Text 16868, 1189 rader
Skriven 2007-02-27 21:32:12 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 16866 av Rich Gauszka (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Adobe 8 Activation nightmare
=========================================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0588_01C75AB6.BE95BB20
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The article to which you referred claimed that music purchased from =
the Zune store plays on PlaysForSure devices. There doesn't seem to be = the
restrictive problem that apple has with the itunes store.
Even with apple's itunes problems in Europe, I don't see anything =
that I would consider a quagmire. The problems they do exist are with =
interoperabilty and lock in not with the DRM itself.
Rich
"Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:45e502d3@w3.nls.net...
Yet there are multiple standards issued from the same company for copy =
protection( PlaysForSure, Zune DRM ). I wouldn't describe that as = attempting
to avoid interoperability problems.
FWIW - My diatribe isn't meant to be directed at Microsoft solely - =
just the current quagmire that is DRM
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:45e4fc3e@w3.nls.net...
PlaysForSure tackles the same problem as apple tries with itunes =
and their fairplay. The key difference is that PlaysForSure is widely =
licensed to avoid the interoperability problems that apple has with = itunes.
Apple could license PlaysForSure if they wanted.
I don't think the DRM applications to which you refer to are =
generically corporate interests as much as they are content owner = interests.
This is why steve jobs stated the obvious when asserting = that he would like
to offer other people's content without any DRM. Of = course he would as would
probably everyone else who has no interest in = the content itself.
Rich
"Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:45e4f15d$1@w3.nls.net...
or you have the idiocy with Microsoft's PlaysForSure =
certification. DRM=20
is currently a mess with various corporate entities in a power =
struggle=20
for control of a market without care of how it affects (screws) =
the=20
consumer. The average consumer I know either by facial expression =
or=20
vocally expresses a dissatisfaction with the current state of =
affairs
http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/337/C11865/
While it still appears to be true that PlaysForSure content won't =
work=20
on a Zune, the reverse is completely hunky doory. You can =
seemingly drag=20
songs from the Zune Marketplace onto any PlaysForSure device, like =
offerings from Rio and Creative.
Rich wrote:
> I don't see average consumers misusing the term. I see =
strongly=20
> opinionated and technical folks like those that would have their =
own=20
> blog or would post to a public forum. This isn't a consumer =
topic=20
> beyond that some folks are trying to make it one. That isn't to =
say=20
> there aren't real issues with interoperability and longevity =
such as you=20
> read about lately with itunes. This is just a single =
application of=20
> DRM. The same aspects that are an issue for this application =
are not=20
> issues for the application of DRM to your medical records or =
sensitive=20
> corporate documents.
> =20
> Rich
> =20
>=20
> "Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com
> <mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com>> wrote in message
> news:45e4e27a$1@w3.nls.net...
> I don't disagree. The notable constant though is that people =
are
> including DRM in their complaints just because they can. If =
DRM was as
> beneficial for consumers as the industry propagandists spout =
I highly
> doubt you'd see this trend.
>=20
>=20
> Rich wrote:
> > It's not just DRM and this, it's DRM and anything =
people want to
> > complain about that can be stretched to garner more =
support.=20
> Broadly I
> > see it used for anything that restricts access, copying, =
or
> similar. I
> > think people believe they will get more sympathy for =
their
> position from
> > a certain audience if they apply the term DRM than if =
they are
> honest.
> >=20
> > Rich
> >=20
> >
> > "Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com
> <mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com>
> > <mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com>> wrote in =
message
> > news:45e4b899@w3.nls.net...
> > I understand the point you are making. Unfortunately, =
like it
> or not,
> > DRM and Activation are starting to be used =
interchangeably in
> everyday
> > use ( as in the Infoworld Gripeline blog )
> >
> >
> > Rich wrote:
> > > This is neither a content nor a service which =
is one
> reason I
> > > questioned the use of DRM. I think the new =
subject is
> appropriate.
> > >
> > > Rich
> > >
> > >
> > > "Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com
> <mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com>
> > <mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com>
> > > <mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com>> wrote in =
message
> > > news:45e4b05e$1@w3.nls.net...
> > > It's an inane activation scheme. From =
Microsoft's own
> > definition one
> > > could make the case that Adobe's activation is =
a content
> > owner setting
> > > the business rules of a file ( a program in =
this case
> ). Most
> > would use
> > > 'activation' for clarity in this context - so =
Subject
> changed
> > >
> > > =
http://www.microsoft.com/security/glossary.mspx#d
> > >
> > > digital rights management (DRM)
> > >
> > > Any technology used to protect the interests =
of owners of
> > content and
> > > services (such as copyright owners). =
Typically, authorized
> > > recipients or
> > > users must acquire a license in order to =
consume the
> protected
> > > material=97files, music, movies=97according to =
the rights or
> > business rules
> > > set by the content owner.
