It is not illegal - OEM's can do what they what. The GPL just restricts them from ripping off open source software and using it as their own and selling it (like MS perhaps does).
This all leads to the 'lock-in' and makes the user who pays good money (i.e. YOU) have no choice.
If you are happy to run licenced software that you never own, and have a computer that you do not control (the software controls what you can do), sobeit - but there is no way you can use that argument to support MS products vs GNU/Linux - not in a million years.
Trying to herd cats is one thing, being a sheep is another.
...here is that MS Vista GETS bundled with OEM machines. Users who don't know better just get it, and in most cases think a computer is MS Windows (sad state of affairs really - shows the real level of intelligence of the average person).
If a GNU/Linux distro was bundled with the machine, the user still wouldn't know any difference, but GNU/Linux sales(whatever they are!?)) would be up.
Fortunately moves are being made to stop the 'bundle MS' (i.e. MS Windows tax) with new computers, and allow the purchaser to select an OS. That at least makes them aware that at least there is far superior OS than the MS offerings.
"Not sure what kind of speakers Nostradamus may have been using, tho."
But it is only modern man, hundreds of years later that are looking at Nostradamus' 'predictions' and trying to make them equal events that have happened (or will happen next week, etc.).
All Nostradamus did was write down his 'dreams and visions' in a vague 'blog of the day' type thing. They are pretty obstuse and nebulous to say the least (and written in a very old language that still can be taken in meaning very many ways).
Well, what can you say? I would say - tough shit. Until this gets stopped, users have to be hurt (even though it is a MS issue really). If MS deem their customers to be idiots (which they do) then what more can you expect?
Is MS windows boxes that are comprised and doing this - you can see this where the spam mails get 'chinese whispered from one box to another and end up incoherent (to say the least).
Any ISP should/could get suspicious of thousands of mails sent from one 'home user' source at anytime. But when you have thousands of 'users' doing the same thing, it gets lost in the noise.
One simple solution is:
if account == home user & running MS
if mails sent > 10 per minute
block it
fi fi
... personally MS have lost the plot and got far too way into trying to keep the monopoly lock-ins and have really lost their way with what a computer (and OS) is supposed to do.
Second. They are shit scared somebody can interoperate with MS systems (i.e. better systems), so make it as obscure and nebulous as possible (and it appears that happens internally to MS Corp too).
Third. NO WAY are you going to be able to copy this, so make every legal owner go through hoops and rings to get the thing to work (if that is at all possible) [again touched on many times in here].
Fourth. Ttoally ignore security as the aim is to get as many people 'hooked' on the MS crack as possible (this itself spawned a whole new industry in anti-virus/anti-trojan/anti-malware,...) and then literally have to 'innovate'... oops, I mean buy an AV company to bundle in their own 'protection'. Ha.
Actually you have a point. If MS _can_ update system files on a users computer WITHOUT any interaction with the user, let alone the users consent, then legally (I guess. IANAL), you could use this as admissible evidence that MS products can be and are being altered autonomously.
Then how can you (the prosecuter) prove the user actually installed/downloaded anything by their own free will?
We all pay for (either direct from home or indirect from work/wifi hotspots) etc. for Internet connection.
Why should we then [sic] pay EXTRA to visit a site that relies on adverts or be expected to view these adverts to justify being there?
We don't - we have already paid our due, and by blindly visiting a site that EXPECTS a random visitor to pay more is an obscene assumption when it isn't announced (imagine walking into a shop only to find to have to pay to get out!).
The solution is advert driven web sites that exist from advert revenue should be made to have a place holder index page that has the question:
"This is an advert funded site - if you agree to this, then enter and agree to view the adverts - if you disagree, please move on."
Make this a requirement for ALL advert driven sites.
They will soon go out of business, unless the adverts are relevant, non-intrusive, and 'nice'.
IBM are for it as they do not persue IP patents but could. MS need it as they steal (innovate) and their R&D fund gets hammered every time they steal from somebody.
So, the two for it, but both for an opposite reason - IBM to protect silly fleas, MS to protect and try to limit the damages caused to them by their usual business practices.
What also needs addressing here is the ethical way this was abused by MS. OK, it does now seem MS are exempt to be held accountable for their unethical and immoral behaviour - but after Enron and virtually every Company worldwide had to go and improve and PROVE ethical behavour of all employees, Companies that TRADE with unethical companies should be punished also.
So, all those that did take the bribes, all those that did the dirty work for MS here should be held accountable.
Doesn't anybody else find it strange that MS and it's allies can launch an attck like this that is totally unethical (maybe in the rules, but it is still unethical and immoral) to do this?
I don't think Microsoft Partners have a say to be honest - they either have to adhere to MS [un]ethical way of working or they become ex-Microsoft Partners.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and also no tie-in with the Devil and what that will entail in the near future.
The new anti-pirate mechanism worked exactly as planned. DON'T copy music, especially in your underpants.
It is not illegal - OEM's can do what they what. The GPL just restricts them from ripping off open source software and using it as their own and selling it (like MS perhaps does).
This all leads to the 'lock-in' and makes the user who pays good money (i.e. YOU) have no choice.
If you are happy to run licenced software that you never own, and have a computer that you do not control (the software controls what you can do), sobeit - but there is no way you can use that argument to support MS products vs GNU/Linux - not in a million years. Trying to herd cats is one thing, being a sheep is another.
"However, one thing has kept XP on my system (dual-boot)-- drivers."
