Slashdot Mirror
XP Service Pack Does the Impossible
Peyna writes "This article over at C|net discusses the upcoming Microsoft Windows XP service pack, which will contain the normal bug fixes, but more importantly, will make XP more modular, allowing you to override their default products. I assume this means Internet Explorer and possibly some other apps as well."
Windows is actually modular enough to allow people to add their own apps. I'm amazed!
The next thing Microsoft will tell me is that the sky is blue.
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
Oh, it's still bloated. IE, OE, Messenger, etcetera aren't uninstalled, most likely because XP still depends on their DLLs. It seems like you could accomplish nearly the same thing by deleting the relevant icons from the Start menu...
I'm sure a read a story this morning which said they were only 'hidden', not removed.
So, are the core IE executables/DLLs actually deleted from the disk? Or are the just disabled?
It amazes me how incredibly clever Microsoft is as they twist words. They go by the letter of the law, not the spirit, and we all suffer.
4 23.html
This is a very enlightening article, I think:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/25
I honestly wish I were clever enough to use their own tactics against them, but looking at how difficult the courts have made it, it seems impossible. How do we keep them from doing this to us over and over again?
It sounds to me like the update is really just allowing Windows to be shipped with third party applications links on the desktop. I guess Microsofts packaging tools used to remove these links (which would suck no doubt) and part of SP1 will change that "functionality".
:-)
. asp and take a long hard look at some of the cool shit MS is doing.
As for it making Windows more modular - thats a load of crap. I love how the editors and the submitters around here intentionally embelish just so they can get more pageviews and comments. Oh well I guess they suceeded today...
Whats really going to rock in SP1 for XP is the new Mira technology stuff. If you dont know what that is - I suggest you cruise on over to http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/mira_preview
J
I love idealists not because I am one, but because they make life bearable for pragmatists such as myself.
It mentions are which components are replaceable:
IE,
Outlook Express,
Messenger,
Windows Media Player
JVM.
There will be 4 configuration options: (from the article)"You can have the Microsoft option, the original machine configuration (i.e. what the OEM decided it would ship you, but this is going to be most obviously applicable to new machines shipped by OEMs post-SP1 release), a non-Microsoft option that allows you to substitute non-Microsoft middleware, and custom configuration."
This SP does NOT make Windows more modular. It simply is a convenient interface to override default applications.
You can't uninstall IE or its libraries - they still will load on startup. What you can do is associate URLs to Moz or whatever.
This can all be done now, just not very conveniently for the average user. All the SP adds is a Control Panel applet to facilitate the association changing.
Marc
From the Cnet article:
Another change seeks to curb about 90 percent of Windows XP piracy. Microsoft introduced Product Activation with the operating system, which uses a numeric key to lock the software to the hardware. But code stolen from a large Microsoft customer allowed rampant illegal Windows XP copying. People using Windows XP with the stolen key will not be able to apply the service pack or any future updates available from Microsoft's Web site.
"Basically we're freezing their computer where it is," Cullinan said. "We're not preventing them from using it, but obviously one of the benefits of having a license is keeping your PC updated."
Not that any /.ers would use pirated software, but interesting nonetheless
This service pack will do nothing to make windows modular, it simply will allow the user to change the default program associated with a file extension simpler. It does not remove any MS software from Windows. The default program thing isn't anything spectacular, I'm more interested in the part that says that XP won't bug you until you sign up for passport. That right now has to be the biggest pain related to XP, the damn thing just won't go away!
According to this article, XP SP1 doesn't remove the apps, it just hides them. One of the FEATURES of the middleware hiding app is that other programs need to register themselves through a new API to be the default web browser or email client or media player etc... My question is will the API documentation have the same "Anti-OpenSource" clauses that MS has grown so fond of recently??? Would this prevent Mozilla from being the default browser??
------- Assumption is the mother of all f$#@ ups.
You really don't want to upgrade, since the new SP1 will make your WinXP unusable, as MS knows about illegal keys (like the one which escaped from a company who are good friends of MS and their name starts with D) (thats according to the-register)...
Hetz (Heunique)
I'll bet they're holding lotteries in the Federal Pen right now to see who gets to be Bill Gate's boyfriend.
Kinda useful, then, the way he rocks back and forth.
All this does is HIDE the icons for internet explorer and outlook express and windows media player.
I can already do that. Tweak UI does it. And as for file associations, who here thinks that if you accidentally start up windows media player even after this service pack, that it will still redo all your file associations without asking...
This is not a plea of guilt on Microsoft's part, hell this supports their case, they aren't removing anything, they are just hiding it (since of course, windows would stop functioning if you removed it)...
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
Does this Service Pack raise the dead? What about walking on water? Does it do cold fusion? Because all those things are "impossible" to achieve to. So without any context, the title is meaningless.
SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
I use Yahoo! Messenger all the time on my PC. I like it, I use it, it gives me handy access to my account there.
But it's annoying because YM uses IE as its HTML rendering engine. If I uninstalled IE completely, YM wouldn't work. HomeSite has (or at least, had) similar problems; it advertised "experimental" Gecko integration, but I never did get it to work. If I wanted to preview my pages without launching a browser, IE needs to be installed.
Other third-party apps do the same thing, because IE's engine is so easy for them to integrate. It's not my fault they rely entirely on MS's browser to make their application work, but there you are.
So we keep IE installed and just deal with the memory bloat. I don't use IE anymore except for browser testing, not since Mozilla became so friendly and I convinced Windows to make it the default browser for everything. (This took some time.) But it'd be nice if third-party apps didn't agree with MS that the browser is an "integrated" part of the OS.
The article mentions that:
"Another change seeks to curb about 90 percent of Windows XP piracy. Microsoft introduced Product Activation with the operating system, which uses a numeric key to lock the software to the hardware. But code stolen from a large Microsoft customer allowed rampant illegal Windows XP copying. People using Windows XP with the stolen key will not be able to apply the service pack or any future updates available from Microsoft's Web site."
