and you don't remember it, which you readily admit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-20 13:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <HpvQJ.105666$SeK9.62488@fx97.iad> |
| In reply to | #1184 |
On 2022-02-20 12:09 p.m., nospam wrote: > In article <suts0h$rdj$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Burnelli > <spam@nospam.com> wrote: > >> Rest assured I _know_ why Apple locked me out (as I was testing what they'd >> do when I used VPN, from Russia no less!) when forced to _re_ validate my >> identity. > > bullshit you were testing, but regardless, you locked yourself out by > your own actions and want to blame others. > > the same would happen if you tried to connect to google, banks and many > other companies from a russia vpn, or even a local vpn. some companies > take security very seriously. Agreed here. In fact, I would dare to say that he didn't simply change from one location to another through the VPN as I stated previously but that he went from one city to another and another and another until Apple's security triggered his behaviour as suspicious. I had the same kind happen to me using a VPN with sports service DAZN. I was curious as to what content was available in each country so I tried Germany, England, the United States and so on until the service flagged my behaviour as suspicious and, like Apple, asked me to log in again from my original Canadian location. < snip > -- rabidR04CH Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Windows 11 For fans of message boards, I invite you: https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-20 20:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <suu8r6$1ep8$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #1186 |
rabidR04CH wrote: > Agreed here. The question in this thread isn't about Apple. It's about Microsoft. *Can Microsoft now lock up your device if you refuse to re-validate?* Even if we discuss Apple (which we don't need to do), nospam is wrong. What nospam does is fabricate any excuse for what he _hates_ about Apple. The fact is clear what Apple is trying to do (didn't you look at the pics?) <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg> What nospam say is bullshit because he is wrong about everything he said. Look at the screenshot above. It's clear _exactly_ what Apple wants to do. Besides... This isn't about iKooks' endless fabrications in support of Apple anyway. I don't care that Apple permanently locked up my iPads in the least. What I _learned_ is what matters for the purpose of this thread. *Because of the required login, Apple has the power to disable your PC!* If Apple can do it (as Apple _does_ do it), why can't Microsoft? > from one location to another through the VPN as I stated previously but > that he went from one city to another and another and another until > Apple's security triggered his behaviour as suspicious. I had the same > kind happen to me using a VPN with sports service DAZN. I was curious as > to what content was available in each country so I tried Germany, > England, the United States and so on until the service flagged my > behaviour as suspicious and, like Apple, asked me to log in again from > my original Canadian location. You didn't look at a _single_ screenshot as that is _not_ what happened. Look at this screenshot again which shows _exactly_ what Apple is up to. <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg> Apple wants you to _periodically_ update all your settings with them. And that's fine as I wanted to see what happens if you refuse that demand. Just like Finland wanted to see what happens when they refused Russia's demands and just like the Ukraine is going to find out refusing anew. Remember, I don't care that Apple locked up the iPads, one by one. What I care about for this thread is whether M$ can do the same thing. Can they? *Can Microsoft now lock up your device if you refuse to re-validate?*
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-20 21:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <%WCQJ.26103$U_B9.25592@fx20.iad> |
| In reply to | #1189 |
On 2022-02-20 3:37 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote: > rabidR04CH wrote: > >> Agreed here. > > The question in this thread isn't about Apple. It's about Microsoft. > *Can Microsoft now lock up your device if you refuse to re-validate?* > > Even if we discuss Apple (which we don't need to do), nospam is wrong. > What nospam does is fabricate any excuse for what he _hates_ about Apple. It's pretty clear by now that nospam is indeed a liar who will say just about anything to defend Apple, including trying to completely rewrite history in Apple's favour. > The fact is clear what Apple is trying to do (didn't you look at the pics?) > <https://i.postimg.cc/nrFHSvby/appleid11.jpg> The pics are worthless without context. You have to explain what you did to get to that point and not just show a picture of the end result. > What nospam say is bullshit because he is wrong about everything he said. > Look at the screenshot above. It's clear _exactly_ what Apple wants to do. > > Besides... This isn't about iKooks' endless fabrications in support of > Apple anyway. > > I don't care that Apple permanently locked up my iPads in the least. > What I _learned_ is what matters for the purpose of this thread. > > *Because of the required login, Apple has the power to disable your PC!