Post by Mike Williams [MVP]The lifespan is mainly determined by available hardware
and economics of
That used to be the case, but in the case of activation-
required software lifespan is determined by when the
activation facility is withdrawn for a given program.
Even if the program is still capable of running on the
hardware, it will be disabled due to non-activation.
Post by Mike Williams [MVP]Why do you think activation support is going away?
As you have yourself already stated, no company is going
to continue to give support to it's programs
indefinitely. 'Support' also includes the facility for
activation. It's inevitable that it will be withdrawn.
Post by Mike Williams [MVP]How many people are really going to want to use ancient
software on new
Post by Mike Williams [MVP]machines with hardware that is unsupported by the
operating system, and
Post by Mike Williams [MVP]maybe even quantities of RAM or diskspace that cannot be
addressed by it?
(sigh) If the software you are using does the job you
require and runs on the system you are using, what does it
matter how old it is? If a new version adds nothing that
you will make use of there isn't really much sense in
spending hundreds of pounds/dollars/euros on it. But that
is the situation we seem to be heading towards.
Personally, I would *love* an operating system with multi-
CPU support and more than 1000MB addressable RAM for 3D
rendering, and were it not for the activation issue
Windows XP would be down on my Christmas list this year
without hesitation because it has features I could
genuinely make use of. It would be a *useful* upgrade,
not a forced one.
Post by Mike Williams [MVP]All software has a limited lifespan. Get used to it.
I *am* used to it, however I am not prepared to be
dictated to by any company as to when that software has
reached it's 'use by' date. The lifespan of a piece of
software should end when it is either not practical to run
it on a system (ie, when the standard RAM of a system is
1000MB, but the software can only address ~700MB) or when
it becomes unsuitable for the purpose for which it was
purchased. In this instance, I am separating
the 'practical lifespan' from the 'supported lifespan'.
While I don't expect a company to support a product
forever (which would certainly be a bad thing), I don't
expect my right or ability to use a product I have bought
to be withdrawn simply because said company chooses to no
longer support it. How would people feel if a car they
bought contained a mechanism that only allowed it to start
if fed occasional signals from the manufacturer, only to
one day learn that the car is no longer supported, and due
to the cessation of 'activation' signals it no longer
started, forcing them to purchase another car if they
desired to continue driving. In any other industry it
would be seriously contested - imagine videos/DVDs/CDs
that required activation to be used, only to one day have
that essential support crutch pulled away...
Post by Mike Williams [MVP]You have not mentioned cessation of activation facility
in any prior posts.
**aaarrrggghhh!?!??!** That has been my whole point! My
whole 'lifespan'/'usage' argument/rant/babble has revolved
around that primary core. Sorry if I didn't clarify that
previously. If activation was merely a relavitely benign
registration issue, I would have already snapped up XP and
embraced it with a passion. It's the whole 'countdown to
cessation of activation' issue that burns me, the idea
that I will be left holding a piece of software I have
spend precious money on that, although still entirely
usable to me and my hardware, has been rendered useless by
the company that created it purely because *they* have
withdrawn support for it rather than a natural
technological progression of phasing-out.