> > >
> > >
> > > Rich wrote:
> > > > What does this have to do with DRM? Or =
do you
> use DRM for
> > > everything
> > > > from actual DRM to encrypted email to =
password
> protected ZIP
> > > files to
> > > > SSL/TLS?
> > > >
> > > > Rich
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Rich Gauszka" =
<gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com
> <mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com>
> > <mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com>
> > > <mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com>
> > > > <mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com>> =
wrote in
> message
> > > > news:45e4792a$1@w3.nls.net...
> > > > Adobe - If you use a disk defragger the
> activation doesn't
> > > like it?
> > > >
> > > > =20
> > > =20
> > =20
> =
http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/archives/2007/02/acrobat_activat.ht=
ml
> > > > when it comes to stupid IT designs as =
far as the
> > activation
> > > issues I
> > > > encountered with Adobe. I upgraded from =
Acrobat
> 7.0 to
> > 8.0,
> > > because the
> > > > demos and features looked great. After
> installing it,
> > I didn't
> > > > really use it
> > > > for a few months. Then I went to use it =
and it
> said it
> > was not
> > > > activated."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > When the reader went to the menu, he =
was puzzled to
> > see both the
> > > > "Activate'
> > > > and "Deactivate' buttons turned off. =
"Seems
> stupid --
> > > shouldn't one
> > > > always
> > > > be highlighted?" the reader wondered. =
"After
> calling in,
> > > Adobe told
> > > > me to
> > > > run the repair function. I did, and it =
worked
> for one day,
> > > and then
> > > > it was
> > > > deactivated again and both buttons were =
off
> again. I
> > called again
> > > > and waited
> > > > on hold forever to be told to uninstall =
and
> reinstall.
> > So I
> > > > uninstalled and
> > > > it deactivated. I went to reinstall and =
it said
> I did
> > not have an
> > > > original
> > > > product to upgrade from. Wow, like I'm =
supposed to
> > keep all
> > > > hundred-plus key
> > > > codes I've ever had from Adobe. So =
after about
> 3 more
> > people
> > > and a
> > > > lot more
> > > > time on the phone I got around the =
installation and
> > activated
> > > again
> > > > with a
> > > > temp key. Then within hours it =
deactivated again."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The reader then entered a support =
nightmare
> from which
> > he is
> > > yet to
> > > > awaken.
> > > > For weeks on end, tech after tech would =
tell him to
> > run the
> > > repair
> > > > function
> > > > and reinstall. When that wouldn't work, =
the techs
> > would begin
> > > > speculating as
> > > > to what changes he should make to him =
computer to
> > placate the
> > > > activation
> > > > gods. "Gee, the guy would say, why do =
you need to
> > mirror your
> > > hard
> > > > drive?"
> > > > the reader wrote. "Then they send me to =
another and
> > the guy says,
> > > > gee, if
> > > > you upgrade or restore your drive, or =
change your
> > > configuration, or
> > > > backup
> > > > to Ghost, or use a RAID array, or use a =
disk
> > defragger, the
> > > activation
> > > > doesn't like it. Then they start asking =
why I
> need to
> > do these
> > > > things, which
> > > > is none of their business."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Some of the Adobe techs mentioned that =
what the
> reader
> > really
> > > needed
> > > > to fix
> > > > the activation problem was "Patch =
2.70."
> > Unfortunately, it seems
> > > > Patch 2.70
> > > > is not provided to just any old Acrobat
> customer, and the
> > > reader had to
> > > > supplicate his way up the support =
ladder to find
> > someone who
> > > could
> > > > authorize
> > > > sending it to him. "I finally get to =
the right
> guy and
> > he asks me
> > > > why I need
> > > > it and why I can't stop mirroring and
> defragging and
> > using Ghost.
> > > > Finally he
> > > > says he'll escalate the issue and I'll =
have an
> e-mail
> > in 24
> > > hours.
> > > > Next day
> > > > there's no e-mail so I call back. It =
was never
> > escalated and
> > > I have
> > > > to start
> > > > the process of filing to get the patch =
all over
> again."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The reader is a stubborn man, though, =
and he
> > eventually prevailed
> > > > upon Adobe
> > > > to send him Patch 2.70. It didn't help. =
Several
> more
> > weeks of
> > > > escalations to
> > > > supervisors and higher levels of Adobe =
support have
> > followed,
> > > without
> > > > success. Last week Adobe promised to =
send him a
> copy
> > of Acrobat -
> > > > presumably
> > > > the corporate version - that would get =
around
> the problem.
