Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Backs Down on Windows 2000 EULA
nachoboy writes "After the fiasco surrounding the overly intrusive EULA for Windows 2000 SP3, it seems Microsoft has backed down a bit with the upcoming release of SP4. The section concerning automatic updates now states simply "You consent to the operation of these features, unless you choose to switch them off or not use them." The EULA then proceeds to list the five services liable to connect to the internet without explicit confirmation. A reference copy of the SP4 EULA may be found here. We can only hope for a similar move with Windows XP."
This may be too little too late for us. With the release of SP3 for Windows 2000 "Professional" we went to a "code freeze" with Microsoft Windows (among other things).
:)
With this SP we also decided it was time to completely ditch them from operations and have been rolling out Linux and Mac OS.X workstations as existing systems reached their EOL.
Fortunately we may actually use SP4 for the existing Windows boxes (about 35% left now) -- but our budget for Microsoft products has been placed at -0- per the board of directors.
Too little, too late... (fp
To all the people who say what can we do; Here is a perfect example of the power of the people. We the consumers hold the power. We can stand up and fight corporate greed. From here we need to demand better software with less bugs.
I hate posting about M$. Last time i got modded to Flamebait. DOH!!!
-- Karma Karma Karma Karma, Karma Chameleon - Boy George
This is a nice concession by microsoft, but what of the weird restrictions on benchmarking alluded to in the older slashdot article?
.NET Framework component of the OS Components to any third party without Microsoft's prior written approval.'
'You may not disclose the results of any benchmark test of the
Do you actually believe Microsoft only spies on you if it's written in the EULA?
Does the EULA say that the Internet Explorer reports all web domains to the MSN search engine if it can't resolve them?
Oh, so you can turn it off alright. Does that change anything?
People don't trust Microsoft, and for good reasons.
The only way to "switch them off" is with a pair of scissors on your power cable.
You consent to the operation of these features, unless you choose to switch them off or not use them.
Haha... Yes, I consent to the operation of features I bought and left on. I don't consent to those I turn off or don't use. But could I consent to the actions of those I turn off? If I don't operate them can I give permission for them to operate? This is such a wacky sentence it's funny. I give permission for the features which are turned on to operate and don't give permission to those which are turned off to operate. I know it's legal mumbo-jumbo, but could this statement ever not be true?
consent: 2. To indicate or express a willingness; to yield to guidance, persuasion, or necessity; to give assent or approval; to comply.
Developers: We can use your help.
My virus scanner updates itself without my knowledge, as does my weather bar and e-mail client. How do I know they aren't doing nefarious things? But in the end, they make for a more convenient product.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
You will be liberated with Service Pack 5. Until then, use SCO.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
I remember there was a discusion about SP3 and where I worked that was one of the main reasons we held off installing it on our machines
Apparently Windows Upbreak decided to update a bunch of stuff that required the new video driver before it updated the video driver itself.
Apparently you never looked at Windows Update enough to realize that you can control the order of the installation. Want to do driver updates first? No problem. Oh wait, it is easier to complain and blame Microsoft.
Is the agreement on SP4 only touching the technology modified by this service pack?
If I agreed on SP3, can a further SP change my rights?
I mean, I already said yes to all that invasive stuff.
Seems like a PR-move for me.
I can't wait til this is done, as I use 98lite for the pentium 233 here at work.
Speedy goodness, and I feel a bit better about the saftey of my midget porn.
Does this have anything to do with SP4? I don't know. I just wonder what SP4 will break.
Yup, this has been the only stumbling block for me to move from Linux to Windows XP .... That and it costing money.
-- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
Bullshit. Windows Update never "decides" to install drivers. The only thing WU ever installs or selects by itself are critical updates, which never include drivers.
I seriously believe that this is the result of constant pressure and bad PR Microsoft has been getting from techies like us. Even powerful, monopolistic companies like Microsoft must respond to the dissent of the public. We must continue to discuss our grievances while educating techies and non-techies alike about how things like EULAs and buggy software can affect our lives. This is the only way companies will be forced to make better products and treat their customers better.
According to Microsoft's position, they will officially support Windows 2000 Professional/Server right through the end of 2005.
This means they will still have the signed driver program and WHQL certification program in place for the next 30 months. I expect Microsoft to offer at least up to Service Pack 6 for Win2K before the official support program ends at the end of 2005.
Besides, Windows 2000 Professional is a very nice OS, with very good stability and decent security if you apply all the proper security patches (something that should be done on all operating systems on a regular basis).
Does it matter that MS has changed the wording around in their EULA for win2k? They are still going to try to force their will upon you. Look at the Media player 9 EULA. It gives M$ the right to remove "content" they beleive to be violating a copyright holder. Just when did M$ get the damn power to be police of the world? Where was I when that power was granted? There is no need for any of this garbage. There are laws to protect copyrights, let the copyright holders use the legal system just like the rest of us have to. Just don't give in to the MS FUD or the MS monoply.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
Have they taken out that clause that states "By opening the shrinkwrap on this Microsoft product, you agree to assign to Microsoft, in perpetuity, your immortal soul. You also agree that Microsoft may sell, sublicense, or reassign your soul to any third party, including but not limited to individuals, other corporations, government entities, demons, spirits and other supernatural beings, God and/or Satan, and any other powers or dominions, at Microsoft's sole discretion."?
Man, I always hated that clause, but at least they took out the bit about your firstborn child...
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
That's about as effective as saying:
"The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it." -- Ayn Rand
Any corporation, no matter how large or small has a Board of Directors. The board is made up of people that are voted into positions, by the shareholders.