This means that the CD you have in your cube with XP written on it with a Sharpie will not take the service pack.
Other than the security issues this service pack claims to rectify, seems like issues that the average slashdot reader can solve his/herself. I mean, do we really need help making Netscape the default rather than I.E.?
Not to mention that it's build 2600 :)
On a serious note, I wonder why they did'nt do this a long time ago (read windows 95, or first anti-trust lawsuit) it seems that it would have saved them a great deal of headaches.
What about Windows 2000 Service Pack 3? Will it allow me to choose to uninstall the software that was mentioned?
If the answer is no, then why is it not possible?
Clearly it _CAN_ be done.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Well, I thought it was quite funny.
But, as several commentators have already pointed out, this isn't really modularising Windows at all - MS have been using the word "hide", which strongly suggests that all their stuff will be installed, it just won't have icons (rather like NetMeeting in XP).
So far so redundant.
But I was interested in the bit at the end of the article where it mentions "freezing" copies that have been activated with a known pirate key. I thought most pirate copies of XP were the corporate edition, that doesn't need activating, and should therefore be indistinguishable from legit copies? Or do they really mean the Product Key, which you enter when you install Windows? In which case, what's to stop you simply changing it in the registry - or, very worst case, simply finding a working Product Key on the net and reinstalling? Still far far easier and cheaper than going out and buying XP.
Other apps use IE within themselves using IE's API. Until there is a generalized API that will allow Netscape/Opera/etc. to work in the same places IE does now, such a feature is mostly useless.
I can imagine MS may want to shorten that statement down to "this feature is mostly useless".
the service pack willnot install on those Corprate versions that were floating around becasue MS locked out that Product ID key.
to bad for those that have it......
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
"Basically we're freezing their computer where it is," Cullinan said. "We're not preventing them from using it, but obviously one of the benefits of having a license is keeping your PC updated."
You still be able to use your current pirated version just fine. The upgrade will not disable it from working. It's just that it won't let you upgrade.
Dont post FUD
Joseph?
While this is a welcomed change for Microsoft to open up their operating system and play nice with third party companies, what has Microsoft done with the EULA for SP1? That is the real reason not to use XP -- not because it doesn't play nice with RealAudio. The XP EULA is affront to an individual's right to cpu privacy.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
...I wonder how many people currently running a pirated version of XP will reconsider and actually BUY XP to be able to apply the service pack.
;)
My guess: probably fewer than those who will switch to a free OS
The idea with those select versions of the OS is that no key should be required anywhere. Large organisations cannot call Microsoft every time the upgrade or reinstall a computer.
And for those who didnt read the article and runs a pirated version of XP: M$ says 90% of you wont be able to upgrade to SP1...
I think this is horribly irresponsible, because the people who pirate are probably never going to pay for the full product.
So, what, MS is morally obligated to give their software away for free to keep the Internet secure? Please. The problem with Code Red wasn't software pirates, it was (and is) ordinary users who either don't know enough to keep their bug patches up-to-date, or don't care. If pirates were the only reason viruses spread on the Internet, we wouldn't even have a problem.
Don't know why
"The control offers four different choices for changing the Windows desktop and Start Menu: "Computer Manufacturer Configuration," "Microsoft Windows," "Non-Microsoft" and "Custom."
When I change my setting to Non-Microsoft, will microsoft know? If so, will I not get updates for certain things because I am "Non-Microsoft"? Why does the system need to know that the program is "Non-Microsoft"
(I am not trying to flamebait or troll, just stating my worries considering previous Microsoft practices.)
~ kjrose
Yes.
You see, you might think that setting Netscape to launch when you click on a hyperlink or double-click an HTML file means you've set the default. What I call setting the default is having the OS itself decide that when an app has programmatically requested an HTML-rendering component, it gets that component from Netscape and not from IE.
No user intervention can achieve that right now. Not even by a Slashdotter.
Cheers,
Ian
From the article: Another change seeks to curb about 90 percent of Windows XP piracy. Microsoft introduced Product Activation with the operating system, which uses a numeric key to lock the software to the hardware. But code stolen from a large Microsoft customer allowed rampant illegal Windows XP copying. People using Windows XP with the stolen key will not be able to apply the service pack or any future updates available from Microsoft's Web site.
Any bets on how long it takes for a crack to appear for the Service Pack? Or new ISO's of Windows XP with the Service Pack already applied?
Actually, the article says that it will be just as bloated as before, but you won't necessarily see it all. This is the smallest step MS could make in the right direction, but its not big enough. The ability to actually remove the various components, not just hide them, for both OEMs and consumers, that is what I'm waiting for.
Do not confuse duty with what other people expect of you; they are utterly different.Duty is a debt you owe to yourself.
Please press OK to continue.
This program has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down. No changes will be saved.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
I would never pay for XP anyway. In fact, I haven't paid for an MS Product in years. Last time I guess you could say I paid was when I bought a new machine about 4-5 years ago. It came with Windows, so I had to pay the obligatory Windows tax. After that, used a pirated 98SE, now Win2k pro, which was supplied from a company I do work for.
WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
There is!
Carpe Cerevisi - Seize the Beer
This link contains some API and registry changes that allow OEMs and other vendors to change the default programs from e-mail, JavaVM to media player within Windows.
¦ ©® ±
So, who was that?
Dell?
Well of course.
How else am I, as the operating system, supposed to know that this completely unknown executable you've just stuck on the drive handles foodlewidgets unless you tell me that it handles foodlewidgets?
No conspiracy here people. Move along now...
Cheers,
Ian
It disables further updates/patches for users who run XP with pirated activation numbers. I think this is horribly irresponsible
So let me get this straight, not only should a company be OK with people using pirated copies of their software, they should also offer software updates to those people? Maybe 24-hour tech support too just in case?
