You buy software and they wont let you use it.You have to jump thru all kinds of hoops to use your software that you PAID for.They invalidate your product key even when you are doing nothing wrong.I installed on XP. Then I bought Vista Ultimate. Un-installed FSX from XP and tried to install on Vista 32 Bit.The product key was CORRECT, about 5 times."Your product key is incorrect or invalidated". Invalidated???I hope Gate's goes broke!!!

Have you phoned them and asked for a new key? They'll be very friendly, helpful and give you a new key.RegardsJim

Nice or not, people shouldn't *have* to bother with calling anyone just to use their computer.Product Activation has many flaws...RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

>You buy software and they wont let you use it.>You have to jump thru all kinds of hoops to use your software>that you PAID for.>They invalidate your product key even when you are doing>nothing wrong.>I installed on XP. Then I bought Vista Ultimate. Un-installed>FSX from XP and tried to install on Vista 32 Bit.>The product key was CORRECT, about 5 times.>"Your product key is incorrect or invalidated".>Invalidated???>I hope Gate's goes broke!!!>>OK, I'm an idiot! Would have sworn I had the correct key.Anyhow, someone posted that they thought FSX ran better on Vista.I have to agree. Tried to get some screen shots at the gate at JFK but Fraps don't seem to work with FSX. Maybe I'm doing something wrong?

>>Anyhow, someone posted that they thought FSX ran better on>Vista.>I have to agree. Hmm. Interesting. Any more info would be nice! Hopefully you can get FRAPS working with FSX because I know some people have.The whole notion of CALLING some company just to use software is ridiculous. And so is this notion that you paid for it, but it's not really yours. You just have a license to use it. A complete change from where we were 15 years ago.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

What makes this truly laughable is that the pirates who have stolen and hacked copies of the software don't have any touble installing it on as many computers as they want, as many times as they want.One inconvenienced genuine customer might be worth it if it meant keeping one hundred more piratea out, but what possible purpose does this hoop-jumping serve, except to alienate genuine, legitimate customers? Does it even help catch one pirate? Allcott

Microsoft has a long history of being overly paranoid, especially when it comes to competition with their OS. (Remember OS/2 Warp? DesqView? NextStep?)RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

>What makes this truly laughable is that the pirates who have>stolen and hacked copies of the software don't have any touble>installing it on as many computers as they want, as many times>as they want.>>One inconvenienced genuine customer might be worth it>if it meant keeping one hundred more piratea out, but what>possible purpose does this hoop-jumping serve, except to>alienate genuine, legitimate customers? Does it even help>catch one pirate? >>>>>AllcottQuite the opposite, of course - it creates more of them. Microsoft's activation/validation is doing for piracy what the US occupation of Iraq is doing for terrorism. I don't mean or want to turn this into global politics, but the similarity is too striking to resist mentioning.

Excuse me? I've been using software for now 25 years, and I don't ever remember a software license that said you owned the software. It has always been a "licensing" arrangement.Also, from reports I have read, the new validation system was meant more to stop "casual" users from installing the software on multiple computers. I think MS has given up trying to stop pirating through copy protection, as they realize they'll never win that way, and are using other means to combat piracy (i.e. lobbying governments to do their part in enforcing their laws).Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

While I agree that the licensing arrangement has been around and I don't actually own the software, I totally disagree with the way it works. Software is a product. You purchase it, you should own it. Take a car, for example...you buy it, either by buying it outright with some cash, or finance it...either way you either own it the day you pay for it, or (with financing), EVENTUALLY own it. What the heck is with software these days? It drives me nuts....activation DRIVES ME FRICKEN NUTS!!! Pirating is illegal, yet screwing over innocent "valued" customers is legal????? ARGHH SON OF A .....kjdhnsflndskljnf;ds;lgfgf;ldsfldsmf!!!!ARGH!Sick and tired of licensing/activation/DRM %^&*!

>I've been using software for now 25 years, and I>don't ever remember a software license that said you owned the>software. Well I sure do, and I go back to 1986 in this scene.I am not about to argue with you over this trivial point. I remember software BEFORE the EULA. That is exactly what I am talking about.anyway cheers,RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

>Quite the opposite, of course - it creates more of them.>Microsoft's activation/validation is doing for piracy what the>US occupation of Iraq is doing for terrorism. I don't mean or>want to turn this into global politics, but the similarity is>too striking to resist mentioning.>:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lolYou don't want to turn this into global politics??? You just tried to (very clumsily I might add).

>>Quite the opposite, of course - it creates more of them.>>Microsoft's activation/validation is doing for piracy what>the>>US occupation of Iraq is doing for terrorism. I don't mean>or>>want to turn this into global politics, but the similarity>is>>too striking to resist mentioning.>>>>:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol:-lol>>You don't want to turn this into global politics??? You just>tried to (very clumsily I might add).An utterly pointless message befitting your handle. :-roll

I thought it was analogous to the Revolution? Now it is the Iraq war? What would George Washington do? Use a Mac?You can't handle my handle...:-xxrotflmao

>Microsoft has a long history of being overly paranoid,>especially when it comes to competition with their OS. >(Remember OS/2 Warp? DesqView? NextStep?)>>>RhettSorry for bringing this thread back to life, but I just read it and Rhett's comment (above), which is just so ironic under the circumstances. After reading the comments of many here and on other forums (actually fora..but I no one speaks latin anymore :-) ), I think the paranoia is mainly on the part of those who think that some group of people at MSFT is sitting around a meeting table with Bill Gates and plotting to steal personal information, keep track of users' every move, and otherwise take over the world. With the kinds of comments being made by some, could you even blame MS for being paranoid...if in fact they were? Members of the ACES team come here and offer information and interaction, and they get blasted and treated to diatribes about "M$" and "greed" and how they're liars keeping to the "marketing plan". I think some give the average MS employee too much credit for their presumed ability to juggle their daily jobs, their home lives, and also keep working on the plot to take over the world, all at the same time. Dr. Evil would be proud.