I think you have just discovered the MS lock-in tactics and why you HAVE to use MS products.
The easy way is to stop buying products that lock you and make you, as a customer, have NO CHOICE.
...here is that MS Vista GETS bundled with OEM machines. Users who don't know better just get it, and in most cases think a computer is MS Windows (sad state of affairs really - shows the real level of intelligence of the average person).
If a GNU/Linux distro was bundled with the machine, the user still wouldn't know any difference, but GNU/Linux sales(whatever they are!?)) would be up.
Fortunately moves are being made to stop the 'bundle MS' (i.e. MS Windows tax) with new computers, and allow the purchaser to select an OS. That at least makes them aware that at least there is far superior OS than the MS offerings.
"Not sure what kind of speakers Nostradamus may have been using, tho."
But it is only modern man, hundreds of years later that are looking at Nostradamus' 'predictions' and trying to make them equal events that have happened (or will happen next week, etc.).
All Nostradamus did was write down his 'dreams and visions' in a vague 'blog of the day' type thing. They are pretty obstuse and nebulous to say the least (and written in a very old language that still can be taken in meaning very many ways).
He is the best (I am subscribed to his mail shots). LOL. Great story.
... and God created light. Then he could see there was nothing. (Spike Milligan).
Move along please - nothing to se here.
Well, what can you say? I would say - tough shit. Until this gets stopped, users have to be hurt (even though it is a MS issue really). If MS deem their customers to be idiots (which they do) then what more can you expect?
Is MS windows boxes that are comprised and doing this - you can see this where the spam mails get 'chinese whispered from one box to another and end up incoherent (to say the least).
Any ISP should/could get suspicious of thousands of mails sent from one 'home user' source at anytime. But when you have thousands of 'users' doing the same thing, it gets lost in the noise.
One simple solution is:
if account == home user & running MS
if mails sent > 10 per minute
block it
fi
fi
etc.
Very easy.
I was serious - MS wasn't.
If that was the case they would have installed Ubuntu.
... personally MS have lost the plot and got far too way into trying to keep the monopoly lock-ins and have really lost their way with what a computer (and OS) is supposed to do.
...) and then literally have to 'innovate'... oops, I mean buy an AV company to bundle in their own 'protection'. Ha.
First instance [touched on many times in here] DRM. Visit here --> http://badvista.fsf.org/what-s-wrong-with-microsoft-windows-vista
Second. They are shit scared somebody can interoperate with MS systems (i.e. better systems), so make it as obscure and nebulous as possible (and it appears that happens internally to MS Corp too).
Third. NO WAY are you going to be able to copy this, so make every legal owner go through hoops and rings to get the thing to work (if that is at all possible) [again touched on many times in here].
Fourth. Ttoally ignore security as the aim is to get as many people 'hooked' on the MS crack as possible (this itself spawned a whole new industry in anti-virus/anti-trojan/anti-malware,
Fifth. Visit http://www.lamlaw.com/tiki-index.php
I think what we are seeing here a dying Elephant. And it is their own fault.
Great stuff... lol.
...minesweeper on Vista. It takes like 4 hours a click to actually do anything.
... great firewall of China.
Actually you have a point. If MS _can_ update system files on a users computer WITHOUT any interaction with the user, let alone the users consent, then legally (I guess. IANAL), you could use this as admissible evidence that MS products can be and are being altered autonomously.
Then how can you (the prosecuter) prove the user actually installed/downloaded anything by their own free will?
We all pay for (either direct from home or indirect from work/wifi hotspots) etc. for Internet connection.
Why should we then [sic] pay EXTRA to visit a site that relies on adverts or be expected to view these adverts to justify being there?
We don't - we have already paid our due, and by blindly visiting a site that EXPECTS a random visitor to pay more is an obscene assumption when it isn't announced (imagine walking into a shop only to find to have to pay to get out!).
The solution is advert driven web sites that exist from advert revenue should be made to have a place holder index page that has the question:
"This is an advert funded site - if you agree to this, then enter and agree to view the adverts - if you disagree, please move on."
Make this a requirement for ALL advert driven sites.
They will soon go out of business, unless the adverts are relevant, non-intrusive, and 'nice'.
IBM are for it as they do not persue IP patents but could. MS need it as they steal (innovate) and their R&D fund gets hammered every time they steal from somebody.
So, the two for it, but both for an opposite reason - IBM to protect silly fleas, MS to protect and try to limit the damages caused to them by their usual business practices.
What also needs addressing here is the ethical way this was abused by MS. OK, it does now seem MS are exempt to be held accountable for their unethical and immoral behaviour - but after Enron and virtually every Company worldwide had to go and improve and PROVE ethical behavour of all employees, Companies that TRADE with unethical companies should be punished also.
So, all those that did take the bribes, all those that did the dirty work for MS here should be held accountable.
Doesn't anybody else find it strange that MS and it's allies can launch an attck like this that is totally unethical (maybe in the rules, but it is still unethical and immoral) to do this?
Detecting it still needs the 'detection done'. Then if that is done, we still need a fix for all the various cancers that abound.
So, there is a new way to detect cancer - how many people here actually get tested for cancer at anytime?
My guess is ZERO
Maybe he is trying to break the world record for the longest search party?
I don't think Microsoft Partners have a say to be honest - they either have to adhere to MS [un]ethical way of working or they become ex-Microsoft Partners.
... would have to vote YES for ooxml at a cost of $25,000 to join up.
I would rather shut down.