I don't run XP and don't plan to. However, they are offering an update to their paying customers, I have NO clue why you think they should cater to people stealing their software too.
Mark
This is essentially useless. Great, you can remove the icons if they were really bothering you so much...but can the OEM's?
Doubt it.
http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,s=701&a=27311, 00.asp explains that the icons are only hidden and the and the default views in the start menu are now more configurable.
You can still run IE - the executibles and dll's are all there. That is why the rest of the 9 states didn't jump for joy and say 'good microsoft... now play dead!'
This is just stupid. First of all, hardly anyone is going to disable these things, and secondly I expect that the first thing that most products will do in future is make you turn them back on before they install so they know what environment they are running in.
Sig is taking a break!
Remember how you could "fuse" NT 4's and 2000's service packs into the installer so you wouldn't have to update it when you made a fresh install? How much do you want to bet that this will the next method that the piraters will use to circumvent the piracy control method?
In a nutshell, this is quite easy to do. You extract the contents of the service pack to a directory, copy the contents of the Windows CD to some random folder, place the updated files in the appopriate places, burn a CD with the updated contents and make it bootable, and voila! You have an updated Windows CD.
I'll bet loads of people run pirated versions of XP that aren't well-known stolen activation keys or other cracks that attempt to override it.
.net server that would manage (contain?) the spread of select CDs.
I'll bet lots of them are grey-area pirates -- people with Select agreements that have a copy that doesn't require online authorization and can be used on lots of computers. I'm sure there are other similar distributions that are in the wild that don't require this and won't get caught by XP SP1.
Unless (when?) Microsoft starts limiting how these versions can be used, there will still be large numbers of illicit copies of XP and other software on the market. I wouldn't be suprised to see a MS licensing service in
Despite Unix, there's more to life than files you know.
Modular means that I can programatically get a component that handles foodlewidgets. Not foodlewidget.fwdg documents, but the actual live thingies themselves.
Example: I need a component to play some streamed media. I go to the new registry, find out what the user has told me handles this kind of media, and I play it.
Not a million miles away from MIME types, is it? And the MIME system is good...
Cheers,
Ian
You act as if the consumer will be forced into a package he/she does not want. That is so short sighted.
I bet the software package sold with the PC can be as interesting as the hardware itself. This may give some real difference between Dell, Gateway, Hp ect.
Future statement" I bought a System X because it comes with Media Planet Version 5"
Get the drift that maybe this could create some new and alive software companies.
Get a free ipod.
since I refuse to pay for XP, I wouldn't be able to upgrade
If you didn't pay, you shouldn't have anything to upgrade in the first place. The fact that software should be free doesn't mean that we can refuse to pay companies who want us to. As silly as Microsoft sometimes are, I entirely approve the anti-piracy part of this.
Guilt? There is no guilt. In an attempt show good faith efforts being made, Microsoft will start modularizing their OS.
Soon, spurred by the concept of modularity, they will make the jump to encapsulation. Further moved by the benefits this produces, they will convert all Microsoft codebases to Visual C++.
After the massive outcry from all the people who really hate C++ because few things need the OOP that C++ gives you (and b/c Microsoft's default OS install will have bloated to 2GB) Microsoft will slowly convert everything over to C#, and the entire operating system will then be based on .Net.
Spurred on by this, Microsoft will then drop the current licensing scheme, and offer operating systems as .Net service only - .Net boot loaders will be free.
Soon, licensing will be directly attached to your .Net Passport, and corporate logins will be another service of Windows.Net. Companies will pay exorbitant fees to set up XP.Net Networks. No one will need Exchange anymore, as we will all have Hotmail.Net accounts, now a pay-per-message service. There will be surcharges for leaving a company, as your Identity.Net profile will have to be updated.
Microsoft will then make the push to DataCenter.Net - ending support for hard disks in client computers accidentally when a particularly malicious .Net virus they can't seem to kill prevents any fixed drives from functioning on computers with a video card. All companies will be required to license DataCenter.Net on a Hardware.Net compliant server to be able to store any files on fixed media, or they can purchase private space on Microsoft's CentralFile.Net.
The need for bandwidth will increase exponentially, as your will need to download an operating system everytime you log in. To improvie the bandwidth situation at your company, you will be able to license OSProxy.Net. To cope with the ever-increasing need for their own bandwidth, starting up a computer will become a "service" of Microsoft, as will OS updates, even minor builds. To prevent version conflicts, you will only be able to have the most recent version of Windows.Net. If an upgrade occurs and your computer is not capable of handling the new version (which you just paid for by attempting to download it), you will receive a message directing you to both local stores where you can purchase acceptable hardware and computer recycling centers.
Excited by the money Microsoft is making with this method, software vendors will flock to join the Software.Net program, allowing you to pay usage licensing instead of flat rates for almost any program or utility. Many gaming companies will stick with CDs, with increased development for Macintosh and Linux. Sadly, installing from a CD will require a small per-use fee for Add/Remove Programs.Net
On the upside, though. Windows.Net will be completely modular, ensuring that you can use any browser you wish to take the time of loading each time you start up.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
So, what, MS is morally obligated to give their software away for free to keep the Internet secure? Please.
You don't have to pay for the service pack - it is an update to the existing software. The service pack on it's own is useless. Stopping people with unauthorised copies of Windows from installing it will not magically make them pay for the software they already have a copy of.
The problem with Code Red wasn't software pirates...
Correct.
it was (and is) ordinary users who either don't know enough to keep their bug patches up-to-date, or don't care.
Right. Now, what has changed here? A hell of a lot more people will simply not have the option of installing the updates.
So, before MS did this, the number of people using an unauthorised copy of Windows was u million. Afterwards, it's still u million. Before, the number of people with wide-open Windows was c (clueless) million + a (apathetic) million. Afterwards, it is now c million + a million + u million.
