Fine. Call it a license. I paid for the damn thing.
Have you ever rented shelter? Say a house/apartment/room?
Well, you don't own the home you rent. For software, it is exactly the same, except the rent is not monthly/weekly but a one-time-only payment to allow you to use the software. Use the software for 1 day or 1000 days, the cost is the same, which is the initial licensing cost.
Once I have paid for it the company should not be concerned with what I do with it, whether I like to stick it up my a88 or create the next improvement to Windows.
Actually they are not concerned with what you do with the software at all. Stick it up your a88 for all they care.
Coming back to the home rental analogy, if your agreement specifically dis-allows sub-letting the premises, then the owner has the right to check it out if there are valid signs of sub-letting happening.
I have to admit that I have never had any problems with Microsoft licensing over the years, and I even live in a country that is listed by BSA as having "70% of the software used is pirated"
---
I don't think a monopoly breeds innovation. But we made MS who they are now. If you feel so strongly against MS, then use an alternative. Get everyone you know to do so too. I freely admit that I can't use an alternative and so will not be taking this path. That is not MS's fault nor BillyG's.
Slam MS for buggy software, lousy programming, expensive licensing fees, incredibly lousy security, non-stop updates, whatever. But not for being the OS on the computers out there.
Last edited:

