Slashdot Mirror
BBC Hails "fair" Microsoft XP SP1
Richard Bown writes "Continuing their current trend of only giving you half the story the BBC have
this article on how fair and equitable Microsoft are these days. No mention of EULA changes."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
I didn't know it was new that the mainstream media never tells you the whole story, on what subject you wish.. not only MS..
Of course its me, I am the best!
FIRST POST OF DEATH
blah
rob aka rob
Someone SHOOT THIS UNGRATEFUL SON OF A BITCH WHO HAS NO CLUE AS TO WHAT TRUE PATRIOTISM IS!?
What you don't know can't hurt you, right?
So if you don't read the EULA, it doesn't apply, right?
frost spit
MS being fair? Oh, I should've known, as fair companies always see their customers doing this in regards to their product, "Windows users have turned to software produced by Lite PC that strips out unwanted applications from Windows 98, 2000 and XP.". Fair indeed.
- - Just because I don't care, doesn't mean I don't understand. - -
Whenever they cover the war in the middle east they support the arab side. They are one sided and driven by money.
Nice to see that slashdot is finally picking up the BBC's bias on certain issues. Those who watch/listen to BBC news will know how biased they are on, for example, the Euro. It seems the Americans can't do anything right in their eyes, either...
SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
And, for anybody who is using XP, they say that the software (like IE, Media Player, etc) is hidden. But if I double-click on an HTML file, does it come up in IE anyways? Or does it say "File type not recognized"?
</Karma Whoring>
Trust the English Not... with their Tea Tax and what not...
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
But I'm curious (and not running XP)... Is there any truth to the rumor that Windows XP with a hacked/unauthorized serial number won't allow you to install the service pack?
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
is your title. The BBC article (which, let's face it, is a fluff piece or a very quick brief at best) simply states that Microsoft's implemented in XP SP1 the "ability" for end users (and resellers, no doubt) to "hide" any program's icons and existence.
Whoopty. Maybe the BBC will run a bigger article later.
More security through obscurity.
Jonahweb.com has stuff.
Because it doesn't bash Microsoft?
It would have been nice of the submitter to make his case instead of just linking to the article and whining how "wrong" it is.
The owls are not what they seem
Does anyone have other examples of problems with the BBC's reporting? I always thought of them as rather good, but then again I'm an American, so I'm mainly comparing them with American news... :/
Want to Know How to Cheat the GPL? Read On!
Is the article accurate? The settlement was just to "hide" the bundled software? There was no part indicating that the services offered to IE, Outlook, Media Player, etc by the OS have to be available to competitors, so that they can integrate and interoperate as seamlessly? No wonder 9 states dissented.
11*43+456^2
"Microsoft is due to release on 9 September a 133MB upgrade for its Windows XP operating system called Service Pack 1."
Wow, my 0.9x slackware was lighter !
Besides this "hide-features" feature, what is lying in this SP1 ?
A 132MB-EULA ?
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The BBC is only marginally more credible than the Sunday Sport. The British love affair with sensationalism and fictitious "reporting" comes from a desperate wish for SOMETHING interesting to happen on that moldy shit-hole of an island. Think about it: "George Bush is Bad, Bill Gates is Good." That's British intellect in action. No wonder that godforsaken crap-filled swamp can't pull itself out of the middle ages. No wonder they've been ruled by inbred monarchs for 800 years. No wonder their babysitters come to the US and kill babies. Centuries of gray skies and infectious beef have made them all passive, hopeless, and above all stupid.
At least the BBC and other European media has the guts to call brutal military occupation, oppression and state approved torture by their real names. It is amusing to see certain right wing US media call this reporting as "the rise of anti-semitic sentiment in Europe". As if criticizing Israel's war crimes is anti-semitic...
If people have a problem with the EULA then that's a separate article.
A definition of irony
Contribution by Erpo
UK companies that have taken data from me can-not agree to the terms of Microsoft's ELUA, any company found agreeing to the terms will be violating the data protection act by potentially allowing Microsoft to access my data.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Isn't Slashdot calling somebody "biased" a case of the pot calling the kettle black?
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Also the basis of the Blair-And-Bush show
currently available at:
The White House
Thanks and have a marijuana inspired week!
News agencies have completely degenerated to trash. People are better off reading the Inquirer. Atleast the inquirer makes more no effort to appear legit. It knows it's trash and loves it. So called "mainstream, reliable" news sources haven't been objective for over a decade. News reporting has never a perfect thing, but now with all the technology available to news stations, the line is increasingly difficult to identify. The technology isn't the blame though. It's the lack of ethics and drive to be sensational that makes most news trash.
Among the bug fixes and security updates are a set of tools that let people hide the existence of Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, Windows Messenger, and Windows Media Player.
Gee, thanks for allowing me to hide the stuff M$, everyone likes having useless software that still takes up disk space and probably still loads DLLs into memory that they can't see. I want the ability to remove the stuff, not just hide it. If I wanted to just hide it, I just wouldn't look at it!
Since many under the age of 18 use computers, can a EULA be binding on a minor?
I've asked this many times of many, and I've never received any response other than a shrug.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
I was pissed when I got married, so does it meen that I can get an easy devorce!
When the BBC is critical of the US it is reporting of the highest caliber. When they DON'T attack Microsoft they are shoddy only giving half the story. LOL good times...good times....
with the service pack, xp is still slow. All my drivers to my mp3 player do not work. The printer driver is gone I cannot believe anyone would release such crap...oh wait yeah its microsoft. They release crap all the time. I am total tempted to 100 % switch to the mac. I just wish some of the games that I play on the mac like (DAOC, and Everquest) would be ported over...its not so much to ask is it?