Now, where is the benefit to Microsoft? The vast majority of people who are affected by this will simply leave their software as it is, because every time a service pack comes out, they are going to look at the hundreds of pounds it costs to buy a legitimate copy, and measure the value against the updated features in the service pack, and not the features of the whole OS.
All this will do is vastly increase the effect of worms like Code Red. The only possible benefit I can see of this is that in the future, if Code Red 5 (or whatever) breaks out, Microsoft can blame pirates rather than admitting the average Windows server isn't maintained by somebody who isn't remotely qualified to do so.
Does MS really think that by shutting down the current crop of warezed XP's out there, that another crop won't appear?
Come on, how much ingenuity will it take for someone to make a copy of another XP Corporate disk and/or key (I'm not sure if the disks are somehow tagged, but the keys certainly are) and put it up on an FTP server somewhere?
It doesn't even need to be an IT guy that does it, though it will probably be an IT guy's head that rolls when MS figures out which company had it.
I can see it now.. Bill the Janitor is declared Hero of the Warez Realms by Sir Hax0r for courage and valor above and beyond that of all janitors, for swiping an XP Corporate CD and key for a night.
They're scared because the continuing trial has been going very badly for them. If you follow the daily coverage, just about every day one of their witnesses ended up making a fool of themselves in one way or another. The gov't lawyers on the case have been effective enough in getting information that at one point MS had to cut almost 1/3 of their witnesses to avoid even more debacles.
They still swear they did nothing wrong and still continue to file motions to get the case dismissed summarily, but they're also obviously aware that the case is going not in their favor at the moment. Now I'm not saying the gov't lawyers have been angelic either, they've gotten caught with their share of knuckle slaps by the judge also. But from the perspective I see from the daily coverage, MS is keenly aware that they've been made fools of repeatedly and many of their key witnesses have been discredited. They probably view this as a way to try and stave off more penalties by appearing to have a change of heart (in the face of stiffer penalties, of course) just long enough to get the trial done with.
"Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
Netscape? yeah, real? nope. Winamp 3 will most probably be their choice for media players. Nullsoft is owned by AOL.
"My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett
The service pack doesn't make Windows modular, it just makes it look like Windows is modular. As many others have said, Microsoft is being pretty smart by making this move. They're trying to blow a hole in the case continued by the nine other states and DC.
i'm reading a lot of posts about how the new patch cripples pirated keys
.Net
i'm wondering how this affects the different flavors of XP?
as everyone knows that Professional is not supposed to be subject to the key bullshit whereas the home version is
personally i'm using a pirated copy of XP pro and while it would be trivial for me to get a legal copy for $5 thanks to a collegiate cocksucking arrangement with M$ that one of my ex-colleges had, i'd rather not since that would mean re-installing and the fact that M$ might see a penny of my money (which is unacceptable)
in fact the last legal copy of windows i think i purchased was of '98, and that wasn't by choice
fuck M$, if they cripple my desk i'll just have another *nix desktop with a 98 SE partition for gaming, maybe eventually they will learn to stop treating their customers like criminals (although they seem to have taken a lesson from US law enforcement on that one, since you are presumed guilty until proven innocent in most cases these days)
hopefully the DoJ will give them a vasectomy and people won't have to worry about selling their souls to
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I don't believe so because internet explorer IS the interface. The IE DLL's are doing double duty as also core O/S files. It's similar to what would happen if you took the Mozilla shared libraries and built them into the base kernel. Yes, Mozilla will run faster and it will boot up when you start the machine and make it look pretty (it would also probably replace window managers and X). However, you would then be totally unable to uninstall Mozilla because it's now intermingled with the kernel code.
"Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
Despite the "horribly irresponsible" comment which is a load of rubbish, this point is pretty important.
If people are running a pirated version of XP and install SP1 and are prevented from applying any fixes then the next time some virus starts crawling all over the web that requires a patch to be applied then they won't be able to apply it.
This means that the virus will stay rampant in the wild for longer because a large number of people won't patch it because they can't.
Having said that, getting SP1 to just prevent WinXP from running again causes just the same problems. People with cracked keys won't run the SP update - but at least they will be able to use the emergency patches MS often requires releasing.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
I would think that this would make the next Code Red even easier to code and distribute. Once the worm is on a computer, it just has to make a simple check, does the product key on this machine corrospond to the one that Microsoft locked out with SP1?
If not, delete self.
If so, run payload, know that the computer will NEVER be secure, and keep the back door open for whatever the worm writer wants to do with it.
Ouch.
Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I think the idea here is that, to follow your example, Netscape would now be able to create a replacement for mshtml.dll, the core rendering engine, that's used by explorer, the help system, active desktop, and so on.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
"fdisk /mbr works nicely for that..."
/mbr workd for nothing but overwriting the boot loader.
fdisk
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Example: My roommate and I traded a months rent for an IBM laptop with '98. XP would bring this machine to its knees. That and I'm not shelling out the $$$ to a company I find dishonest for a product I feel is inferior for the money and resources it demands. Soooo, I put Slack, Mozilla and OpenOffice on there and guess what? Except for games (which I don't really play anyway) I have a laptop that works better (IMHO) than most laptops with Windows and provides the same function!
I think people need to start "walking the walk" a little more. People bitch about MS, tout *nix, but then most use IE and Win to read /. ! I don't get it. I have to use Win2K (but installed Mozilla) at work, but other than that...
Computer Science is Applied Philosophy
If I steal a car from the dealership, the dealership is MORALLY OBLIGATED to give me warranty on the stolen car?
/. ... but this is ridiculous.
I dislike Microsoft as much as the next guy on
I stand corrected on that example. However, I'm sure you see my point - it could be applied to, say, streaming media, viewing image files, launching Java apps...whatever.
Curious - with the drop-in replacement, who sets the the choice? The user? At install time or whilst running? Would an app requesting an HTML rendering component have to specifically request the replacement? Or could it just say 'Give me an HTML component' and the OS would supply it with Mozilla.
However, as I say I stand corrected on the MSHTML stuff.
Cheers,
Ian
Can I uninstall Pinball in WinXP? I was going through my Win2k machine deleting junk the other day, and looked at my logs:
"Pinball.exe has been restored to maintain system stability"
Me: ehh.....
XP is the king of all desktops
Linux is the king of all servers
I use XP to browse the web, play games, do my accounting, word processing, coding, etc.
I use Linux as a web, email, ftp, mysql and ssh server.
you have that computer loaded with Longhorn and a dozen or so Mirya tablets, one for each meeting attendee. They can work on materials being shared on one desktop in the same room, ala a whiteboard.
No they can't, because Mira only allows one user per machine at a time. Version 2, which will likely be released in 2004, will allow... 2 users! So no, it will be impossible to do what you discribe using Mira in the forseeable future.
I won't argue that Mira could be something cool, but it is hamstrung by Microsofts absurd user licensing policies. I expect that it will be possible to do what you describe once these devices are hacked to run Linux, but Microsoft has no plans to give you that functionality any time soon.
That said, though, it would be easy enough to create similar functionality using Linux with much cheaper hardware. Those web tablets have been mentioned, which seem to run about half the price of a Mira tablet, or a laptop would also work, and there are some laptops with touchscreens.
In short, there is nothing particularly cool or innovative about Mira. MS is taking something that's simple to do with *nix/X windows and hamstrung it to fit their licensing model.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
On the Mac OS, when specifying the apps to be used as http/ftp/mailto/etc. helpers, literally *any* app can be specified, just by browsing to it. And yet, now Microsoft is saying that you have to use their APIs to register as a helper, but they've said nothing about how you get access to the documentation for those APIs!
Yes, and the same applies today under Windows. Microsoft are talking about adding ANOTHER layer to make it easier for people who don't know what mailto or MIME types or helper apps actually are, which will do the registration step you describe above automatically.
Otherwise, you have three choices: (1) do it by hand, (2) hope that your app asks you every time you run it whether you want it to be the default or not, or (3) reinstall the app every time you want to make it the default.
Pick one.
Simon
Coming soon - pyrogyra
The fact that Microsoft has gotten everyone to call an *application* like Windows Media Player "middleware" is a victory in itself for them. This is *not* middleware. There is no good goddamn reason why WMP has parts of its code in the OS and vice versa. The only reason MS has done that is to make the OS and their (not) middleware apps so inextricably intertwined that they can truly claim that it's impossible to remove the apps without destroying the OS. They take chunks of code from the browser and other apps and put it into the OS. Then they take chunks of the OS code and put it into the browser. That's the only reason why they can call those apps middleware with a straight face. Go read the Findings of Fact from the last antitrust trial (Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's) and you'll see what I mean. What I need is a link to the page. Karma whores! Fetch me a link!
As ever, The Register have a good article on this. Has a bit more detail on how the modularisation will work
This post will enter the public domain 70 years after my death, unless Disney buys another extension.
My XP install is downright tiny compared to a full Mandrake Linux install, and from what I hear, OS-X is around 3X as big.
Bloated? Compared to DOS6.22, yeah, but not compared to anything current.
+5:offtopic,but anti-American
Go and listen to an hour of their brain-wa^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hmarketing drivel about .NET development and they'll give you a free copy of XP Professional, key and all. That's where I got mine.
Yeah, when I read "XP Service Pack Does the Impossible", I thought...
-- Actually fixes crash bugs?
-- Patches security holes?
-- Comes with source code under GPL?
I don't use XP, thank god... I think this is a trick... they're going to release the service pack, and come back to the trial when tons of people call in with problems saying "see?? SEE??? I told you we couldn't do it!!"
They're going to use this as their proof of concept, at the expense of all XP users...
Tread lightly.
Snooze and you lose your sushi.
I see this as an excuse for Microsoft to deliver "legitimate" spyware to your machine. If they can shut you down from updates, there is nothing stopping them from "adding" a little update that notifies Microsoft that you are using the software illegally from IP address 12.34.56.78, through whatever ISP you use.
No thanks, not for me. Microsoft Window is still the "Duplo" block of the operating system world.
when i make a copy i have not deprived you of anything
Well, actually you have. Does the word 'revenue' mean anything to you?
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
Really? Didn't Cullian say "Basically we're freezing their computer where it is," ? I've got several M$ hard drives like that. You know, won't boot. No, they were not pirated. Most of them have been reformatted to Debian and the computers work much better that way. The infamous instability of M$ OS is wholly the fault of M$.
Don't confuse unpleasant truth with FUD.
1. All M$ EULA have a unilateral temination clause where M$ may terminate your license to use their OS and demand that you destroy all the coppies of "thier" software that you own.
2. XP EULA explictly gives M$ permision to inspect your computer at will and replace "components and modules". This simply augments the BSA way of doing things: on foot. That's innovation for you. It's not about "piracy", they want you to use their software, it's about control.
3. XP has hardware checkers and what not that attempt to detect coppies to other computers. This will mainly be a nuisance to legitimate users who change their software.
So, they said they would, they built the tools to make sure they could, they even made it so they would when they did not mean to. Do you think they don't mean to now with that 40MB "patch"?
Someone here once compared XP to a blimp ride with adverts stapled to his face. I got to see the beast first hand the other day. The other fellow forgot the handcuffs, gag, ball and chain you get to wear on that ride and that you don't get to chose the destination. It was very difficult to use and will be a real turn off to anyone buying a new computer.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
If XP has all the stability of w2k, nt, 98, 95, and 3.1, by all means you should upgrade. Try this wink, and never worry about "piracy" again. Yo-ho, yo-ho, a Disney life for me.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
It sounds worse. If the service pack "hides" certain components, they will be harder to find and rip out won't they?
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
"as everyone knows that Professional is not supposed to be subject to the key bullshit whereas the home version is..."
u rr entVersion (ignore stupid /.-added space)
:P
No. The OEM version of Windows XP is not subject to the activation crap that the retail version is. That means that if you buy your software from Pricewatch (search "Microsoft Windows XP Professional"), you'll not only pay half-price ($89 for XP Home; $140 for XP Pro), but you will escape the activation crap completely.
As to the warez part, I'd bet $100 it is at least partially based on this registry key:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\C
In there you'll see a key called ProductId. (This is in Windows 2000, at least... I'm assuming it's in XP as well.) Change that to a legal (as in, non-warez) value, and I bet that your system will magically update again.
Back in the Windows 95 days, Microsoft used to make it simple and hand out those Product IDs as the keys on your CD case, but recently they have gotten smarter about it. The new stuff translates from that 25-character gobbletygook to these oldschool product IDs. Figure out the translation algorithm (I believe several warez groups already have) and you're set.
Or stop being such a cheapass and go spend $89 for an OEM copy of XP Home. That's what I did for Windows 2000.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
My favorite part of the article:
.exe file to use. You can only pick one from "the list."
But for the choices to appear, software developers must write programs "so that they can register here," he said. When no third-party middleware installed, Microsoft software would appear in the list.
I'd be interested to see how difficult Microsoft makes it to register your program. And, I also find it interesting that they won't simply pick a different
Not very modular.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
I don't care if you like the Windows defaults, and it's not a relevant issue if you like it. Nothing about the suit says you won't be able to get just what you've always had.
And regarding communism, there is no playing field there, because there's no playing! It's all marching, and just where they tell you to.
- Sig this!
How else am I, as the operating system, supposed to know that this completely unknown executable you've just stuck on the drive handles foodlewidgets unless you tell me that it handles foodlewidgets?
So you are the voice of my operating system. Finally! I've been waiting to communicate with you for a long time. I've already emptied it, but would you now please let me delete the Outlook Express folder from C:\Program Files\?
Remember "Bring 'em on"? *sigh
Level playing field means that MS can't use its monopoly position to crush otherwise viable competitors. When a monopoly's power gets too great, it actually creates a threat to a capitalist economy. That's why we have antitrust laws.
"I can open a URL from the same window I open my File Manager console from. I like that."
I don't use IE at all, and I still have those features. Those features are in fact incidental to integration.
Does Opera "just keep up"? Opera's had a MDI for two versions now. I can use mouse gestures. I can even put a picture of Anna Kournikova in my browser's background. And Opera had the best cookie control of any browser for a long time.
How long did it take for IE to have any of those features? So who's playing catch up now?
"Resistance is futile only for those who refuse to resist."
Judging from the description, they only disable a number of OEM keys. Of course, I wonder how many *legitimate* systems there are out there that use this key and will be screwed over. That is the boneheaded part of this move, not some silly obligation to pirates. While turning a mostly blind eye to home piracy helped Windows acheive the monopolistic power it has today, piracy is probably no longer necessary to keep the platform alive like it once was. The number of people who absolutely would not buy the version is probably small compared to the ones that would pay some way or another.
Personally, I got a copy free from MSDNAA licensing with my school, but I keep those records on file and use a corp edition lifted from work because I don't want to submit any information to MS about usage. If someone comes knocking at the door I can show them my legitimate licensing and say leave me alone, though I'd probably refuse admittance to begin with. Not that anyone would bother, but at least I have a legally licensed copy that is unused.
My scenario, and many others out there will be left unaffected by such a crippling, as that sort of cripple would royally piss off some of MS's biggest companies. Say what they will about piracy and their bottom line, but all the piracy going on doesn't hurt them nearly as much as losing some big corporate customers would.
I think the bottom line with piracy is that a lot of people I know went out of their way to obtain pirated versions *because* of WPA. Every one of those friends also had a legitimate path to the software (same as mine), but most chose not to even obtain a valid key on principle, favoring the illegal channels.
I'd much prefer some dongle arrangement than some central database tracking this stuff. For the money MS wants per copy of XP, they sure could afford the hardware costs...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Permitting and even encouraging unpatched machines is a bad policy. Pirated software or not, the machines are a hazard to local networks and the internet as a whole. They serve as launching points and targets for worms and viruses. I believe it is irresponsible to leave these machines on the internet, but it is even more responsible to deny them patches. If not for the sake of their machine, then for the sake of MY machine and my email quota.
This is similar giving fresh needles to drug users. It is not just to protect the users, but also those around them who would otherwise share dirty needles. Is it just helping the pirates (drug users)? No way! It's better for the your network (your adventureous son/daughter), too.
I understand that some people would prefer not to deal with these problems in this way and it's okay to disagree. I'm surprised to see my comment moderated as a troll. Everyone take off your blinders for a second and think a little about the problem.
/ \
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign for peace
x
/ \
Such as "Your security settings have disabled ActiveX. The site may not display properly" KEEPS popping up and there is no way to disable it (well, I hexed a DLL to do so, but it seems to be the only way)
It is so obvious a propaganda has been going on. If I'm disabling ActiveX on an untrusted site, I mean it! Why keep bugging me?
Hope they'll do something about it.
Basically the ones with two commas in a row are not hidden by default, but when you delete the word hide you have to also delete a comma, so there's only one comma. Don't ask me why this is what works.
Not suprisingly, for IE, it doesn't actually allow you to remove it, it says "remove access to internet explorer". If you open up the file tree browser thing, ("windows explorer") or just any file folder, and type in a URL in the address field, it just turns into IE.
/ \
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign for peace
x
/ \
It works in win2k and winXP,
/winnt/inf/sysoc.inf
in there to a replace all for the world "hide"
once those are blank (leave the , marks... just remove the "hide" part) you can go into control panel and do add/remove windows componants. That's how I was able to get snmp loaded on Win2k Professional. It also lists COM+ componants and other fun stuff.
If Microsoft tries to legally prevent open-source programs from using their helper-app registration APIs, then just write a closed-source proxy app that will register the open-source app as the helper. This is the reverse strategy that some companies try to use to create open-source proxies to dynamically load GPL libraries.
cpeterso
So, in some parts of the world (the Far East, for example), we have a lot of pirated windows. Which means, with no security updates, we have a fertile breading ground for worms, viruses, and other fun things.
Does this cost money, or is it 'free'?
Here's the kicker: what are the licensing terms for this 'registration'? ...acceptance of the Microsoft 'shared source' license, perhaps?
That would be a _sweet_ boobytrap.
"XP Service Pack Does the Impossible"
Makes a Microsoft OS Secure and reliable???
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
true... we have a app here on the company i work for that were dying to make more modular... were analysing and coding it for months and it is not 10% as complex as windows! MS may have all of the most brilliant softwares engineers in the world because I thought doing such thing AFTER the app is already done was truly hard! :)) MS is so good that they do that in a 30mb patch! :))
Fabio - Sumare/Sao Paulo/Brazil/South America/Earth/Solar System/Milky Way/Universe
http://www.morroida.com.br
The real question is will M$ allow OEMs to actually use this new functionality. In the past M$ has been pretty strict about what OEMs can put on the user's desktop and what screens can be displayed during initial bootup.
The above may have been modded as Funny, but I think it's dead-on accurate as to where M$ ultimately wants us all to go. And now that we've got them right where they want us, it'll be easier than ever for them to implement.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
The UI and the Kernel are seperate entities. That is why, using 98lite, you can completely remove Internet Explorer by switching to the Windows 95 GUI.
It's been a long time.
Thats why I use MacOS X!
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
- C/C++ Compiler
- Perl, Python, or any other scripting languages
- source files or balls
- A lot of utilities and tools that can do anything to your liking
- Mail client and server software (like Sendmail, Pine, Mutt, etc.)
and many other things that I just can't think of off of the top of my head. There are some things that are quite bloated in a full Linux or FreeBSD install (KDE 2/3, Gnome, StarOffice) but Windows XP doesn't even include basic spreadsheet, presentation or decent graphics programs (think of KOffice as an equivalent to Microsoft Works or the like).Just my $0.015
In reality though Microsoft has already won this case. By dragging the case on for so long the issues are de facto settled. As long as this case is slowly grinding it's way to completion, M$ can do whatever they want without even being bound by a legal agreement.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Hell it isn't even that so much as the sheer number of dependencies.
.
Of the 2GB standard install (or 1.5GB, depending on which version of XP you have), you can remove MAYBE 500Megs of that.
Oh joy. . .
Of a standard Linux/BSD install all but a few MEGABYTES can be removed and you will still have yourself a stable OS.
If you just want a server machine and not a lot of crud, why even go for the GUI? Hell just one more thing to break and take up resources. Even if it is not very many resources, they are still MINE damnit, and I would like the option to have them back.
This is why I refuse to go from 2K to XP, XP is basicaly 2K with a few kernal tweaks to make users think that it is not bloated, and then 500Megs of blue curvy CRAP that is installed along side everything else.
Yes I can DISABLE the blue curvy crap but it will still be there, and that is what upsets me. That MS sees fit to install blue curvy crap that I do not want nor need.
Actualy the entire WinNT line has tons of extra applications installed, it is just that hardly any of them are documented. . . . Very few productivity apps though.
Need help treating your acne? Come here!
/ \
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign for peace
x
/ \
And running X-ray diffractometers and SQUID magnetometers isn't exactly simple text-based stuff either (a proper unix program would be but you know what Windows programmers are like: let's make it all buttons and clicking contrary to the fact that most people just want a freaking cli interface that works and doesn't require you to pick out high resolution objects with the mouse instead of just typing in the exact angles for example).
Although we have PC-Anywhere on there as well (which may be better, I dunno) it means we can connect up to those machines from practically any type of modern platform, ie we don't have to piss about rebooting into Windows just to control a couple of windows on another box. Added to that the fact that you can sling VNC quite happily onto anything else for serving and you're set: the users don't have to learn anything new they still use the same old clients.
You can compare the bandwidth requirements and cpu requirements and blah blah blah but the fact that VNC is here, has been for years and works on any system we use (Unix, Windows, Macs, even RISC OS) makes it a sure fire winner.
Anyway, at least nobody here has been sucker enough to get XP in the first place which must be a goddamn record for this dept (I'm ignoring the pirating scum and the ripped-off copies they had within days, naturally).
Anything else is X, and I don't need to point out the sheer Joy of its network transparency now do I? (Seeing as I'm often doing graphical analysis/editing and sometimes using OpenOffice to look at people's PowerPoint presentations at home via our cable connection without using anything other than my default desktop).
"Don't get mad, get a monkey!"
I just bought a Compaq PC that was "Enhanced" by Compaq. Most of these enhancements were annoying at best, and detrimental at worst.
For example, it came bundled with Roxio EZ-CD creator preinstalled. This breaks windows XP's built in CD-ROM burning that lets you simply drop files on the CD-ROM icon in the explorer.
It came with about 6 useless programs that all took up space in the toolbar tray. I spent about an hour getting rid of them.
The browser came with some silly browser-bar extensions (how often do I need to visit Compaq.com?) and the toolbar is set to say "Microsoft Internet Explorer--Enhanced by Compaq")
It came with some stupid imaging packacge preinstalled that broke the "filmstrip" preview mode that XP has.
Considering all of this, I shudder when I think of all the "enhancements" that vendors will add if given the chance.
Apple doesn't let vendors much with the OS when it sells boxes. Why should Microsoft?
--
Ask the Ya-Hoot Oracle Anything!
People seem to be bashing this SP, but don't forget that it will also have a ton of security fixes. What I want to know is if they'll allow you to install just the fixes without the useless hide-and-seek part that has been rightfully bashed.
You already have to have their blessing every time you start up - after all, what is the Activation Code? If you don't enter it, you get shut down after a 30 day trial period, basically. And you have to get a new activation code every time you make 3 or more hardware changes. Another little tiny baby step and they can just change the "3 or more major hardware changes" to "1 year since install date" or something like that.
And they're already doing this anyway. If you've read their latest round of corporate licenses, you pay per seat per year. You don't own the software, you own a yearly license to USE the software. Now there are other perks that come with this, i.e. you get a shoebox size package that contains cd's of every MS product ever made (not including Bob...we checked) and you get new products shipped to you every time they come out, complete with the license to use them. But the point is, you HAVE to upgrade, even if you don't need to. You're tied to that yearly fee, and yes they DO check up on you.
"Christ what a design! I could eat a handful of iron filings and PUKE a better emergency pump than that!"
This means that the CD you have in your cube with XP written on it with a Sharpie will not take the service pack.
It will if the key is my company's valid bulk lic #.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
> Why don't they already prevent use of pre-SP1 patches then?
Probably because they're changing their policy now, not yesterday, and they'd have to re-qualify and re-release older patches in order to do this. That's a big deal.
> I can only see the Service Pack blocking software updates by means of collaberation with Windows Update. It can't see it preventing use of patches created in the future that it can't know about yet without scanning all executables run on the system for a tell tale "MS Official Patch" signature or whatever.
I don't see how windows update needs to be a part of this. Every patch has an integrated installer. Why can't Microsoft (a) require SP1 to be installed (certainly not unheard of in the world of software patches) and (b) require that SP1 has validated the installation key? I don't see where the Windows Update utility needs to fit in here. There are plenty of other variants on this idea. You could also have each patch check the validity of the registration number, just as the service pack must do. This is probably not a complex check.
/ \
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign for peace
x
/ \
Unfortunately this is not a realistic philosophy. This is not elitism, rather, it's reality based on experience as a tech support and helpdesk professional (years ago - average user savvyness has improved a little). I always make a point to teach people, not just hand-hold them (the whole "give a man a fish, teach him how to fish" comes into play). However, A) Many users (especially in the American "every NOW NOW NOW" culture) don't really care and B) Many users don't have the time to care.
The following are generalizations and obviously don't apply to every single person:
Things have to be "dumbed-down" because people are comfortable being ignorant. This has nothing to do with software but with every single aspect of society. Talk to a contracter who builds houses and they'll tell you how hard it is to communicate relatively trivial concepts to their customers. Their customers just have no desire to be educated about the process. People want to be "right", and they can't humble themselves nor get the patience to gain a basic level of understanding. We have experts for a reason, and the customer need not be an expert. Again, ask a car mechanic how frustrating his job is when he has to deal with the customers.
Personally, as a software developer and designer, I want to do everything I can to make computers as DUH as possible without making them dumb. This is kind of why I really like MacOSX, because it's a reasonably userfriendly (needs some matureing) UI without sacrificing power. This is also why I _don't_ like WinXP, because it's the dumbest UI I've seen yet. Dumb in the sense that it's stupid-easy which is what MS customers want, but is not what's best for them, IMHO, becuase not only will they never learn, but things will always be inefficient due to the 800 step wizards required just to copy a file (exageration, for the anal retentive). So, I'll try to make software as intuitive and easy as possible, without making it dumb. I'm also very patient with the users of my software (interal employees) and I am always more then happy to educate someone willing to learn. However, I'm never willing to put up with impatient, arrogant people who really don't care about anything but NOW.
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Sorry for the quickly typed and poorly worded and structured post. I'm in a hurry to leave so I skipped preview mode before realizing that this was quite scattered!
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
Hmm, I guess it must have been a case of mistaken identity when I downloaded that "Windows 98 Service Pack 1" at home from that renowned hax0r site "Windows Update".
Good to see Microsoft on the ball again, I'd hate to see them spreading FUD to look like they were going to extreme lengths to comply with the antitrust provisions.
<!-- DHTML / JavaScript menu, popup tooltip, Ajax scripts -->
You're right. Terminal services is faster than VNC because it's based on RDP (see http://www.rdesktop.org/ for more info), but there's nothing particularly new or innovative about it.
Windows uses the much smarter RDP protocol for thin-clients. RDP is hooked into the GDI at a low level, and transfers only the minimum information required to clients. Clients can cache images, and expose their local files and devices to the server. There are clients available for every platform imaginable.
The new Mira technology is basically a dumbed-down version of the professional thin-client stuff for home users. Some friends already have similar networks running at home, and I've experimented too. It's amazing to access your full desktop from any computer, anywhere, anytime. Over ADSL it's fast enough to do most typical office tasks like reading email or writing documents.
The Windows XP "Remote Assistance" tool uses RDP, so it can give you an idea of what Mira will be like.
Microsoft have done stranger things... no, let me rephrase that... Microsoft have done many stranger things, but I wouldn't expect them to make an OS truly more modular immediately after telling a court that this was impossible, and before the hearings had ended.
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
...sue your ass off if you're caught with a dud copy. No carrot, just a very big stick. In some countries, you can face a mandatory minimum of 8 years in jail for software piracy, regardless of the actual value (or sticker price) of the software.
Of course, the other kind of software piracy - actions by large software companies which are effectively extortion, stealing or dumping - goes widely unpunished by the courts. We-the-people have started to take matters into their own hands, worldwide. For example, Australian schools, having just paid tens of millions of dollars to Microsoft, are eyeing off the `$100 million' worth of Microsoft software donated (with attendant tax writeoff) to South African schools, and starting to ask questions. Soth Africans are starting to ask questions, too, like `why did they wait until it lookerd like an Open Source alternative was going to take off in SA?' and `how long will this deal really last, and what will it cost afterwards?'
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing