Microsoft Dodges Class Action In WGA Lawsuit

Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 02:47 · Score: 5, Insightful

I never planned on using the corporate justice system anyway.

I used the consumer justice system... I pirated some of their software and then switched to Linux.

Re:Thats fine by me... by wall0159 · 2010-01-22 03:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

While switching to Linux is a punishment for MS - pirating their software is not - it merely entrenches their position.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:19 · Score: 0

Linux is my operating system.
Windows under virtualization is just an emulator. And I'm not paying $100+, or in fact anything at all for an emulator.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Asphalt · 2010-01-22 03:19 · Score: 1

It also means that noone else is bound by the outcome, and is free to sue individually. If Microsoft loses the individual suit, you could potentially see 10,000,000 more individual suits using this case as a precedent for an easy win. That would cost MS significantly more money. Lack of class certification COULD be a disaster for Microsoft ... especially if they lose and the award is substantial.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:25 · Score: 0

Yeah it's a long shot but I am glad I finally found my real XP disc and box. Now I can prove I was effected by this terrible terrible lie.
Re:Thats fine by me... by PopeRatzo · 2010-01-22 03:30 · Score: 2, Insightful

While switching to Linux is a punishment for MS - pirating their software is not
Of course it is.

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
Re:Thats fine by me... by robinstar1574 · 2010-01-22 03:50 · Score: 0

Can you send me a copy?
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:53 · Score: 0

Who is "Noone" and why are they bound by this outcome?
Re:Thats fine by me... by qazwart · 2010-01-22 04:01 · Score: 5, Informative

You actually have a point.
Back in the 1990s with the Microsoft antitrust case, many emails and discussions came out. One of the most interesting ones was Microsoft taking about their market position in China at that time. They talked about market share and how many people there were using Windows and Office and what they could do to improve this. The funny thing is they weren't talking about sales, but the number of people pirating their software. Microsoft wanted to encourage people in China to pirate more copies of Windows and Office.
Microsoft new the number of people who could actually afford their software in China at that time was low, but they also believed that one day China would crack down on the pirating and become a legitimate market. Microsoft thought their best position was to make sure everyone was using Microsoft products -- even if they were pirated -- because people would be use to them. Then once the government cracked down on pirating, Microsoft's sales would go through the roof.
Microsoft's biggest fear is that if people were discouraged from using pirated copies of Microsoft products, these people would turn to "open source alternatives" and would never become Microsoft customers.
Re:Thats fine by me... by just_another_sean · 2010-01-22 04:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

I don't think so. MS allowed rampant piracy for years. It wasn't until long after they were the king of the desktop that they suddenly became concerned with piracy. Allowing people to pirate their software, coupled with generous give-aways to developers via MSDN, is what gave them their control over more then 90% of user's computers.

--
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:16 · Score: 2, Insightful

While switching to Linux is a punishment for MS - pirating their software is not - it merely entrenches their position.
Yes, but switching to Linux is also a punishment for me.
This is not intended to be flamebait. I prefer Linux on my servers, but I prefer Windows on my desktop. I know that around here that makes me deficient in some way, but it's true.
Re:Thats fine by me... by MistrBlank · 2010-01-22 04:23 · Score: 1

It further legitimizes the use of microsoft formats and standards, it does not punish microsoft.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:28 · Score: 2, Informative

Then you're a thief. Be honest about being a thief, don't try to make cute justifications for it like calling it an "emulator." Just say "I steal windows because I have no respect for other peoples' property." You'll feel better about yourself afterwards.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Pojut · 2010-01-22 04:30 · Score: 2, Funny

::begin shameless self plug::
Just like people "stealing" my music only helps me get more exposure! Oops, looks like I left links to a few tracks off my album without any payment method enforced...oh well.
http://www.livingwithanerd.com/music/ ::end shameless self plug::

--
Living With a Nerd
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:30 · Score: 0

Who is "Noone" and why are they bound by this outcome?
He used to be the lead singer of Herman's Hermits. For some reason all sorts of things get attributed to him around here.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Pojut · 2010-01-22 04:36 · Score: 1, Informative

I love having Linux on my Dell Mini 9, which stays in our living room. Watching TV/streaming Netflix and browsing the Internet on that little thing is awesome. Using Linux helps an underperforming device just feel snappier (plus I don't have to run anti-spyware, antivirus, etc which eat up precious CPU cycles)
I love it for my browsing purposes, but yeah I agree...I don't think I would want to use it for regular daily tasks.

--
Living With a Nerd
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:37 · Score: 1

I respect property, but not imaginary property.
Yes, I am a thief of imaginary property. So sue me.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:45 · Score: 1, Interesting

Why should she/he be honest about it?
Microsoft has a history of screwing their customers but you dont see Steve Balmer shouting "We abuse our monopoly position, vast resources and wealth to spread FUD and to lock-in and screw our customers".
I'm not saying it isn't theft but if a multi-billion dollar monopolist can lie about it, why cant everyone else?
You might like to feel superior because you're not pirating any software but I dont care and I also feel superior for not buying into
the copyright/IP bullshit.
Re:Thats fine by me... by arose · 2010-01-22 04:56 · Score: 1

How do you stream Netflix to it?

--
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Pojut · 2010-01-22 05:01 · Score: 0

Sorry, lol...I meant streaming Netflix to our TV while browsing the internet on my Mini 9. Shoulda been more clear -_-;;

--
Living With a Nerd
Re:Thats fine by me... by nomadic · 2010-01-22 05:06 · Score: 1

I don't think so. MS allowed rampant piracy for years.

Actually, it's the opposite of what you just said.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Maxo-Texas · 2010-01-22 05:21 · Score: 3, Interesting

As a person who lived through dos and 3.1, it felt like microsoft cared very little about piracy back then.
However, when I did some googling, it looks like microsoft has put a lot of money and effort into stopping piracy all the way back to at least 1990. Microsoft anti-piracy articles dominate the search results and I wasn't able to easily find any good examples of them tolerating piracy (tho I remember talk of them tolerating it in china and i remember talk of them tolerating it with windows 3.1/3.11).
Perhaps we were rationalizing, or perhaps microsoft had variable enforcement depending on market penetration.
While typing this, I realized my piracy toleration attitude came from windows 3.1 so I did some searches on tolerating windows 3.1 piracy and got some hits.
http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:Cs-TDEi65mkJ:blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/index.php%3Fp%3D709+microsoft+tolerated+windows+3.1+piracy&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
for example.
"than failing to put anti-copy protection on MS-DOS in 1983 or encouraging easy copying of its "enterprise" virtualization software today. Similarly making it easy for users to "illegally" copy and install Office 4.0 for Windows 3.1X while straight facedly working with both WordPerfect Corporation and Lotus Development to help these companies prevent illegal copying, was a simple tactical extension of a long term strategy based on using piracy as a way of gaining market share. "
This matches the Microsoft I grew up with and know well. Strongly saying one thing, and selectively doing other things. Saying you had to follow the legitimate API's to be Windows 95 certified, but using backdoor API's for Word95 and then still certifying it. Saying you want a partnership with a smaller company, learning their technology, dropping the patnership, and then bringing out a similar product (and being sued for it and losing a few times).
I'm sure that Microsoft is strongly against piracy wherever it has high market penetration. I'm sure it says that it is strongly against piracy everywhere but some areas are very low on the enforcement list.

--
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Totenglocke · 2010-01-22 05:43 · Score: 1

While switching to Linux is a punishment for MS - pirating their software is not - it merely entrenches their position.
How does it entrench their position? First off, I use Windows, OS X, and Linux and find each one to have strengths and weaknesses. Secondly, I actually do find Windows 7 (which I've been using since the beta) to be worth paying for - I just find the price tag to be way too steep (especially given that they block features unless you pay more money). However, I don't understand how you can say pirating their software is good for them since I'm aware of the alternatives - if I get a free copy of Office, why not use it? If the day came where I couldn't get a free copy, I'd go back to using Open Office (like I did for a couple of years). It's the same with any other MS product - while some of their products actually are good (Win 7 and MSE are the only two I can actually think of, hah), my main reason for using MS products is that I can get them for free. When I can no longer get them for free, I'll just use open source equivalents for free instead - so it's not like I'm going to pay them money once I can no longer get it for free.

--
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
Re:Thats fine by me... by Totenglocke · 2010-01-22 05:45 · Score: 1

Allowing people to pirate their software, coupled with generous give-aways to developers via MSDN, is what gave them their control over more then 90% of user's computers.
Sorry, I have to disagree there. I think the reason they have 90% of the market is because Windows is what most companies develop software for.....as a result, if you want to run most software, you MUST run Windows. Hopefully this changes in the future, but I doubt it.

--
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
Re:Thats fine by me... by just_another_sean · 2010-01-22 06:02 · Score: 1

Well your comment isn't really exclusive of mine. There are definitely other reasons (e.g. Unix Wars!) but MS practically giving away developer software + the fact that said developer software was brain dead easy to use (didn't always create good software, but still) is why there are so many applications that only work on Windows.
And piracy works there as well. In the late 90's I worked for a company that had a single MSDN subscription that was shared with every developer in the company, including allowing them to take copies home. This gave us not only "free" copies of the dev tools but also to free Windows OS software and to a lesser extent free Office.
Now where I work there is a single MSDN subscription used by a single developer that keeps careful track of how often he has installed anything he gets. The OS's need keys to be installed, need activation like any other copy and are subject to WGA. IMHO the proliferation of Windows Apps was definitely influenced by the earlier "look the other way behavior". And of course now that it's accepted practice to give away dev tools for an OS, MS is doing the same but guards Windows and Office more and more. The free dev tools still encourage Windows only apps but they don't want people pirating Windows or Office because they don't need them to.

--
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 06:28 · Score: 0

I feel sorry for your mother.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Z00L00K · 2010-01-22 06:46 · Score: 1

Of course - at that stage they had gained market for the majority of the computers in the world and were able to change the playing field by getting harsher and raising the prices to gain even more money.
And now they are pushing against possible competition at many fronts - all from patent lawsuits to covert operations masked as cooperation.
Business as usual.

--
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 06:51 · Score: 0

Thank you for your insightful argument
Re:Thats fine by me... by Undead+Waffle · 2010-01-22 07:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

Or they can settle on this small case and make the problem go away without setting a precedent.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Sleepy · 2010-01-22 07:14 · Score: 1

While switching to Linux is a punishment for MS - pirating their software is not
Of course it is.
Of course it is WHY?
If you merely pirate Microsoft software, you are still allowing them to OWN YOUR DATA.
Worse, you perpetuate the status quo of Microsoft's proprietary file formats you are storing your data IN.
How many people save their wedding videos in closed file formats without understanding the implications?
I'm sure folks elaborated on the document-formats issue more, but I wanted to highlight an example where you are not creating any file formats:
Let say you browse the web in MSIE - you're helping Microsoft.
Most of the smart web developers would LIKE to always target the true standard - the W3.org specs - and then hack in CSS/HTML bugfixes to workaround Microsoft's bugs. But that's an IDEAL. In many corporate environments, you write FOR the Microsoft bugs... and if Firefox does not render the page the same way, ban Firefox. Thankfully this is becoming LESS common, but it's still pervasive. Anyways..
Even today, lots of Intranets still REQUIRE IE6 to access Intranet applications.
This came about as the result of short-sighted thinking.. that conformity and monoculture in software is somehow good.
Now, corporations are having their security breached as a result of being locked into the "IE6 format" webpage (see China's "R&D" spyware division..).
Good planning...
(BTW, IE8 gets MS some credit. They're still not embracing CSS3 and HTML5, but they've mostly given up on turning the web into an Office
Re:Thats fine by me... by weicco · 2010-01-22 07:21 · Score: 1

I used the same system. I made some changes to Linux, distributed it without giving out the source code and then switched to Windows. That doesn't so good anymore, doesn't it?

--
You don't know what you don't know.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Demonantis · 2010-01-22 07:22 · Score: 1

I think this is more important then ensuring Linux becomes a household name. That people have choice in what products to use. That is why there are so many flavors of Linux. It is understandable that some people may like Microsoft and that is perfectly fine. Getting it rammed down our throats every time we buy a computer is just the annoying part.
Re:Thats fine by me... by hodet · 2010-01-22 07:54 · Score: 1

I look forward to the day that I can express this opinion using my own account and not as AC. ...ah crap!
Re:Thats fine by me... by Pojut · 2010-01-22 07:56 · Score: 1

Getting it rammed down our throats every time we buy a computer is just the annoying part.
That's why you don't buy a computer...you build it. That way, you can get exactly what you want and none of what you don't want :-)
xoxide.com, frozencpu.com, and newegg.com are your friends!

--
Living With a Nerd
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 08:06 · Score: 0

And we, as well as Microsoft, know full well that not a single other lawsuit will ever take place... because it takes time, resources, and effort that nobody will expend.
Re:Thats fine by me... by hairyfeet · 2010-01-22 08:17 · Score: 1

Actually as someone who lived through that era (gag) allow me to point out a slight error in your rant buddy. You see the reason IE6 became so hooked into the Intranet was NOT some MSFT conspiracy, because if it was they would have made sure that IE7 and IE8 could continue the lock in, but instead was by developers that bought the whole "ActiveX is the wave of the future" crap. To be fair at the time there was IE and....well there was Opera but they were ad supported and irritating as hell, so IE was pretty much it.
But even MSFT didn't see the "gotcha" when it came to ActiveX. You see at the time MSFT was still very much in a corporate mindset VS the web mindset that is prevalent today. Back then they envisioned everything going through nice corporate firewalls and enterprise AV so they didn't realize how badly they fucked up with IE6 and ActiveX. But ActiveX on IE6 was really really easy to write web based apps with, so developers jumped all over it. What nobody thought of at the time is there really isn't much difference between script kiddie code running on a web page and an Intranet app, so ActiveX became a security nightmare. But by then the damage was done and you had huge amounts of corporate Intranet apps written for it.
But if it was a MSFT lock in plan, they would have made damned sure that IE7 and IE8 would allow them to continue the lock and move the corps to the new hotness. After all the whole point is to keep them buying MSFT, right? Instead you have tons of SMBs and corps running XP and even Win2K pro because their entire business depends on Intranet apps that won't work in anything past IE6. And since IE6 don't work in Vista or Windows 7, MSFT is royally boned until XP is completely EOL in 2014, which by then hopefully most will have replaced their IE6 craptaculars. Although I wouldn't be surprised if even then some businesses cling to IE6, which will of course mean less profits for MSFT.
You know, if Linux really wanted to make inroads somebody would design a way that you could run IE6 crap in a sandbox in such a way as the user didn't notice, ala parallels for Mac. VMs are too complex for the Sally Secretary types, and if it were sandboxed you would have the threats like you do with native IE6. But I'm sure MSFT wishes right along with web developers that IE6 would just DIAF already, because as long as they still have corps using IE6 they can't get them to switch to the new hotness.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Golddess · 2010-01-22 09:11 · Score: 1

I seem to recall an article a while back which said that Microsoft would rather the Chinese pirate Windows than switch to Linux. Unfortunately, my google-fu is weak today.