Now here's the funny part. In my opinion Windows Media Player is freaking great. It's fast, it's not bloated, and it plays crap like MPEGs wonderfully. As a result, when I install a piece of software like (shudder) RealPlayer or Quicktime or (oddly enough) the new Winamp that tries to take all this back from WMP, it annoys me quite a bit. This lets me easily switch back to WMP. Same goes for IE, though rival browsers are better about that.
Also, for those of you who have problems wherein the Sun Java VM won't run certian things that the Microsoft Java VM will and vice versa (oh, the irony...) then you'll love the feature where you can chose which Java VM to use. I wonder if this will help or hurt Java in the long run...
Schnapple
At least two series of seriall will just not allow the service pack to install on XP.
There are ways of changing the serial that work nicely.
But I'd rather let most kiddie hackers get knocked out of SP1 to give the appearance that the SP1 got rid of all the pirated copies. If you can use a search engine, it's easy enough to find.
$200 is a bit stiff for XP Pro. I think $50 is a fairer price. There are ways to get legitimate copies for $40, but I won't tell you because MS will get antsy about this method.
When I try to access Microsoft's only *obvious* updating feature, I get this message:
Thank you for your interest in Windows Update
Windows Update is the online extension of Windows that helps you get the most out of your computer.
You need to be running a version of Internet Explorer 5 or higher in order to use Windows Update.
Download the latest version of Internet Explorer
Once Internet Explorer is installed, you can go to the Windows Update site by typing http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com into the address bar of Internet Explorer.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
...would be that he obsesses over legalese in EULA.
I mean, under any standard EULA, they can still reformat your hard drive, install other apps, delete files, etc etc etc all under the "not responsible for anything" clause. It's all just CYA. The new stuff just there to cover their asses if you sign up for Windows Update or want Windows Media Player to automatically download codecs.
Complain about Microsoft having DRM on by default when you rip CDs. Complain about how XP bugs you to sign up for Passport all the time. Complain about all the security holes. Complain about the oppresive activation stuff.
Hell, complain about the whole concept of EULAs if you want.
There are tons of things to complain about. When Microsoft starts arbitrary installing stuff without asking, complain about that. But this Slashdot obsession with a few frickin' changes in Microsoft's EULA is the biggest sign yet that you people need to GET A LIFE!
What happens to Windows Update, which requires the use of MSIE, if a user chooses to "hide" the MSIE browser? How is that user going to download the inevitable patches that will be needed for XP SP1? Is Microsoft providing a new stand-alone update application (a la Apple's "Software Update"), and if so, how secure is it? Or, have they retooled Windows Update to work with non-MSIE browsers?
Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
You can put in a new serial number on a running system. Do a quick search on deja and you'll find it.
I'm not a jew lover by any means.
But the palestineans by condoning the suicide bombings have doomed themselves.
I have no more pity for them. I did at one time, but their latest tactics are those of animals and thugs.
I hope they all blow themselves up now.
BBC (by and large) has the best news coverage, it beats ANY news out let in US hands down.Less hype, and more complete on issues that matter to most of the world, and it's not being "LEAD AROUND BY THE NOSE" by the US Goverment like CNN and the rest of the US news media.
Alison
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein
and meta-mods...how do you handle those?
Here is the message you get when trying to install SP1 on a "pirated" system (well one of the systems with that one cd key that is used in over 90% of the pirated XP's out there).
The only real "feature" this would prevent all you "pirates" out there from getting would be the middleware-removal thingy. You can still download the previous updates (security, bug fixes, etc.) fine.
Just to note, you have to be sure to wear your eye patch and parrot on the shoulder during the install, or SP1 might not recognize you as a "pirate."
A computer is a valuable tool, so use it and stop whining.
Well, I really believe the problem is not in simply giving out peices of software with their operating system, it is more deep.
They can give as much programs with their system as they like, but they should build it WELL. Windows lacks all these programers who give there time free to recheck the code and add to it, this is what makes Open source powerful.
Well, my main point here is, what kind of people would accept 'hiding' the software as 'not giving out' the software. This is nonesense in my opinion. Well whether they allow you to download it freely, give it to you directly, or hide it doesn't make a difference. Other compitiors should find something better in their services so people usually get to download it, and well, they usually do!
The main problem with this software is that we don't know what's there, we pay the money and we don't get but the surface. Who would accept a house built for him without knowing what substance was used to build it, nobody. We still don't know much about windows source code. We can't find the bugs they produce with their rush in building more.
Another small point I'd like to mention, the best way to fight the Microsoft syndrome isn't law (the way it's going on now), but users. If everybody still buys windows, everybody always usees it, then it's *clearly* gonna have a monopoly, but if we can use, or develop, systems that none-geeks can use, systems directed to the masses, and still NOT monopolized, then we will be able to KILL Microsoft's lust.
Well, so let's all format C: for now ;) (if we have one)
"What you 'seek' is what you get!"
ActiveX is required, that's why.
What that boils down to is the average user still using them anyway. Does anyone think Mom & Pop are messing with this stuff?
"Expert users" would have already found the options to change file associations so "hiding IE" does nothing (in fact you can change .html file associations by simply installing Netscape).
Not that I don't think people should have the option (to use or not to use the MS programs), but at the same time I don't see this as any large threat to their browser dominance, etc.
-- Scientist: You aren't going to leave me here, are you? Boagh! Thump...
....the beeb has been forgiven for all the illegal installs they have.
