Slashdot Mirror
Professor Michael Geist on Vista's Fine Print
Russell McOrmond writes "With Microsoft's Vista set to hit stores tomorrow, Michael Geist's weekly Law Bytes column (Toronto Star version, homepage version) looks at the legal and technical fine print behind the operating system upgrade. The article notes that in the name of shielding consumers from computer viruses and protecting copyright owners from potential infringement, Vista seemingly wrestles control of the "user experience" from the user. If you are a Canadian and think that the owner of computers should be in control of what they own, rather than some third party (whether virus authors or the manufacturer/maker), then please sign our Petition to protect Information Technology property rights."
There is still a lot of debate on whether EULA's and click through agreements are completely binding. I won't get into all of the arguments on both sides, but I believe that companies are afraid to really go after anyone for breaking the asnine portions of these agreements because a court might rule that these documents are not binding contracts. They are handy for threatening people in certain situations, with cease and desist letters, and for making corporate users wary about potential law suits, thus restricting their usage and options. Of course, a court could hold that they are completely binding, and then the software companies would be free to attack an breach. So each side seems to be in an uneasy truce.
http://bgcommonsense.blogspot.com
Isn't the most effective way to "protest" it just not buy, to explain to your friends and workplaces why they shouldn't buy it, and most particularly, to aggressively pursue a refund for any bundled versions that you're forced to buy with hardware?
The point of protesting is to make your voice heard. If you get enough people involved, then word spreads about the problem. While the things you mention would be somewhat effective, the best predictor of effectiveness is probably the amount of people you can get involved.
IMO, telling your friends or pursuing a refund would not be nearly as effective as an online petition and a story on slashdot.
That's not to imply that any of these things will really make a significant difference. Maybe they will, maybe they won't.
That is exactly what I did a few months ago. I dropped my wife's HP laptop and the screen broke. It would have been $600 to fix it so I bought an Intel Macbook. My wife loves it, and so do I. In fact she was always yelling at me for always taking it from her so I said the only way she could keep it is if I got my own Mac. A little later I got an Intel iMac and love it. I triple boot with WinXP for a few games, Visual Studio and MS SQL Server and Linux for my "fix".
There is just no reason to go to the junk that is called Vista. I hope WinXP will still allow me to do the few things I need to in MS Windows for the next 3-5 years, then I can see what the OS landscape is like.
As for others saying Apple is just as bad as MS when it comes to restrictions and DRM, they are clueless. I never had to do any "activation" on my two Intel Macs. The only DRM I have found is with iTMS, so I just don't use it or buy music. I did buy a few TV episodes from iTMS, however when I couldn't burn them to DVD to watch on my big TV, I stopped that as well. OS X is just far better than anything from MS. I get the juicy *nix that I love and a very good user experience for me as well as an easy to use experience for my wife.
General, you are listening to a machine! Do the world a favor and don't act like one.
Isn't the most effective way to "protest" it just not buy, to explain to your friends and workplaces why they shouldn't buy it, and most particularly, to aggressively pursue a refund for any bundled versions that you're forced to buy with hardware?
:)
Not to buy. Have not given MS a dime since 1995.
Explain to friends and workplaces. I cannot recommend MS products over the alternatives. With my friends, I clearly tell them if they are asking my advice, my answer is to buy a Mac. None to date have taken my advice, and they still ask me about "Windows problems" when I politely told them that I don't do windows and that I could not help them with windows problems upfront. Workplaces. They seem to be MS dependant despite years of suggestions to change.
Refund? The principle of the thing is worth more than the money, and for most people, neither is that important to them.
All I can say is that this petition is a day late and a dollar short, but although I have fixed my microsoft problem. I still know plenty of people that don't care or just won't change from the MS problem.
I am _not_ brand loyal/disloyal. I treat all things as generic tools and will use what is best for the job at the current time, and things come and go on my shitlist, and I don't hold a permanant grudge until the company has gone too far. To date, only two companies have made my permanant shitlist, and I have brought one of them to court as well, and neither are Microsoft.
Macs were on my offlist before OS X, but they have seen the light
If things go poorly enough, the stranglehold could be lost. As for myself, the only thing typing me to a Windows platform on one machine at the moment is games, but MS has done such a good job (relatively) on te xbox 360 that I could see that requirement going away, allowing me to run *nix across the board.
"you may not work around any technical limitations in the software."
That's absolutely stunning. I wonder exactly how broadly that could be interpreted?
If I buy any kind of third-party utility... antivirus software, backup software, a defragmenter... isn't that "working around" technical limiations in the software Microsoft provides? Isn't Firefox arguable a "workaround" for technical limitations in Internet Explorer?
It's about time to stop calling it a "personal computer" and start calling it a "Microsoft corporate computer."
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
I mean look at their generous FairPlay licensing program!
Yes, look at it. Its dominance is forcing the record labels to consider abandoning DRM altogether (see prior Slashdot article). And it's from a company who said early on that they weren't a fan of DRM and has refused to license it.
Let's put it this way - less DRM means more iPods sold. The iTMS is just infrastructure to sell iPods, not a massive source of revenue. And they could make good money licensing FairPlay.
Maybe I'm wearing rose-colored glasses, but this seems to be the way things are playing out.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
"Refund? The principle of the thing is worth more than the money, and for most people, neither is that important to them."
The cost, to Microsoft, of the Refund is not just a lost sale. It's also the time and money that went into licensing and de-licensing that copy, and returning the money. It's not cheap for them.
There's also the fact that everyone who does this can now tell everyone they know that they got their money back for their unused copy of Windows. Eventually, it'll stick in peoples' heads that they aren't stuck with Windows.
It also gives you the ability to defuse anyone who says 'Yeah, but I've already paid for it, so I might as well use it.' If you haven't actually received the refund, they'll say it's like a rebate and you won't get it.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
So my new debate is whether to accept Vista and simply work around its limitations and restrictions
According to Microsoft's EULA: "You may not work around any technical limitations in the software"
I think they just helped you with your decision.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Wow, he was pretty unspecific there about what he was talking about.
:-p
Maybe it's about the HD Content Protection tech again which we've seen stories on here at Slashdot ad nauseum by now. Why is the editors even still approving this stuff? We'll soon enough know ever Slashdot members' stance on the matter.
Anyway... I agree DRM is stupid, but shouldn't these guys be barking at the paranoid media companies trying to enforce that junk, not Microsoft? Vista provides merely an implementation of the HDCP standards that are being pushed out. As long as these guys whines at Vista, nothing will change, because Microsoft will always be the kind of guys that wants to at least provide their users the option to use protected media if they really, really want to. (you aren't required to, and you're free to pirate DRM-less stuff and play it back on Vista perfectly fine) It's like he thinks Microsoft thought it was a good idea to arbitrarily limit users in how they can view protected media. In that case, he needs to provide a major part of his article giving convincing conspiracy-free details on how Microsoft would exactly profit from that. Please... Wake up and smell the fresh MPAA air. MS may be huge and bad and all, but isn't it obvious who's pulling the strings here? There's more than one behemoth developing Vista at play here.
And when you've got a more balanced view on the situation, maybe it's even possible to realize that Vista can play free media as freely and unrestricted as OS X or Linux, and actually see that Vista only provides the option to playback DRM'ed content, just like OS X provides the option to playback FairPlay stuff, or Linux provides you the option to install non-free libraries with truly draconian licenses that would make baby Gates cry. Is this the operating systems' faults?
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
If you are curious what I would say, just ask.
Speaking to a group of copyright holders about this issue, Stewart Baker, Department of Homeland Security's assistant secretary for policy, said, "It's very important to remember that it's your intellectual property -- it's not your computer. And in the pursuit of protection of intellectual property, it's important not to defeat or undermine the security measures that people need to adopt in these days."
Nothing in this petition diminishes the legitimate rights of copyright holders. What it does is recognize the age-old saying, which is "Your right to swing your cane ends at my nose". IE: A copyright holders right to protect their copyright ends at my property rights.
Digital Copyright Canada forum
Windows Vista is, at least for me, the anvil that broke the camel's back. I have been planning a switch to Linux for about two years and Vista is the prefect opportunity to commit. In fact, Microsoft has practically made it mandatory. I wonder how many other users feel the same way? Regardless, Ubuntu, here I come :).
The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
I loaded it on a twin dual core with 4 gig of ram.