--
"I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
Re:Thats fine by me... by Mr.+Freeman · 2010-01-22 09:13 · Score: 1

A memo written by bill gates in '76 is not at all representative of Microsoft's stance against or actions towards piracy during the last 20-30 years.

--
-1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
Re:Thats fine by me... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 11:30 · Score: 0

modding you redundant for the rest of eternity.
Re:Thats fine by me... by khellendros1984 · 2010-01-22 12:47 · Score: 1

Based on personal experience (the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", yadda yadda), most people aren't aware of anything besides Windows and OSX. Even the people that I know that have heard of Linux think of it as "that geek thing". OO.o is considered to be a distant second choice for most people. While I agree with your position of staying legal but going for free when possible, I think that it's a rare decision. Most people don't care enough about computers to look into their options, and so they'll just continue to use whatever is first set in front of them.

In short, "Why not use it?"? Because they already paid for the other thing, and the pay thing just has to be better, right?

--
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Re:Thats fine by me... by NSN+A392-99-964-5927 · 2010-01-22 17:25 · Score: 1

While switching to Linux is a punishment for MS - pirating their software is not - it merely entrenches their position.
Yes, but switching to Linux is also a punishment for me.
This is not intended to be flamebait. I prefer Linux on my servers, but I prefer Windows on my desktop. I know that around here that makes me deficient in some way, but it's true.
Do you know what? I use windows for web development because I am better at using Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Fireworks etc on a windows machine than I am on Linux or Mac. I only really use windows for what I need. Other than that, I ditched Linux many many years ago and only run NetBSD or FreeBSD on all of my clients servers. Sooner or later most Linux systems are just going to be exploitable as windows machines. It has been rumbling like a volcano to erupt over the past 5 years when using Linux has become the fashion statement. Oooo I run Linux. Open Source is becoming more fashionable as days progress. One still cannot escape the fact that GPL, GNU, will have to have they're own WGA called GPLGA at some point because of source code theft that is actually occuring. Linux has grown massively and each person wants a slice of the PIE when there is not enough pie to go around. My advice is leave Linux alone and go all out BSD. Regards, NSN

--
All cows eat grass!
Re:Thats fine by me... by PopeRatzo · 2010-01-23 01:47 · Score: 1

From Bill Gates' memo:

They are the ones who give hobbyists a bad name, and should be kicked out of any club meeting they show up at.
As a long-time English teacher, it makes my stomach hurt to think that someone who writes as badly as this could be as successful as Bill Gates.
"..any club meeting they show up at." Really, Bill?

--
You are welcome on my lawn.
Re:Thats fine by me... by the_womble · 2010-01-23 18:23 · Score: 1

I live in a country where:
1) The police will raid shops if copyright holders make credible allegations that they are selling pirated stuff.
2) Corporate use of pirated copies of Lotus Notes, and Adobes various design apps stopped after they started contacting people and making i clear they would sue.
3) Everyone still open sells pirated Windows and Office, and I mean city centre shops, not markets or anywhere obscure. Even corporate users often pirated copies. Pirated Windows and Office are standard "free" installs in new PCs.
4) MS has offices and a subsidiary company here, and spends on advertising here, including ads on the importance of using "genuine " (shades of ACTA there) Windows
How can you account for that, unless they are deliberately allowing piracy? If they spent a fraction of what they did on advertising on enforcement, piracy rates would plummet.
So, yes, they definitely do enforce selectively to build market share. Of curse, they no doubt plan to do exactly what Adobe did, and start collecting once people are lacked in.

Hundreds of millions by Spad · 2010-01-22 02:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

...the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damages

All of which would have gone to the lawyers.

Re:Hundreds of millions by spikenerd · 2010-01-22 03:15 · Score: 1

All of which would have gone to the lawyers.
Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich, or to make the world a better place? What's important here is that Microsoft should have been the one paying the lawyers. (For all I know, the lawyers probably get paid anyway by tax dollars through some legal loophole, and the judge gets a cut too.)
Re:Hundreds of millions by mcgrew · 2010-01-22 03:28 · Score: 1

I wouldn't care who it went to so long as it caused them to rethink their way of doing business.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:Hundreds of millions by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:42 · Score: 1, Interesting

Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich
Seems like that happens a lot in America. Seriously, what's wrong with you people? Why do you have to sue so much?
Re:Hundreds of millions by ebuck · 2010-01-22 03:56 · Score: 1

I know it's flame-bait, but there's few alternatives to suing someone. Every alternative involves taking vigilante action (highly illegal) or letting someone take advantage of you.
Re:Hundreds of millions by Funderburk · 2010-01-22 04:05 · Score: 1

All of which would have gone to the lawyers.
Not all of it. Those involved would have received a shiny new coupon for $20 off MS Office ... Or a copy of Vista if they wanted to say "F#%& You!"
Re:Hundreds of millions by cmiller173 · 2010-01-22 04:05 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich
Seems like that happens a lot in America. Seriously, what's wrong with you people? Why do you have to sue so much?
It's a liberalism thing. Liberal politicians have spent decades telling people that it is someone else's fault whatever the problem is. It's the rich bankers/oil companies/insurance companies etc. that are the cause of all your problems, you have no responsibility for your life.
So naturally if my computer does something wrong it's Microsoft's fault and I should sue them...
Re:Hundreds of millions by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:28 · Score: -1, Troll

Do you sue for the purpose of getting rich, or to make the world a better place?
If you are a nigger you sue to "Get yours from the man!".
Re:Hundreds of millions by Pojut · 2010-01-22 04:41 · Score: 2, Insightful

So naturally if my computer does something wrong it's Microsoft's fault and I should sue them...
If Microsoft's own software identifies what you are running on your computer as an illegal copy even if it was legitimately bought and paid for, then yes it is Microsoft's fault.
Come on. We're talking about software here. Not everything requires petty political bullshit. Save it for HuffPost or Drudge Report; don't bring that malarky in here.

--
Living With a Nerd
Re:Hundreds of millions by nomadic · 2010-01-22 04:53 · Score: 2, Interesting

All of which would have gone to the lawyers.

Modded insightful? It's completely and utterly false, though. Ahh, slashdot.
Re:Hundreds of millions by natehoy · 2010-01-22 04:53 · Score: 1

Law firms initiate class action suits, by and large, to make money. Some of them also happen to contribute to the public good by punishing companies for bad behavior, but the core reason most class action suits go forward is because large law firms have found the formula (forgive the ./ meme):
1. Find an injustice or perceived injustice with enough victims to qualify as a "class".
2. Get a judge to certify it as a class action.
3. Win a judgment (or better yet convince the defendant company to settle)
4. Profit (usually about 1/4 to 1/3 of the total settlement)!
Basically, class action law firms are mostly comprised of ambulance chasers who decided the exhaust fumes were getting to them.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:Hundreds of millions by nomadic · 2010-01-22 04:56 · Score: 1

large law firms

Actually in my experience most class action law firms tend to be small. It's the defense firms that are the big ones.
Re:Hundreds of millions by Mr_Silver · 2010-01-22 04:58 · Score: 1

All of which would have gone to the lawyers.
Maybe so and yes it sucks. However I'd rather it went to lawyers than stay in the hands of Microsoft and validate their opinion that they did nothing wrong.

--
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
Re:Hundreds of millions by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 05:23 · Score: 0

Liberal politicians have spent decades telling people that it is someone else's fault whatever the problem is.

And conservatives have blamed it on the liberals.

And those corporations never did anything wrong because of ideological laissez-faire goodness

Idiot.
Re:Hundreds of millions by GasparGMSwordsman · 2010-01-22 05:36 · Score: 1

...the ruling means Redmond has managed to avoid hundreds of millions in potential damages
All of which would have gone to the lawyers.
And this matters why?
The point of this kind of lawsuit is not to make money, it is to punish a perpetrator for wrong doing. So if Microsoft looses 2 Billion US, why should I care where it goes. The point is that Microsoft had to pay money for its actions and is hopefully less likely to repeat that action.
Re:Hundreds of millions by Pojut · 2010-01-22 05:36 · Score: 1

Hey, out of curiosity, what kind of lawyer are you? One of our good friends is a contract lawyer...he doesn't help write up the contracts, he just goes over them to make sure they are legally proper. Based on what I've seen from him and people he knows, that seems like it is one of the less douchey lawyer jobs out there...

--
Living With a Nerd
Re:Hundreds of millions by nomadic · 2010-01-22 06:47 · Score: 2, Interesting

Believe it or not, I work in a plaintiff class action firm. How shady/obnoxious/arrogant a lawyer can be based on specialty (litigators are probably in general the worst), but a lot of it is also based on law firm culture, which is self-perpetuating to a degree. And obviously, law school itself tends to attract a lot of obnoxious type-A personalities with massive senses of entitlement (though fortunately a lot of that gets knocked out of them when they graduate and find out that a law degree is, in terms of job security, one of the worst advanced degrees you can get).
Re:Hundreds of millions by Pojut · 2010-01-22 07:38 · Score: 1

+1 interesting. Thanks!

--
Living With a Nerd
Re:Hundreds of millions by RobertLTux · 2010-01-22 07:50 · Score: 1

even better if they id your install as "stolen" even if it was paid for
AND THEN DISABLE YOUR COMPUTER
this should be considered extortion and a possible violation of the RICO act

--
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
Re:Hundreds of millions by Red+Flayer · 2010-01-22 08:03 · Score: 1

It's a liberalism thing. Liberal politicians have spent decades telling people that it is someone else's fault whatever the problem is. It's the rich bankers/oil companies/insurance companies etc. that are the cause of all your problems, you have no responsibility for your life.

Horsecrap.

It doesn't have anything to do with liberalism. Conservatives have been playing the same cards for decades (and longer), substituting "large government" as the source of all your problems (among other sources, such as Commies and illegal immigrants).

Can you honestly say with a straight face that conservatives have not blamed illegal immigrants for high unemployment among citizens?

Go back under your bridge, troll.

--
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai

good by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 02:52 · Score: -1, Flamebait

They don't deserve being sued for this anyway. WGA enables other updates to be installed, it pretty much is a security update.

Re:good by adolf · 2010-01-22 02:59 · Score: 5, Insightful

WGA enables other updates to be installed, it pretty much is a security update.
Yeah, sure. It "enables" other updates to be installed, just like DRM protection "enables" movies to be watched.
The converse, however, seems far more true: WGA restricts other updates from being installed, just like DRM restricts movies from being watched.
There is no technical or security reason for WGA's existence. The "other updates" that it "enables" would work just fine without it, were they not arbitrarily designed to require WGA.

--
Kid-proof tablet..
Re:good by GiveBenADollar · 2010-01-22 03:10 · Score: 4, Interesting

What upsets me the most is that if I legally purchase windows for my computer I am limited on how much I can upgrade, but if I illegally pirate it I can actually treat it like I own a copy of the OS. The same is true with the excessive DRM on DVDs and Blu-ray. It doesn't stop people from pirating, it just punishes those of us who own legal copies.
Re:good by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:11 · Score: -1

It actually does enable because without WGA you can't get certain patches from Windows Update. Even on a brand new install of XP, if you choose not to install WGA, you're still not allowed to DL the updates that are restricted when you do DL WGA.
And saying WGA should be gone so you can pirate the OS easier is pretty god damn dumb. Why would pirates have free access to updates too?
Re:good by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:12 · Score: 0

While what you say is true, it doesn't follow that they can be successfully sued for deciding to ensure that only their actual customers can install patches (the purpose of the DRM). Just like folks don't sue Mozilla over the Awesome Bar (which I like, but it seems some folks incessantly whine about).

If a company implements a technical measure to ensure that updates are only able to be installed by their customers - so what?
Re:good by FlyingBishop · 2010-01-22 03:16 · Score: 2, Interesting

If Microsoft wants to claim and enforce a draconian EULA, they're effectively saying that by buying their software there's a contract between you and them, and as part of that contract they agree to provide any updates through the supported life of that product. In most businesses, the contracts are much more explicit.
By making a change like this which requires action on your part to continue receiving updates, they've made a substantial change to the contract, without renegotiating. Such unilateral changes to contracts are normally frowned upon by the courts.
Re:good by gparent · 2010-01-22 03:22 · Score: 1

What upsets me the most is that if I legally purchase windows for my computer I am limited on how much I can upgrade,
No, you're not. People who legally purchase Windows are allowed all updates, and you can upgrade your computer as you wish. You may have to reactivate it.
Re:good by Inda · 2010-01-22 03:27 · Score: 1

What's the problem? I had no problems with WGA on my pirated copy of XP and I was able to get the Windows updates just fine. :p

--
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
Re:good by giminy · 2010-01-22 03:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

What upsets me the most is that if I legally purchase windows for my computer I am limited on how much I can upgrade
Sadly you didn't purchase windows, you licensed it. Welcome to the world: intellectual property gets all the protection that physical property gets, with none of the 'disadvantages' (ability to loan, etc).

--
The Right Reverend K. Reid Wightman,
Re:good by GiveBenADollar · 2010-01-22 03:39 · Score: 1

Guess it pays to get the retail version vice the OEM. Lesson learned.
Re:good by Karellen · 2010-01-22 03:46 · Score: 3, Interesting

Why would pirates have free access to updates too?
Because a insecure, compromised OS affects more people than just the owneruser of that OS. Unpatched pirated copies of Windows can be pwned and exploited to send spam, perform DDOS attacks, do distributed cracking of encryption keys, or whatever else the operator of a botnet chooses to do with it; actions that hurt all the users of the internet, including all the legitimate ones.
Patching pirated copies of Windows is in the public interest

--
Why doesn't the gene pool have a life guard?
Re:good by uglyduckling · 2010-01-22 03:49 · Score: 3, Insightful

No... he purchased a copy of Windows, with a license to use it. That's where the sticking point is - just like when you purchase a book, the physical copy is your own, but that doesn't mean you have the right to read it out on the radio or adapt it as a screenplay.
Re:good by uglyduckling · 2010-01-22 03:51 · Score: 1

So, it's an invasion of privacy to have your computer regularly sending information back to Microsoft about where you are (they know the IP address at least and the time, so can work it out pretty well), what hardware you have etc.. I know you're trolling, but there's other ways Microsoft could ensure only their customers can install patches, for instance the 'genuine advantage' software could run only when you want to download a patch - with a clear warning stating that information will be sent to Microsoft.
Re:good by indi0144 · 2010-01-22 04:04 · Score: 1, Troll

>> Why would pirates have free access to updates too?

To minimize the pool of botnet-ready machines connected to our internet? Thing that may or may not help you directly but is a good thing anyway. It does cost the same for MS to deliver 10 or 10000 patches.

WGA as any DRM it's broken by design, removing it was easy. Unlike Win 7 wich requires a bit more of struggle and is not 100% a sure shoot. In fact, I'd like to buy the copy of Win 7 just for the sake of not messing around with BIOS mods and the like, IF ONLY Win7 delivers something to improve my workflow.. but it is not, I'm more likely to switch to Linux and emulate Win and spend the money in buying compatible hardware. In the meanwhile my OEM XP license is not going anywhere. YMMV
Re:good by mcgrew · 2010-01-22 04:12 · Score: 1

You assume that these corporate whores give a rat's ass about their paying customers. In the old days, a business competed with other businesses for your dollar and had to care about you; new customers were valuable as there was a limited supply. These days of globalism there are seven billion prospective customers; there's more where you came from.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:good by c6gunner · 2010-01-22 04:15 · Score: 1

Yep. I've seen dozens of people running pirated copies of XP, all with WGA installed and humming happily to itself. As usual, the ones most harmed by this measure are those who aren't doing anything wrong.
Re:good by orasio · 2010-01-22 04:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

What upsets me the most is that if I legally purchase windows for my computer I am limited on how much I can upgrade
Sadly you didn't purchase windows, you licensed it. Welcome to the world: intellectual property gets all the protection that physical property gets, with none of the 'disadvantages' (ability to loan, etc).
Well, I don't know whether you are trying to make a point, or you actually believe what you are saying, but "intellectual property" is not something that can be compared to actual property. The concept of property has its origins on scarcity. Intellectual works are not scarce, so the concept of property has no meaning regarding them. "Intellectual property" is about monopoly rights over immaterial works, in this case, copyright. The only thing copyright and property have in common is that confusing term. There is no analogy to be made between property and copyrights, and doing so brings confusion like the GP, who thought he bought something, when he only paid for the right to run certain software under certain conditions. Much more like game tickets, only you have to play yourself in addition to paying.
Re:good by Anonymous+Cowpat · 2010-01-22 04:25 · Score: 1

I bought the OEM version retail (which you can do so long as you're buying hardware in the same transaction) and it reactivates fine. The limit is once every 6 weeks, apparently.

--
FGD 135
Re:good by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:35 · Score: 0

It's people like you that are the reason the rest of us have problems with WGA. Go suck a cock.
Re:good by natehoy · 2010-01-22 05:17 · Score: 1

It "enables" it, but only because Microsoft requires it, not because there's some underlying technology in WGA that adds any value to the update process. It becomes an artificial prerequisite, not a technical one.
That's the problem with WGA. It didn't fix any security problems with Windows at the time, it was introduced as a gatekeeper to make sure that only verified legitimate copies of Windows were allowed to get updates from that point forward. Though their verification system was pretty good, it was far from perfect so one side effect of this is that a number of legitimate copies of Windows could not be verified as legitimate, and the people who bought and paid for Windows had to buy it again, or call Microsoft and try to prove something they should not have had to waste their time proving. Plus, Microsoft failed to ramp up their call center, so a lot of people wasted a lot of time on hold waiting to talk to a Microsoft rep so they could prove they bought what they had already paid for. Early reports also had a number of Microsoft reps unaware of the nature of the problem and calling people pirates and hanging up on them, without even bothering to ask for proof of purchase.
Fortunately, in my case, I had a legitimate copy, I still had my original install disc, and I got a relatively nice rep after only an hour of waiting on the line. I had to drive down to a local shop to FAX an image of my original install disc with a long number written on the FAX sheet, then the rep got back to me about a day later with the activation code. It only cost me about 3 hours and $2 not including gasoline. But that was for a single copy installed at my home, and it was still three hours of my life wasted to, in my view, no good purpose. I found out later that some people were only asked to read off the code, or describe some small detail of the disc. Others had to produce a receipt (as if most people would keep one!). A few were even charged for a standard support call. So the internal procedures at Microsoft appeared ridiculously inconsistent.
But the REAL complaint about WGA is that it was not disclosed. Microsoft just listed it as a "critical security update" and didn't explain to people what it was or what it could do. WGA, in and of itself, was not a security update, and Microsoft artificially made it "critical" by tying all future security updates to it. You just installed the update and, if you got unlucky, you got the "this copy of Windows will self-destruct in 30 days" message.

Why would pirates have free access to updates too?
They shouldn't. That was the goal of WGA, and that's all well and good, but Microsoft failed to account for the collateral damage they'd cause.
All Microsoft had to do was tell their customers what WGA was, why they were deploying it, and warn people that their machines may come up with the "Your Windows will die in 30 Days if you don't call us and ask permission to keep running it" prompt. Put a dedicated 800# on the lockdown message, and have that number route to a call center with people who know what the hell is going on and have the authority to approve activations.
Throwing it on there as a "critical security update" along with a bunch of other "critical security updates" was reckless and irresponsible. It was neither critical, nor was it a security update. Not telling their internal reps who would start getting angry calls from customers about it.. I don't have a polite word to describe that so I won't.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:good by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 05:20 · Score: 0

And its people like you who just bend over and accept everything a company does that lets MS get away with WGA. Go.. figure.
Re:good by Sandbags · 2010-01-22 05:44 · Score: 1

The XP license is restricted to (i think) 5 reactivations. OEM licenses are restricted to the original machine only and can't be moved. Hardware changes are permitted such that less than 3 of 5 registered devices are swapped out. If activation is required because say a motherboard with lots of onboard cvomponents was replaced, then a simple call to M$ solves the issue. They activate it anyway.
Vista was initially given 1 reactivation on new hardware, but that was later upped to 3 due to pressure. However, the license was NEVER intended to be portable to an unlimited number of machines, and certainly never allowed to be on more than 1 machine at a time. WGA ensures that only 1 copy of a valid license is concurrently installed (aside from VMs on the same hardware which there's an exception for under Pro and Ultimate versions).
If you have a copy of Windows, and buy a whole new PC, its expected if you're re-using a license on that new machine in leiu of buying a new one: 1) the one being moved is not an OEM copy. 2) if it's an upgrade, the original license terms from the last full retail version apply, which may have limits on migrations (upgrades do not have portability unless the OS upgraded was itself not an OEM version). 3) It has been moved fewer times that it was originally allocated for.
I've called microsoft a dozen times on my own personal licenses to have additional activations granted. I've done this a hundred times for companies. Its never once taken more than a 5 minute phone call to get around WGA with a legitimate copy of Windows. On 2 occasions i was re-installing a copy for a customer and it turned out to be pirated (over 1,000 active copies of the licese key were in use in once case) and they refused to activate, but in both cases the customer had other keys on hand that worked anyway.
WGA has never once prevented me from getting a machine activated, and I've done several thousand machines since XP alone. ...and thank god I'm no longer in that segment of the IT industry. I don't even have admin logons anymore :)

--
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
Re:good by Sandbags · 2010-01-22 05:50 · Score: 1

I've put dozens of hardware upgrades in my home PC. Until very recently when i installed Win7 on it through my renewed action pack subscription, I'd probably reactivated that single copy of XP Pro a dozen times. yea, it stopped auto-activating, but a phone call to an operator who picks up on the second ring (never been on hold for activations ever), got me another activation. All you ever need to tell them is that it's a hardware repair, and they activate immediately (and read you a long string of characters to type in). The first few times you do this, you don't even need to speak to a person...
There is NO limit on "upgrades" The limit is on complete hardfware reaplcement. M$ does consudder the replacement of the board, processor, ram, and video card to essentially be a "new" PC, in fact anytime more than 3 out of 5 analyzed components change all at once, a reactivation is triggered. There IS a limit on how many machines a copy of windows can be MOVED to (remove from old, install on new) and that is spelled out in the licence terms you agreed to. A copy of XP is NOT a lifdetime use copy. They're GENEROUS to even let you re-use it the 3 to 5 times they do (depending on version, it;s changed a few times). Symantec, AutoDesk, McAfee, WebRoot, and many many more do NOT permit application portability to a new machine AT ALL.

--
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
Re:good by tendrousbeastie · 2010-01-22 05:52 · Score: 1

You're making a rather circular arguement:
Microsoft is breaking its contractual agreement to provide updates to those customers who don't install a particular set of updates.
So, the only people to who it witholding updates are those who explicitly chose not to install some of them.
Re:good by jim_v2000 · 2010-01-22 05:57 · Score: 1

>There is no technical or security reason for WGA's existence.

I can think of one. Someone unwittingly buys a pirated copy of Windows (it does happen), and that copy has malware hidden all throughout. As soon as the person in question installs WGA, it will alert them to the fact that Windows is pirated, at which point they will hopefully stop using the infected copy of Windows, report whoever sold them the disk, and get a free copy from Microsoft.

--
Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
Re:good by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 07:20 · Score: 0

No... he purchased a copy of Windows, with a license to use it. That's where the sticking point is - just like when you purchase a book, the physical copy is your own, but that doesn't mean you have the right to read it out on the radio or adapt it as a screenplay.
Minor nit-pick, and you are correct in every way that matters still, but instead of 'right' it should be only 'legal right' since it is our right to do so in every way but legally.
Sadly there is not actually any legal right to restrict distributing 'art' in the way it is being limited by the men with the guns. Nothing in the Constitution, bill of rights, nor any international treaty gives our government the legal right (let alone any other right) to restrict such actions indefinitely like they are (or are trying anyway)
Humanity as a whole, nor any single human being, would be able to exist if we didn't have a natural right to copy. We would have no language, society, and community are rooted and fully based on sharing ideas, none of which would exist if there really was no natural right to copy.
So in reality, they only have the 'legal' right to do this because they have guns and run the prisons. The law of the land specifically states how copyright as we have it now is unconstitutional and illegal. The damage it causes to 90% of society shows it is not a moral right any more than murder is (IE any one person CAN, but to do so is bad for the whole)
Unfortunately things won't go back to normal until all of the control freaks in our government die off and go away or are put to death. Something else our constitution virtually demands (and more than provides for), and just one other thing our government is illegally stopping from happening...
Re:good by Windowser · 2010-01-22 07:34 · Score: 1

There IS a limit on how many machines a copy of windows can be MOVED to (remove from old, install on new) and that is spelled out in the licence terms you agreed to
I'm sorry but I never agreed to any license terms. I went to the store, bought a product on display (a box of Windows XP) and paid at the cash. What license terms are you talking about ?
It may be like so where you live, but where I am there is law protecting the consumer, and one of them say that if I have to agree to a contract to use your product, you have to make me sign it BEFORE I buy the damn thing.
Now, if MS don't let me activate my copy of XP when I upgrade my machine, I will just call the consumer protection agency and let them explain the law to MS.

--
Avoid the MS tax, always buy I.B.M. PC's (I Built-it Myself)
Re:good by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 08:48 · Score: 0

WGA enables other updates to be installed, it pretty much is a security update.
Yeah, sure. It "enables" other updates to be installed, just like DRM protection "enables" movies to be watched.
In much the same manner that lubrication "enables" a colonoscopy. (Credit to Illiad Frazier on that one.)
Re:good by hydroponx · 2010-01-22 08:58 · Score: 1

Something to think about, at least in some versions of XP the original (retail/upgrade) license even allowed for it to be installed on 1 Desktop and 1 laptop computer. This was removed in Windows 7 (and probably vista).
Re:good by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 09:21 · Score: 0

What upsets me the most is that if I legally purchase windows for my computer I am limited on how much I can upgrade,
No, you're not. People who legally purchase Windows are allowed all updates, and you can upgrade your computer as you wish. You may have to reactivate it.
Okay, so you essentially have to ask permission to Microsoft in order to upgrade your computer by a certain amount. I call that a limit on how much I can upgrade. What, you don't think that they'd ever say no?
This is more Product Activation than Windows Genuine Advantage, but the principle is the same. The easiest way to drag everyone kicking and screaming into an upgrade is for them to say "No, we're not reactivating your copy of XP. Buy a copy of Windows 7 if you want to continue using your computer." Don't think it will happen? If there's an avenue for abuse that you allow on the say-so that it will never be used, then you have nobody to blame but yourself when they go back on their word.
Re:good by hairyfeet · 2010-01-22 09:23 · Score: 1

Actually there is an easy way to prove it is nothing more than DRM. If it actually was "for security" and not DRM crap then autopatcher wouldn't work, which of course it does. While my XP is legit, I don't want to be dealing with that crap, nor would I install spyware like WGA without a client's permission, so I use autopatcher. Installs all the updates, along with nice reg tweaks I can choose from along with non security add ons like Java and Flash. I highly recommend it along with Ninite after a clean install to give them all the basics like FF, OO.o, and IMGBurn.
But the only ones that "win" in these class action lawsuits is the lawyers. It will not make MSFT do squat differently, the consumers if they are lucky get a coupon they have to jump through hoops for, which most never do (I had a chance with 3 different class actions, but they wanted so much info on me I refused to do it for a lousy $5-10 coupon) so nothing ever changes except the lawyer can afford a nicer trophy wife. Yeah I would say the system is pretty damned broken at this time.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Re:good by causality · 2010-01-22 10:13 · Score: 1

You assume that these corporate whores give a rat's ass about their paying customers. In the old days, a business competed with other businesses for your dollar and had to care about you; new customers were valuable as there was a limited supply. These days of globalism there are seven billion prospective customers; there's more where you came from.
That's because the people who patronize the company are too ignorant/lazy/stupid to ask two questions:

What is this company's track record regarding how they have treated previous customers?
and
Based on that information, do I really want to do business with them, knowing that giving them money for products/services is not merely an exchange, but is also a statement of approval of their business practices?

--
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Re:good by HeadlessNotAHorseman · 2010-01-22 12:29 · Score: 1

I'm a bit confused about what the actual issue with WGA is. I had a legitimate copy of WinXP on my computer (it came with the computer) for several years. I installed all of the microsoft security updates, including WGA. WGA didn't appear to adversely affect my computer in any way. What is the problem with WGA?

--
I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
Re:good by chentiangemalc · 2010-01-22 21:00 · Score: 1

it makes it more difficult to use illegal copies of windows (what a crime!)
Re:good by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-23 09:57 · Score: 0

how this ended being moded troll just states that /. moderation system is now on hands of Redmond. Guess it's time to leave.
Re:good by Sandbags · 2010-01-26 02:28 · Score: 1

1) this has been covered in US and international case law many times. It it not disputable. The CPA is on Microsoft's side on this one, sorry.
2) The box, on the outside, indicates "License," and fine print on that box in the "requirements" area mandated to be present by law indicates where to get a full text copy prior to purchase. YOUR failure to do this is NOT microsoft's fault, the license is freely available (and Microsoft vendors are ordered to provide you a free copy in paper form as part of their partner agreement should you so request).
3) inside the box, the disk has a seal, which upon opening confirms you agree to the license. Additionally, on installing you further confirm this license agreement.
4) for OEM products, on first boot, you have to agree or decline. If you decline, it must be removed from the machine and then you can get a refund of the OEM license cost (about $30 in most cases).
5) the product registers itself online within 30 days. This is manditory, as spelled out in the License. Doing so further confirms your agreement to the terms.
6) A license is not a contract. It requires no signature on file. It is a right of use, like a ToS, and it CAN be revoked at will.
You CAN refuse the Microsoft license. You CAN return the product and use something else.
Per case rulings, you are not buying the product, you're only buying the license to use it for specific purposes for a limited time. This is covered in the US Code of Commerce, a document defined in the constitution itself, and backed up by numerous laws and the supreme court.
If you don't like it, uninstall it. unfortunately for you, the ONLY OS that can be installed on a computer without SOME form of restrictive license is the one you write yourself. Good luck with that, let me know how it turns out.

--
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.

If you can dodge a class action lawsuit... by Barefoot+Monkey · 2010-01-22 02:56 · Score: 5, Funny

If you can dodge a class action lawsuit, you can dodge a ball.

Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit... by Spazztastic · 2010-01-22 03:05 · Score: 5, Funny

If you can dodge a class action lawsuit, you can dodge a chair.
Fixed that for you.

--
Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:13 · Score: 0

If you can dodge a class action lawsuit, you can dodge a car.
Fixed that for you.
Fixed that for you.
Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:18 · Score: 0

That's not fair, Microsoft is probably the only one with that much muscle, and you go replacing the balls in dodgeball to chairs?!?!
Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:25 · Score: 0

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit... by Arancaytar · 2010-01-22 03:26 · Score: 1

No, Bill. I'm trying to tell you that when you're ready, you won't have to dodge lawsuits.
Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit... by PhxBlue · 2010-01-22 03:52 · Score: 0, Redundant

If you can dodge a class action lawsuit, you can dodge a ball.
But can you dodge a chair?

--
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
Re:If you can dodge a class action lawsuit... by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:48 · Score: 1, Informative

It's a play on a quote from the movie Dodgeball.

Who cares whether it's class action? by SirGarlon · 2010-01-22 02:57 · Score: 4, Insightful

By the time the settlement or judgment is made -- assuming Microsoft doesn't go to trial and win -- the damages would probably amount to a few bucks per end-user anyway. It's the injunctive relief that matters IMHO. Microsoft should be forced to comply with anti-spyware laws. That can potentially happen whether the suit is class action or not.

--
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.

Re:Who cares whether it's class action? by dnoyeb · 2010-01-22 03:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

The plaintiffs will probably get a LOT more payout since its not class action.
Re:Who cares whether it's class action? by Asphalt · 2010-01-22 03:24 · Score: 2, Insightful

By the time the settlement or judgment is made -- assuming Microsoft doesn't go to trial and win -- the damages would probably amount to a few bucks per end-user anyway.
This is why large companies often preferclass action suits over individual suits.
Class action suits mean that, if the company loses, they never have to litigate over the matter again.
If they lose an individual suit, every consumer on the planet is free to chase the same reward the original litigant won, and they are not bound by any $5 off coupon settlements.

Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Penguinisto · 2010-01-22 02:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

Seriously - we all know this. Every class-action against a tech company usually results in (at absolute best) a hundred bucks or so to each class-action participant, while the lawyer(s) leading the charge get to go buy a new yacht/house/jaguar/whatever with their take.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?

Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by rhook · 2010-01-22 03:15 · Score: 4, Informative

It still ends up hurting the company and may make them think twice about using similar practices in the future.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:32 · Score: 2, Interesting

Does it though?
Even if a company gets fined 5 or 10 times what they made doing the bad deed will that really change anything?
Thats only if there is enough evidence, only if the judge has a clue and only if the company cant bury it with
all the usual tactics at the disposal of a company with hundreds of millions to spend on lawyers. Even if they
lose they appeal for years, ask the government to help protect their industry/monopoly or they'll have to fire
thousands of poor innocent employees.
Compare that to the recent copyright infringement cases where amounts are 10,000 times the value lost
against people who usually cant afford to mount a proper defence.
I dont see a class action lawsuit as any real kind of threat to a huge company.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by c6gunner · 2010-01-22 04:10 · Score: 2, Informative

Seriously - we all know this. Every class-action against a tech company usually results in (at absolute best) a hundred bucks or so to each class-action participant, while the lawyer(s) leading the charge get to go buy a new yacht/house/jaguar/whatever with their take.
Yes. And?
In a lawsuit with 10,000,000 plaintiffs which pays out $1,000,000,000 dollars, how do you expect the distribution of the money to work out? Do you expect the lawyers to work for free? Or are you suggesting that the defendant should be fined 1 million-bliion-quazillion dollars so that EVERY plaintiff can go out and buy a yacht?
I'm not sure what point you were trying to make, or what your proposed solution is, so if you could clarify that for me I'd appreciate it.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:38 · Score: 2, Informative

I don't mind the lawyers making money, but when they agree to give me coupons for products from a company that ripped me off, they shouldn't be paid.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by multisync · 2010-01-22 04:45 · Score: 1, Flamebait

Every class-action against a tech company usually results in (at absolute best) a hundred bucks or so to each class-action participant, while the lawyer(s) leading the charge get to go buy a new yacht/house/jaguar/whatever with their take
They also take all of the risk, and do all of the work. If the suit is not successful, they lose. If they are successful, the participants get a token compensation, and - more importantly - the entity that was sued is punished, giving them an incentive to stop the behaviour that landed them in court in the first place.
Bashing lawyers is usually good for a couple of Insightful mods around here, but you might as well complain about those greedy medical doctors taking money for treating the sick, or - gasp - programmers or musicians or journalists wanting to be paid. If someone is willing to pay them for their services, why is that such a problem for you?
If you're so anti-lawyer, you can choose to not hire one and represent yourself in any litigation you participate in. And good luck with that, by the way.

--
I don't care why you're posting AC
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Pojut · 2010-01-22 04:52 · Score: 0

^^^More or less this.
My issue with most lawyers is the way they carry themselves, like they are all high and mighty. Granted, not all lawyers are like this (one of our closest friends is a lawyer), but many of them are.
I can't deny that they have a tought job, but they don't have to be such dicks about it.

--
Living With a Nerd
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by tlhIngan · 2010-01-22 04:59 · Score: 3, Informative

In a lawsuit with 10,000,000 plaintiffs which pays out $1,000,000,000 dollars, how do you expect the distribution of the money to work out? Do you expect the lawyers to work for free? Or are you suggesting that the defendant should be fined 1 million-bliion-quazillion dollars so that EVERY plaintiff can go out and buy a yacht?
What happens usually is the damaged parties get a $10 coupon off their next copy of Windows, and the lawyers walk away (using your numbers) with $900M cash. Knowing full well that said coupon will probably expire, and most probably won't even use it or even bother to collect it after having to give Microsoft their full personal history for it.
(I'm sure the lawyers could get Microsoft to make them $20 or $50 coupons off Windows, but it reduces their share).
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by nomadic · 2010-01-22 05:03 · Score: 1

My issue with most lawyers is the way they carry themselves, like they are all high and mighty.

Have you ever met an MD?? They make us lawyers look humble by comparison.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by petermgreen · 2010-01-22 05:06 · Score: 1

If someone is willing to pay them for their serviceIf someone is willing to pay them for their services
But that isn't really what happens in a class action. Instead a group of lawyers and a couple of sample plaintiffs takes over the right to sue from a large class of people without asking most of them. Then rather than persuing the case to the end they make a settlement where the class get some token ammount that is often payed in vouchers.

--
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Pojut · 2010-01-22 05:20 · Score: 1

lol, that is a very good point. My own PCP is such a bastard. "You know, you should lose about 10 pounds, you're a bit overweight". Meanwhile, this dude has to huff and puff to get up a flight of steps.
When I can't see the belt you are wearing because your fat belly covers it, don't talk to me about my weight. So crazy.

--
Living With a Nerd
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Sandbags · 2010-01-22 05:33 · Score: 1

Worse, the class action is merely a privacy issue, not anything that woul dhave actually been validatible by any real damages or bunsiness impact. WGA didn't COST anyone anything other than a few minutes of their time to implement the patch that added it. Even if the OS crashed or had issues because of it, or simply due to the reboot, is irrelevent due to the "no warranty extressed or implied" regarding the software as spelled out in the EULA.
At best, micsorsoft might have been forced to remove this feature, and might have paid some big fine to the government and covered some laywer (massive) expenses and fees, but judging from the whopping $16 each plantifs got in the last successful anti-M$ case, which WAS backed by damages (inflated pricing due to anti-competitive moves), what did these people expect to get, $1 each if they were lucky? if the case continues either way, the removal of WGA is still possible, so all we're loosing a 100 million people geting $1 each, after spending $3 in paperwork processing and a lot of time to get it.
Also, the question if WGA is even an invasion of privacy liekly will not even hold up in court. The activiation itself does NOT require registration, and only collects basic information about your machine IDs, IPs, etc, not much different from what any website could collect, and far LESS information that is sent to M$ each time you have a crash and let it report the issue. I think M$ might actually WIN this case. (though I'm hoping they don't).

--
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Sandbags · 2010-01-22 05:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

No, the coupon is what happened when micrsoft lost a court case that proved people were actually HARMED and incurred financial losses. What COST did WGA bring to you? (and system crashes don't count, those are already excluded from warranty in the EULA).

--
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by c6gunner · 2010-01-22 05:56 · Score: 0, Redundant

What happens usually is the damaged parties get a $10 coupon off their next copy of Windows, and the lawyers walk away (using your numbers) with $900M cash
Really? Got a source for that claim?
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 05:57 · Score: 0

Denial of Service by Design?
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by lgarner · 2010-01-22 06:02 · Score: 1

Then they're not advocating your interests. Get different lawyers.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by sjames · 2010-01-22 06:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

In other words, the plaintiffs get the 'opportunity' to provide more profits to the defendant and get more of exactly the thing they sued because of in the first place.
That's like suing someone for causing your broken leg and they offer to break your other leg for 10% off of their regular price. Somehow it doesn't look like much of a win.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by bornagainpenguin · 2010-01-22 06:39 · Score: 1

They also take all of the risk, and do all of the work. If the suit is not successful, they lose. If they are successful, the participants get a token compensation, and - more importantly - the entity that was sued is punished, giving them an incentive to stop the behaviour that landed them in court in the first place.
It's called the cost of doing business son, and most corporations gladly pay this "tax" while gleefully pocketing their illegal profits. Once the spotlight is gone, the corporation goes back to doing the same stuff it did before, while taking steps to hide it more carefully. End result? A couple of lawyers get paid, a few CEOs shift around from one company to another, some congress critters get their payoffs adjusted a bit and you and I continue to get screwed just as we always have been.
If you want to talk punishment, call me when there's a working corporate death penalty and we'll talk about whether or not that works as a deterrent. Might even see some real change once that happens! ;)
Otherwise, yeah I'd love to get the kind of sweet deals these companies get--I'd gladly pay a few million here and there so long as I got to keep a few billion there and here. I might even be able to write it off on taxes, as a...wait for it...business expense! Heh...
--bornagainpenguin

--
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Z00L00K · 2010-01-22 06:51 · Score: 1

The cost of WGA is that I get something on my computer that slows down startup and doesn't provide me with any advantage whatsoever.
WGA is a genuine disadvantage - and the whole name of it is a lie. I don't want it, and I don't need it - except for the reason that M$ thinks it's necessary in order to provide OS updates.

--
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Darundal · 2010-01-22 06:53 · Score: 1

And people have the option of opting out of the class action, too, allowing them to sue on their own behalf and get however many hojillions from it themselves. The only people who lose the right to sue are those who don't opt out.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Sandbags · 2010-01-22 07:10 · Score: 0, Flamebait

WGA is only checked once every 90 days, and has no impact on system utilization or performance or startup. It is only validated when installing patches. You know nothing of this apparently.
YOU in fact don't need it, but would you prefer ACTUAL DRM in stead? I think not. It's a non-invasive system for validating vs a central system that your copy of Windows has not been installed more than the licensed number of times (and even if it has, a 5 minute phone call gets it activated anyway unless it really is a priated copy).
The first time you go to Microsoft update with an unvalidated copy, you download an ActiveX control that you run only once, this generates a unique license token based on several hardware metrics and your installed key, and a validation from a central server. After that, it is only referenced at logon to see that it exists (ond only after a cold boot), and anytime you try to install an update. THAT'S IT!

--
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Sandbags · 2010-01-22 07:15 · Score: 1

Oh, btw, M$ already has an out, as the performance or reliability of the OS is not warantied in ANY WAY, so performnance costs can NOT be challenged in court. You would actually have to prove that WGA itself incurred a provable cost to you (say WGA did NOT do what it advertizes and: steals data, provides partners unwanted access to your machine, crippled legitimate licenses, caused major business disruption due to its activation, etc). Sicne it doesn't apply to VLEs, and noone has any proof it did any of the above, you would actually have to argue HARM (and inconvenience is NOT a legal definition of harm when measured in seconds per year).

--
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Windowser · 2010-01-22 07:19 · Score: 1

You know the difference between an MD and God ?
God doesn't believe he's an MD

--
Avoid the MS tax, always buy I.B.M. PC's (I Built-it Myself)
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by minderaser · 2010-01-22 07:34 · Score: 1

> Have you ever met an MD?? They make us lawyers look humble by comparison.
Have you ever met a judge? I assume you have because you speak as if you're an attorney. They make EVERYONE appear to be humble.
Seriously, what kind of ego must one have to take (and, generally the _strive_ to get) a job where you have ultimate power over people's lives?
I've spoke with a number of lawyers on both sides (prosecutors and defense) and for the most part they all agree that those vying to become a judge are the ones who are to be trusted the least.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by jafiwam · 2010-01-22 08:32 · Score: 1

"That's it!" Really?
"That's it" as in, now all of a sudden my legit copy of windows is saying it's not? After being on the box FOUR YEARS?
Or, like when I helped out my in-laws by wiping their old Acer laptop, using the original sealed "recovery CD" which I assume used the original XP install code (which is present on the bottom of the laptop) which ALSO is now claiming it's not legit.
Or some how that every copy of MS Office 2003 is now starting to do this?
It's not that they want to sell more stuff by pressuring legit customers or anything!
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Z00L00K · 2010-01-22 19:15 · Score: 1

That depends on which country you live in if that's legal or not.

--
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by chentiangemalc · 2010-01-22 20:58 · Score: 1

if you have a genuine copy of these products MS will fix it over the phone.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Sandbags · 2010-01-26 02:19 · Score: 1

Did you CALL Microsoft on this issue? It's entirely plausible YOUR copy is not at fault, but simply an illegal distributor happened to use the same install key in their illegal copy and distributed it a few hundred times, invalidating your key. M$ can issue a new key in very short order over the phone, espeically if it's an OEM copy of if you bought it in a box and have the paper license.
This happens, it takes 5 minutes to fix.

--
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
Re:Mod parent way the hell up, plz. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-26 02:58 · Score: 0

Ah, so nice to get mod points and "even the score" three days after the fact.

Meaningless penalties by toby · 2010-01-22 03:00 · Score: 4, Insightful

As in the patent infringement case - even "several hundred million" is only a couple of days' revenue, assuming the crooked bastards lost.

Penalties against Microsoft do not change their behaviour.

--
you had me at #!

I can see that by Murdoch5 · 2010-01-22 03:00 · Score: 0

I can see why they would tell a customer that the Windows Gen app was a security update. To a lot of users they just know that if they download a "high" priority update they will be protected.

Take my mom for instance, her entire computer knowledge equates to if I double click the blue E icon Google appears and then I can youtube. So then only way she would know that she should get an update like Windows Gen is if it was declared high priority and had the word security attached.

This lawsuit is fair but I agree that it should not be class action.

"In closing, your Honor..." by the+roAm · 2010-01-22 03:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

"This was indeed a critical security update. An update to secure the legitimacy of the software which we support."

Then the judge rules in favor of Microsoft.
The end.

--
~The roAm

Re:"In closing, your Honor..." by the+roAm · 2010-01-22 03:05 · Score: 3, Funny

I've been modded funny? I'm dead serious. This is how the American legal system works. Been to court in the last 10 years? Obviously not.

--
~The roAm
Re:"In closing, your Honor..." by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:22 · Score: 0

Apparently, we were thinking alike.
I was about to post something in a similar vein.
It is accurate.
Microsoft was simply seeking to secure their product by adding something to check if it is a good, untampered copy of the operating system. They could probably have done it a little better, since I did hear the stories of people with good copies of XP being told their copies are not genuine.
However, if Microsoft had not taken that action, would it be seen as Microsoft is not trying to protect their brand (I know there is fancy english word or two for letting people blatantly knock the product off, with almost identical copy, and only a minor change in look)?
Re:"In closing, your Honor..." by mcgrew · 2010-01-22 03:53 · Score: 3, Funny

If said the right way, anything can be funny no matter how insightful. Your comment was modded up and thus visible, and unless you're a karma whore that's all that matters.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:"In closing, your Honor..." by Zero__Kelvin · 2010-01-22 06:24 · Score: 1

Shit, you figured it out. Now I have to notify the Triumverate.

--
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun

$5 million for how many users? by ThreeGigs · 2010-01-22 03:03 · Score: 4, Informative

How about original linkage? : http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/09/04/microsoft.sued.over.wga
The lawsuit is for $5 million for the whole class. You do the math and tell me if this is to benefit the lawyers or the end users. This isn't about MS, it's about lawyers making money. I have a feeling there will be a lot of misplaced outrage in these comments.

Also, it was a high priority update, _not_ a critical security update. Inflammatory summaries again.

Re:$5 million for how many users? by Nerdfest · 2010-01-22 03:46 · Score: 4, Funny

Relax, we have plenty of rage for both Microsoft and lawyers. No one needs to go without.
Re:$5 million for how many users? by c6gunner · 2010-01-22 04:23 · Score: 1

You do the math and tell me if this is to benefit the lawyers or the end users.
I hate to tell you this, but lawyers use MS software too.
Re:$5 million for how many users? by jtownatpunk.net · 2010-01-22 06:42 · Score: 1

Just FYI:
The purpose of a class action is never to benefit or provide relief for the class. The purpose of such actions is to punish the corporation. Period. The beneficiary is irrelevant as long as the target suffers.
Re:$5 million for how many users? by nomadic · 2010-01-22 07:16 · Score: 1

Huh?? Since when? A class action is just a procedural action that allows one side to have one or a few named members who sue or are sued on behalf of an unwieldy number of persons. The underlying purpose/method/law is the same as if they were suing individually.

What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate? I know very few people that had this happen. A few corporations had their volume keys flagged as such, but if the admin was doing things properly, they would have denied the update through group policy (or some other patch management).

For all the individual users - I remember coming across a few who decided to let their beliefs be known at a few functions I attended. They were up in arms over this, how it removed their background, and had a nuisance box pop up on the system tray. I asked if they bought the copy - they said no. So, WTF is the problem? You steal something, then get upset, when you get caught? Be happy, nothing really happens when you get caught. MS is basically saying "we know you pirated this, but no worries, just buy a copy now, we won't tell, we won't take you to court, we won't send Jimmy to break your legs."

Now, we can all be pro-linux, pro-mac, pro-whatever, but the bottom line is, Windows costs money, and like any other company, MS has to make money to continue making Windows, etc. Now, they may be charging TOO MUCH, but this is a case for a monopoly. Just because all the oil makers are in cahoots, doesn't mean we can steal gas because we feel because it is a monopoly their prices are too high. And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $130. MS fanboys have had the pleasure of paying $200 retail (or $140 OEM w/ a mouse or stick of ram, or anything else cheap), for 5 years. I bet if MS released OS updates every year for $130, everyone would be up in arms, but when Apple adds a program like Notepad to it's OS, they repackage it, and call it something cute. I'm waiting for Apple Liger (it comes with a new theme!!!!!!!!!).

So, back to reality, if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up. And I love it, you know why? Because I'm a legitimate sysadmin, and when I load on Windows XP, Server, or even Linux (Redhat, or another one with support) I purchase the program, and make sure my clients are fully licenced. I have to compete with people who steal software and sell computers with pirated versions. The client usually does not know the difference, until the genuine advantage shows up - and I love this, because it weeds out the PC makers that are cutting corners and pocketing the extra money. The client gets pissed, then the PC maker ends up getting in trouble.

Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:28 · Score: 0

if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up .. I love this, because it weeds out the PC makers that are cutting corners and pocketing the extra money

Do you have any hard evidence that WGA only shows up on pirated Windows or that PC makers are cutting corners. And regardless, WGA phoning home with details of what's on my PC is a breach of privacy laws.

To remind you of what the case is about ..

'Microsoft this week was sued in a Washington district court for allegedly violating privacy laws through Windows XP's Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA) copy protection scheme. Similar to cases filed in 2006, the new class action case accuses Microsoft of falsely representing what information WGA would send to verify the authenticity of Windows and that it would send back information [daily IP address and other details that could be used to trace information back to a home or user]. The complaint further argued that Microsoft portrayed WGA as a necessary security update rather than acknowledge its copy protection nature in the update
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:38 · Score: -1, Redundant

Microsoft's right to only support their legitimately-purchased products does not entitle them to mislead their (legitimate) customers. MS's war on those who stole windows is fine with me, if they just avoid collateral damage.
I realize that this particular lie didn't cause all that much damage. Maybe a few thousand people had to put in a few more hours to make sure the 'critical' patch didn't break their company's setup. It's a matter of principle, however - if we allow Microsoft to get away with this, what's to keep them from doing more damage with other lies in the name of fighting piracy?
I'm not defending those who stole Windows - honestly, I'd rather they just switch to a legal free-as-in-beer (and preferably free-as-in-speech) OS. I'm defending the legitimate customers that Microsoft chose to deliberately lie too, both past and future.
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:47 · Score: 0

if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up.
I "stole" windows, and it never shows up. Then again, I have auto updates disabled.
Oh, and I do have legitimate copies of Microsoft software lying around, since MS DOS 2.odd. However Microsoft feels it can enforce a "per CPU" license agreement on individual users. I disagree. I also disagree to be bound by their agreement by opening the package. So there. Up to them to enforce it. Good luck with that.
Re:What's the issue? by infinitelink · 2010-01-22 03:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

Your comment is a perfect example of being off-topic; as such, it functions as a diversion from the real matter at hand--the illegal installation of malware onto many computers, breaching privacy laws, and worse, under guise as an update, rather than something new altogether; this ain't no Mac vs. Lin vs. Win issue, and your mind's immediate jump to such things as those, and "piracy", is a perfect example of how unfortunately stupid people are these days--too quick to speak; I want to be fair, however, I'm an idiot too: I do it too much too, but I'm trying not to; I say this in friendly encouragement--shut-up more often. Speaking of speaking out of ignorance: WGA installs on all computers running Windows, "pirated" (ahem, stolen, not pirated--there is a legal difference) or legit, and it does indeed flag legit installs, even proper installs, for whatever reasons unknown: too often; I've heard reports that it sometimes flags machines even after having "validating" them already once before. The thing is, Microsoft has no legal rights to validate any computer, period: even if someone has breached copyright by installing an illegit duplicate: there are no legal means for them to create effective enforcement mechanisms outside of going through court: seriously. SERIOUSLY. Just because software is dynamic instead of static, does not mean those who make it may begin to become their own legal enforcers, judges, etc.. This is a serious trespass on authority, just as are so many other things (use licenses overriding secured rights, etc.) these days: so much arrogance--even more when the Microsofty types decide they'll pay what it takes to have laws written for them, pragmatic rather than concerned with just government. I can't say it's just Microsoft, though. It's like the lawyers pissed about the "residual overhang of physicality", who want laws to ensure they and clients can continue extracting protection money for "IP" without continuing to make real product: those laws are set-up to be just, not subjugate justice to profit; it's like the lower courts' and patent offices ignoring the Supreme Court's caution that the case reviewed regarding a patent which included a piece of software in a physical transformation does not mean software is patentable: all this patent litigation over software is illegitimate, unauthorized, i.e. illegal, but the unauthorized "authorities" have been using power they are not given for enforcement nonetheless; it's like the congress, president, executive staff, political parties (both major ones), etc., making laws federally they are not authorized even to debate in session--which some of the more open scumbags (who were actually open about being scumbags) have dared repeatedly say in session in congress, and to the public: and here we get to the point where a bunch of jerk offs who want this or that with society, this way vs. their way vs. his way, cry "but but but" without any real deference or regard for "rule of law", which has been of late bandied about too often by those who so often trample it. Sheesh. e whole case is rather about

--
Intelligent idiots are we. | Evil men do not understand justice.
Re:What's the issue? by thePowerOfGrayskull · 2010-01-22 03:48 · Score: 3, Informative

How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate? I know very few people that had this happen. A few corporations had their volume keys flagged as such, but if the admin was doing things properly, they would have denied the update through group policy (or some other patch management).
Somewhat OT, but every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend, it tells me that it may be pirated (it's not) and blocks me from t downloading any optional updates. Mine was a simple upgrade from Win Vista (which came with the laptop) to Win 7 (upgrade disk provided by the manufacturer), and yet I'm still told that it's not legit. I have no trouble believing that legit XP installs have their fair share of this with WGA.
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:51 · Score: 0

they didn't miss inform any body. they clearly stated that if you didn't install WGA you would not be able to get necessary security updates. they never said that WGA was an necessary security update.
Re:What's the issue? by EXrider · 2010-01-22 04:02 · Score: 0, Troll

And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $130.
Wrong, Apple stopped doing yearly OS updates once their OS finally reached general usability, which was version 10.3 (back in '03). Anyways, they've been supporting their most recent OS releases for at least 4 years, you don't have to upgrade Mac OS soon as it comes out, just like you don't have to upgrade Windows as soon as a new release comes out.

I bet if MS released OS updates every year for $130, everyone would be up in arms, but when Apple adds a program like Notepad to it's OS, they repackage it, and call it something cute. I'm waiting for Apple Liger (it comes with a new theme!!!!!!!!!).
If you were an admin that had actually supported some Macs, you'd realize that there are always un-advertised features in those OS releases that actually make your job as an admin easier. Additionally, based on that comment, I can tell you've never actually used Mac OS X for any length of time. By the way, 10.6 is offered as an upgrade for merely $30 and it doesn't come with any new eye candy, just underlying OS refinements that make Active Directory and Exchange integration work better, and memory and disk footprints smaller.

Because I'm a legitimate sysadmin, and when I load on Windows XP, Server, or even Linux (Redhat, or another one with support) I purchase the program, and make sure my clients are fully licenced.
Well then, you've had the fortune to only deal with companies that pony up the cash for volume licenses then. When you work for a company that only buys OEM licenses, WGA makes things that you take for granted as an admin, hell. Disaster recovery, Terminal Services, system images and virtualization all become a pain in the ass or even impossible to practically implement thanks to WGA.

--
grep -iw skynet /etc/services
Re:What's the issue? by mcgrew · 2010-01-22 04:02 · Score: 4, Insightful

Rape isn't murder, it's rape. Copyright infringement is not stealing; it's copyright infringement.
If you download a copy of XP, that infringes Microsoft's copyright. Microsoft has not been deprived of property any more than the rape victim has been deprived of life.
If you walk out of Best Buy with a copy of XP without paying, you have indeed stolen it, and Best Buy is out the cost of the software they bought from Microsoft.
Come on, guys, this is a technical forum. Lets be a little more precice, can we?

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:28 · Score: 3, Funny

Somewhat OT, but every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend, it tells me that it may be pirated (it's not) and blocks me from t downloading any optional updates.
Funny, every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend, it doesn't tell me that it may be pirated (it is) and doesn't blocks me from downloading any optional updates. Maybe you should do what I did?
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous+Cowpat · 2010-01-22 04:34 · Score: 1

ah, because 'necessary update for security' and 'necessary security update' mean such different things, and don't both boil down to "you need to install this to keep your computer secure"

--
FGD 135
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 05:06 · Score: 0

"And to jab the Apply fanboys - Apple releases OS updates YEARLY for $130. MS fanboys have had the pleasure of paying $200 retail (or $140 OEM w/ a mouse or stick of ram, or anything else cheap), for 5 years"
I'm still running OS X 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4 systems, just as I'm still running some Windows 2000 and XP machines. Just because a new OS update is sold doesn't mean you have to buy it.
"So, back to reality, if you stole Windows, expect the genuine advantage to show up. And I love it, you know why? Because I'm a legitimate sysadmin, and when I load on Windows XP, Server, or even Linux (Redhat, or another one with support) I purchase the program, and make sure my clients are fully licenced."
I also make sure my machines are fully licensed. That's why I complain bitterly about a program continuously running in the background that does no good for me at all, and which can occasionally incorrectly claim my system is illegitimate. WGA is one of the first things I disable after installing my legitimate copies of Windows. It is one of several ways that you can optimize Windows performance and reliability. That Microsoft chose to foist it on unsuspecting users as a "critical security update", when it was nothing of the sort, is unethical.
"Back in reality", what will you tell your clients when this happens again?
Re:What's the issue? by Virmal · 2010-01-22 05:40 · Score: 1

Don't you love it when a sysadmin posts on /. as "Anonymous Coward" ?
Re:What's the issue? by cdrguru · 2010-01-22 06:22 · Score: 1

Just because all the oil makers are in cahoots, doesn't mean we can steal gas because we feel because it is a monopoly their prices are too high.
Huh? You mean you haven't been stealing gas in protest?

I have to compete with people who steal software and sell computers with pirated versions.
Yup. And the goal of piracy is to (a) obviously to get free stuff, but (b) destroying revenue from digital goods is even more important. The idea that popular idea (piracy) can bring large corporations to their knees is extremely attractive. So attractive, in fact, that there is almost no chance of any anti-piracy anything ever winning out.
So sure, there are some selfish pirates out there that are just in it to get free stuff. But don't ignore the fact that these people are also contributing to the freedom of digital goods worldwide. Sounds like a good idea when you put it in those terms. Unless of course you own or work for a company that actually gets money from (gasp!) the sale of software. In that case, your days are probably numbered because unless software is nailed down tight, it will absolutely be stolen and redistributed all over the planet. And any attempt to nail it down will be fought.
Anyone that is hoping to actually make a living selling creative works (software, music, books, anything) is unaware of the pirate movement and the effect it is having on greedy bastards trying to make money off intangible objects.
By the way, I am one of those greedy bastards. Just like Microsoft.
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 06:31 · Score: 0

Yes, copyright infringement is different from taking a physical item from somebody.
That said, we've had the concept of theft-of-service for a very long time. As far as I can tell, it's a rather new concept (and one mostly restricted to tech website) that stealing is only stealing when you deprive somebody else of the thing stolen. Which isn't to say that there's no difference, just that it's still stealing in the sense that the word has meant for a very long time.
Re:What's the issue? by Zero__Kelvin · 2010-01-22 06:32 · Score: 1

"Somewhat OT, but every time my Win7 computer wakes up from suspend, it tells me that it may be pirated ..."
That is strange. When I bought my computer I left Vista on it and set up Dual Boot Linux/Vista just in case I needed a good laugh. The last time I tried to boot Vista, as far as I could tell, it never woke up.

--
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Re:What's the issue? by Zero__Kelvin · 2010-01-22 06:35 · Score: 1

"If you download a copy of XP, that infringes Microsoft's copyright. Microsoft has not been deprived of property any more than the rape victim has been deprived of life.
Sometimes the rape victim is so traumatized they kill themselves. You'd be surprised how many Windows users the world has lost that way.

--
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Re:What's the issue? by Hatta · 2010-01-22 07:12 · Score: 1

How many of the people that were to join the class action suit would have had legitimate copies of XP flagged as illegitimate? I know very few people that had this happen.
My girlfriend had this happen to her. Installed her retail copy of XP on a new computer, it would not activate. She called Microsoft and after getting bounced around for almost an hour, she was told that there's nothing they can do. She used Ubuntu for quite a while, until she decided that she couldn't live without Freehand MX, so we pirated XP.
People like to cast piracy as theft. Microsoft didn't lose anything when we pirated Windows. My GF lost ~$150 because of WGA. That is theft.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:What's the issue? by kackle · 2010-01-22 07:21 · Score: 1

Copyright infringement is not stealing; it's copyright infringement.
Copyright infringement is theft of permission. It takes away the copyright holder's ability to control any copying. So yes, it is stealing; not of the "product" per se, but of the holder's right of control. That cat doesn't go back in the bag.

Lets be a little more precice, can we?
How embarrassing for you. ;)
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 07:30 · Score: 0

I have a moral issue with being treated like I broke the law every time I buy something. I paid my money, yet I am harassed? Pirates enjoy a far better experience for far less cost. This is true for *ALL* DRM. DRM is bad, unethical, immoral. Why is it legal to try to trick me into installing it?
Re:What's the issue? by mcgrew · 2010-01-22 07:57 · Score: 1

"theft of permission"? That's a real stretch there.
Lets be a little more precice, can we?
How embarrassing for you. ;)
Indeed! I hate it when I miss a typo. Especially when programming.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 08:03 · Score: 0

Perhaps, but Apple's operating system actually works right. Microsoft uses its marketing budget power to brainwash everyone into thinking that Windows is the only thing out there.
By the way, I'm also a legitimate network admin, and we've dumped Windows and Server 2003/2008 for Leopard Server and MacOSX. Now, I spend my time moving us forward instead of fixing all of the crap that Windows throws in your face every time you log in. I don't need to kludge anything with OSX.
Oh, and by the way, you only buy updates for major upgrades to the operating system, not every single update (like 10.4 to 10.5). And Snow Leopard was only $25.
And before you accuse Apple of selling bells and whistles, take a look at Microsoft on that one first. What real functionality did they add to XP that made it different from 2000? Nothing. They didn't add the firewall until SP2. What, Windows Movie Maker? Please.
By the way, on the subject of activation, I can remember a number of times that I have swapped out a network card or replaced a video card or something, and had to reactivate Windows -- and the "automatic" one didn't work! The last time that happened, it was with a Dell server that had completely wiped (it developed a bad memory controller). Now, I had installed this copy of Server 2003 on this computer before, and it had never had to activate. But when I took that server and transferred it to a VM (not reinstalled, just transferred to a VM), it not only wanted to activate, but I had to call Microsoft to activate it! Then, when I called, it took two hours of talking to some "Engrish" speaking guy before they finally decided I wasn't a pirate and gave me the activation code.
Now, how hard would it have been to get that working if it had been a pirated copy? Cakewalk. It's been shown that WGA is trivial to defeat. Which one was it harder for, the legit customer or the pirate? Who was penalized? Hint: He wouldn't say "Yarr".
I call it WGD: Windows Genuine Disadvantage Lubricated Tool. Oh, wait, they didn't say it was the CUSTOMER that gets the advantage...
Re:What's the issue? by mcgrew · 2010-01-22 08:14 · Score: 1

Theft-of-service IS stealing. If you go to your barber and get your hair cut, and walk out without paying, you have deprived him of the time and effort he used to cut your hair that he could have used cutting someone else's hair. You have defrauded him by promising money in exchange for a service, recieved the service, and not paid for that service.
If you download XP you have deprived no one of anything; you made a copy of something that already existed. Quite a bit difference from theift-of-service.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 08:17 · Score: 0

Come on, guys, this is a technical forum. Lets be a little more precice, can we?
Perhaps you should start by being precise; it's "let's."
Re:What's the issue? by mcgrew · 2010-01-22 08:25 · Score: 1

DOH!

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:What's the issue? by idontgno · 2010-01-22 08:29 · Score: 1

I'm glad you acknowledged it. I was gonna snark out on that, but that would have detracted from the fact that basically, I agree with you.
Still, misspelling "precise" is pretty much an irony singularity. You can't get much higher irony density than that.

--
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 08:33 · Score: 0

Rape isn't murder, it's rape.
While I agree with your point, I personally equate rape with murder, and I think the penalty should be the same. I've known several women who have been raped, and their lives are in shambles because of it. Women very rarely fully recover from it.
Re:What's the issue? by mcgrew · 2010-01-22 08:37 · Score: 1

Not only that but I left the apostrophe out of "let's". Epic fail!

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:What's the issue? by mcgrew · 2010-01-22 08:43 · Score: 1

I've also known rape victims, some who were close to me (or they wouldn't have mentioned it, it's not something a woman wants to talk about) but the difference is rape ruins one life, murder ruins many lives. I had a friend twenty years ago who drove a cab for a living and was shot and killed dropping off a fare in a bad neighborhood. I saw his fiancee five years later; she'd become a drug addict by then. She would have suffered far less trauma had she been raped then losing the man she was in love with. Either way her life would have been ruined, but his parents and siblings and friends all suffered from his death as well.

--
Free Martian Whores!
Re:What's the issue? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 09:21 · Score: 0

Theft of service is not stealing.
If you go to your barber and get your hair cut, and walk out without paying, you have committed the civil infraction of breach of contract, not the criminal infraction of theft (nor the civil infraction of copyright infringement). The barber sues you, the barber can only collect the amount you actually owe (plus the costs of collection; ie court fees, time lost from cutting someone else's hair, etc.). Its not the same thing as stealing, as in loaf of bread. You can be ordered by a court to replace a loaf of bread that you stole, or to pay damages equivalent to the cost of replacing a loaf of bread. A barber cannot uncut your hair.
Re:What's the issue? by Duncan+J+Murray · 2010-01-22 11:37 · Score: 1

Disagree. I had a perfectly valid version of Windows XP. Fed up with the increasingly slow boot-up times, I was irked that microsoft wanted me to install WGA - even explicitly stating that it ran every time on start up. No thanks - I didn't want it, and it wasn't a critical update.
I'm glad in retrospect that I didn't just moan about it. March last year, I switched to Ubuntu after my last time clicking no to WGA, and it's a breath of fresh air just how much Ubuntu respects my choices.

Frivolous lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:06 · Score: 0, Interesting

Managed to "dodge"? This is the classic definition of a frivolous lawsuit. this is not a compliance lawsuit. There is no injuctive relief. This is a perceived slight by litigous individuals. Why didn't the entire case get thrown out altogether?

TWAT by SpockLogic · 2010-01-22 03:06 · Score: 5, Funny

WGA renamed for Vista and 7 as "The Windows Activation Technologies (TWAT)" Your Honor, I rest my case.

Re:TWAT by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:43 · Score: 0

And who doesn't love twat?
Don't answer that. :)
Re:TWAT by Spazztastic · 2010-01-22 03:54 · Score: 4, Funny

WGA renamed for Vista and 7 as "The Windows Activation Technologies (TWAT)"
Your Honor, I rest my case.
I made a guild in World of Warcraft called T W A T, The War Against Terrorism. Anybody who objected to the name was called a terrorist, including the GM who contacted me about it. It didn't end very well...

--
Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
Re:TWAT by copponex · 2010-01-22 03:55 · Score: 2, Funny

Catholic priests and publicly homophobic senators?
Damn. Couldn't help myself.
Re:TWAT by Zero__Kelvin · 2010-01-22 06:50 · Score: 2, Funny

"I made a guild in World of Warcraft called T W A T, The War Against Terrorism."
Well I've been an active Slashdotter for years, and this is the first I am hearing about TWAT, but the very idea of it is very intriguing to me. Can you tell me how I can get in?

--
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Re:TWAT by Culture20 · 2010-01-22 08:08 · Score: 1

I'm certain the group has dried up by now.
Re:TWAT by fm6 · 2010-01-22 09:15 · Score: 1

In my junior high, the guys who had Dominic Patrone's physed class (colorful fellow, only teacher from that period whose name I remember) for home room voted to name the intramural football team "Mr. Patrone's Supporters". Patrone himself was delighted. The principal was not amused.
Re:TWAT by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 12:57 · Score: 0

Get them really, really drunk first, usually works.

In other news by DarkofPeace · 2010-01-22 03:27 · Score: 0, Offtopic

http://politics.slashdot.org/story/10/01/21/2014204/Supreme-Court-Rolls-Back-Corporate-Campaign-Spending-Limits

Denial of class != ruling on merits by xymog · 2010-01-22 03:32 · Score: 5, Informative

The problem with the case is that plaintiff's' attorneys have failed to meet the legal requirements to certify the lawsuit as a class action. The initial pleading has been repeatedly amended to add and drop plaintiffs, while at the same time it is not able to advance coherent legal arguments backed by evidence. Courts will not certify a lawsuit as a class action based on wishful thinking. The courts require prima facie evidence that the issue is widespread, that many people are harmed, and that judicial economy will be best served by having a single lawsuit. This isn't a "win" for Microsoft or a "loss" for the common man; plaintiffs' attorneys haven't done their homework and met the burden of proof for certifying the class.

Re:Denial of class != ruling on merits by j00r0m4nc3r · 2010-01-22 08:54 · Score: 1

Man, talk about Buzzkill.

Halfway install by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 03:54 · Score: 0

I have an older computer that while in a hurry allowed the WGA to start to install. I wanted to cancel that installation but now was unable. Every time I boot it asked to continue with the install and I cancel out of it. Does anyone know if I will have the option to de-install that feature once it is installed? Or a way to remove the partial installation?

Re:Halfway install by natehoy · 2010-01-22 05:25 · Score: 1

No, but chances are (assuming your copy of Windows is legitimate) it will install fine and unlock access to real updates you really do need to have. Of course, there's always the chance WGA will "go off" accidentally, but that was relatively rare, and I think in the intervening years Microsoft has loosened their policies on WGA activations. I ran into it, and it was a pain, but that was back when it first came out and Microsoft hadn't expected the flood of support calls (even a small minority of people being tripped up by it means a LOT of call volume!).
This is all assuming you have a legitimate copy, of course. If you're pirating it... no offense but you should really uninstall it and use something else.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:Halfway install by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 05:53 · Score: 0

It is a legitimate copy. That does not answer the question though of how to stop the install. Of if the install completes, can it be unistalled?
Re:Halfway install by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 17:46 · Score: 0

You could try the "Windows genuine forever patch".
You may need google-fu

Not $130 by btaylor · 2010-01-22 03:58 · Score: 0, Troll

Apple doesn't necessarily release its updates for $130 a pop. Snow Leopard was released as a $29 upgrade.

