Microsoft have a new definition of "stale"



  • Can't be too careful - if the image is going to expire in 5,883,516 years then probably best to update it now.



  •  It is a known bug. Your product is currently licensed to your Microsoft Account [not a product key], so Visual Studio is "calling home" to see if your license is valid....but got an error.



  • "Your license has gone stale"? WTF does that even mean? It smells bad? You left the box open and now it's hard? (Maybe if you put it in the microwave for a few seconds it will soften up again?)



  • "Your license has gone stale"? WTF does that even mean? It smells bad? You left the box open and now it's hard? (Maybe if you put it in the microwave for a few seconds it will soften up again?)

    As a term it makes sense. The license must be reFRESHed every 3 days or it begins to get stale. If you "leave the box open" (actually the internet connection down), the staleness (duration since it was freshened) will increase. 



  • @TheCPUWizard said:

    "Your license has gone stale"? WTF does that even mean? It smells bad? You left the box open and now it's hard? (Maybe if you put it in the microwave for a few seconds it will soften up again?)

    As a term it makes sense. The license must be reFRESHed every 3 days or it begins to get stale. If you "leave the box open" (actually the internet connection down), the staleness (duration since it was freshened) will increase. 

     

     Finally someone who actually prevents me from working on vacation.

     



  • @TheCPUWizard said:

    As a term it makes sense.
     

    Only if you accept that refreshing a license makes sense. I'm not there yet.



  • Only if you accept that refreshing a license makes sense. I'm not there yet.

    Many things (including Visual Studio) are beginning to offer subscription based licenses.

    Need to have 100 people use MTM? Don't buy 100 copies (at a few thousand each), just get 1 month subscriptions (at a few tens/month)!!!!

    Now as to refresh specifically, it really helps because you can change your license at the single place (subscription/account page) and add/change/remove as desired. Machines will automaiclly be updated the next time the appliction is used.

    Prefer "I bought it" type approach... FINE, just "Change License" and enter the Product Key (same as you always have).

     So the only element I see for discussion [could be missing something] is the choice to DEFAULT to the subscription approach upon installation....

     (I am delibrately ignoring the bug that caused the silly number of days to appear, and focusing on the change in approach. 

     



  • @TheCPUWizard said:

    Prefer "I bought it" type approach... FINE, just "Change License" and enter the Product Key (same as you always have).
     

    You know, if I go to a bookstore and buy a book, I can do anything I want with it, except copying and redistributing. But if I go into a software store and buy some software, I get an entire set of restrictions on what I can do with it - limited time only, can't look into the binary, can't compare with the competitors...

    How does that make any sense? And how can a software company just package a time bomb inside their product and get out with that?



  • But if I go into a software store and buy some software

    However, you do not buy the software. You buy a license to use (under certain specific conditions) the software. Ownership of the software remains with the seller. People seem to fail to understand this.

     



  • @TheCPUWizard said:

    But if I go into a software store and buy some software

    However, you do not buy the software. You buy a license to use (under certain specific conditions) the software. Ownership of the software remains with the seller. People seem to fail to understand this.

     


    So you're saying it's a good thing that companies get away with "selling" a good that is not owned by the person who buys it, for 100% profit?




  • @Ben L. said:

    @TheCPUWizard said:

    But if I go into a software store and buy some software

    However, you do not buy the software. You buy a license to use (under certain specific conditions) the software. Ownership of the software remains with the seller. People seem to fail to understand this.

     


    So you're saying it's a good thing that companies get away with "selling" a good that is not owned by the person who buys it, for 100% profit?

     

    * Company sells a License to Use...
    * Purchaser owns the License (but usage may be revoked if terms are not followed)

    COMPARE

    * State sells License to Drive Car...
    * Person owns the License (but legalty of Driving may be revoked if terms are not followed)

     Or are you suggesting that people should be allowed to "buy the right to drive" and then be on the road regardless of of anything???

     [...and yes, I am deliberately baiting]

     

     

     



  • @TheCPUWizard said:

    * State sells License to Drive Car...

    Whoa.

    WHOA.

    WHOA.

    I got my state ID for free. If your state charges you to vote, something is horribly wrong with the system.



