Straight from the horse's . . . Well, never mind. There is a Knowledge Base article published about product activation in FSX - if you check out the FSInsider site, there's a blurb about the article, and a link directly to it. (If you get a "page not found" error when opening the article, just refresh - the support servers can get kind of busy. :) )Hopefully, the article will answer some questions, and there is a bit of useful troubleshooting information in it, though, as has been pointed out here, there are a series of steps involving editing the registry that should include a reboot at the end - the article should be updated shortly.It's probably understandable why we don't / can't disclose every single detail about the mechanics of our copy protection mechanisms, so I know this won't answer everyone's questions, or solve everyone's problems. But hopefully, it will help.If it needs to be said, I'm happy to say it here: The last thing we want is to make it difficult for our customers to use our product, and we regreat the struggles that some of you have had. And, for the record, nobody should have to reactivate because they've updated drivers, reinstalled FS9, bought X-Plane, etc. We're the first title in our division (that I'm aware of) to use Product Activation - it's a significant improvement over our previous "disc in the drive" mechanism, but there's been some growing pains. Take this, then, as a reminder of our committment to all of you that we want you up and running (or, for some, up and tweaking ...) as painlessly as possible. We're watching the incidents closely, and we'll do everything we can to make sure that the problems are resolved as smoothly as possible. Oh, and keep an eye on the FSInsider site - there's some good performance stuff coming soon, including a lot of interesting info in a Powerpoint deck that will be part of our AVSIM conference writeup, hopefully live by the end of the week.Thanks for your patience, everybody, and we're certainly sorry to those of you that have had trouble in this area. We're paying attention, and we're working on it, among other things. Flame gently!Hal "9000" BryanFlight Simulator Community Evangelisthttp://www.fsinsider.comInsert "Wish I Was Cool Like Tdragger" sig image here.

Speaking of Tdragger, I see he already posted a link to the knowledge base article in another thread.Oh well . . .Maybe mine is a little more visible?Hal "9000" BryanFlight Simulator Community Evangelisthttp://www.fsinsider.comInsert "Wish I Was as Fast as Tdragger" sig image here

Would somebody....ppaaaallleeeeaaaase make Hal a sig!!:9

>Would somebody....ppaaaallleeeeaaaase make Hal a sig!!:9 I'm working on it, Jeff! Honest!

With all due respect Microsoft: Work out your growing pains on your own dime, not on your customer's. Your so called 'copy protection' has already been hax0r3d, so once again it is the legal, average joe user that pays the price for a poorly designed and ill conceived protection scheme.On another more positive note: Thanks for providing such a great product for us to use to learn with. We all may gripe about problems and shortcomings, but when the day is done this is still a kicka$$ simulation. I just hope the framerate problems and activation debacle is fixed some time soon :) For all the niggles and bugs in the released version, i think we all still owe a great deal to these guys and 3rd party developers for providing us these wonderful tools. *thumbs up*Dave

I'm sure some of the ACES team feel like the b a s t a r d at a family reunion here.:) I appreciate your participation and comments. Even though FSX has not met my expectations, I cannot imagine this forum without tdragger, PC-Pilot, Brian and others offering opines and guidance. Thanks.Bob...

Hi there,I have a rather simple question. I will be over at my in-laws for the next couple of days and will purchase FSX there. Is there a problem if I'd install it on my in-laws PC, delete it when I leave next week and then re-install on my PC?I know this sounds weird but I won't have anything else to do at my in-laws and my wife 'allowed' me to take my Yoke/Pedals with me :-)....must be flightsim addicted ;-)Cheers,Petehttp://members.aol.com/pzsoulman/myhomepage/logo.gifAMD64-3400,1GB/3200DDRAM,WinXP(SP2),DirectX9.0c,Geforce6800(128MB)(Det.84.21), CH Yoke/Pedals

