NO, it will not require it. The phone option is for people who don't have a connection to the internet. It will be just like the Windows XP activation, Microsoft Office activation, etc. (if it requires activation, of course.)Why is everyone freaking out about this???

maybe 'cos it's a pain in the @r5e, especially if you're unlucky enough to have several major bits die on you within a year, I came close to that a couple of years back, when my AMD machine kept killing CPU's on me, installed XP twice on it, then again when it finally went back to being an Intel machine. Any more and I would've had MS down the phone saying "now tell me sir why EXACTLY do you need to re-install our OS yet again?"Especially when they seem to think you should only need to install it once....

It's not that bad. I've reinstalled XP over 30 times (sometimes 2 or 3 times over the course of a week), and I've only had to call MS twice, and that was because of major hardware changes. And yes, I know I have OCD when it comes to OS installs. Lets just say that I sometimes have nothing better to do. Both times I called, all I had to do was give the nice IVR lady my installation ID, then had some person with a thick Indian accent ask if this computer was the only computer that I had XP installed on, then they rattled off a 40 digit confirmation ID, which then activated Windows.

I've had to call and talk to a human (this was a MSDN re-install on the same machine with some changed hardware), and they've never asked why I was re-installing. They only asked if I've installed this before.Though I imagine if you've re-installed XP on your machine a bunch of times with a lot of hardware changes they may ask...but I imagine it would take a lot before they get suspicious.

>NO, it will not require it. The phone option is for>people who don't have a connection to the internet. It will>be just like the Windows XP activation, Microsoft Office>activation, etc. (if it requires activation, of course.)>>Why is everyone freaking out about this???Indeed, Ken. For years many of these same folks have whined and b'tchd about the requirement to have CD#4 in the drive to run FS......now, when that requirement is being removed, these same folks are going to whine and b'tch about the new activation process... *:-*

No complaint from me Bill. I enjoy having additional opportunities to prove that I'm not a software pirate. And, the possibility of someday getting to do so with someone in a foriegn land is especially exciting to me as that will give me a chance to practice my listening skills. Not to mention the potential for using my training in languages to help some poor soul speak correct, or at least understandable, english.No, the convenience of using the to-be-developed-soon-after-the-release-date anti-activation patch holds no interest at all for me. I'd much rather be inconvenienced by getting to call someone who could care less and explain why I've had to reinstall FSX five times in two days because of faulty Vista installs requiring HDD reformats. Or, could it be that I'll be speaking to the same person for both Vista and FSX? - that would save some time but wouldn't be nearly as much fun. I could, of course, connect my FSX machine to the internet but that would deprive me of all the joys previously mentioned. Oh, "what to do?" he said in a high-pitched voice while wringing his hands and fretting over the future...

:-lol

yup, they're also in (possibly large) part the same people who complain that the "backup copies" they gave to their neighbours, colleagues, and friend and family don't work...

No problem with activation, but I have no interest in MS' Windows Genuine advantage notification "tool", which MS wants to critical download to me because "our customers want to know if their copy of windows xp is authentic". Right. And the "tool" wants to call home to Redmond every day.scott s..

Just another reason to never, ever, turn on automatic updates :-) .Doug

For the record, I have never once ######ed about having to have CD 4 in the drive. That doesn't bother me at all. What bothers me is the increasingly invasive measures software developers are taking in the name of anti-piracy. Sure, each step is quick, easy, and painless, but at some point we, the general software-using public, will find our PCs LoJacked with every move we make monitored by some entity that's immune to the checks and balances a government would have to submit to, and we'll wonder how in the #### it happened. I understand that a developer must protect its IP, but as long as we accept these kinds of measure as "Oh well, that's the way it's gotta be" then we become SHEEP, not consumers. You have to take a stand somewhere.

>>Why is everyone freaking out about this???>>Indeed, Ken. For years many of these same folks have>whined and b'tchd about the requirement to have CD#4 in the>drive to run FS...>>...now, when that requirement is being removed, these>same folks are going to whine and b'tch about the new>activation process... *:-* Come on, you guys know the old addage, 'always something to whine about'. They fix something so they find something new to whinge about...Someone posted a parody of the FS community recently which basically shows the same thing...Activation should not be an issue, almost every program out there these days requires you to put in a serial number, sometimes two verification numbers.Let me see:Adobe PhotoshopAdobe PremiereApple Quicktime ProSound Forgeetc etc etc need I go on?So what if it calls MSFT and says 'hey I'm the genuine article'... if they remove the copyright protections, guess what, everyone will be whining about how much FS costs instead because the 20% of us will be supporting the 80% who have pirated copies ...

>Indeed, Ken. For years many of these same folks have>whined and b'tchd about the requirement to have CD#4 in the>drive to run FS...>>...now, when that requirement is being removed, these>same folks are going to whine and b'tch about the new>activation process... *:-* It's the plain and simple fact that people just don't like anti-piracy schemes whether it be in the form of having the CD in the drive to play or be it that you'd have to activate the licence over the internet or telephone.I have to admit, I personally don't like anti-piracy schemes but they are obviously deemed necessary. If we lived in a perfect utopian sociaty, we wouldn't have people out there trying to obtain software illegally -- heck, we wouldn't even need police, FBI, or even a judicial system in our government!

Hello,So, in effect, you are elevating Microsoft (or any other private entity, for that matter) to the same level with state agencies (police, the Federal BI, etc). I fail to see the difference between ACME software peeking into the contents of your hard drive (let me just stress this point out - YOUR hard drive) and their breaking into your house, just to make sure all your software is properly licenced. I mean, what the heck, privacy is a minor concern compared to the justified interests of a software company.Why is it so hard for people to see that all that anti-piracy craze serves to make life hard for the honest paying customers ONLY, is trully beyond me. Software thieves will always find a way to steal the piece of software they're interested in. Why on earth did I have to buy an extra CD drive for my computer that has MSFS CD#4 permanently glued in (that's how sick I got of looking for the #### thing all the time) when my buddy down the block happily uses a pirated "no CD" copy (and calls me stupid for paying 50 bucks for the inconvinience).Why is it that every time I change my hard drive I have to notify Microsoft, Adobe, Captain sim, PMDG, Ahead, and a dozen other software companies I happen be a customer of. What business is it of theirs what I do with my computer? Heck, I get a kick out of formating my HDD twice a day. Do I need their permission to do that?OK, time to cool down... :-)regardsSpiros HazapisAthens, GreecePS/ as you may have noticed, English is actualy my third language so pls forgive any mistakes.

> ...now, when that requirement is being removed, these same folks are going to > whine and b'tch about the new activation process... *:-* This is true. These guys seriously want the cake and to eat it too :-lol