* > > If Apple can do it (as Apple _does_ do it), why can't Microsoft? Since Windows machines, unlike Apple machines, make it fairly easy to install something other than Windows, I doubt that they would ever set any of them in such a way that they would be disabled merely because Microsoft was unhappy about something you were doing. They might lock up the OS, but not the hardware. Surface devices are another story. >> from one location to another through the VPN as I stated previously >> but that he went from one city to another and another and another >> until Apple's security triggered his behaviour as suspicious. I had >> the same kind happen to me using a VPN with sports service DAZN. I was >> curious as to what content was available in each country so I tried >> Germany, England, the United States and so on until the service >> flagged my behaviour as suspicious and, like Apple, asked me to log in >> again from my original Canadian location. > > You didn't look at a _single_ screenshot as that is _not_ what happened. I looked at _all_ of the screenshots but you provided zero context as to how you got to that result. < snip > -- rabidR04CH Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Windows 11 For fans of message boards, I invite you: https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 04:16 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <suv3n5$f1d$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #1199 |
rabidR04CH wrote: > The pics are worthless without context. You have to explain what you did > to get to that point and not just show a picture of the end result. You actually seem to be close to a normal person so I apologize for treating you like I treat the iKooks (who drank the Apple Jim-Jones punch long ago). The SUBJECT here is what matters as I don't need to prove to you that Apple can (and does) lock you out of your own device, as you already know that. Don't you? The question here is an adult observation that if Apple can, why can't MS?f >> If Apple can do it (as Apple _does_ do it), why can't Microsoft? > > Since Windows machines, unlike Apple machines, make it fairly easy to > install something other than Windows, I doubt that they would ever set > any of them in such a way that they would be disabled merely because > Microsoft was unhappy about something you were doing. The question here is whether MS can pull the same sleazy tricks as Apple? Can they? For example: a. You have hardware setup #1 with boot disk #1 and Windows 11 license #1 b. For whatever reason, Microsoft pulls the Apple sleazy lockout trick c. Does substituting a new boot disk #1 on hardware #1 re-engage license #1? > They might lock up > the OS, but not the hardware. Surface devices are another story. This is an adult observation that if Microsoft _tried_ to lock you out of your own machine, they'd have to do it in a way that you couldn't subvert. Like just installing a new boot drive. But the adult question to ask is whether Microsoft could lock that up too? For example, this is a logical related adult question to ask: Can Microsoft prevent you from installing the Windows 11 you _already_ paid for on that new boot drive? > I looked at _all_ of the screenshots but you provided zero context as to > how you got to that result. What doesn't matter for this thread is _how_ I got to that result. Suffice to say that nobody on the Apple ngs can get it out of that result. But that doesn't matter to me because I was _testing_ what Apple would do. I know more than any of those iKooks as a direct result of that test. Apple _will_ force you to re-validate your login if you don't use it often. Apple _will_ lock you out of your own hardware if they don't like your VPN. That's just a fact that you need to know "can" (and does) happen. The question here is whether MS can pull the same sleazy tricks as Apple? Can they? For example: a. You have hardware setup #1 with boot disk #1 and Windows 11 license #1 b. For whatever reason, Microsoft pulls the Apple sleazy lockout trick c. Does substituting a new boot disk #1 on hardware #1 re-engage license #1?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 04:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <suv514$pff$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #1207 |
Andy Burnelli wrote: > The question here is whether MS can pull the same sleazy tricks as Apple? > Can they? > > For example: > a. You have hardware setup #1 with boot disk #1 and Windows 11 license #1 > b. For whatever reason, Microsoft pulls the Apple sleazy lockout trick > c. Does substituting a new boot disk #1 on hardware #1 re-engage license #1? I made a mistake on the numbering so I repeat the question being asked here: a. You have hardware setup #1 with boot disk #1 and Windows 11 license #1 b. For whatever reason, Microsoft pulls the Apple sleazy lockout trick c. Does substituting _boot disk #2_ on hardware #1 re-engage license #1? If yes, then Microsoft _can_ pull the same sleazy lockout trick as does Apple.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 08:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <o6MQJ.38323$OT%7.12316@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #1207 |