You know guys, for the most part, since the release of FSX, I think anyways, I haven't been that vocal when it comes to the performance issues, "bugs", or in general most of the hard core controversy.The reason I haven't 'gone off' in my usual fashion lately is because there's actually a lot of valid issues mixed in with all the emotion and passion.What I can say with 100% certainty is this: Your point of view may differ and I'll try to hit just the major points.In previous versions we had a pretty good and dedicated team. In THIS version we have a team that is now going after EVERY ISSUE that is within their control and making sure everyone knows they are doing it, to the point of almost getting personal attention by the FS team. At the risk of coming very close to the boundaries of my NDA, and as a consequence, I've "heard, but shall not confirm", us betas may even get responded to in our other area (which we deny exists of course), after the customers in the forums get responded to first. In my opinion I think that's the way it should be after the beta, "If that's the way it is", because we're supposed to the professionals.For those of you new to the FS world, this type of interaction is a first for the FS team. They were pretty much gagged from any direct interaction on all previous releases.Now for those of you who are clever enough to read between the lines should see that yes, the beta seemed to come and go pretty fast (if you looked at the blogs--may have actually been a bit longer then the last one though). The release time line with Vista I'm sure threw an extra wrench in the pile which they didn't need, from my point of view. Now that's just to say the least.Also look at their public appearance schedule they had to keep up with.Imagine what none of us never saw behind the scenes also. Those of you that have jobs understand what I mean...What management constrainsts were they under? What technology hurdles did they have to overcome? Who the heck knows.Before you even get into the coding of the sim, try to imagine also coordinating an internal beta, a regular beta, a public beta, a public demo, etc., etc.Now most of you have already started typing your repsonses, and I realize the door swings both ways and what I said sounds like I'm trying to make excuses for them or us, but nothing could be further from the truth, nor is it my intention to start another coulda, woulda, shoulda, thread on bugs and other issues. Most of what they're doing with this release is an actual first, so hind sight is 20/20 for some of these issues, IMO. Could it have caused some real common sense bloopers? It would seem like it, sure. Some things probably couldn't have been avoided at this time, some probably could have. Again, it's easy to monday night quarter back this thing without seeing the entire big and intense picture.Are there still pretty large issues facing the 3rd party dev community right now? You bet.** Now for the whole point of this big long post **1. You don't see ANYONE from the FS team making excuses. They are telling it eactly like it is. They are not passing the buck.2. They are taking EVERY issue that they can possibly take on seriousley and trying to help users fix it. Maybe not today, maybe not tommorrow, and maybe never, but NO ONE IS GOING UNHEARD.To sum it up, what I'm trying to say is this:Shouldn't all this count for at least something? For all the issues in this release, shouldn't we at least support them? After they've told is in big bold type that they're looking into our issues and supporting us, maybe we should look before we leap.I for one don't feel bad to be a 'fan' of those who are fans of us. I call it like I see it.I understand everyone's frustration, and heck, I've almost jumped on that wagon myself several times, but so long as they're committed to us, I'll be committed to them reagardless of the issues. That doesn't mean we won't continue to be vocal as we always have, it just means maybe we won't scream as loud next time so they won't go deaf and not hear the rest of our problems and concerns.Sorry about my fragmented writing style I know you've all come to love to hate.OOOPPPS, I put this in the wrong thread. I thought this was the frustration thread I saw earlier. My bad, or was it? Hal, you're teaching me bad habits!;)

Believe me, Dave, we tried. We had activation enabled for the entire beta progress with thousands of users and only saw a handleful of issues. We thought we killed all the bugs but we obviously missed a few.

If you don't mind the 30-minute time limit then I'd recommend installing it and *NOT* activating it, as doing so will use up one of your activations. And, heck, leave it installed--maybe they'll end up wanting to buy a copy and then all they'll need to do is type in their key!

I certainly can understand the benefits of activation over having to use the CD. I prefer it. I didn't like the fact that it didn't work on my PC and it was so broken that the telephone activation was impossible. But, I could even live with that. What put me over the edge was contacting support and having them suggest that I reinstall my OS. I explained to them that I have a perfectly functioning workstation that runs FS9, FSX, Visual Studio 6 and Visual Studio 2005 just fine. I didn't think there is anything wrong with my OS, but that was their solution. To me that is unacceptable. I feel sorry for the all the poor people that actually did re-install their OS.I found the article that you posted about and I provided feedback to it. There are other valid combinations of that Upperfilter key. In my case I had "snapman" and the appropriate value is "PartMgr snapman". The question is where was "PartMgr"? Why wasn't it there? and why does Activation fail so miserably if it is missing?It wasn't Acronis True Image, because it appends snapman to the list of filter drivers.Bruce

Unluckily there is already a 'community patch' to solve all problems. So only DCRM abiding simmers have to worry about activation and the the bugs... sigh.....