> > > But at last
> > > > report it still hasn't shown, so the =
reader's
> copy of
> > Acrobat
> > > 8 remains
> > > > deactivated.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "The amount of time, support, and money =
that
> Adobe and
> > I have
> > > wasted
> > > > on this
> > > > is crazy," the reader wrote. "I =
understand
> protecting your
> > > product, but
> > > > these people have gone way overboard =
with this
> > activation that's
> > > > tied so
> > > > closely to the hardware that you can't =
do anything
> > that doesn't
> > > > upset it.
> > > > Many people back up, restore, defrag =
and mirror
> disks and
> > > many more
> > > > will do
> > > > so as the prices come down. I think =
Adobe needs to
> > clean some
> > > > management
> > > > house, toss out this stupid activation =
process, and
> > get something
> > > > that works
> > > > instead of the runaround."
> > > >
------=_NextPart_000_0588_01C75AB6.BE95BB20
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16397" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> The article to which you =
referred=20
claimed that music purchased from the Zune store plays on PlaysForSure=20
devices. There doesn't seem to be the restrictive problem that = apple
has=20
with the itunes store.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Even with apple's itunes =
problems in=20
Europe, I don't see anything that I would consider a quagmire. The =
problems they do exist are with interoperabilty and lock in not with the =
DRM=20
itself.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich Gauszka" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com">gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com</=
A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:45e502d3@w3.nls.net">news:45e502d3@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Yet there are multiple standards =
issued from the=20
same company for copy protection( PlaysForSure, Zune DRM ). I wouldn't =
describe that as attempting to avoid interoperability =
problems.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> FWIW - My diatribe isn't meant =
to be=20
directed at Microsoft solely - just the current quagmire that is=20
DRM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:45e4fc3e@w3.nls.net">news:45e4fc3e@w3.nls.net</A>...</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> PlaysForSure tackles =
the same=20
problem as apple tries with itunes and their fairplay. The key =
difference is that PlaysForSure is widely licensed to avoid the=20
interoperability problems that apple has with itunes. Apple =
could=20
license PlaysForSure if they wanted.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I don't think the DRM =
applications=20
to which you refer to are generically corporate interests as much as =
they=20
are content owner interests. This is why steve jobs stated the =
obvious=20
when asserting that he would like to offer other people's content =
without=20
any DRM. Of course he would as would probably everyone else =
who has no=20
interest in the content itself.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich Gauszka" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com</=
A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:45e4f15d$1@w3.nls.net">news:45e4f15d$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>or=20
you have the idiocy with Microsoft's PlaysForSure certification. =
DRM=20
<BR>is currently a mess with various corporate entities in a power =
struggle <BR>for control of a market without care of how it =
affects=20
(screws) the <BR>consumer. The average consumer I know either by =
facial=20
expression or <BR>vocally expresses a dissatisfaction with the =
current=20
state of affairs<BR><BR><A=20
=
href=3D"http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/337/C11865/">http://www.mobi=
lemag.com/content/100/337/C11865/</A><BR><BR>While=20
it still appears to be true that PlaysForSure content won't work =
<BR>on a=20
Zune, the reverse is completely hunky doory. You can seemingly =
drag=20
<BR>songs from the Zune Marketplace onto any PlaysForSure device, =
like=20
<BR>offerings from Rio and Creative.<BR><BR><BR><BR>Rich=20
wrote:<BR>> I don't see average consumers =
misusing=20
the term. I see strongly <BR>> opinionated and technical =
folks=20
like those that would have their own <BR>> blog or would post =
to a=20
public forum. This isn't a consumer topic <BR>> beyond =
that some=20
folks are trying to make it one. That isn't to say <BR>> =
there=20
aren't real issues with interoperability and longevity such as you =
<BR>> read about lately with itunes. This is just a =
single=20
application of <BR>> DRM. The same aspects that are an =
issue for=20
this application are not <BR>> issues for the application of =
DRM to=20
your medical records or sensitive <BR>> corporate=20
documents.<BR>> <BR>> Rich<BR>> <BR>>=20
<BR>> "Rich Gauszka" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com</=
A><BR>> =20
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmai=
l.com</A>>>=20
wrote in message<BR>> <A=20
=
href=3D"news:45e4e27a$1@w3.nls.net">news:45e4e27a$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
> =20
I don't disagree. The notable constant though is that people=20
are<BR>> including DRM in their =