I am glad to notice that my favourite news source novadays is news.Google.com and there you have good alternative link for this story:0 18.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/27
This just reads like a tiny little abstract about SP1. I don't see the one-sidedness at all. It says to me 'Microsoft is being more fair than it has been'. This is true.
It doesn't try and pin a halo on Microsoft, it doesn't advocate them. It just says that they've complied with part of the DoJ bargain, and SP1 ships Sept 9th.
IMO, saying that MS is now 'more fair', reinforces that they've been completely unfair in the past. In that sense, it's a slam more than a boost.
Its just a blurb, theres not enough room to be one-sided. There's not enough to even quote.
Is it that any news item about computers that doesn't rant about 'MS world domination conspiracy theories' like a homeless schizophrenic is one-sided?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Well, listed in my list of programs to uninstall are Windows Media Player, Internet Explorer (W2K), and in addition to these two, I know that you can also remove Windows Messenger in XP.
So, you already can uninstall all of this stuff. The competitors are just bitching that people can "see" the IE icons, etc before they see their own. Waah.
...when your name is "Younger Pants"?
The last bastion of truthful journalism here in the UK seems to have fallen. This latest oversight is hardly a surprise, let me explain:-
Bill Gates has GWB in his pocket
Tony Blair is GWB's little lapdog
BBC stands for Blair's Broadcasting Corporation
The, once great, BBC is now nothing more than a propaganda tool for the Conservative views of Prince Blair, helping to lead the UK down the same path as the US of A and turn it into a country where democratically elected representatives of the people do nothing but shaft the people of said country to help no-one but themselves and multi-national companies.
(-1 Flamebait me if you like, but you know it's true!)
P.S. I didn't post this, a big boy did it and ran away.
Of course they have to package this in a 133 megabyte package in order to discourage dialup users from applying it... is there any valid reason that such a patch should take up so much space?
Found this earlier today:
/ SP /SP1/WXP/en-us/xpsp1_en_x86.exe
http://www.trwxp.kit.net/xp_sp1.html
Also, a download for SP1:
http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler
This thing is a fucking pig... 137MB.. Woah! Lots of bugs...er..features fixed here.
Corporatism != Free Market
What, like their APIs?
There is no such word as alot.
Sure there is. RAM, IDE, CPU, PCI, XFree86, BSD, PCMCIA, SVGA, UTMS, WiFi, ISA, ISO, CD, DVD, MP3, and RTFM are all common words unrecognized by ispell. And alot most certainly is a word in Polish. Now piss off, teaboy.
>> "Continuing their current trend of only giving you half the story the BBC have this article on how fair and equitable Microsoft are ...
/. and use innuendo, bias, sarcasm, unsupported assertions and unverified claims to support their own agenda? The BBC report is a straight news piece containing not a single word of BBC opinion. They're reporting on the pending XP patch that responds to the mandate of the court. If you think they should do a piece on the EULA, send them an email.
What's your problem? Do you expect a professional news organization to adopt the posture of a place like
Curious to see evidence of their "trend of giving you only half the story..".
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
Actually the BBC has always been the PR arm of the British Government in "times of crisis". Stated by the founder Lord Reith and oft re-stated.
Apart from the fact that all BBC IT reporting, with one or two notable exceptions (like asking Bill Gates if he would like to acknowledge Apple's "contribution" to Windows XP - i.e. doing all the innovation) tends to read like an MSC press release, what get me is that they write the DOJ "demanded". Far from demanding the DOJ rolled over and said tickle my tummy.
You need to be running a version of Internet Explorer 5 or higher in order to use Windows Update.
As far as I know, this is because Windows Update runs an applet on your PC to see what patches you already have installed, and needs MSIE to run this code.
double-clicking an html file would bring up IE unless you also removed the IE files themselves (not just the shortcuts).
On my WinME and Win2k boxes, double-clicking a .html file brings up whatever Mozilla build is installed at the moment (currently 1.1). It did so even before the relevant Windows 2000 service pack was released.
You'd have to go into the registry and edit/remove the file type associations.
Or have your competing program's installer do it for you. This is the approach AOL has chosen with its "Netscape" web browser and "Winamp" media player.
Will I retire or break 10K?
What percent of AOL users use something other than an MS operating system?
I don't know, but there are plenty of devices that run AOL clients without running Windows: AOL Mobile Communicator, AOLTV, Instant AOL for Internet terminals, AOL for PDAs, AOL by land phone and by mobile phone, etc. How many of those are used by Mac users rather than Windows users is anybody's guess (unless you work in AOL marketing).
Will I retire or break 10K?
I'm going to wait and see what stuff gets 'broken' as a result of this sp that ms will blame on 'app hiding'. Then they can say 'see? we told you that you can't remove Internet Explorer!!!'
We all know that windows has become inbred and overdependant with its own apps to provide functionality. Most of us are trying to move on to better things and the rest are trying to sell us MS products.
I've experiments to run, there is research to be done on the people who are still alive.
I just went through the windows update BS to update my laptop, and the download was around 55MB, yet the article states:
Microsoft is due to release on 9 September a 133MB upgrade for its Windows XP operating system called Service Pack 1.
Last time I checked, today was September 9th. Am I just jumping the gun here? Have they not yet posted SP1 to the windows update site?
Yes, it is.
But the point of an action like this is to get sympathy internationally and within Isreal itself.
But by targetting working class people and student, they've removed any trace of sympathy for the palestineans and they make Isreal seem reasonable.
If they would've targetted only military targets, then people would *get it*. The way it looks to us now in the US, this is on the same level as the 9/11 terrorists. You don't even need the media to make that connection.
The tactic is brave, but strategically is flawed.
My only hope now is they blow each other up completely to get rid of both of their miserable existences.
Wow...Microsoft has an application that you need to use to get updates. You want to use Mozilla instead, and it doesn't work correctly. WHAT'S THE FUCKING PROBLEM?
...when I first saw the subject "133MB", I was trying to figure out what "leemb" could possibly mean. Then I realized those actually were numbers.
Activation is just DivX warmed over. I have no intention of submitting to it.
Do programs that use a browser to render their content still use IE to render after it's been 'hidden'? Do programs that insist on popping up IE windows, despite your 'old' browser default settings, still pop up IE windows?
The EULA issues, the DMCA, fair use, all the stuff
that gets our back up on the west side of the pond, are mostly irrelevant to people in Europe.
Most of the copyright and software patent stuff is a joke in Europe, compared to the way US companies (and activists) treat them here.
Soon, if not already, the markets outside the US
will be large enough to create entire sustainable industries which do not need the US market to survive.
Continuing their current trend of only giving you half the story the BBC have this article on how fair and equitable Microsoft are these days. No mention of EULA changes."
Yes that's why I come to slashdot.org, for pure unbiased reviews of windows! *snicker*
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
There was a release of documentation for a few APIs a couple weeks ago
Will I retire or break 10K?
They seem to have hired a cartload of semi literate
hard-of-thinking momkeys to do the online news site.
Of course, you hire your own kind of people - Greg Dyke, the New Labour flunkey BBC boss, is not renowned for his intellect - he was the proud producer of Roland Rat.
AOL browser still uses IE for it's underpinnings.
The latest release of Compuserve uses Gecko. The latest AOL client for Mac OS uses Gecko. Beta versions of AOL 8 for Windows use Gecko. AOL was waiting for its Netscape division to finish Mozilla 1.0 before switching away from Microsoft browser technology.
Will I retire or break 10K?
The once promised object orientated operating system?
Oh, yeah, thats right, that was back when they had OS/2 to kick around, which handled multiple applications per file type much better than Windows, and that was the promised hope.
The concept that here is a file of a certain type, and you have the following programs that say they can handle it, which one would you like to open, with this one as a default?
The fight over file types in Windows is more about control of the user by the corporations involved than any thing else.
I just put the SP1 on my computer. Basically, as far as I can tell, all it does is add a "Set Program Access and Defaults" shortcut to your startment that allows you to change the defaults. (Mine were mostly off of the defaults anyway, so this was pretty useless). If you go to add/remove programs, you have the option to "remove access to" ie, outlook express, and messenger, but obviously not get rid of them. It goes along well with previous posts about Microsoft doing a very little bit of good to prevent the imposition of a huge block of restrictions on them.
On another note, after I installed it, I burned it onto an cd-rw to put on my other computer, and my burn program had to test for read speeds, something it only does the first time you run it. Why would this happen?
Cogito ergo sum in Slashdot.
He did make his case:
EULA changes.
His case (for those too lazy to read two sentences before they start flaming) is that MS has made EULA changes in SP1 that many would consider a bad thing, but the BBC article makes no mention of this.
Because they included the good and left out the bad the submitter considers the story to be baised. If you don't know anything about the EULA changes then, (besides reading the articles about it on slashdot) you can do a quick search and find out what they are pretty quickly. Granted it won't be as hard as a doctoral thesis, but you would have a clue what the submitter's point was.
Life is too short to proofread.
KDE has released a tool which will allow users to hide components like kmail, konqueror, and panels, turning it into something very much like WindowMaker. Users don't seem to be taking to the tool, saying 'If we wanted WindowMaker we'd use WindowMaker. We use KDE because we like its features.'
What's better
.... but the ELUA allows Microsoft to access/change you computer systems.
.... But not from the rest of the system.... there still there and not even hidden.
....' that's a lie you can-not switch off IE Kazaa will still work and it uses IE.
convicted or found guilty
running a monopoly or abusing its market dominance.
compliant with US Government rulings on fair competition.....
or
compliant with US Government rulings on fair competition. A more broad-rainging case against Microsoft is still running through the European parliment. (given that the BBC is in Europe!)
The update also fixes many security loopholes and vulnerabilities in the software.
or
The tools banish all appearances of these programs from the desktop screen, the start menu and the taskbar on the bottom of the screen.
or
An icon in the Control Panel section of XP gives access to the new program hiding system.
or
An icon in the Control Panel section of XP(which required Internet Explorer to be installed) gives access to the new program hiding system.
The CNN report is just talking shit,'switch off and conceal
The BBC is very bad with it's use of language, they don't quite put 'communist' infront of every china story!
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I would like to see a whole lot of IP put into the public domain as part of the settlement and some restrictions on Microsoft's buying up of everyone.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
The harder it is for the normal user to make a copy of Windows/Office, the better it is for Linux/OpenOffice. If I couldn't get an ISO of Windows XP, what would my next logical choice be? Buy it? Yah okay.
Back when I had 3 CDROM drives in my pc WMP used to access all three of them (making me wait for each one to spin up) before playing the file I actually opened, an mp3 on my HD. There was no good reason for it to do this. IMHO the (default) GUI is a ridiculously inefficient use of screen real estate as well.
Winamp gives you options to stop it from doing what's annoying you, use them.
Life is too short to proofread.
As far as MS being fair, I don't buy it for a minute, but the EULA isn't all that bad. MS has opened itself for HUGE lawsuit is they so much as look at you're computer the wrong way. The EULA states that the clause that gives them root to your machine is only valid IF you ENABLE automatic updates. If you disable the auto update, it'll still leave the hole open, but if they so much as query your machine, they break the EULA themselves which opens the door for the lawsuit, or at the very least, the EULA becoming invalid due to contractual negligence on their part, giving you free reign to do what ever the hell you want since you're no longer legally bound. Anyone want W2K Source? Just wait until you can decompile it legally. Maybe the BBC is right, MS has been alot more fair lately.
I got caught by the extra space inserted by /. After I figured that out, it worked. So, that's three different ways I've seen so specify the CD player :(
the real problem is the headline: "Windows plays fair with rivals" which is blatently untrue. As a UK citizen whos TV licence pays for this crap, I mailed them to constructively critise. The rest of the article though is fairly reasonable, even if it seems to have been written by someone very bored of writing about M$ :)
Nothing new there.
We're talking about the same corporation, where the management gave a directive to journalists to refer to killings of Palestinians by Hebrews as killings, and to killings of Hebrews by Palestinians as murders...
And to think that the BBC was once seen as the pillar or objective journalism....
/. Where the truth
What APIs are you talking about? ... nowhere have I seen an NDA or request for corporate ID
How about these? You need at least a partnership or corporation to get a D&B DUNS number, and you need a D&B DUNS number to get the protocol documentation.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Look at this BBC news article on a tanning "pill". It would have allowed all us palid geek types to get a cool tan without having to compromise our lifestyle (or lack of it). I was going to submit it to slashdot but umm, look at those before and after photos. Those remind you those scam ads in certain tabloid magazines? The use of different camera and lighting angles to make the "before" picture look much worse than the "after" picture. I don't know but I think some bogon alerts should have been set off on this one.
The main problem with this article is that BBC makes it sound as if there was already a final settlement in the anti-trust case.
From the article;
"Nine US states have refused to accept the settlement that produced this upgrade and are seeking stricter penalties. US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has yet to rule in this case. "
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
Even if the reporting may err on the incomplete side of the story - at least it is able to be viewed by anyone with an HTML browser.
All of their audio/video is restricted to those who have suffered the torture of installing Realplayer.
Does this not seem to be a worse bias?
They use Microsoft products and their website is IE biased (they don't respond to claims that their site doesn't work on Netscape).
I love it when the grammatically stupid try to sound smart, but end up making things worse by misusing words.
Well, except for going up by 150%, anyway... That's a little ahead of inflation, don'cha think?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
The BBC is generally very good, with radio and TV news significantly better then their web site. I generally like the web site as well, but their Technology section is frequently riddled with ill-informed, ill-expressed or Just Plain Wrong(TM) articles. They also have a way of alternating between scaremongering and glossing over genuine concerns, probably because they don't appreciate the nuances of the issues they're reporting.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
I'm paying the same $50 for Myst 3:Exile that I paid for Riven and the original Myst. The fact is, software prices have stayed relatively constant while hardware costs were in a freefall.
Since inflation has been running at 3 to 5 percent a year, you would then expect to AT LEAST pay that much more for software, using your argument that the cost of producing software is the same or more than it was in the past. Additionally we should factor in the increases in salaries in the IT industry, especially for programmers. So, the reality is, when taking into consideration inflation and such, you are paying less, in real terms, for Myst 3 than you did for the original Myst, and it's probably a far better product (I don't play Myst, I have no idea).
Furthermore it's a buyer's market right now, because demand is down (don't believe me, check out the deals you can get on anything, from cars, to software, to computers to home electronis, to ... well, I'm sure you get the point). When demand is down, the suppliers drop prices to try and sell their products. This is elementary economics, Adam Smith formulated the concept over 200 years ago. Microsoft's software continues to go up in price, not down or stay the same, at a time when the demand for the product is low. Either they missed out on how the market works in their economics classes, or they have a captive market. I'm not making this up. This was brought out in testimony during the Anti-trust trial. The Economics Professor who testified wrote a thesis on this in the mid 1980's. He was actually a Microsoft expert witness, and it was fairly embarassing when the prosecution started asking these questions. The argument is not ridiculous, it's how the market works, when you have healthy competition.
In my universe I'm perfectly normal, it's not my fault you don't live in my universe.
It's obvious what's going on here. For those of you not in the know, the BBC is actually a toy of the British government, supported by taxes (including the infamous television tax). These taxes bring us things like "Are You Being Served," "Whose Line is it Anyway?," and "1840 House: The Greatest Generation," but also the BBC News Service, who used to be a great, possibly the best, English (as in language) news source, until recently.
What's dastardly about these "news" stories is the trend of the BBC to overlook certain details. It reads like classic PR techniques applied in the American media for decades: News by Press Release. One theory is that BBC is feeling the effects of the global economic trouble, and more people are hiding their TVs than ever, decreasing funding while demand still increases. That's what some so-called investigators will tell you, but I've got the real truth.
There are two possibilities here, but I'm only going to go over in detail the most probable. Microsoft bought the BBC in a massive, but secret, merger, in an effort to compete with the bohemoth AOL/TW. The secrecy is required in order to avoid anti-trust processes from recurring.
Why not just hijack the public radio & TV here in the US? Trust. Your average joe user trusts the BBC; PBS in the US is kind of like the Discovery Channel for poor folk that can't afford basic cable, especially to see the topless natives.
People trust the BBC mostly because it's British, and most Americans trust the British for some reason. I, personally, haven't trusted them since the war of '76.
Why would London sell the BBC? The British government needs the money from MS to support the stupidly extravigant(sp) lifestyle afforded the royal family, especially since the Faulklands War in the early 80's, and the Royals are still a source of pride for the British people, well, at least the ones with bad teeth.
The other possiblity involves the Masons, Bush's not-so-secret Shadow Government, and Heidi Klum.
Actually, now that I think about it, there remains a final possiblity that seems really remote, but worth stating, at least in brief. Maybe, just possibly, perhaps perhaps perhaps it could be that the technical details were the focus of the article, and not the evil EULA. I'm not going to hedge my bets this way, though. It's obviously a conspiracy on a massive level.
Dan
From Usenet:
C urrent /a /a
If you are using the Windows XP Pro 'Corporate' (MSDN) i.e. not requiring windows activation, and are using
the popular FCKGW-RHQQ2-YXRKT-8TG6W-2B7Q8 CD-Key, XP service pack 1 will not upgrade.
It is rumored that XP service pack 1 will not install on any cd-key that begins with an F or a D
If you have already installed with a bad key, you will need to change it. Follow these directions:
1. Start | Run | regedit
2. Find [HKey_Local_Machine\Software\Microsoft\WindowsNT\
Version\WPAEvents]
3. Double-click "oobetimer" and change at least one digit which will
cause XP to deactivate because of a bad key.
4. Start | Run | %systemroot%\system32\oobe\msoobe.exe
5. At the activation screen select Activation by phone.
6. Click Next
7. Ignore the top of the screen and go to the bottom of the window
and click "Change Key" [or something similar].
8. In the new window enter the key generated by the Blue List keygen.
If there is an apply button or something click it.
9. Close the window.
10. Reboot.
11. Start | Run | %systemroot%\system32\oobe\msoobe.exe
12. You should be told that your XP installation is already activated.
The item could have gone into more detail but what it does say is pretty straight-down-the-line factual and is not "half the story" as the poster claimed. Sure, there's no mention of EULA changes but, since they're not legally binding anyway who gives a toss? It's only a small piece, not the history of Windows!
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
SUPPLEMENTAL END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
.NET .NET Framework to any third party
IMPORTANT: READ CAREFULLY - This
Supplemental End User License Agreement
("Supplemental EULA") is a legal agreement
between you (either an individual or a single
entity) and Microsoft Corporation ("Microsoft") for the Microsoft
software that accompanies this Supplemental EULA, which
includes computer software and may include associated media,
printed materials, "online" or electronic documentation,
and Internet-based services (the "OS Components").
The OS Components are provided to update, supplement,
or replace existing functionality of the applicable
Microsoft software for which the OS Components
are designed (any such software referred to here as "OS
Software"). An amendment or addendum to this
Supplemental EULA may accompany the OS Components.
YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THE
APPLICABLE OS SOFTWARE END USER LICENSE
AGREEMENT ("OS SOFTWARE EULA") AND THIS
SUPPLEMENTAL EULA BY INSTALLING, COPYING, OR
OTHERWISE USING THE OS COMPONENTS. IF YOU DO
NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL, COPY, OR USE THE
OS COMPONENTS.
IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALIDLY LICENSED COPY OF
THE APPLICABLE OS SOFTWARE, YOU ARE NOT
AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY OR OTHERWISE USE
THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS
UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.
General.
* Microsoft grants you a license to use the OS Components
under the terms and conditions of the OS Software EULA
(which are hereby incorporated by reference except as
set forth below), the terms and conditions set forth in
this Supplemental EULA, and the terms and conditions of
any additional end user license agreement that may
accompany the individual OS Components (each an
"Individual EULA"), provided that you comply with all
such terms and conditions. To the extent that there is
a conflict among any of these terms and conditions
applicable to the OS Components, the following hierarchy
shall apply: 1) the terms and conditions of the
Individual EULA; 2) the terms and conditions in this
Supplemental EULA; and 3) the terms and conditions of the
applicable OS Software EULA.
* The OS Components are protected by copyright and other
intellectual property laws and treaties. Microsoft or its
suppliers own the title, copyright, and other intellectual
property rights in the OS Components. Microsoft reserves
all rights not expressly granted to you in this Supplemental
EULA. The OS Components are licensed, not sold.
* Capitalized terms used in this Supplemental EULA and not
otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to
them in the applicable OS Software EULA.
Additional Rights and Limitations.
* You may reproduce, install and use one copy of the OS
Components on each of your computers that is running a
validly licensed copy of the applicable OS Software,
provided that you use each such additional copy of the OS
Components in accordance with the terms and conditions of
this Supplemental EULA.
* Solely for the purpose of preventing unlicensed use of the
applicable OS Software, the OS Components will include
installation on your computer of technological measures that
are designed to prevent unlicensed use, and Microsoft may
use this technology to confirm that you have a licensed copy
of the OS Software. The update of these technological
measures only occurs through the installation of these OS
Components. The OS Components will not install on
unlicensed copies of the OS Software. If you are not using
a licensed copy of the OS Software, you are not allowed to
install the OS Components or future OS Software updates.
Microsoft will not collect any personally identifiable
information from your computer during this process.
* The OS Components may include the Microsoft
Framework. You may not disclose the results of any
benchmark test of the
without Microsoft's prior written approval.
* Solely with respect to the OS Components, if the licensor of
the applicable OS Software was an entity other than
Microsoft, then for the purposes of this Supplemental EULA
Microsoft is the licensor with respect to such OS Components
in lieu of the "Manufacturer" or other entity. Manufacturer
or such other entity has no obligation under this
Supplemental EULA to provide support for such OS
Components. With respect to the existing functionality
contained in the applicable OS Software that is not updated,
supplemented, or replaced by the OS Components, the OS
Software EULA provided by the Manufacturer or other
licensing entity shall remain in full force and effect as
to that OS Software.
IF THE APPLICABLE OS SOFTWARE WAS LICENSED TO
YOU BY MICROSOFT OR ANY OF ITS WHOLLY OWNED
SUBSIDIARIES, THE LIMITED WARRANTY (IF ANY)
INCLUDED IN THE APPLICABLE OS SOFTWARE EULA
APPLIES TO THE OS COMPONENTS, PROVIDED THAT
THE OS COMPONENTS HAVE BEEN LICENSED BY YOU
WITHIN THE TERM OF THE LIMITED WARRANTY IN
THE APPLICABLE OS SOFTWARE EULA. HOWEVER,
THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA DOES NOT EXTEND THE
TIME PERIOD FOR WHICH THE LIMITED WARRANTY IS
PROVIDED.
IF THE APPLICABLE OS SOFTWARE WAS LICENSED TO
YOU BY AN ENTITY OTHER THAN MICROSOFT OR ANY
OF ITS WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARIES, MICROSOFT
DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES WITH RESPECT TO THE
OS COMPONENTS AS FOLLOWS:
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES. TO THE MAXIMUM
EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, MICROSOFT
AND ITS SUPPLIERS PROVIDE TO YOU THE OS
COMPONENTS, AND SUPPORT SERVICES (IF ANY) AS
IS AND WITH ALL FAULTS; AND MICROSOFT AND ITS
SUPPLIERS HEREBY DISCLAIM ALL OTHER
WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS, WHETHER EXPRESS,
IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO, ANY (IF ANY) IMPLIED WARRANTIES,
DUTIES OR CONDITIONS OF MERCHANTABILITY, OF
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OF
RELIABILITY OR AVAILABILITY, OF ACCURACY OR
COMPLETENESS OF RESPONSES, OF RESULTS, OF
WORKMANLIKE EFFORT, OF LACK OF VIRUSES, AND
OF LACK OF NEGLIGENCE, ALL WITH REGARD TO THE
OS COMPONENTS, AND THE PROVISION OF OR
FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT OR OTHER SERVICES,
INFORMATION, SOFTWARE, AND RELATED CONTENT
THROUGH THE OS COMPONENTS OR OTHERWISE
ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF THE OS COMPONENTS.
ALSO, THERE IS NO WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF
TITLE, QUIET ENJOYMENT, QUIET POSSESSION,
CORRESPONDENCE TO DESCRIPTION OR NON
-INFRINGEMENT WITH REGARD TO THE OS
COMPONENTS.
EXCLUSION OF INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL AND
CERTAIN OTHER DAMAGES. TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT
PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT
SHALL MICROSOFT OR ITS SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE
FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE,
INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES
WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS OR CONFIDENTIAL
OR OTHER INFORMATION, FOR BUSINESS
INTERRUPTION, FOR PERSONAL INJURY, FOR LOSS
OF PRIVACY, FOR FAILURE TO MEET ANY DUTY
INCLUDING OF GOOD FAITH OR OF REASONABLE
CARE, NEGLIGENCE, AND ANY OTHER PECUNIARY
OR OTHER LOSS WHATSOEVER) ARISING OUT OF OR
IN ANY WAY RELATED TO THE USE OF OR
INABILITY TO USE THE OS COMPONENTS,
THE PROVISION OF OR FAILURE TO PROVIDE
SUPPORT OR OTHER SERVICES, INFORMATION,
SOFTWARE, AND RELATED CONTENT THROUGH THE OS
COMPONENTS OR OTHERWISE ARISING OUT OF THE
USE OF THE OS COMPONENTS, OR OTHERWISE UNDER
OR IN CONNECTION WITH ANY PROVISION OF THIS
SUPPLEMENTAL EULA, EVEN IN THE EVENT OF THE
FAULT, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE),
MISREPRESENTATION, STRICT OR PRODUCT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF CONTRACT OR BREACH OF
WARRANTY OF MICROSOFT OR ANY SUPPLIER, AND
EVEN IF MICROSOFT OR ANY SUPPLIER HAS BEEN
ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILTY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY AND REMEDIES.
NOTWITHSTANDING ANY DAMAGES THAT YOU MIGHT
INCUR FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING,
WITHOUT LIMITATION, ALL DAMAGES REFERENCED
ABOVE AND ALL DIRECT OR GENERAL DAMAGES IN
CONTRACT OR ANYTHING ELSE), THE ENTIRE
LIABILITY OF MICROSOFT AND ANY OF ITS
SUPPLIERS UNDER ANY PROVISION OF THIS
SUPPLEMENTAL EULA AND YOUR EXCLUSIVE REMEDY
FOR ALL OF THE FOREGOING SHALL BE LIMITED TO
THE GREATER OF THE ACTUAL DAMAGES YOU INCUR
IN REASONABLE RELIANCE ON THE SOFTWARE UP TO
THE AMOUNT ACTUALLY PAID BY YOU FOR THE OS
COMPONENTS OR U.S.$5.00. THE FOREGOING
LIMITATIONS, EXCLUSIONS AND DISCLAIMERS SHALL
APPLY TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY
APPLICABLE LAW, EVEN IF ANY REMEDY FAILS ITS
ESSENTIAL PURPOSE.
stand for "License". The software license is purchased by your company. They own the license. They are on the hook. Not you.
I knew there was a reason Microsoft acts like a 3 year old.
