Slashdot Mirror


WGA Under Vista SP1 Is Kinder and Nags More

DaMan writes in with a ZDNet blog entry on Windows Genuine Advantage under Vista SP1. It seems that the draconian features present in Vista RTM have been replaced by nag screens and annoyances such as repeatedly changing the desktop background to black. But WGA no longer turns off Aero and ReadyBoost or logs you out after an hour."

6 of 299 comments (clear)

  1. Re:nag screens and annoyances by Ilgaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sounds to me like they just made WGA consistent with the rest of the OS. Isn't spyware (forget that lawyer made up term) something:

    1) Installs itself with false promises , e.g. "We will make your internet and system faster with better features!"
    2) Steals private data which you would normally NEVER provide if you had a chance to think twice.
    3) Tortures your user experience and break your system if you ever attempt to get rid of it?

    So, by definition, WGA enabled Windows is spyware and I don't blame MS for it. There is a company who makes easier, faster, better products and they got significant market share at least on portables now. It is not like "Install Linux and ./configure" anymore. Also user friendly distros like Ubuntu exists.

    If considerable amount of MS customers got rid of it or simply rejected using Windows only because of WGA, you would see WGA fade away in weeks, no less.

    I was using Windows back in 2002-2003 era and I can't see a reason why WGA or Customer Experience service isn't considered plain spyware.

    Of course if you act like a lemming, you will be treated like a lemming. After OS X, Intel Switch which made Mac very credible thanks to popularithy, distros like Ubuntu... Why do we blame MS anymore? It is end user/customer to blame. Let them sit with their WGA bugging OS who treats them as a thief.

  2. Re:nag screens and annoyances by cliffski · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't mind if windows verifies itself with Microsoft. Does that make me a sheep? It's an expensive product and they want to ensure people aren't pirating it. My copy is legit, so why should I resent that? I'm not sure what 'personal information' they will be getting from me, my hard drive serial number maybe? hardly my bank account details.
    Microsoft are no more 'treating their customers like thieves' than a store that has security tags on the clothes and a scanner by each exit. Amazingly, only the shoplifters get bent out of shape about those.

    --
    DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
  3. Re:nag screens and annoyances by RicardoGCE · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft are no more 'treating their customers like thieves' than a store that has security tags on the clothes and a scanner by each exit. Amazingly, only the shoplifters get bent out of shape about those.
    Once I leave the store, I don't have to check in with the store owner when I want to use the product I already paid for.
    I'm against software piracy. But I'm also against intrusive control mechanisms that will annoy legitimate users.
  4. Re:nag screens and annoyances by EvilIdler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't mind if Windows calls home ONCE, as I install it, to verify.

    But WGA is, to use your security tag analogy, as if they leave the tag on after
    you buy the clothes, and regularly sweep your home to ensure you did not lend
    out any of your clothes to other people.

    But verifying that you have the genuine article on each installation is
    perfectly agreeable.

  5. Re:nag screens and annoyances by Denyer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nobody wants to feel that an expensive piece of software they paid for (probably a tool they rely on for business) could stop working if someone remotely flicks a switch.

    --
    Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Gates M'dna wgah'nagl fhtagn.
  6. Re:nag screens and annoyances by RicardoGCE · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You personally have had trouble with a legally purchased copy of Windows Vista and WGA? Or are you just parroting the vocal minority because that's the slashdot way?
    I called the system "unacceptable". That means I don't use Windows, because I don't like the strings attached, regardless of how "transparent" people want to claim it is.