As far as playing games. Most of the games I play are ID software games, and Star Wars type games that run PERFECTLY well on my Håckintosh Pentium 4. Jedi Academy, which my server runs on Linux. Quake 4, Doom 3, Halo, most of the types of games I play run well on Mac. If it doesn't run on my system, then I won't buy it. If the DVD doesn't play on my DVD player, I take it back. Use some common sense. Why do you believe the 'software' industry is the only exception for the common rules of other industries?
I use Photoshop on a daily basis on my Mac to fuel my hobby.
Ive never heard of 3d studio max. But I use Shake, Blender, Soundtrack Pro, and Final Cut, and iMovie for my hobbies. Most movie studios do too. But I don't believe any of those, but Blender run on windows. I couln't tell you since I havn't touched windows in 11 years.
The Biggest problem with windows is that it lacks blatent reliability and security. I can't have a machine that won't run weeks at a time without a reboot. This is what happens when you have a desktop market share that is totally illogical. I don't see %94 of the roads clogged with Pentos. If it were, then the guys driving the Volvos would be pissed because the roads are clogged full of broken down cars. Yes, Windows looks pretty, but not as pretty as Tiger, but has no equal footing to the security, and stability of a Unix/Posix based system.
As far as your last comment. Maybe you can tell that to Pixar, and see if they switch their some 2,000 node Linux based rendering farm to this so called "Windows". Yea, that will be the day.
/ In my opinion, vandalism is not the primary Wikipedia problem. Yes, it is embarrassing, but ultimately only a secondary symptom of the central problem: when you have an "encyclopedia that anyone can edit", anyone does edit it. /
If everyone is allowed to edit it, then who is a vandal? How do you DEFINE vandal by this standard? If you want to call a vandal, would not the vandal be the one that created the wiki, OR anyone that edits it? From my first impression of wikipedia, nobody is allowed to edit, or make changes. Especially if those changes link to, or involve opposing views, that involve strong factual information with reputable sources... pretty much censorship was my first impression.
Obviously you have never been to OSx86project.net. Most people there, as well as I have found ways to make OS X boot on AMD machines. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILPHeXC6VfY
The whole "It won't run on an AMD, or a beige box PC." is utter bullshit, and Apple knows it. Apple can make their platforms run on AMD processors without almost any effort on their part. Apple is so concerned about the TPM chip crap, that they are lagging behind on development. This is why we have not seen the Core 2 duo in their machines, much less, the AMD workhorses.
I can't count the number of times I have gone to a site on my Mac & Linux boxen and it gave me some windows garbage error. That it 'only' works under that ONE platform. Forget the other 5,000 platforms out there that share universal protocols and standards. It only works on that ONE platform, (a closed, and unfree one at that) because some idiot decided to code the site to work with THAT ONE PLATFORM, and not follow standards. So basicly what those sites are telling you is. "In order to use this site, you must go buy a $300-$400 i386 architecture machine, and it MUST have this OS installed on it."
Someone decided to stick proprietary plugins and codecs into a site, like "Active X" or some other off the wall language. Why not Python, or Perl? I believe these two run on almost EVERY platform out there. HP started loading their cheap-o, spyware filled PCs with Python about 3 years ago.
I believe modern day people that call themselves 'admins' or 'webmasters' are just people that came out of collage that don't even have a clue what they are doing, and pick up some 'off the shelf' 'marketed to them' windows software that another idiot told them to try.
This is why I have decided to allow ALL browsers into my site, BUT Internet Explorer. IE is the ONLY browser not allowed to go to our company site, as well as my personal sites. After looking at the web logs a few times over the past few months, it seems that an average of %74 or so of IE users go download Firefox after they visit the error message.
I don't make money off the software I pirate. I have gigs of Mac software, some old windows software, and tons of DVDs, and Music, but I don't make a dime off of them. 6 years is way to much for someone to go to jail for since he didn't hurt anyone. If the guy made that much money from pirating, I say more power to him.
I believe there are players out there that already play HD content for Linux (Correct me if I am wrong). I can already play HD content on my Mac without DRM, or copy protection. All the movies I put up on youtube are high def until youtube degrades the quality into a 'flash' format of some type.
Personally I believe that if Vista implements this broken player, it will slow the adoption of HD video, and the entertainment industries will once again be shooting themselves in the foot.
My girlfriend's son is 10, and he got his first cell phone from his mother this year. The phone is from Cingular. He has had 7 calls from strangers in one week since he got the phone. Apparently someone had the number before he got the phone is why he is getting these calls asking for someone named 'kalita' if that is how it is spelled. I told her to start treating them as harassment calls and report them to the authorities if they continue to call his number.
There is one problem with this. I WILL NOT buy a game if I cannot demo it, or try it, or copy it in some way. Blizzard has offered me no demo without signing over a CC number, therefore Blizzard will not get my business, it is this reason alone I have not bought WoW, nor played it, nor will I ever buy another Blizzard game.
A customer of mine bought FEAR some months ago. After finding out that the game will not run while AnyDVD was running, they became pissed and shipped it back claiming it was spyware (because it is). The online store refused to take it back, so they took them to small claims court, and sued for $500, and won.
People don't like to put up with that crap. It is annoying, and nothing short of highway robbery. People can only be pushed so far.
"Oh my god! You saw that new app they released on Linux? I can't wait for it to be ported to Windows!"?
This was actually true a few months ago. Then someone released a semi-working build of Evolution for Windows. (I have a copy) I'm going to wait until a good stable build is released before I start replacing outlook on my customer's machines. The ones that need it now, have been switched to Thunderbird.
G4 Sawtooth 450mhz updated to: 2.0ghz Powerlogix with, 2.0gb PC 133 ram, Radeon 9800 Pro 256mb, 80+120gb WD HDs running on ATA 66, + SATA 3.0 4 channel card running a 400gb Samsung + 16x Pioneer DVD+-RW. Tiger 10.4.7 / 19in Envision LCD.
This machine is 6 years old, and runs Quake 4, Doom 3, and Halo like a dream. I don't see any reason to upgrade to a G5 when I am running 86+ scores on Xbench. I probably won't upgrade for another year at least.
Yea, it has a 100mhz bus, and fights between resources, but if im doing one or 2 things at a time, it flies.
ISPs, and telcos should not limit what goes over their networks. With the idea you propose, it would lead to at least a %80 reduction in customer base. If a carrier were to cut off every uer, for every violation of their TOS, or every law broken there would be no customers left.
Imagine if an internet provider just one day cut off everyone that uses, or decided to use bittorrent. Wether the use was legitimate or not. Thats a %20 loss in their customer base. Lets stack the child stalkers on top of that. Thats another %10. Lets add Limewire on that as well. Thats %50. And Kazaa, %20. Not to mention that a lot of those were spam zombies. The carrier just lost it's entire user base. Who is left? No one. This is what happens when ISPs start trying to squeese people. They pop like a balloon, and go somewhere else that will let them use what they pay for, instead of using a closed in useless network.
Bellsouth has already had a %42 drop in it's userbase here since I have been in this town the past 3 years. I will not help anyone with a tiered connection, and will refer them to call Bellsouth. In turn they will get someone in India that they cannot understand (we live in Mississippi), and have to repeat themselves 3 times before the person can understand them, and visa versa. Usually when someone calls somewhere, they want to reach someone from their own country, and not someone who can't even speak their language.
By the time they get off the phone, they call back and ask for help again. This is when I suggest the local Cable company (net neutral) that has local staff, and employs local people.
If I buy a car, steal a car, or a car is given to me, the dealer cannot tell me I can't drive/own it anymore. The dealer cannot revoke my license. You are talking about copyright, not licenses. If I buy something from someone, they can't just up and say I can't use it anymore. They have no right. If I sell a computer, or give a computer away. I can't just up and tell the customer/person they can't use it anymore. They would laugh in my face. That is my point. Software is no different. The government is a 3rd party issue relating to the car, but not to the highway. The government can't tell me that I can't own a car, or not drive it on my own property.
Ok. Just because someone agrees to install spyware without reading the EULA that makes it not spwyare? That doesn't make much sense. Spyware is Spyware, wether you agree to install it or not. If most people knew, and read the EULA, I am pretty sure most of them would not be dumb enough to install it.
No there are no laws protecting licenses, there are only laws protecting those who believe in copyright. If you buy 10 copies, and put it on 10 computers, then that is it. You are within legal boundries. Lincenses you don't have to keep track of. Microsoft is not the law, and the law doesn't work for Microsoft.
There was a story here on Slashdot a few weeks back on this subject where Microsoft tried to extort money from a guy that had all legal copies, and they wanted him to detail his so called 'licenses'. He refused, and Microsoft backed down. As for me. Im a Independant, Christian, GPL loving Marxist, Anarchist, Extremeist, Software/Music/Movie Pirate, that runs OS X & Slackware Linux, Symbian, and Palm OS, and the Flock Browser. (No VxWorks for me) My car's chip actually runs Linux too believe it or not.:)
Ok, if MS destorys just MS data, that means that the software ceases to function reguardless if it were harmed or not, I see your point here. How could one remedy this (current install) without buying windows, I guess is a better way for me to ask this?
Yes, and since then software is racked on shelves for people to buy. People have no idea that they can get better things for free anymore. Its sad the way Bill Gates, and capitalist facists ruined software.
BTW, Thanks for your contribution to mozdev. The world needs more OSS developers.:)
Oh, to get updates. Ok. That wasn't made clear anywhere in the article, nor was it mentioned in a prior post. Luckily it is possible for Windows Update, and it's service to be removed from the CD before deployment with nlite, and other such freely available software.
A properly loaded, and protected machine should not need updates at all, unless something terrible happens. Especially if you are not networked in any way, form, or manner.
They are actually morally right and you are wrong.
How is this so? I don't understand. Is it because they own some copyright? Does that make them right? Does being a copyright holder make you immune to spyware laws and litigation?
If you have 40K worth of windows software, you better make sure to buy that 100USD copy of MS Windows, my friend.
So because I have somthing on my machine, which is only a part of a working whole, that gives them the right to destroy what they want, even if it is NOT theirs? This is like saying the RIAA has the right to hack your machine because you have mp3s on your drive.
Just because a company is found guilty of anti-competitive practices, it does not give you a right to infringe on copyrights and violate licenses.
Research your history. Licenses don't matter. If you buy 200 copies. And put it on 200 machines. the License means nothing since you paid for it. There are no laws to protect the license philosophy since it is just a idea... Kind of like your facist liberal beliefs.
My bet is that MS is actually morally and legally right here. Explain Please. If you pirate, then they are just as much as a vandal as you if they destroy your data. I believe its 50/50. Not 0/100. Either that, or your logic is distorted.
If I am not mistaken, Microsoft was the one who INVENTED the idea of copyrighting software, and selling it. Before Microsoft we just passed software around, and it wasn't illegal. You were probably born after that, and are too young to know about it. But that changed when Bill Gates got rich. So you are telling me that becuase Bill Gates started the idea of copyrights on software, changes how people obtain software, then lobbies to have the law changed in his favor, the pirates are the criminals? Why? Becuase Bill Gates says so? Because Bill Gates has this 'copyright', and it gives him unlimited power to get vigilante all over your box, reguardless if he is wrong?
Mod me down if you wish. Ill remember it as well when your time comes. The law is the law, no matter what I, or you believe. You say hes right, I say hes wrong. But because the law says I can't do this, or that, doesn't make it LEGAL for him to respond in an illegal manner.
Copyrights don't give you power to break the law. No matter what philosophy you believe.
It also says that Microsoft can modify the contract at any time. But it doesn't say that I can't modify the contract.
So what you are saying is that because I don't want something on my machine that came later without warning, that I can't use something I paid for? What about those that don't even have XP networked, or routed to a internet connection? Is Microsoft going to snail mail them a CD?
You make absolutely no sense in your illogical statements.
So just because you 'believe' in 'copyright' you have the authority to break the law as well, and install spyware on someone's PC?
I am going to simplify what you are saying. "I broke into your house and stole your guitar. So that gives you the right to break into my office, and burn it down." To my knowledge vigilante justice does not work too well in a court of law.
I don't know what delusional world you live in. What makes you think just because you own a copyright, and have a god complex that you have power over other people's property?
This is exactly why software patents should not exist. It makes people think they have some kind of power over others.
Imagine I sold you a peice of software. I told you you HAD to install spyware that phones home to us, and lists all the software installed on your machine. If you don't install it, I will disable your ability to run said software.
Lets say for a tick that your OS is pirated. Lets say you have $40,000 worth of software you BOUGHT. If Microsoft turns windows off, and you loose said software, then Microsoft is guilty of vandalizm, and by that THEY have broken the law.
WPA, by current law is illegal. It is spyware. And lets not forget we are talking about a company that has commited over 8,500 crimes, not to mention a current monopoly that has been found guilty of Anti-Trust violations, since it's start in the 1970s.