The new "Set Program Access and Defaults" dialog is a thinly disguised mechanism to allow users to easily change back to Microsoft's components all in one convenient location.
nt
" You need to be running a version of Internet Explorer 5 or higher in order to use Windows Update."(Link to Explorer 6.1)
Hypocrisy? naaaaaah!
-----
Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton
FWIW, I'm using Moz 1.0, and I can read the BBC News site with no apparent problems, at least no more than any other web site.
I'm not sure where all these people have found a stable 1.0 build, though; mine crashes left, right and centre, particularly if it's got the pretty-much-essential Quick Launch feature enabled. It's just that IE 6 is just as bad, and Moz generally does a better job otherwise, so I'll stick with it anyway. :-(
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
unbiased journalism is a myth. Humans are incapable of producing journalism that is unbiased since their writings will be tainted by there knowledge and expereinces. Besides, no one would want to read unbiased journalism since it would read like an almanac, with nothing but dry facts (which is probably why this article is on the boring side). This article is as close to middle of the road as they come. While not particularly stimulating, it doesn't really have much of an opinion either way (on anything). Think about it.
An error occurred rendering the requested content.
/ Windows/XP/SP1FixList.asp?SD=GN&LN=en-au
URL: http://support.microsoft.com/support/ServicePacks
If you choose Express update you'll only download what you need, with my setup it only downloaded 50 megs.
For a Linux/Windows similarity, think of it as the difference between running "apt-get dist-upgrade" or Redhat's up2date versus downloading a brandnew ISO image.
The BBC article didn't seem biased in either direction, except maybe in the title.
Vote for Pedro
What if you change the text displayed in the EULA box to something in the likes of "You are free as in speech to use the software updated by this update package" and then click the agree button?
Changing the text that will be displayed in the EULA box is actually very easy, it doesn't require anything that is not installed on any windows version since '95, and works the very same way for both Windows 2000 SP3 and Windows XP SP1.
That's larger than a full install of Windows 9x!!!!
Wow thanks! That is so *intuitive*, not like the linux voodoo. And you don't have to use the dreaded command line!
Now I understand why people don't want to use linux, since you have to type cryptic commands into textfiles, such as:
ONBOOT=yes
IPADDR=192.168.1.10
NETMASK=255.255.255.0
Try changing the user agent string to "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1)". It'll at least let you in with that.
If that doesn't work, then you'll have to use IE. It looks to me to be mostly javascript, though I didn't look at the entire thing. I obviously can't test it properly under linux. Though Konqueror does support activex through emulation...
"Besides, if everyone uses Linux all of a sudden, who has the monopoly? Red Hat? Gentoo? Mandrake? Slackware? Debian? Linus Torvalds himself?" I'd keep my eye on that doped-up looking penguin, if I were you.
"Whose Line is it Anyway" started out on BBC radio station 4 (Source) in '87. Then they moved to TV station 4 in '88. You might only be familiar with the version hosted by Drew Carey, but be aware that the show has a history.
If you read my comment, then you might possibly get the joke. I debated humor "tags" for about five minutes while I was writing the post, but thought that the avg. Slashdot reader would actually read it and be capable of understanding humor. Not the first time I've been wrong.
The fact that I don't have a life doesn't change the fact that you just didn't get it, and instead felt the need to flame randomly, but really, all you did was get yourself burned.
Dan
BLACKLIST="microsoft.com MSFT.NET"
for i in $BLACKLIST; do
$IPTABLES -A INPUT -s $i -m limit --limit 5/minute \
-j LOG --log-prefix "Blacklisted: "
$IPTABLES -A INPUT -s $i -j DROP
done
Oh, wait! Something bad about the BBC on Slashdot? That's damn near the closest thing I could hope for besides Slash's glowing praise of Microsoft on the scale of Earth Shattering events...
You need a FREE iPod Nano
No, we should bomb your house and let Britain help us.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
It wasn't random but I did ponder the issue of whether it was humour or not. I guess I got it wrong.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
You should always negoitiate a contract, ..... anyone who's aggreed to Micrsofts EULA)
what Big company do you know that would just accept a contract without having negoitiations and letting they leagle people read through it..... (HP, IBM, The Government,
HP's big enough to tell Microsoft to fuck off about virgin pc's there just too lame to bother!
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Maybe, a long time ago, the BBC had a reputation as a fair and independent journalistic organisation.
But in recent years, they are merely parrots for whatever press releases they deem worth broadcasting.
Their normal news items are highly sensationalised, bordering on sub tabloid (a curse of uk journalism in particular) and rarely researched at all.
Their tech journalism, however, reaches new heights of incompetence. I think they must recruit the homeless to write their articles.
- They regularly bite any PR for publicity whoring madman kevin warwick (see theregister for his recent japes).
- They regularly use the words "web and the internet" interchangably.
- They probably have not actually _heard_ of linux (their television tech program certainly doesn't seem to know about anything but windows)
Basically, its the modern curse of crappy journalism which blights a lot of media organisations with a tech arm...
I personally reckon they've spending too much time trying to get Word to do what they want, to actually go off and research anything...
A Reasonable Settlement for Conviction of Monopoly Practices: All of Microsoft's code base and IP becomes open source and public domain up to the date of the settlement. All non-compete contracts that Microsoft holds with current and former employees become null and void. In other words: take away their monopoly.
WAH!!!! i can't run apt-get thru IE6!!!!
Given that the prices are actually about the same as I recall them, it looks like the price for an Office upgrade was used the first time, but the full retail product price was used the second time. I'm not sure if it's still the case, but older upgrade copies of Office would work if you had MS Works, WordPerfect, almost anything really.
Oops! -1 Offtopic! Oh well.