In the case of a really small company with only a few shareholders, those shareholders (if even only 2 or 3 people) will typically make up the board.
If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
No, EULAs are licenses, and therefore legal documents. Legal documents cannot be copyrighted.
"The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it." -- Ayn Rand
If you're not capable of knee-jerk opinions based on strong prejudices you don't belong here. This is Slashdot. Please take your well thought out opinions and go elsewhere.
Mmmm.. Donuts
that someone actually had the patience and will to read the whole EULA. I felt my strength slipping after the 5th paragraph. Also I kept hearing: ."
"Resistance if futile. You will be assimilated.
Resistance if futile. You will be assimilated.
. .
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Microsoft Backs Down on Windows 2000 EULA
Yes, but did it hurt when they did?
Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
If Microsoft actually did what it says, you would not have to turn your computer off to keep it from spying on you, but you would not be able to listen to music, bank, check school and government records, watch movies or just about anything. Of course, M$ is a dishonest company, so we can imagine it will store all the information until you say, "uncle root me!", and then send it all up.
This is a natural continuation of M$ practices. They already kept lists of songs and movies, now they will have your explicit permision to collect them. No, they did not really tell you what they were going to collect, they just told you that the features will have to talk to work. We can imagine they will say whatever M$ wants them to.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
"Not according to M*ft's legal brochureware. They claim that using an XP license to install w2kpro is a violation. We had to look that up at work a while ago. "
It depends on how you obtained the product. Volume Licensing users automatically have this right.. (search for downgrade)
Retail purchasers are supposed to ask for permission.
This is incorrect. More recent licenses (such as the one on SP4) supercede previous agreements. This section from the EULA clearly identifies this:
19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This EULA (including any addendum or amendment to this EULA which is included with the Product) and the CAL or TS CAL (if applicable) are the entire agreement between you and Microsoft relating to the Product and the support services (if any) and they supersede all prior or contemporaneous oral or written communications, proposals and representations with respect to the Product or any other subject matter covered by this EULA.
Posted Anonymous Coward
Makes me feel very comfortable insofar as the veracity of the rest of your post is concerned.
Do post some more details...for example:
* What is your core "real business"?
* How big is your company?
* How big is your network?
* How long has your company been established?
You get the gist...really, just some sort of detail that, say, might lead me to believe this is anything other than a rather poor troll.
I love 2a, by the way. How did you present your offer to Microsoft? (Was it a formal business proposition, or an open letter posted on the local "MS-SUX" mailing list?) To whom did you present it? What were they supposed to get out of it? (My goodness, I'm just shocked that Microsoft wasn't falling over itself to take up your little proposal involving a whopping ten -- count 'em! -- workstations.) To whom did you present the same Linux-server-based contract?
(And it still gets modded up as Interesting. Good ol' Slashdot...)
How is this official? It's not even on Microsoft's website. Sheesh.
I think I'm going to make-up an SP5 EULA and post it on my site, and then submit it as a Slashdot story. Yeah, that's the ticket!
Not All Who Wander Are Lost
I installed WMP 9 the other day, and the first thing I did was go through the settings to turn off all the "features" that I don't need.
One thing that I found interesting though, is that I unchecked the "Update my music files (WMA and MP3 files) by retrieving missing media information from the Internet" (which has an accompanying help link that explains that it would be used to add information to both the media library database and tags within the actual files), yet all the files that I played in WMP were actually still modified. Their modification dates and file sizes changed.
Now that is enough for me to decide not to use their software for playing my music, because the way that I see it, any info that is used by the media library (such as song ratings, number of times played, etc.) belongs in the separate database that it uses, and my files should not be changed unless I click a "save" or "apply" button somewhere.
So does anyone know what is being added to these files by WMP? I don't like the idea that it is changing my files just to add some stupid "This audio file was played by Windows Media Player" tag.
SP4 is not HIPAA compliant. I am going through this with one of my clients. The lawyers that I'm working with are telling me that because service packs include previous service packs, agreeing to SP4 means that you also agree to SP3 legal terms. In order for SP4 to be HIPAA compliant it must specifically revoke any HIPAA onerous terms in SP3. SP4 doesn't do this. Basically the law takes from SP3 things that are not dealt with in SP4. IANAL but this is what the client's lawyers have come up with. My client is now stuck and is in the planning stages of ripping out Win2K and replacing it with Linux.
Quit playing Monopoly with Bill.
Linux - of the people, by the people, and for the people.
You're new here, aren't you?
It's not that easy to dismiss.
However, the VPN line has gone down and the user happens to be on the Internet, where internalserver.company.com doesn't resolve. Or the local DNS server might have a temporary hiccup. Or a variety of other reasons might cause the lookup to fail.
Example: A VPN user enters https://user@password:internalserver.company.com
IE then proceeds to send the URL to the search engine of choice. NOT good.
that's right, mozilla 1.4final and up will need java 1.4.2+ (due to gcc3.2.x),
which means you need to agree to those terms if you want java. see mozilla bug 204236,
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20423
(bugzilla blocks direct links from slashdot; you'll have to copy & paste.)
Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
I work at a small ( about 5 devs ) company, and one of the projects I have worked on was a facility to update the code OTA. We recognized that we would need to be able to deal with the concept of prerequisites ( dont install B unless A is present ). And we did it.
Forgoing all the above,
Why should the end user be responsible for parsing the prereqs and figuring out what goes first? Why should you have to control the order?
A big "world class" software developement organization, full of "the best" people couldnt do better?
I'm as tired of the "microsoft can do no wrong" as I am of the "microsoft can do no right".
emt 377 emt 4