complaints just=20
because they can. If DRM was as<BR>> =
beneficial=20
for consumers as the industry propagandists spout I=20
highly<BR>> doubt you'd see this =
trend.<BR>>=20
<BR>> <BR>> Rich=20
wrote:<BR>> =
> It's=20
not just DRM and this, it's DRM and anything people want=20
to<BR>> > complain about that =
can be=20
stretched to garner more support. <BR>> =
Broadly=20
I<BR>> > see it used for =
anything that=20
restricts access, copying, or<BR>> =20
similar. I<BR>> > think =
people=20
believe they will get more sympathy for=20
their<BR>> position=20
from<BR>> > a certain audience =
if they=20
apply the term DRM than if they =
are<BR>> =20
honest.<BR>> >=20
<BR>> >=20
Rich<BR>> >=20
<BR>> =20
><BR>> =
> =20
"Rich Gauszka" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com</=
A><BR>> =20
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmai=
l.com</A>><BR>> =20
> <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmai=
l.com</A>>>=20
wrote in message<BR>> =20
> <A=20
=
href=3D"news:45e4b899@w3.nls.net">news:45e4b899@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>>=
=20
> I understand the point you are =
making.=20
Unfortunately, like it<BR>> or=20
not,<BR>> =
> =20
DRM and Activation are starting to be used interchangeably=20
in<BR>> =20
everyday<BR>> =20
> use ( as in the Infoworld Gripeline =
blog=20
)<BR>> =20
><BR>> =20
><BR>> =
> =20
Rich wrote:<BR>> =20
> > This is =
neither=20
a content nor a service which is =
one<BR>> =20
reason I<BR>> =20
> > questioned the use of =
DRM. I=20
think the new subject is<BR>> =20
appropriate.<BR>> =20
> =20
><BR>> =20
> >=20
Rich<BR>> =20
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =20
><BR>> =20
> > =
"Rich=20
Gauszka" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com</=
A><BR>> =20
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmai=
l.com</A>><BR>> =20
> <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmai=
l.com</A>><BR>> =20
> > =
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@-nospam-hotmai=
l.com</A>>>=20
wrote in message<BR>> =20
> > <A =
=
href=3D"news:45e4b05e$1@w3.nls.net">news:45e4b05e$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
> =20
> > =
It's an=20
inane activation scheme. From Microsoft's=20
own<BR>> =
> =20
definition one<BR>> =20
> > =
could make=20
the case that Adobe's activation is a=20
content<BR>> =
> =20
owner setting<BR>> =20
> > =
the=20
business rules of a file ( a program in this=20
case<BR>> ).=20
Most<BR>> =
> =20
would use<BR>> =20
> > =20
'activation' for clarity in this context - so=20
Subject<BR>> =20
changed<BR>> =20
> =20
><BR>> =20
> > <A =
=
href=3D"http://www.microsoft.com/security/glossary.mspx#d">http://www.mic=
rosoft.com/security/glossary.mspx#d</A><BR>> &n=
bsp;=20
> =20
><BR>> =20
> > =
digital=20
rights management (DRM)<BR>> =20
> =20
><BR>> =20
> > =
Any=20
technology used to protect the interests of owners=20
of<BR>> =
> =20
content and<BR>> =20
> > =
services=20
(such as copyright owners). Typically,=20
authorized<BR>> =20
> > =
recipients=20
or<BR>> =20
> > =
users must=20
acquire a license in order to consume =
the<BR>> =20
protected<BR>> =20
> > =20
material=97files, music, movies=97according to the rights=20
or<BR>> =
> =20
business rules<BR>> =20
> > =
set by the=20
content owner.<BR>> =20
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =20
><BR>> =20
> > =
Rich=20
wrote:<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> What does this have to do with DRM? =
Or do=20
you<BR>> use DRM=20
for<BR>> =20
> > =20
everything<BR>> =20
> =
> >=20
from actual DRM to encrypted email to=20
password<BR>> protected=20
ZIP<BR>> =20
> > =
files=20
to<BR>> =20
> =
> >=20
SSL/TLS?<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> >=20
Rich<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> "Rich Gauszka" <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com">gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com</=
A><BR>> =20
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmai=
l.com</A>><BR>> =20
> <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmai=
l.com</A>><BR>> =20
> > =
<<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmai=
l.com</A>><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com">mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmai=
l.com</A>>>=20
wrote in<BR>> =20
message<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> <A=20
=
href=3D"news:45e4792a$1@w3.nls.net">news:45e4792a$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
> =20
> =
> =20
> Adobe - If you use a disk defragger=20
the<BR>> activation=20
doesn't<BR>> =20
> > =
like=20
it?<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> <BR>> =20
> > =20
<BR>> > =20
<BR>> <A=20
=
href=3D"http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/archives/2007/02/acrobat_ac=
tivat.html">http://weblog.infoworld.com/gripeline/archives/2007/02/acroba=
t_activat.html</A><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> when it comes to stupid IT designs as =
far as=20
the<BR>> =
> =20
activation<BR>> =20
> > =
issues=20
I<BR>> =
> =20
> > =20
encountered with Adobe. I upgraded from=20
Acrobat<BR>> 7.0=20
to<BR>> =
> =20
8.0,<BR>> =20
> > =
because=20
the<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> demos and features looked great.=20