Wow, we should all read the eula...That article is misleading, IMHOHere is the link to the Article:http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/927007Which, IMHO contains items contrary to the eula on our hard drive....With regards to the activation scheme of FSX, I have a real problem with that article and what reads in the eula on my hard Drive...The Article states:Q4: How many times can I activate the product?A4: You can activate games for Windows two times. Removing and then reinstalling the game will not affect the game activation quota as long as you have not changed any hardware components on the computer.Q6: Can I install the game on more than one computer?A6: Microsoft Product Activation verifies that a software program's product key has not been used on more personal computers than the software's license allows. The product key can be used only on one computer. To run a game on two or more computers, purchase additional copies.FALSE...FALSE...FALSE... No where does it say anywhere in the eula ONE COMPUTER.... Are they for real???? This is in direct contradiction of the eula on my hard drive. No where in the eula in my directory of FSX does it say I can only activate two times, or on one computer. It specifically uses device, not computer...The eula Deluxe Version states the following:a. Licensed Device. The licensed device is the device on which you use the software. You may install and use one copy of the software on the licensed device. IT DOES NOT SAY COMPUTER... Guess what, I designate the device which by definition becomes the device when I use the software on it.. Get it... "8. TRANSFER TO ANOTHER DEVICE. You may uninstall the software and install it on another device for your use. You may not do so to share this license between devices......What..... Doesn't say one, as the eula says I MAY, (Don't have to, IMHO) uninstall and then install on another device.... Pretty vague, I don't think that one would hold up, IMHO.... As far as sharing between devices, it says I can transfer it, and then it says the device by definition is the device you use it on... HUH?????1) b. License Model. The software is licensed on a per copy per device basis.......Yep, got that, per device, and of course Number 8.2) a. Licensed Device. The licensed device is the device on which you use the software. You may install and use one copy of the software on the licensed device......5) SCOPE OF LICENSE. The software is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the software.......8. TRANSFER TO ANOTHER DEVICE. You may uninstall the software and install it on another device for your use. You may not do so to share this license between devices.********************It DOES NOT Say I can only activate twice, nor does it limit the number of devices I desire to install it on..... It says install on another device for your use...It also states:11. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This agreement (including the warranty below), and the terms for supplements, updates, Internet-based services and support services that you use, are the entire agreement for the software and support services.So is there now a LEGAL supplement to our License within one week of release, that states only two activations and is MSFT pulling new terms as they move along. And I have a couple other beefs with this license and activation scheme.....WILL MICROSOFT be charging for a DX10 Update as alleged new functionality is added by way of a feature update.....The License says this:"3. ADDITIONAL LICENSING REQUIREMENTS AND/OR USE RIGHTS.a. Additional Functionality. Microsoft may provide additional functionality for the software. Other license terms and fees may apply"Note the words FEES Folks.... Just like SOME add-on developers are charging for alleged feature updates, MSFT has now given themselves the out to charge you down the road. Doesn't mean they will, but it's there, isn't it ....Oh and one more for you.....4) "You acknowledge and agree that Multiplayer Play may not be consistently available or operate error free, and that Multiplayer Play may be discontinued by Microsoft or its agents at any time without notice to you."That's right they could decide that multiplayer is so screwed up, they MAY just turn it off without any notice to you. Maybe someone keeps hitting the switch which is why folks apparently keep getting booted from the gamespy network....Folks your responsibility is to the eula, and that article is blatantly contradictory to the eula, in my opinion....I think I can make as many hardware changes as I desire, uninstall it, reinstall whatever, and no where does it state in the eula that I am limited to two activations....The way I read it, someone is attemtping to reap Vista Type license schemes on FSX.....So, why is MSFT putting these NEW items in an article when it does not match up legally IMHO, with the eula.... Why the contradiction?????Why the alleged two limit activation, and why is it not in the eula if it allgedly applies so badly they put in in an additional article....I appreciate the FSX folks coming in, and this is no dig at you good folks who develop this. This has to do with the policy folks and this license scheme..I am enjoying borrowing the software thus far, but that article is simply not factual in nature nor does it read as the eula does, IMHO.Comments....Thanks,Joe

>Hi there,>>I have a rather simple question. I will be over at my in-laws>for the next couple of days and will purchase FSX there. Is>there a problem if I'd install it on my in-laws PC, delete it>when I leave next week and then re-install on my PC?>>I know this sounds weird but I won't have anything else to do>at my in-laws and my wife 'allowed' me to take my Yoke/Pedals>with me :-)>....must be flightsim addicted ;-)>>Cheers,>Pete>>http://members.aol.com/pzsoulman/myhomepage/logo.gif>AMD64-3400,1GB/3200DDRAM,WinXP(SP2),DirectX9.0c,Geforce6800(128MB)(Det.84.21),>CH Yoke/PedalsPete,Read your eula, it does not mention PC, or Computer per say, it does mention device, of course, device is defined ONLY as the device you use the software on... (You is you, I think) :-)So follow the eula, and if they give you grief, recite the eula, and take a look at how it reads.You can't share it between device, but hey that may mean both copies running at once on two device, you can't be in two places at one time, can you?So you have to decide that one on your own. Me, I'm not in your situation, but it doesn't say you have to uninstall, only you may uninstall...Talk about ambiguous.... Courts don't like vague contracts they tend to throw them out quite a bit, IMHO...

I think the multiplayer bit is protecting themselves against complaints due to servers failing, remember that they don't actually do the multiplayer, Gamespy do, so they don't want complaints pouring in if GS' servers play up or get switched off altogether.Gamespy is free, if they suddenly find that serving games is no longer profitable, then they may switch off their servers which of course MS have no control over. So fundamentally MS are just covering their own butts with that one.It's called legalise, same as printing on a pack of peanuts "contains nuts"