On 2022-02-20 23:16, Andy Burnelli wrote: > rabidR04CH wrote: > >> The pics are worthless without context. You have to explain what you >> did to get to that point and not just show a picture of the end result. > > You actually seem to be close to a normal person so I apologize for > treating > you like I treat the iKooks (who drank the Apple Jim-Jones punch long ago). Thanks. I assure you that I am not a zealot for anything. I use Windows 11, Linux and even Apple products. I tend to go for whatever's best for my needs in any particular category. I am somewhat sympathetic to Apple since they definitely produce some stellar stuff, especially as far as portability goes, but I am not the type to defend it at all costs and regardless of what they do. > The SUBJECT here is what matters as I don't need to prove to you that Apple > can (and does) lock you out of your own device, as you already know that. > > Don't you? > The question here is an adult observation that if Apple can, why can't MS?f I totally agree that Apple _can_ do so. Much of it has to do with the fact that Apple assumes that you are buying their hardware to use their operating system. You can use another system, but they tend to make you jump through hoops to do so. As such, if they notice that there is odd behaviour coming out a particular system, their security probably assumes that it is stolen and will lock out the potential thief if he refuses to verify that he indeed the authorized user of a particular machine. That security assumes that the rightful owner of the hardware would not want it to be used by anyone without them being compensated for it first. I don't disagree with their approach here. >>> If Apple can do it (as Apple _does_ do it), why can't Microsoft? >> >> Since Windows machines, unlike Apple machines, make it fairly easy to >> install something other than Windows, I doubt that they would ever set >> any of them in such a way that they would be disabled merely because >> Microsoft was unhappy about something you were doing. > > The question here is whether MS can pull the same sleazy tricks as Apple? > Can they? > > For example: > a. You have hardware setup #1 with boot disk #1 and Windows 11 license #1 > b. For whatever reason, Microsoft pulls the Apple sleazy lockout trick > c. Does substituting a new boot disk #1 on hardware #1 re-engage license > #1? Speaking as someone who _has_ been locked out of his Windows system several times, I can say that Microsoft will do so. On this particular machine which came with Windows 8.1, I eventually installed Windows 10 through the free upgrade and upgraded with a Pro license. Things happened, as they always do, and I decided to install a clean version of Windows 10 on it sometimes using the product key saved to the BIOS or the Pro key, depending on the situation. On repeated occasions, Windows would tell me that my license is not valid and that I would need to purchase one. Clearly, that is annoying behaviour. However, there are two possibilities to this: 1) Microsoft was expecting me to send them the product key saved to the BIOS and I sent them something different (confusion between the key I purchased and the one bundled with the machine), 2) the product key was never actually saved to the system despite it being entered upon installation. Whatever the reason, the result is the same and that is why I am very sympathetic to Linux as well since it doesn't bother me with licenses at all. >> They might lock up the OS, but not the hardware. Surface devices are >> another story. > > This is an adult observation that if Microsoft _tried_ to lock you out of > your own machine, they'd have to do it in a way that you couldn't subvert. > > Like just installing a new boot drive. > But the adult question to ask is whether Microsoft could lock that up too? > > For example, this is a logical related adult question to ask: > > Can Microsoft prevent you from installing the Windows 11 you _already_ paid > for on that new boot drive? They can, if they decide to blacklist your product key while you are installing. Generally, they don't do this and let you install, locking you out of the features you paid for _post_ installation. However, it should be noted that Windows product keys are saved to the BIOS nowadays if you buy a pre-built machine so even if a purchased key doesn't work, Windows will end up just using whatever it finds in the BIOS. If it doesn't find it, there's a command to retrieve it and force it to be used. >> I looked at _all_ of the screenshots but you provided zero context as >> to how you got to that result. > > What doesn't matter for this thread is _how_ I got to that result. > Suffice to say that nobody on the Apple ngs can get it out of that result. > But that doesn't matter to me because I was _testing_ what Apple would do. > I know more than any of those iKooks as a direct result of that test. > > Apple _will_ force you to re-validate your login if you don't use it often. > Apple _will_ lock you out of your own hardware if they don't like your VPN. > > That's just a fact that you need to know "can" (and does) happen. > The question here is whether MS can pull the same sleazy tricks as Apple? > > Can they? > > For example: > a. You have hardware setup #1 with boot disk #1 and Windows 11 license #1 > b. For whatever reason, Microsoft pulls the Apple sleazy lockout trick > c. Does substituting a new boot disk #1 on hardware #1 re-engage license > #1? If they locked out the product key and blacklisted it, changing the boot device won't help you in any way. If they merely locked you out because the hardware changed post installation, you can reinstall with the same product key and it will work. -- rabidR04CH MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3 For fans of message boards, I invite you: https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 08:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <210220220838096166%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #1217 |