Is this a question of who is wrong and who is right? My bet is that that the law is not in favor of Microsoft on this one.
Slashdot Mirror
That doesn't work. You have to have some proprietary application to use the music.
No thanks. I like to stick to standards that WORK.
As far as playing games. Most of the games I play are ID software games, and Star Wars type games that run PERFECTLY well on my Håckintosh Pentium 4. Jedi Academy, which my server runs on Linux. Quake 4, Doom 3, Halo, most of the types of games I play run well on Mac. If it doesn't run on my system, then I won't buy it. If the DVD doesn't play on my DVD player, I take it back. Use some common sense. Why do you believe the 'software' industry is the only exception for the common rules of other industries?
I use Photoshop on a daily basis on my Mac to fuel my hobby.
Ive never heard of 3d studio max. But I use Shake, Blender, Soundtrack Pro, and Final Cut, and iMovie for my hobbies. Most movie studios do too. But I don't believe any of those, but Blender run on windows. I couln't tell you since I havn't touched windows in 11 years.
The Biggest problem with windows is that it lacks blatent reliability and security. I can't have a machine that won't run weeks at a time without a reboot. This is what happens when you have a desktop market share that is totally illogical. I don't see %94 of the roads clogged with Pentos. If it were, then the guys driving the Volvos would be pissed because the roads are clogged full of broken down cars. Yes, Windows looks pretty, but not as pretty as Tiger, but has no equal footing to the security, and stability of a Unix/Posix based system.
As far as your last comment. Maybe you can tell that to Pixar, and see if they switch their some 2,000 node Linux based rendering farm to this so called "Windows". Yea, that will be the day.
I thought it was called a 'Fry Hole'. But Steven Hawking wanted to call it a 'Hawking Hole'.
Maybe you should try Slackware, or xBSD.
My OSx86 box runs perfect on a Core 2 Extreme. Wanna bench?
/ In my opinion, vandalism is not the primary Wikipedia problem. Yes, it is embarrassing, but ultimately only a secondary symptom of the central problem: when you have an "encyclopedia that anyone can edit", anyone does edit it. /
If everyone is allowed to edit it, then who is a vandal? How do you DEFINE vandal by this standard? If you want to call a vandal, would not the vandal be the one that created the wiki, OR anyone that edits it? From my first impression of wikipedia, nobody is allowed to edit, or make changes. Especially if those changes link to, or involve opposing views, that involve strong factual information with reputable sources... pretty much censorship was my first impression.
Obviously you have never been to OSx86project.net. Most people there, as well as I have found ways to make OS X boot on AMD machines. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILPHeXC6VfY
The whole "It won't run on an AMD, or a beige box PC." is utter bullshit, and Apple knows it. Apple can make their platforms run on AMD processors without almost any effort on their part. Apple is so concerned about the TPM chip crap, that they are lagging behind on development. This is why we have not seen the Core 2 duo in their machines, much less, the AMD workhorses.
I can't count the number of times I have gone to a site on my Mac & Linux boxen and it gave me some windows garbage error. That it 'only' works under that ONE platform. Forget the other 5,000 platforms out there that share universal protocols and standards. It only works on that ONE platform, (a closed, and unfree one at that) because some idiot decided to code the site to work with THAT ONE PLATFORM, and not follow standards. So basicly what those sites are telling you is. "In order to use this site, you must go buy a $300-$400 i386 architecture machine, and it MUST have this OS installed on it."
Someone decided to stick proprietary plugins and codecs into a site, like "Active X" or some other off the wall language. Why not Python, or Perl? I believe these two run on almost EVERY platform out there. HP started loading their cheap-o, spyware filled PCs with Python about 3 years ago.
I believe modern day people that call themselves 'admins' or 'webmasters' are just people that came out of collage that don't even have a clue what they are doing, and pick up some 'off the shelf' 'marketed to them' windows software that another idiot told them to try.
This is why I have decided to allow ALL browsers into my site, BUT Internet Explorer. IE is the ONLY browser not allowed to go to our company site, as well as my personal sites. After looking at the web logs a few times over the past few months, it seems that an average of %74 or so of IE users go download Firefox after they visit the error message.
I don't make money off the software I pirate. I have gigs of Mac software, some old windows software, and tons of DVDs, and Music, but I don't make a dime off of them. 6 years is way to much for someone to go to jail for since he didn't hurt anyone. If the guy made that much money from pirating, I say more power to him.