It booted slower than 2k pro
It would not allow me to install sybase (vista said it was a virus)
I could not run Office 2000 on it. I would just crash if it opened at all
I was unable to load my custom written backup software, it did not have a valid certificate
( i wrote the software )
I unloaded vista and put 2k back on it
-- I am the NRA, enough said...
Implicit in your comment is the assumption that business IT departments are significantly more savvy than Joe Schmoe computer owner. My experience is that there are plenty of IT professionals, possibly even the majority of them, who accept what Microsoft tells them about their own products and generally don't ask questions about the company's pronouncements that a new product is "better" or "more secure" or whatever.
If MS sends out the word that their new OS is a must-have, these people will only be held back by their companies' giving them the time and money to make the new upgrade. It is very unlikely that such people would EVER EVEN CONSIDER not using Vista on their new machines after it becomes the OEM OS.
That's how I perceive the situation where I work. I'm not an IT professional, I'm a librarian. We have an Integrated Library System (a.k.a., ILS, i.e., the online catalog) that runs on MS SQL Server and it crashes probably once a day on average. When I have mentioned to the IT group that there are OSS alternatives I am literally answered with blank stares. These people have no idea that OSS even exists. They will drink the Vista Kool-Aid.
I have no statistics on how many IT departments are like this, but I imagine that it is more than the average Slashdot reader might believe. Obviously, people who don't even know what OSS is are not reading Slashdot.
I'm just sayin'.
The first culpable parties in this are Microsoft, the media groups, and the hardware manufacturers who agreed to be party to it. They're the direct actors, and should be dealt with via direct action.
The next group of culpable parties are those who participate in the scheme. The people who pay for supporting hardware and install Vista on it are enabling this to continue. In their absence, it would not happen. They are indirectly responsible. Or perhaps irresponsible.
The appropriate thing for those of us who do not wish to allow this to happen to do is to shun those who participate. This creates a tangable disincentive for continuing down this course, and also disempowers those who choose to do so, reducing their capacity to act as effective supporters.
The common wisdom says that in the land of the internet, you must do everything you can to entice the users to come to your site, and if you don't, you're shooting yourself in the foot and no one will care.
I would suggest that is a short sighted view in this case.
There is a vast amount of content out there that is generating negligable income if any for those who host it, who do not depend on being as popular as they can be to survive.
If you are in such a position, please, break your site for users of Vista. Break it utterly, tell them that it's intentional, tell them how to find alternatives, and let them know their patronage is not welcome until and unless they do.
It's time to play hardball.
We can't make people not build it. We can't make them not buy it. We can't make people not put premium content out there that only supports Vista with DRM, and we can't make people not pay for that premium content.
But right now, the choice is non-DRM-supporting systems offering limited choice compared to the DRM-supporting systems that offer greater choice.
That is something we can do something about.
We can make it so that choosing DRM means limiting your choices. One server at a time.
And if we do it soon enough, and quick enough, we can do it from the comfortable confines of a system where the price is only a small percentage of the market.
Webmasters everywhere chose not to bother supporting anything but IE5/6 with Windows. For years and years.
Because they could get away with it.
Because that describes 90% of the market.
And their sites did just fine.
That same fact can be used against Vista. Right now.
Think about it.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Vista Basic is to be found in the top fifty, but far down the list.
I think the opportunity for confusion is overstated.
The businessman or professional will be attracted to features like whole-disk encryption, others will see Ultimate as the right choice for the core system of an increasingly complex and sophisticated home network.
At any given moment, there are a half dozen or so Macs on the market, compared to the hundreds of variations on the commodity Wintel PC. We'll ignore the fact that you have left direct sellers like Dell out of the equation.
Amazon.com is as close as we have to the old Sears, Roebuck Catalog on the net, the clearest reflection of middle class tastes and values.
I've no doubt the next iteration of the Mac OS will rank high on its charts.
But I also have no doubt that Vista will remain a strong and steady seller for years to come.
Interestingly, I've noticed this doomsday scenario doesn't really happen that often anymore. I was always the go-to guy amongst family and friends for fixing computer issues, and for the last year or so, no one has bothered me at all.
It's entirely anecdotal, to be sure, but I think since SP2 Microsoft really got their shit mostly together with XP. People of normal intelligence seem perfectly suited to running it.
Welcome to Linux's (and others) greatest enemy: the good enough.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.