And YOUR comment... by Petersko · 2010-01-22 04:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

"Your comment is a perfect example of being off-topic;"

And your comment is a perfect example of being too exhausting to read. I'm sure you had a good point, but I saw that huge block of unbroken text and thought, "no thanks".

Yes, I'm being pedantic, but the "enter" key can be a trusted ally and an aid to communication. Use it wisely.

Re:And YOUR comment... by idontgno · 2010-01-22 04:31 · Score: 2, Insightful

tl;dr

--
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
Re:And YOUR comment... by El_Oscuro · 2010-01-22 12:44 · Score: 1

Yes, I'm being pedantic, but the "enter" key can be a trusted ally and an aid to communication. Use it wisely.
Actually, this being slashdot, the "enter" key is not your friend. You have to use HTML tags such as <P> and <BR>. And be careful with formatted text, as you might trigger the dreaded lameness filter. :)

--
"Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."

WGA was the final straw for me by blankoboy · 2010-01-22 04:09 · Score: 3, Interesting

I have to say that WGA was really the final straw for me with Microsoft. I, being a paying customer, felt from day 1 of WGA that it was an absolute kick in the teeth from Microsoft. It is what turned me from a Microsoft fan over to using my Mac Mini. It was a sad thing for me but I'm much happier now and will never come back. Thanks for turning me away Microsoft!

Re:WGA was the final straw for me by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:49 · Score: 1, Funny

Oh no, what will they do without the support of blankoboy.
Re:WGA was the final straw for me by natehoy · 2010-01-22 05:32 · Score: 2, Interesting

WGA was the beginning of the end with my relationship with Microsoft, and I've been using it pretty much exclusively since DOS 3.0.
After the dust settled, I started looking into cross platform software that could do what I wanted to in Windows, with a goal of eventually replacing everything with an open source alternative. It really opened my eyes about open source software and what it can (and cannot) do.
I can now say that, as of two weeks ago, my household became Redmond-free. All three computers in the household are now running Linux Mint, and loving it.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:WGA was the final straw for me by jim_v2000 · 2010-01-22 06:06 · Score: 1

>I have to say that WGA was really the final straw for me with Microsoft.

What did it do to you that was so terrible?

--
Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
Re:WGA was the final straw for me by myspace-cn · 2010-01-22 06:41 · Score: 1

Nice. Got any advice for people with hardware that runs old school XP/2000?
Should we buy guns instead? j/k ;o)
Use what works. If you have to have XP, then have it. Hell I connected on a 1k ram 386 compact portable recently on IRC! lol I didn't get hacked either. Maybe the exploits are too big for the MFM drives? LOL ahahaha
Re:WGA was the final straw for me by Seth+Kriticos · 2010-01-22 07:05 · Score: 1

Something like that for me too. I was dual booting Windows/Linux since around 97, but never got around to completely switch. Then came Windows XP, I read the license and swore never to use that on my home machine. I still stayed with Windows 2000 up until around 3 years ago, but then ditched the products of that whole company. Definitely an improvement. I have to thank for the final blow to switch me. Never been happier. :)
Re:WGA was the final straw for me by natehoy · 2010-01-22 07:22 · Score: 1

Actually, one of my computers was an Athlon 1.33Ghz Thunderbird with 384MB RAM, and it has no problems whatsoever with Linux Mint 8 (the latest). The old video card on it only has 32MB of RAM, so it won't run the eye candy (compiz), but it runs a 19" LCD panel with no problems whatsoever. That motherboard eventually died of old age, but I've got it running on an Intel Celeron 1.2GHz with the same 384MB of RAM and it's still relatively snappy.
And that's running Gnome. The XFCE desktop absolutely screams on that machine (I just like the look of Gnome better).
Firefox starts faster either machine running Mint than it did on my 2.2 GHz Athlon64 with 1GB RAM running Windows XP. Not that that's a particularly valid benchmark, but still...
Removing XP and installing Mint 8 on my Athlon64 2.2Ghz made me almost not do my latest hardware upgrade. It was that fast. But it's been over five years, it was time for a refresh. (grin)
If you have an old beast that you want to try it out on, you can boot straight from the CD and run it right from there. That's a good way to know if your hardware is going to be happy with it.

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:WGA was the final straw for me by natehoy · 2010-01-22 07:25 · Score: 1

PS: I remember MFM dries. I mail-ordered a 20MB hard drive for my old 8088 (my first hard drive, sigh) then bought an MFM controller to tweak it up to 30MB.
Heh, that wouldn't even serve as a disk cache for my current 1TB hard drive any more. LOL!!!!

--
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
Re:WGA was the final straw for me by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-26 01:34 · Score: 0

Mac Mini is a ghetto computer. For an Apple fan boy you sure are a cheapass.

This may have worked out in MS's favor. by kellyb9 · 2010-01-22 04:15 · Score: 1

Whoever refuses to join the class action lawsuit has illegal copies on Windows!

Isn't that actually the point? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 04:57 · Score: 0

That's actually the point of a class action suit. The idea is that the damages per case would be far too low for the average person to afford/bother with suing. This isn't a terrible thing, IMO.

What bothers me is when it isn't a nominal cash award for damages but is instead a $50 coupon off the newest $500 (just to pull numbers from nowhere) product by the same darn company. Those settlements really tick me off.

Oblig userfriendly cartoon by catman · 2010-01-22 05:03 · Score: 2, Funny

http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20070313

Re:Oblig userfriendly cartoon by nomadic · 2010-01-22 07:20 · Score: 0, Offtopic

Good grief is the art still that bad? I haven't read that in 10 years, I'd assume it would improve at some level. I mean, that's enough time to go to art school up through an MFA and learn to draw from scratch.

What is the WGA? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 06:00 · Score: 0

The World Canadian Bureau?

REMOVE THE ASSININE WGA AND FIX XP ! by myspace-cn · 2010-01-22 06:35 · Score: 1

Jesus Tits just fix XP . Sell licenses to who ever needs them for "pre IE8 applications" and keep it alive for IE7 /6 or give us a tool to remove without de-stabilizing our systems. For example pro audio people with working hardware which is train wrecked by Win 7.

We all already know we have to keep our win systems behind a hardware firewall now.

Too bad by ClosedSource · 2010-01-22 06:56 · Score: 1

You won't be getting those discount coupons for MS products after all.

Named Litigant comments by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 07:21 · Score: 0

As one of the named litigants in this case, it was never about the money, it was more about setting the precident that software companies do not have a right to steal processor cycles from users.. Doesnt matter how many or how few, Microsoft co-opted hundreds of thousands of us to run checks for them to track down illegal software without our consent..

Now obviously, I have legal copies of XP and I dont like what Microsoft was doing, so one way to change their attitude was to sue. It could never have been about the money, because awards were capped by the EULA to $5, so even the people representing the class wouldn't have made a red cent (The lawyer would have.. but to be fair I put in maybe 100 hours, he put in 1000s and got nothing for it)

As one of the class reps, do please know that I would never have allowed the "voucher" crap that we all see.. I would have protested strongly.. I'd have much rather see the total award given to the EFF where it could do some good preventing these actions in the future.

Once more around the track my friend by westlake · 2010-01-22 07:42 · Score: 1

Copyright infringement is not stealing

The geek trots out this argument at every opportunity.

The problem is that copyright infringement was denounced as piracy and theft while the Black Flag still flew over the Carribean.

The geek lost the battle over words 250 years ago.

Re:Once more around the track my friend by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 11:48 · Score: 0

Except that an act of piracy is generally an illegal take-over of a water-bound vessel.
People who call copyright infringement 'piracy' are just trying to make it sound scary.
Re:Once more around the track my friend by b4dc0d3r · 2010-01-23 04:35 · Score: 1

I hereby denounce you as a troll, snake oil salesman, practicing thespian, and a grossly inappropriate sense of grandeur. That makes it true then, eh?
Look, if you want to travel back in time we can have a conversation using the terms as they used to be used. These days there is a different name for different types of unauthorized acquisition. The reason it's important is because in many countries the punishment is quite different.
If you were on trial for manslaughter, having accidentally run over a person who jumped into your auto's path, your lawyer would object every time someone said murder. So the judge says "overruled, either way the defendant killed someone, and admitted to that much in the police report, and that's why we're here".
Go ahead, point out how this situation is different from the copyright/theft argument. While you're doing so, make sure you read your post and my reply again.
The geek is trying to be precise here, and the law clearly defines a difference between the two. Now, given how many times this has been talked about, please tell me honestly, did I just get bite a troll? You other posts suggest you tend to be serious... in fact your other replies tend to take fine distinctions very seriously. But someone will read your post here and think, mighty fine point, I'll use that one someday.

WoW TWAT! by Zero__Kelvin · 2010-01-22 08:16 · Score: 1

"I'm certain the group has dried up by now."

No. I was so excited about TWAT that I asked my neighbour about it, and she assures me she can get me in next week. Apparently something is wrong with her hardware right now. I'm so excited that I don't even care that she is ugly, as long as she helps me get into TWAT. (I was surprised that she told me to make sure my joystick is in good working order, but then I realized she has been having those hardware problems)

--
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun

Re:WoW TWAT! by Culture20 · 2010-01-22 10:56 · Score: 1

I'm surprised, maybe your neighbor knows more about it than I do. Sounds like it has a fluid membership with loose requirements.
Re:WoW TWAT! by Zero__Kelvin · 2010-01-22 11:15 · Score: 1

I'm even more excited now, as she told me that the user experience has not just visual and audio, but also olfactory feedback!

--
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Re:WoW TWAT! by Culture20 · 2010-01-22 12:40 · Score: 1

Olfactory feedback? Sounds fishy to me. Maybe she's yanking your chain.
Re:WoW TWAT! by Zero__Kelvin · 2010-01-22 12:56 · Score: 1

"Maybe she's yanking your chain."
That comes later

--
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Re:WoW TWAT! by deniable · 2010-01-23 02:23 · Score: 1

"Maybe she's yanking your chain."
That comes later
Only for the self-starters.

Now you understand by BCW2 · 2010-01-22 09:01 · Score: 1

The advantages of donating to both sides in every election are obvious now.

--
Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.

Hairyfeet got his ASS KICKED for trolling... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 09:40 · Score: 0

"Ahhh....I know I shouldn't slap the fanboy, but I'm bored people, and therefor can't help it." - by hairyfeet (841228) on Thursday January 21, @07:58PM (#30854896)

Hairyfeet, You had to "eat your words" numerous times in the exchanges in these very posts which everyone will now see, verbatim, by just going to them here:

----

("Exhibit A", where I merely extolled both SPEED and SECURITY issues in FAVOR of Opera, vs. FireFox):

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30852888

("Exhibit B",where I first caught you in mistakes, regarding SPEED and SECURITY issues in FAVOR of Opera, vs. FireFox):

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856394

("Exhibit C", where I further caught you in mistakes, regarding SPEED and SECURITY issues in FAVOR of Opera, vs. FireFox):

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856658

----

(Big mistake(s) on your part, starting up hassles with others by your intentionally trolling!)

ANYONE IS FREE TO READ THE ABOVE, WHERE "HAIRYFEET" HERE FIRST ADMITTEDLY TROLLED MYSELF & GOT HIS ASS HANDED TO HIM, WITH EASE, & LMAO - DUE TO HIS OWN MISTAKES & RANTS!

(Hilarious!)

Whereas, by way of comparison (when I tried to warn he to leave me be no less, initially)?

I stated nothing but verifiable facts in the 1st URL, & subsequently supporting ones regarding BOTH Opera, FireFox (& addons for them).

APK

P.S.=> The result? "HAIRYFEET" ran, like the TYPICAL /. TROLL (or, any other elsewhere) when confronted with facts, vs. his fictions and outrageous technical errors...

However, before he ran (in "typical troll fashion" no less)? He lastly used the OLDEST "troll trick" in the book: Downrating ALL of my posts as "offtopic" & "troll" etc. / et al (Where my replies actually WERE on-topic unlike his largely stupid & erroneous replies no less)...

No, I think from now on here? Well - Everyone ought to see EXACTLY how you & those LIKE YOU, operate around here & elsewhere online as well (and how you UTTERLY "screwed-up" for it on your part also, all per the above examples thereof on YOUR part)... apk

HAIRYFEET TROLLS AND LOSES BADLY by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 09:44 · Score: -1, Offtopic

"Ahhh....I know I shouldn't slap the fanboy, but I'm bored people, and therefor can't help it." - by hairyfeet (841228) on Thursday January 21, @07:58PM (#30854896)

Hairyfeet, You had to "eat your words" numerous times in the exchanges in these very posts which everyone will now see, verbatim, by just going to them here:

----

("Exhibit A", where I merely extolled both SPEED and SECURITY issues in FAVOR of Opera, vs. FireFox):

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30852888

("Exhibit B" ,where I first caught you in mistakes, regarding SPEED and SECURITY issues in FAVOR of Opera, vs. FireFox):

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856394

("Exhibit C", where I further caught you in mistakes, regarding SPEED and SECURITY issues in FAVOR of Opera, vs. FireFox):

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856658

----

(Big mistake(s) on your part, starting up hassles with others by your intentionally trolling!)

ANYONE IS FREE TO READ THE ABOVE, WHERE "HAIRYFEET" HERE FIRST ADMITTEDLY TROLLED MYSELF & GOT HIS ASS HANDED TO HIM, WITH EASE, & LMAO - DUE TO HIS OWN MISTAKES & RANTS!

(Hilarious!)

Whereas, by way of comparison (when I tried to warn he to leave me be no less, initially)?

I stated nothing but verifiable facts in the 1st URL, & subsequently supporting ones regarding BOTH Opera, FireFox (& addons for them).

APK

P.S.=> The result? "HAIRYFEET" ran, like the TYPICAL /. TROLL (or, any other elsewhere) when confronted with facts, vs. his fictions and outrageous technical errors...

However, before he ran (in "typical troll fashion" no less)? He lastly used the OLDEST "troll trick" in the book: Downrating ALL of my posts as "offtopic" & "troll" etc. / et al (Where my replies actually WERE on-topic unlike his largely stupid & erroneous replies no less)...