In article <o6MQJ.38323$OT%7.12316@fx07.iad>, rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote: > Much of it has to do with the > fact that Apple assumes that you are buying their hardware to use their > operating system. You can use another system, but they tend to make you > jump through hoops to do so. false. apple even provides a utility to install windows, called boot camp. they also fully support linux. they don't care what os someone uses.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 08:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ZQMQJ.67482$Tr18.51530@fx42.iad> |
| In reply to | #1223 |
On 2022-02-21 08:38, nospam wrote: > In article <o6MQJ.38323$OT%7.12316@fx07.iad>, rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> > wrote: > >> Much of it has to do with the >> fact that Apple assumes that you are buying their hardware to use their >> operating system. You can use another system, but they tend to make you >> jump through hoops to do so. > > false. apple even provides a utility to install windows, called boot > camp. they also fully support linux. they don't care what os someone > uses. You're still jumping through hoops since you're installing Windows within the MacOS operating system rather than going straight to the BIOS, setting it up to load a USB key containing the ISO and installing it that way. Admittedly, Boot Camp is actually a safer approach though if you're trying to avoid losing data. -- rabidR04CH MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3 "But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than men.'" - Acts 5:29 For fans of message boards, I invite you: https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wolffan <akwolffan@zoho.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 09:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <0001HW.27C3D8BC0118746870001012B38F@news.supernews.com> |
| In reply to | #1226 |
On 2022 Feb 21, rabidR04CH wrote (in article <ZQMQJ.67482$Tr18.51530@fx42.iad>): > On 2022-02-21 08:38, nospam wrote: > > In article<o6MQJ.38323$OT%7.12316@fx07.iad>, rabidR04CH<rabid@ro4.ch> > > wrote: > > > > > Much of it has to do with the > > > fact that Apple assumes that you are buying their hardware to use their > > > operating system. You can use another system, but they tend to make you > > > jump through hoops to do so. > > > > false. apple even provides a utility to install windows, called boot > > camp. they also fully support linux. they don't care what os someone > > uses. > > You're still jumping through hoops since you're installing Windows > within the MacOS operating system rather than going straight to the > BIOS, setting it up to load a USB key containing the ISO and installing > it that way. > > Admittedly, Boot Camp is actually a safer approach though if you're > trying to avoid losing data. you can install Win directly on the machine, no BC, straight up NNTFS formatted volume, just plain Win. It’ll work. Same for most Linux distros.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 11:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <210220221132218215%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #1226 |
In article <ZQMQJ.67482$Tr18.51530@fx42.iad>, rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote: > >> Much of it has to do with the > >> fact that Apple assumes that you are buying their hardware to use their > >> operating system. You can use another system, but they tend to make you > >> jump through hoops to do so. > > > > false. apple even provides a utility to install windows, called boot > > camp. they also fully support linux. they don't care what os someone > > uses. > > You're still jumping through hoops since you're installing Windows > within the MacOS operating system rather than going straight to the > BIOS, setting it up to load a USB key containing the ISO and installing > it that way. i'm not jumping and your knowledge of macs is severely lacking. first of all, macs have efi, not bios. second, windows can easily be installed and booted natively. third, there is no need to use a usb stick, nor is that desirable. boot camp will partition the drive, directly install windows from an iso and automatically download and install any additional drivers that might be needed for the mac. the entire process is both easier and faster than installing windows on an actual windows pc. using a usb stick is an option, it's just slower. normally, people install windows in addition to mac os for a dual-boot setup, but some people erase mac os entirely and use *only* windows on their mac, including paul thurrott, formerly of winsupersite, who prefers a macbook, stating that it's 'the best windows laptop'. your claim that it's 'within the mac os operating system' sounds like you are referring to virtual machines, (vmware, parallels, virtual box) where windows (and other oses) can run as a guest from within mac os. that's entirely different and an additional option. some people use both a vm and dual booting, depending on their needs at the time. vmware can even use the boot camp partition as a vm, so there's only one windows install. > Admittedly, Boot Camp is actually a safer approach though if you're > trying to avoid losing data. there's no reason any data would be lost, unless it was intentional.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 13:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <9OQQJ.42752$Mpg8.1475@fx34.iad> |