  • @TheCPUWizard said:

     (I am delibrately ignoring the bug that caused the silly number of days to appear, and focusing on the change in approach. 

    ARGH )



  • @aihtdikh said:

    @TheCPUWizard said:
     (I am delibrately ignoring the bug that caused the silly number of days to appear, and focusing on the change in approach.) 

    ( ARGH )

    FTFY



  • @Ben L. said:

    @aihtdikh said:
    @TheCPUWizard said:
     (I am delibrately ignoring the bug that caused the silly number of days to appear, and focusing on the change in approach.) 

    ( ARGH )

    FTFY

    Of course, by quoting his open paren and only closing once, I left the whole page unbalanced. )



  • @aihtdikh said:

    @Ben L. said:
    @aihtdikh said:
    @TheCPUWizard said:
     (I am delibrately ignoring the bug that caused the silly number of days to appear, and focusing on the change in approach.) 

    ( ARGH )

    FTFY

    ( Of course, by quoting his open paren and only closing once, I left the whole page unbalanced. )

    This thread is a really weird formal grammar.



  • @Ben L. said:

    This thread is a really weird formal grammar.

    Please correctly indent this code and add any parentheses required to specify the intended meaning.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @aihtdikh said:

    Filed under: That's Internet Relay Programming not I/O Request Packet, #IRP, Is there any way to influence the tag order?, Yes apparently that fixed it
    Wonderful



  • @dkf said:

    @aihtdikh said:
    Filed under: That's Internet Relay Programming not I/O Request Packet, #IRP, Is there any way to influence the tag order?, Yes apparently that fixed it
    Wonderful

    Filed under: 2, 3, 4, testing, 5, 1

    Ah. The order broke again. I was trying to say #IRP first.

    And the tags on this post were entered alphabetically.



  •  but I'm not very good at it.



  •  I tried to parallel post,


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @TheCPUWizard said:

     [...and yes, I am deliberately baiting]

    That doesn't work on weekends. You've been here long enough to know that we have flamewars during the week because we're bored at work.



  • @PedanticCurmudgeon said:

    That doesn't work on weekends. You've been here long enough to know that we have flamewars during the week because we're bored at work.
     

    Yes.

    Let's do more gif threads.



  • @dhromed said:

    Let's do more gif threads.
     

    Makes me want to say that Skippy is better, even though I don't really know if that's true or not, and especially because it's in a deliberately misinterpreted subject domain.



  • @too_many_usernames said:

    @dhromed said:

    Let's do more gif threads.
    Makes me want to say that Skippy is better, even though I don't really know if that's true or not, and especially because it's in a deliberately misinterpreted subject domain.

    Not to mention misspelled.



  • @HardwareGeek said:

    Not to mention misspelled.
     

    Deliberate mistake, or deliberately mistaken?



  • @Ben L. said:

    @TheCPUWizard said:
    * State sells License to Drive Car...

    Whoa.

    WHOA.

    WHOA.

    I got my state ID for free. If your state charges you to vote, something is horribly wrong with the system.

    Mine does!


  • You don't need photo ID to vote in Massachusetts.

    @The Boston Globe said:

    If you registered to vote by mail on or after January 1, 2003, you will
    be required to show identification the first time you vote in a federal
    election.

    Acceptable identification must include your name and the address at which you are registered. For example: A current and valid driver’s license, photo identification, current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check, or other government document showing your name and address.

    [url=http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/voter_registration/#id]ref1[/url] [url=http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/eleifv/howreg.htm#regform]ref2[/url]



  • @Ben L. said:

    @TheCPUWizard said:
    * State sells License to Drive Car...

    Whoa.

    WHOA.

    WHOA.

    I got my state ID for free. If your state charges you to vote, something is horribly wrong with the system.

    That's nice.  Don't try and drive with one of those.

     



  • @Kyanar said:

    @Ben L. said:

    @TheCPUWizard said:
    * State sells License to Drive Car...

    Whoa.

    WHOA.

    WHOA.

    I got my state ID for free. If your state charges you to vote, something is horribly wrong with the system.

    That's nice.  Don't try and drive with one of those.

     

    Who needs cars when we have internet?


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.