No, I think from now on here? Well - Everyone ought to see EXACTLY how you & those LIKE YOU, operate around here & elsewhere online as well (and how you UTTERLY "screwed-up" for it on your part also, all per the above examples thereof on YOUR part)... apk

Re:HAIRYFEET TROLLS AND LOSES BADLY by ngworekara · 2010-01-22 11:52 · Score: 1

You're fucking nuts man.
Re:HAIRYFEET TROLLS AND LOSES BADLY by hairyfeet · 2010-01-22 17:14 · Score: 1

Yes, now everyone knows I have my own Opera troll! On the one hand, it would have been nicer to have a Safari troll, as at least Apple does have taste, on the other I could have ended up with one of those scary basement dwelling "LOL Windblowz" trolls, and from what I understand they are rather smelly. But I expect I will have for the next week or so this lamer following me around.
Hey trollie? I use the same ID on every forum I'm on...lets see how many you can find!

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

This means that M$ could have millions of suits. by mrmeval · 2010-01-22 12:18 · Score: 1

A class action is a way of protection a company by consolidating a lot of damaged parties. Seek out some law students who are friendly and can show what you need to file to start up a lawsuit for yourself. Do this 1 million times.

Palin?

--
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty

Re: by clint999 · 2010-01-22 12:30 · Score: -1

I never planned on using the corporate justice system anyway.I used the consumer justice system... I pirated some of their software and then switched to Linux.

--
College-Pages.com - Online Colleges, Degrees, and Programs

Re: pirating their software is not by Errol+backfiring · 2010-01-22 15:03 · Score: 1

No it isn't. I can recall a time when Microsoft was proud that MS-DOS was he most copied program in the world (at least they claimed so). All the other software companies that made easy-to-copy software became big, often with really lousy software: Lotus (Multiplan was by far friendlier and better), AutoCAD (present versions still suck compared to CADAM in the '80s), WordPerfect, etc.

--
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!

Re:Hairyfeet got his ASS KICKED for trolling... ap by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 16:34 · Score: 0

P.S.=> The result? "HAIRYFEET" ran, like the TYPICAL /. TROLL (or, any other elsewhere) when confronted with facts, vs. his fictions and outrageous technical errors...

If you don't get any replies, perhaps the problem is you, not them? Ever thought of that ? You should learn about how to write posts such that people feel like they are having a conversation rather than being subjected to a brain dump of incoherent sentences.

Re:Hairyfeet got his ASS KICKED for trolling... ap by hairyfeet · 2010-01-22 17:11 · Score: 1

Actually I think it is kinda cute. I have my own little pet troll! Here trollie, here boy! While I admit is isn't a well trained troll, and tends to drool and piddle on itself, on the plus side it doesn't speak in "LOL WindblowZ" speek like the Twitter troll I had a few years back. all in all, I prefer the drooling and piddling on itself.

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

why on earth not? by toby · 2010-01-22 17:41 · Score: 1

I don't think I would want to use it for regular daily tasks.

You'll find the same advantages in day to day use, as you observe as a media centre: efficiency, reliability, freedom from malware, nagware, and crapware, freedom from "progressive Windows dementia", and availability of many useful packages.

Don't take my word for it, try it. I use Linux for my day to day work and it "just works." Take the Windows brakes off and you'll immediately get twice as much value from your PC.

--
you had me at #!

It appears to me you blew it badly 4 trolling by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 17:58 · Score: 0

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856394

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856658

In those 2 links above, hairyfeet? You had your ass absolutely handed to you for your trolling him is all. So much for ITT, eh?

So much for you wasting time at "ITT", lol by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 18:06 · Score: 0

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856394

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856658

Hairyfeet, face it, You had your ass absolutely handed to you for your trolling him is all. You say you want to teach PC tech stuff in your profile, but you sure got "schooled" above. So much for "ITT training" because apparently it's not worth squat, seeing as you got blown away, lmao.

Why'd you waste time at "ITT"? To be blown away?? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 18:08 · Score: 0

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856394

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856658

Hairyfeet, face it, You had your ass absolutely handed to you for your trolling him is all. You say you want to teach PC tech stuff in your profile, but you sure got "schooled" above. So much for "ITT training" because apparently it's not worth squat, seeing as you got blown away, lmao.

Not his fault "ITT Training" for hairyfeet sucks by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 18:11 · Score: 0

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856394

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856658

Hairyfeet, look. Just face it. You had your ass absolutely handed to you for your trolling your betters, is all. You say you want to teach PC tech stuff in your profile, but you sure got "schooled" above in both urls above. So much for "ITT training" because apparently it's not worth squat, seeing as you got blown away! rotflmao.

Witness "the POWER of... 'ITT Training'" lol (NOT) by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 19:12 · Score: 0

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856394

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856658

Folks, we'd like to introduce you to "Professor Hairyfeet" graduate of "Bottom of the barrell university" @ ITT! That's where they teach you to troll others as well as how to lose very, very badly on technical topics, as he demonstrates above. So, when "the POWER of... 'ITT Training'" fails you, as it has the professor above? Well, there is always, "bottom-of-the-barrell U" for you too, as it's where ALL of the proudest loser trolls like the professor above graduated from (including getting their fake sheepskin from a gumball machine, lol). Professor Hairyfeet, You say you want to teach PC tech stuff in your profile here, but you sure got "schooled" above in both urls above there hairyfeet, lmao. Yes, folks - That's the KIND OF EXCELLENT RESULTS you'll be guaranteed to get, when you go to "Bottom-of-the-Barrell U" @ ITT. Guaranteed, or your money back (all 5 cents of it, lmao).

Witness "the POWER of... 'ITT Training'" lol (NOT) by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 19:14 · Score: 0

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856394

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1519698&cid=30856658

Folks, we'd like to introduce you to "Professor Hairyfeet" graduate of "Bottom of the barrell university" @ ITT! That's where they teach you to troll others as well as how to lose very, very badly on technical topics, as he demonstrates above. So, when "the POWER of... 'ITT Training'" fails you, as it has the professor above? Well, there is always, "bottom-of-the-barrell U" for you too, as it's where ALL of the proudest loser trolls like the professor above graduated from (including getting their fake sheepskin from a gumball machine, lol). Professor Hairyfeet, You say you want to teach PC tech stuff in your profile here, but you sure got "schooled" above in both urls above there hairyfeet, lmao. Yes, folks - That's the KIND OF EXCELLENT RESULTS you'll be guaranteed to get, when you go to "Bottom-of-the-Barrell U" @ ITT. Guaranteed, or your money back (all 5 cents of it, lmao).

R U A GRA-JOO-IT UV ITT Twaining too? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 19:20 · Score: 0

I wan B jus lyk U an Puffesser HairyFeet an grajooAte Fum ITT twaining too

Re:R U A GRA-JOO-IT UV ITT Twaining too? by hairyfeet · 2010-01-25 19:31 · Score: 1

Awww, is my trollie getting tired? Poor poor trollie, guess that is what happens when all you have is a "sock puppet o' love" to keep you company. Me, I am energized and ready to rock! That is what having a great weekend of mind blowing sex will do for you, you know? Oh that is right, you don't. Sorry trollie. Don't worry my poor little troll, your old pal hairy will describe it for you!
There is NOTHING in this world like having a woman drive over 200 miles just to get to you, barely opening the door before she is pushing you towards the bedroom with that hungry look in her eyes. Having her give you that sexy smirk as she pushes you against the wall, gets on her knees, and licks your cock like an ice cream cone! Talk about feeling like a king! Having that sweet pussy running down your throat like honey as you 69, having it grip you like buttery silk as she rides you, laughing and moaning as she plays, having her curl up next to you with a big grin on her face like a contented kitten, God help me I do love it so.
So just remember trollie, as you sit all alone, in the dark, no friends, and nobody to love, stewing that your "special browser" is dead last and even old shit like IE6 is stomping a mudhole in it, that your old pal hairyfeet will be enjoying some truly spectacular pussy and thinking of you...well I won't actually be giving a shit about you, but its the thought that counts, right? While my baby counts the days until she can come back to ride me like a pony, and is already talking about working extra hours so she can take more time off to spend with me in my bed, I'm sure you can take comfort that your special browser is beating "other",LOL!
So you just rest little trollie, I'm sure your right hand is tired. I'm gonna go head into the bedroom now, which still is perfumed with the smell of truly great sex, and dream of deleicious pussy, which sadly you will never get. How do you stand being so alone? So cold and empty, in the dark, don't you want to just make it stop? It would be so easy to just make the pain stop, wouldn't it? Nobody would miss you, nobody would mourn, just an end to the pain and loneliness, that eats what is left of your very soul. It must really hurt when you hear of someone like me, with tons of good friends, a girl that loves to cook me steak and suck my cock, playing bass in a great band and just generally damned happy for every moment of life on this wonderful green earth. Does it hurt? Does it make you feel like a failure? Knowing that so many have truly wonderful lives while yours is so empty and alone?

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

PWUFESSUH HARRYFEIT YO MAH HERO by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 19:50 · Score: 0

I won go thwu "The POWER of... 'ITT Training'" jes soes ah kin be jes laik Yew, PWUFESSUH HAIWYFEIT. so kin ah be, PWEEZ? YO MAH HEIRO PWUFFESSUH! PWUFESSUH HARRYFEIT I WAN B LAIK U 2.

(ROTFLMAO)

Re:PWUFESSUH HARRYFEIT YO MAH HERO by hairyfeet · 2010-01-23 20:52 · Score: 1

Wow, it must really chap your ass to be stuck in last place doesn't it? Does it hurt? Does it make you cry? And it must be awfully sad and lonely with nobody to talk to, nobody to care, nothing but your hand to keep you company. In the night, when it is dark, does the cold seep in? Do you wish the pain would just stop? It must be so sad to be you.
As for my degree? I had already been working IT for longer than you've drawn breath, I simply needed a sheet of paper to make PHBs happy. Now if you don't mind, I'm gonna enjoy a nice cuddle with my baby until she wakes up again. What can I say, five orgasms is apparently more than my sweetie can handle and keep conscious. There is NOTHING like looking into the eyes of the woman that you love as her eyes glaze over and roll back as she comes around you. Oh that's right, you're alone. I'm truly sorry, it must be truly awful and really hurt. I am just so damned glad that I'm not you, all alone in the dark.....so terribly lonely......it must be truly a nightmare...

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

PWUFESSUH HARRYPHEAT YO MAH HERO by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 20:02 · Score: 0

I won go thwu "The POWER of... 'ITT Training'" jes soes ah kin be jes laik Yew, PWUFESSUH HAIWYPHEAT. so kin ah be, PWEEZ? YO MAH HEIRO PWUFFESSUH! DAS ONWY CUZ PWUFESSUH HARRYPHEAT I WAN B JES LAIK U 2.

(ROTFLMAO)

I would like to ask you a question please by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-22 20:13 · Score: 0

Why are you so fucking stupid?

Re: I don't remember them giving away devo s/w by Douglas+Goodall · 2010-01-22 21:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

I remember clearly that Microsoft was the company that broke ranks first and destroyed the feeling of partnership that developers felt towards the previous system vendors. Before Microsoft, developers enjoyed the cooperation of vendors that knew that applications sold systems, whether their interest was hardware of software. The idea of paying to be in the developer program, the idea that Microsoft had as many SKUs for development products as user products changed the whole nature of the development game.

I remember clearly that semiconductor vendors as an example, were happy to provide technical information that helped designers understand the benefits of their products. Piles of handbooks were freely available from a variety of sources, often the sales reps directly, or the vendors support divisions.

Going back as far as CP/M-80, the operating system shipped with developer tools and programming documentation. Until Chuck Peddle stopped shipping the language tools and started charging separately for them. Vendors would put on free seminars to convince developers to support their platforms, and provide free technical support to serious developers needing help to complete products that would enhance the overall market impact of a vendors products.

I remember being shocked and disappointed when Microsoft started charging serious money to be in their developer program. They also priced the development tools rather high, and began an onslaught of versions that never ended, I remember at least half a dozen so called 6-month learning curves alleged to provide developers with the understandings they would need to succeed with their applications. With one hand they charged a lot for assembly and C support, while they talked out of the other side of their mouths about how Visual Basic was all anyone really needed to write applications for Windows. They said you didn't even need to know how to program :-)

Then Novell followed suit and priced up their developer program. Suddenly you had to be a member of several developer organizations at once to get critical mass on information required to create a non-trivial application, and it would not be competitive if you didn't use undocumented APIs like Microsoft did.

Because of Microsoft's marketing style, the other development software vendors fell by the wayside one by one. Microsoft licensed their headers and framework to other compiler vendors, but never the latest version. Eventually the only viable compilers came directly from Microsoft at any cost. And you couldn't write software just with the information contained in the massive pile of refuse called the MSDN Library. It was full of deprecated (or should I say defecated toolkits that were so downlevel that the sample code rarely compiled without massive changes. You also had to buy piles of books, many of which costs more than $70 each. That wasn't even enough, if you were serious, you probably had to attend specific training from Microsoft or approved trainers.

Because of the proliferation of operating system versions, API version, and general DLL Hell, it was rarely possible for small developers to test their products economically on all variations of the target platforms and versions. And Microsoft kept the target moving at all times, complete with misdirections and promises of features and future support that vanished quietly from time to time.

We waited years for a certain version of Visual Studio to come out of Beta, and instead of actually releasing a stable product, they issued what I called the "forgiveness license" that said it was OK after all to ship products using what were previously beta components. The windows of opportunity shrunk to nothing and began overlapping in such a way that linear development was no longer sufficient and cascaded teams were necessary to stay viable in the face of streams of conflicting information and toolkits from Microsoft.

Also if you could not afford the $25,000 support contract, they would just laugh in your face if you asked them a technical question only they could answer in order to complete a product that only operated under their operating system.

Re:Windows by Errol+backfiring · 2010-01-22 23:17 · Score: 1

So it has really nothing to do with the fact that Microsoft forbids the vendors from making dual boot systems and that Windows must be pre-installed to make a computer's price competitive?

Most developers target Windows because it is the only thing they and their users know. And Microsoft wants to keep it that way.

--
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!

I Have This Pattern by Errol+backfiring · 2010-01-22 23:30 · Score: 1

Same here. I vowed never to install XP because of Windows Genuine Annoyance, and moved from 98SE to Xubuntu. Never regretted it even one day.

--
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!

Microsoft allowed, and even encouraged, piracy. by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-23 03:56 · Score: 0

That's exactly right. I have personal experience that Microsoft allowed, and even encouraged, piracy.

Poor students by Estragib · 2010-01-28 10:41 · Score: 1

Mr. Gates' grammar is perfectly valid. There is no hard and fast rule not to put prepositions at the end of the sentence. The aesthetics may displease you, but I'd rather you not force yours on your students, or us.

Slashdot Mirror

Microsoft Dodges Class Action In WGA Lawsuit

256 comments