Then, less than a year ago, there seemed to me to be some strange movements. I joked that it was mousey wanderlust, hoping it would subside before the allusion grew stale. Nope. My mouse and its inexpensive replacements worked initially but were similarly afflicted with abrupt sidewards movements much greater than the occasional prior small ones. Ultimately, I bought a $15 new mouse. A Microsoft mouse prominently described on the box as their BASIC MOUSE, all I’d need or want. Wrong, it worked fine on basic ops. But I learned there or nearby of their fancier mice. Smoother movement, optical not mechanical drive, sideways scrolling, easily invoked magnification. Interesting; why should I continue to deprive myself?
So I got a new and better one with the soothing, elevating name of Optical Comfort Mouse 3000 for $30. Worked fine and still does. What had developed was that I had a need, tried other cheaper mice, then bought first one then two Microsoft mice. Clever marketing. Then the steadfast and reliable mouse on our other PC began worsening in a different, recent reluctant movement behavior, unheard of heretofore. Not fixable by any means known to me, it dragged and stalled. Of course I knew one likely solution, a new MS mouse. Fortunately, I got the last of the same model as above. They were being replaced by new and still fancier series from MS, cordless, laser connected.
Wait a minute. What’s happening here and why? And how? Faithful devices developing two kinds of corrupting condition in two time periods following a series of free Windows upgrades. How could that be? Super clever marketing? Sneaky sci fi? Evil enterprise? Hard to believe. Still, I wonder and suggest you be aware of this experience. You might let me know if it happens to you.
Not so the makers of software. License agreements are a signal that the producer of the product is sincere. And worried. Worried enough to hire lawyers to make up and repair fences to protect them from other lawyers looking for holes. Reminds one of why there are so many lawyer jokes abroad in the land. But fewer than there are lawyers.
Some of them work for the makers of software, composing their proofs of sincerity, walling off their anxiety. One of the best agreement statements I’ve seen was while installing a pretty good application. At least 3, maybe 4 steady screens of legalese. [Mild compared to Buy.com’s 13 screens.] You’ve gotta laugh out loud at that. Another one had a 4-line-deep viewing slit for the agreement. The user was expected to scroll through all the conditions and speculations. Or maybe not. Maybe that was just a candid admission that the makers knew they needn’t use up screen space with trivia.
Of course that’s essential trivia, since it’s a required hurdle. You can pay the money but not use your purchase if you object to their narratives of what might possibly go wrong—for them. You can buy their software but you can’t use it until you lie a little, let them off the hook in case anything goes wrong in any way that alerts a legal mind to potential loss or profit (depending which side in a dispute). Correction above, rent their software, since as I understand it, the maker retains ownership. The user buys access and may use it any way he wants unless he can’t be cool and somehow displeases the maker.
Dave Uffer, originating in Colorado, has been an Illinois resident most of his adult life, so far, preferring to live in or near Chicago. He is a member of some standing & longevity and has attended meetings scattered around North Shore, West Suburban, and Downtown.
>blockquote> There is no restriction against any non-profit group using this article as long as it is kept in context with proper credit given the author. The Editorial Committee of the Association of Personal Computer User Groups (APCUG), an international organization of which this group is a member, brings this article to you.
For more information on the Tulsa Computer Society click here