| In reply to | #1234 |
On 2022-02-21 11:32, nospam wrote: > In article <ZQMQJ.67482$Tr18.51530@fx42.iad>, rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> > wrote: > >>>> Much of it has to do with the >>>> fact that Apple assumes that you are buying their hardware to use their >>>> operating system. You can use another system, but they tend to make you >>>> jump through hoops to do so. >>> >>> false. apple even provides a utility to install windows, called boot >>> camp. they also fully support linux. they don't care what os someone >>> uses. >> >> You're still jumping through hoops since you're installing Windows >> within the MacOS operating system rather than going straight to the >> BIOS, setting it up to load a USB key containing the ISO and installing >> it that way. > > i'm not jumping and your knowledge of macs is severely lacking. Because I haven't been convinced to drink the Kool-Aid and buy one. I'm tasked with fixing them when they inevitably fail for others and that experience is much of the reason why I don't want to buy one for myself... the price for what you get adds to that. > first of all, macs have efi, not bios. I say BIOS out of habit, since that's what it's been since the beginning. > second, windows can easily be installed and booted natively. Good to know: I wasn't aware that they made it possible. > third, there is no need to use a usb stick, nor is that desirable. > > boot camp will partition the drive, directly install windows from an > iso and automatically download and install any additional drivers that > might be needed for the mac. the entire process is both easier and > faster than installing windows on an actual windows pc. using a usb > stick is an option, it's just slower. > > normally, people install windows in addition to mac os for a dual-boot > setup, but some people erase mac os entirely and use *only* windows on > their mac, including paul thurrott, formerly of winsupersite, who > prefers a macbook, stating that it's 'the best windows laptop'. > > your claim that it's 'within the mac os operating system' sounds like > you are referring to virtual machines, (vmware, parallels, virtual box) > where windows (and other oses) can run as a guest from within mac os. > that's entirely different and an additional option. some people use > both a vm and dual booting, depending on their needs at the time. > vmware can even use the boot camp partition as a vm, so there's only > one windows install. > >> Admittedly, Boot Camp is actually a safer approach though if you're >> trying to avoid losing data. > > there's no reason any data would be lost, unless it was intentional. Good to know. -- rabidR04CH MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3 "But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than men.'" - Acts 5:29 For fans of message boards, I invite you: https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 15:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sv0rv2$11od$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #1249 |
rabidR04CH wrote: >> second, windows can easily be installed and booted natively. > > Good to know: I wasn't aware that they made it possible. Note that what nospam claims doesn't work on _any_ of the M1 CPUs. <https://support.apple.com/ja-jp/HT201468> He, like MARKETING, always wants you to _assume_ that it actually works. But it doesn't. It never did.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-22 02:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <220220220230381911%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #1249 |
In article <9OQQJ.42752$Mpg8.1475@fx34.iad>, rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote: > >>>> Much of it has to do with the > >>>> fact that Apple assumes that you are buying their hardware to use their > >>>> operating system. You can use another system, but they tend to make you > >>>> jump through hoops to do so. > >>> > >>> false. apple even provides a utility to install windows, called boot > >>> camp. they also fully support linux. they don't care what os someone > >>> uses. > >> > >> You're still jumping through hoops since you're installing Windows > >> within the MacOS operating system rather than going straight to the > >> BIOS, setting it up to load a USB key containing the ISO and installing > >> it that way. > > > > i'm not jumping and your knowledge of macs is severely lacking. > > Because I haven't been convinced to drink the Kool-Aid and buy one. I'm > tasked with fixing them when they inevitably fail for others and that > experience is much of the reason why I don't want to buy one for > myself... the price for what you get adds to that. there is no kool-aid. > > first of all, macs have efi, not bios. > > I say BIOS out of habit, since that's what it's been since the beginning. many people do, but it's incorrect. > > second, windows can easily be installed and booted natively. > > Good to know: I wasn't aware that they made it possible. like i said, your knowledge about macs and apple for that matter, is severely lacking. installing other operating systems has always been possible. in fact, back in the 90s, apple had its own linux distro: <https://www.mklinux.org> MkLinux is a project begun by the OSF Research Institute (now Silicomp RI) and Apple Computer to port Linux, a freely distributed UNIX-like operating system, to a variety of Power Macintosh platforms running on top of OSF Research Institute's implementation of the Mach microkernel.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-22 10:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <qj7RJ.72877$iK66.31611@fx46.iad> |
