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
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
I hate posting about M$. Last time i got modded to Flamebait. DOH!!!
Apparently you aren't the only person who hates your postings about Microsoft, then.
The only way to "switch them off" is with a pair of scissors on your power cable.
My virus scanner updates itself without my knowledge, as does my weather bar and e-mail client. How do I know they aren't doing nefarious things? But in the end, they make for a more convenient product.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Apparently Windows Upbreak decided to update a bunch of stuff that required the new video driver before it updated the video driver itself.
Apparently you never looked at Windows Update enough to realize that you can control the order of the installation. Want to do driver updates first? No problem. Oh wait, it is easier to complain and blame Microsoft.
I can't wait til this is done, as I use 98lite for the pentium 233 here at work.
Speedy goodness, and I feel a bit better about the saftey of my midget porn.
Does this have anything to do with SP4? I don't know. I just wonder what SP4 will break.
Yup, this has been the only stumbling block for me to move from Linux to Windows XP .... That and it costing money.
-- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
I don't think you understand Microsoft's tactic. They ALWAYS did the same thing:
1) Start with something free or an upgrade.
2) Incrementally and slowly add more and more restrictive claims. Auto-update, DRM, etc.
3) If the people start complaining too much, roll-back to previous claims, which isn't much better.
4) Wait for a while.
5) Go to 2.
This has been MS tactics for as long as I can remember. So, I don't think we should claim victory right now.
Does it matter that MS has changed the wording around in their EULA for win2k? They are still going to try to force their will upon you. Look at the Media player 9 EULA. It gives M$ 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
"Does the EULA say that the Internet Explorer reports all web domains to the MSN search engine if it can't resolve them?"
Yeah maaaan! Microsoft - and therefore the government - now has a huge list of misspelled and non-existant website addresses! Just imagine the kind of horrific infringements of privacy that can take place now!! It doesn't bear thinking about, does it!
"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.
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.
God forbid people do marketing research on your info! Oh no! Whatever will we do?!
If this shit goes into a database it just becomes another dot on a graph. There isn't some guy sitting at the MSN office saying "Hey look! pmz is looking at deep anal porn at 3 AM again! Let's go to his house and rape his mom!"
I've said it before and I have a feeling I'll be saying it until I'm lying in my grave...Nobody cares about you! They're not sitting in your closet watching you surf the internet in your spiderman underoos. You still have your precious privacy!!
Now what? You don't want to be a target of some ad campaign?? I only wish I was targeted more instead of being bombarded with those fucking X10 camera ads everytime I go to a webpage or tampon commercials everytime I turn on the TV.
Kudos to you, my good man.
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.