After<BR>> installing=20
it,<BR>> =
> I=20
didn't<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> really use=20
it<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> for a few months. Then I went to use =
it and=20
it<BR>> said=20
it<BR>> =
> was=20
not<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> =20
activated."<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> When the reader went to the menu, he =
was=20
puzzled to<BR>> =20
> see both=20
the<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> =20
"Activate'<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> and "Deactivate' buttons turned off.=20
"Seems<BR>> stupid=20
--<BR>> =20
> > =
shouldn't=20
one<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> =
always<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> be highlighted?" the reader wondered. =
"After<BR>> calling=20
in,<BR>> =20
> > =
Adobe=20
told<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> me =
to<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> run the repair function. I did, and =
it=20
worked<BR>> for one=20
day,<BR>> =20
> > =
and=20
then<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> it =
was<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> deactivated again and both buttons =
were=20
off<BR>> again.=20
I<BR>> =
> =20
called again<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> and=20
waited<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> on hold forever to be told to =
uninstall=20
and<BR>> =20
reinstall.<BR>> =20
> So =
I<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> uninstalled=20
and<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> it deactivated. I went to reinstall =
and it=20
said<BR>> I=20
did<BR>> =
> not=20
have an<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> =20
original<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> product to upgrade from. Wow, like =
I'm=20
supposed to<BR>> =20
> keep=20
all<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> hundred-plus=20
key<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> codes I've ever had from Adobe. So =
after=20
about<BR>> 3=20
more<BR>> =
> =20
people<BR>> =20
> > =
and=20
a<BR>> =
> =20
> > =
lot=20
more<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> time on the phone I got around the=20
installation and<BR>> =20
> =20
activated<BR>> =20
> > =20
again<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> with =
a<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> temp key. Then within hours it =
deactivated=20
again."<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> The reader then entered a support=20
nightmare<BR>> from=20
which<BR>> =
> =20
he is<BR>> =20
> > =
yet=20
to<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> =
awaken.<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> For weeks on end, tech after tech =
would tell=20
him to<BR>> =
> =20
run the<BR>> =20
> > =20
repair<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> =20
function<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> and reinstall. When that wouldn't =
work, the=20
techs<BR>> =
> =20
would begin<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> speculating=20
as<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> to what changes he should make to him =
computer to<BR>> =20
> placate=20
the<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> =20
activation<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> gods. "Gee, the guy would say, why do =
you=20
need to<BR>> =
> =20
mirror your<BR>> =20
> > =20
hard<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> =
drive?"<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> the reader wrote. "Then they send me =
to=20
another and<BR>> =20
> the guy=20
says,<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> gee, =
if<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> you upgrade or restore your drive, or =
change=20
your<BR>> =20
> > =20
configuration, or<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> =
backup<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> to Ghost, or use a RAID array, or use =
a=20
disk<BR>> =
> =20
defragger, the<BR>> =20
> > =20
activation<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> doesn't like it. Then they start =
asking why=20
I<BR>> need=20
to<BR>> =
> do=20
these<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> things,=20
which<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> is none of their=20
business."<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
><BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> Some of the Adobe techs mentioned =
that what=20
the<BR>> =20
reader<BR>> =
> =20
really<BR>> =20
> > =20
needed<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> to =
fix<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> the activation problem was "Patch=20
2.70."<BR>> =
> =20
Unfortunately, it seems<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> Patch=20
2.70<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> is not provided to just any old=20
Acrobat<BR>> customer, and=20
the<BR>> =20
> > =
reader had=20
to<BR>> =20
> =
> =20
> supplicate his way up the support =
ladder to=20
find<BR>> =
> =20
someone who<BR>&g
|