Wait, did this just turn into some sort of penis waving competition while I wasn't paying attention?

Where / how I, or any of the people I work for or with, and how I get licences / software are honestly, none of your concern. Please stop trying to compete with me, because I really have no interest in doing so. If you don't believe me, or just feel like arguing, that's your perogative.

I'm not competing with you. I'm TELLING you that you are bullshitting people by saying you have a legitmate copy of a software that isn't even available to MSDN subscribers before this morning. YOU are the one doing the dick waving by pretending to have a very expensive MSDN license that makes magical copies of a software that just got released.

You got called out by someone who doesn't buy your bullshit, and now you are angry. Get over it. The only way you could have had the full version of Vista Ultimate is by torrenting the illegal MTF copy that came from the volume license agreements.

Angry, no. It has nothing to do with anger, at all. My copy of Vista was not torrented.It wasn't downloaded. What you need to understand, and what is beyond the scope of this discussion, is that there are partner channels and methods used, outside of what you might or might not understand, where certain people and certain companies obtain software, legally, before it is available to the general public.

Those individuals are, shockingly, under no obligation to divulge that information to anybody, especially not to some random, unknown person on a gaming forum.

I came in here to offer assistance to people who might be using the software, because I am. I've also posted a thread to help people who might not be able to get Diablo 2 running because of it's non support for desktop compositing.

Whether or not you "buy" anything I say is irrelevant. This topic was not titled "Please post stuff that only rockonkenshin believes." It's titled "Is anybody testing Windows Vista."

The answer is "yes" to the relevant, topic of discussion. The answer is "who cares" to the now, irrelevant topic of discussion. You are operating under the dangerous, self deprecating assumption that I, or anybody else who is browsing this forum, cares even a little about anything you mentioned. Stop trying to make yourself feel better by winning some imaginary fight over who gets software, and when, and from who. Sometimes, companies have deals, that even you -the omnimportant, all knowing person, has no idea about.

I understand licensing, I understand MSDN and MS partnerships. I also understand that you are full of shit. You said you got your copy from an MSDN subscription and when I pointed ouit that the copy you have had for a while JUST CAME OUT TODAY you backpedaled into a long winded rant.

Please, please get over yourself. You act like i'm some sort of fool who doesn't understand commercial partnerships and MSDN.

The point is that you are giving people reviews of software that you don't have. That is the problem here.

Also, this has nothing to do with "What rockonkenshin believes". It is fact. I've posted direct MSDN partnership links stating the fact that you are saying is false. Microsoft apparently thinks your company is way better than everyone else, to the point of giving you the software first! That's fucking magic. Considering the fact that your profile picture makes you look like a fucking hobo i'm calling bullshit that you work at any decent corporate enviornment that would have a legitmate (and expensive, mind you) MSDN/MS partnership license.

This post was edited by rockonkenshin on Nov 17 2006 04:01pm

That's wonderful. I'm thrilled that you have taken the time to learn Microsoft's corporate licencing policies, in every minute detail. So much in fact, that you know more about them than the very people who wrote them.



Like I said, you are under the same amount of obligation to believe me as I am to care about what you believe.



Sorry to have confused you, but that statement was a simple informative one, meant to imply retail software doesn't always come from a store.



No, actually, what I was doing was making what I meant more clear, as your posting of the MSDN link seemed to be charging me with getting it from them, considering I made no claim that I did. I simply mentioned MSDN as a possible source for unreleased software.



I, honestly, could care less about your foolishness, your level of understanding of commercial partnerships, or MSDN.




Actually, this debate seems to be based on the fact that you, and you alone, don't think I have it. This has yet to materialize into a proven fact. Which, in reality, means you only have a problem with something YOU THINK I don't have. That sounds like a personal problem, and not one that is centric to the discussion that should be taking place, but cannot, due simply to the fact that you disbelieve me.



Sorry, I missed the part on the front page of MSDN that directly states anything about what corporate policies exist that you might not be aware of. Until you can post a link from Microsoft, where they explain, in detail, each VLK subscriber, each corporate customer, each beta tester, each corporate developer, each news publishing facility and each possible vendor outlet, then you haven't proved anything, except for you can find CTRL+C and CTRL+V.



Ok, so, let me get this right. By your accusation (No companies get the software before it is released) then how on earth did it wind up being torrented, as you so cleverly claim is the method from which I obtained it? Are you saying Microsoft themselves torrented it? Surely SOMBODY had to have had it before others did?



Well, I guess you are throwing that in there because you don't have anything else legitimate to say, in which case, shame on you! My feelings are hurt now! Please, Mr.some dude on the internet, describe to me what sombody working in the IS department as a developer, system engineer, beta tester and helpdesk operator would look like then. Im curious. Please, help me out here!

I've tested it a bunch. I like it as long as you are running it on a fast computer. Older computers should stick with XP.