|
The way I've heard it documented is to do as follows:
Installation of Windows 10 will never ask for a key. The key is entered later when you "activate" it.
1. Install Win7Pro with license
2. Activate.
3. Upgrade to Win10 Pro (it will absorb the license from Win7 activation)
or
1. Install Win 10
2. Activate with Win7 Pro key
Decrease the belief in God, and you increase the numbers of those who wish to play at being God by being “society’s supervisors,” who deny the existence of divine standards, but are very serious about imposing their own standards on society.-Neal A. Maxwell
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
Would a Windows 8 key work as well?...I bought a couple of copies of that when they were selling cheap...
|
|
|
|
|
DaveX86 wrote: Would a Windows 8 key work as well Yes
Decrease the belief in God, and you increase the numbers of those who wish to play at being God by being “society’s supervisors,” who deny the existence of divine standards, but are very serious about imposing their own standards on society.-Neal A. Maxwell
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
'kay, thanks...I'll give it a whirl.
|
|
|
|
|
Nobody got it, or was even bothered to ask for a clue etc., so its my turn again on Monday yay!!!
FOSW from Friday[^]
FYI it did bend the rules a little, each character did represent a character in the answer but I jumbled the characters up too, if I didn't it would have been obvious, does anybody know what the answer is? Don't worry I won't force you to setting one on Monday.
|
|
|
|
|
I looked at it, didn't get anywhere, and forgot to look again!
What the heck was it supposed to be?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't notice it! Sometimes when they drop off the "Our Community" list on the homepage, I forget to scour through the Lounge
No idea on the answer though.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Copeland wrote: I forget to scour through the Lounge
I didn't but I still didn't see it. Perhaps it was covered in an invisibility cloak in honour of the recently deceased?
Anyway, no idea what the answer is.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
That wasn't bending then, it's called breaking!
So what the hell is the answer then?
"I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe HobbyProggy needs to add something to the rules: "must be solvable" perhaps?
Hang on, I just checked, and that's Rule 1[^]!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
...and I just noticed I get my very own exception to the rules as well
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
What are rules for if not to be broken...
Anyway the answer. I didn't think it was too difficult, shows what I know:
ḊṏḉṭṏṟJḉṔḝḝ
could be read as DoctorJcPee (the only answer picked up on that)
and DoctorJcPee is an anagram for CodeProject. Simple when you know the answer.
Mondays one will be more conventional.
|
|
|
|
|
Display Name Taken wrote: I didn't think it was too difficult
How foolish we all now seem expecting that
ABCDAEFCGHH
represented
ABCDEFBGDAH
We shall have ourselves taken out and shot immediately!
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
What you wrote is IMHO more complex than my FOSW and I have no idea what you are talking about.
Tell you what you answer and set one, cos I'm not bothering anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh dear, somebody fell out of the wrong bed this morning. What I wrote is simply a pattern template. The whole contest is predicated on the replacement of each letter with a symbol and therefore it should be obvious that any repeat of a letter gets the same symbol to be placed in the correct position.
The top line is the pattern you created, the bottom the pattern that was correct. There was no way that anyone was ever going to get the answer from your pattern when the actual pattern differed so much from it. If they'd expected to be looking for an anagram (as they would in CCC) then it might have been different.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
Why am I getting the criticism? We've had at least two FOSW's that are "different" in the past.
In fact the one I guessed on Thursday was an Apple keyboard symbol and a pi symbol for pie (answer Apple Pie).
I honestly thought it was easy enough, would it have been easier if I'd written ḉṏḊḝṔṟṏJḝḉṭ ?
Nobody even asked for a clue for this one. Maybe because nobody wanted to set one, or maybe because nobody cares?
Anyway why not have a guess tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
|
I asked Google (tm) this question...
"...How many active cell phones are in the USA today ?..."
Google responded with this (perfectly sensible, hardly surprising) URL...
www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=How+many+active+cell+phones+are+in+the+USA+today+%3F[^]
So far, so good.
The first nine hits were stories from USA Today
Not a one of them came close to actually answering the question.
Bing and Yahoo's Search (arguably the same entity) Did a lot better.
|
|
|
|
|
Blame it on the ambiguity of interpreting the sentence?
Tried 'Today, how many active cell phones are in the USA?' and the results were dramatically different.
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent thinking. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
'How many active' brings up the right question in autocomplete. Unnecessary complication is all down to you! No dissing g gle required.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
Bing understood the question in its original form.
Interesting; last night Yahoo search got it right the first time, but this morning, Yahoo produces hits which are nearly identical to Google's from last night.
|
|
|
|
|
C-P-User-3 wrote: Bing understood
It may well have done but if so it was a fluke. The slightest variation produces less relevant results as you can easily confirm. There is no search engine in the world that can know exactly what you're thinking. It all comes down to the search term and any ambiguity will inevitably get you less than optimal results.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
|
|
|
|
|
9082365 wrote: no search engine in the world that can know exactly what you're thinking
Obviously, you are right, but you have to admit that they are getting better at guessing...to the point of being spooky.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
Now try, "For the perfect suntan, what are the ideal sun times?"
|
|
|
|
|
I'm surprised. I thought the first nine would be adverts to some unrelated companies websites.
|
|
|
|