| In reply to | #1292 |
On 2022-02-22 02:30, nospam wrote: > In article <9OQQJ.42752$Mpg8.1475@fx34.iad>, rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> > wrote: > >>>>>> Much of it has to do with the >>>>>> fact that Apple assumes that you are buying their hardware to use their >>>>>> operating system. You can use another system, but they tend to make you >>>>>> jump through hoops to do so. >>>>> >>>>> false. apple even provides a utility to install windows, called boot >>>>> camp. they also fully support linux. they don't care what os someone >>>>> uses. >>>> >>>> You're still jumping through hoops since you're installing Windows >>>> within the MacOS operating system rather than going straight to the >>>> BIOS, setting it up to load a USB key containing the ISO and installing >>>> it that way. >>> >>> i'm not jumping and your knowledge of macs is severely lacking. >> >> Because I haven't been convinced to drink the Kool-Aid and buy one. I'm >> tasked with fixing them when they inevitably fail for others and that >> experience is much of the reason why I don't want to buy one for >> myself... the price for what you get adds to that. > > there is no kool-aid. Not anymore: you drank it all. >>> first of all, macs have efi, not bios. >> >> I say BIOS out of habit, since that's what it's been since the beginning. > > many people do, but it's incorrect. It is, but everyone who doesn't have a stick up their ass like you do would have understood and not made a fuss. < snip > -- rabidR04CH MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3 "But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than men.'" - Acts 5:29 For fans of message boards, I invite you: https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-28 05:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <svhnfp$dda$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #1304 |
rabidR04CH wrote: >>> Because I haven't been convinced to drink the Kool-Aid and buy one. I'm >>> tasked with fixing them when they inevitably fail for others and that >>> experience is much of the reason why I don't want to buy one for >>> myself... the price for what you get adds to that. >> >> there is no kool-aid. > > Not anymore: you drank it all. That's an important concept to all on these newsgroups. Below is a rather _adult_ observation of why I believe iKooks are what they are, which is always a destabilizing influence on all newsgroups they participate in. I find it revealing that nospam, being a classic iKook, claims there is no kool-aid, given he exhibits the classic symptoms of the Jim Jones' cultists. a. All iKooks are uneducated and of low IQ and of low self esteem b. Apple MARKETING (brilliantly) caters to those of low self esteem c. Where the iKooks garner much of their self esteem from Apple promises As a result of those factors, the iKooks believe in an imaginary belief system that is almost completely devoid of any actual facts about Apple. Hence, any fact about Apple iKooks don't like, they outright brazenly deny. If they can't deny them, they go through a range of seven excuses. The final step is they turn into kindergarten kids with ad hominems. The question is _why_ are iKooks so afraid of facts about Apple products. The answer turns out to be rather simple (if you know the traits above). A. iKooks garner their self esteem from Apple products B. Any fact that detracts from Apple esteem, detracts from theirs C. Hence, they not only hate all facts about Apple, but all messengers Normal people do not act that way. Normal people have not drunk the Apple kool-aid that the iKooks drank. -- My point isn't that iKooks are uneducated & of low IQ & low self esteem, but _because_ of those things, they always deny all facts they hate about Apple.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-21 15:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sv0rrr$vvs$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #1234 |
nospam wrote: > boot camp will partition the drive, directly install windows from an > iso and automatically download and install any additional drivers that > might be needed for the mac. the entire process is both easier and > faster than installing windows on an actual windows pc. using a usb > stick is an option, it's just slower. What nospam does is play Apple's MARKETING game with the TSMC-Silicon. He doesn't tell you Boot Camp doesn't exist on the latest Apple CPUs Like MARKETING, he wants you to simply _assume_ that it works. When it doesn't. It can't. It won't. It never did. <https://support.apple.com/ja-jp/HT211814> MacBook Pro (14-inch, 2021) MacBook Pro (16-inch, 2021) iMac (24-inch, M1, 2021) Mac mini (M1, 2020) MacBook Air (M1, 2020) MacBook Pro (13-inch, M1, 2020) etc. (basically almost every Mac moving forward)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.microsoft.windows
csiph-web