In Soviet Russia, Software pirate you!
I believe there are players out there that already play HD content for Linux (Correct me if I am wrong). I can already play HD content on my Mac without DRM, or copy protection. All the movies I put up on youtube are high def until youtube degrades the quality into a 'flash' format of some type.
Personally I believe that if Vista implements this broken player, it will slow the adoption of HD video, and the entertainment industries will once again be shooting themselves in the foot.
My girlfriend's son is 10, and he got his first cell phone from his mother this year. The phone is from Cingular. He has had 7 calls from strangers in one week since he got the phone. Apparently someone had the number before he got the phone is why he is getting these calls asking for someone named 'kalita' if that is how it is spelled. I told her to start treating them as harassment calls and report them to the authorities if they continue to call his number.
I believe it is time to call DVD Jon, and have him do his magic again.
There is one problem with this. I WILL NOT buy a game if I cannot demo it, or try it, or copy it in some way. Blizzard has offered me no demo without signing over a CC number, therefore Blizzard will not get my business, it is this reason alone I have not bought WoW, nor played it, nor will I ever buy another Blizzard game.
A customer of mine bought FEAR some months ago. After finding out that the game will not run while AnyDVD was running, they became pissed and shipped it back claiming it was spyware (because it is). The online store refused to take it back, so they took them to small claims court, and sued for $500, and won.
People don't like to put up with that crap. It is annoying, and nothing short of highway robbery. People can only be pushed so far.
"Oh my god! You saw that new app they released on Linux? I can't wait for it to be ported to Windows!"?
h p9 6,39202478,00.htm
This was actually true a few months ago. Then someone released a semi-working build of Evolution for Windows. (I have a copy) I'm going to wait until a good stable build is released before I start replacing outlook on my customer's machines. The ones that need it now, have been switched to Thunderbird.
http://evolution-win32.sourceforge.net/download.p
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/windows/0,390203
"I feel it's time for Linux to grow up and find some kind of common ground with the closed source community"
I believe it is time for the closed source community to grow up and find some common ground with Linux.
In Soviet Russia the mp3s will pirate you.
G4 Sawtooth 450mhz updated to: 2.0ghz Powerlogix with, 2.0gb PC 133 ram, Radeon 9800 Pro 256mb, 80+120gb WD HDs running on ATA 66, + SATA 3.0 4 channel card running a 400gb Samsung + 16x Pioneer DVD+-RW. Tiger 10.4.7 / 19in Envision LCD.
This machine is 6 years old, and runs Quake 4, Doom 3, and Halo like a dream. I don't see any reason to upgrade to a G5 when I am running 86+ scores on Xbench. I probably won't upgrade for another year at least.
Yea, it has a 100mhz bus, and fights between resources, but if im doing one or 2 things at a time, it flies.
http://www.kore-net.com/office/sawtooth.jpg
ISPs, and telcos should not limit what goes over their networks. With the idea you propose, it would lead to at least a %80 reduction in customer base. If a carrier were to cut off every uer, for every violation of their TOS, or every law broken there would be no customers left.
Imagine if an internet provider just one day cut off everyone that uses, or decided to use bittorrent. Wether the use was legitimate or not. Thats a %20 loss in their customer base. Lets stack the child stalkers on top of that. Thats another %10. Lets add Limewire on that as well. Thats %50. And Kazaa, %20. Not to mention that a lot of those were spam zombies. The carrier just lost it's entire user base. Who is left? No one. This is what happens when ISPs start trying to squeese people. They pop like a balloon, and go somewhere else that will let them use what they pay for, instead of using a closed in useless network.
Bellsouth has already had a %42 drop in it's userbase here since I have been in this town the past 3 years. I will not help anyone with a tiered connection, and will refer them to call Bellsouth. In turn they will get someone in India that they cannot understand (we live in Mississippi), and have to repeat themselves 3 times before the person can understand them, and visa versa. Usually when someone calls somewhere, they want to reach someone from their own country, and not someone who can't even speak their language.
By the time they get off the phone, they call back and ask for help again. This is when I suggest the local Cable company (net neutral) that has local staff, and employs local people.
Do you not remember the first one? Where the screen read "System Failure" as Neo locked it up?
If I buy a car, steal a car, or a car is given to me, the dealer cannot tell me I can't drive/own it anymore. The dealer cannot revoke my license. You are talking about copyright, not licenses. If I buy something from someone, they can't just up and say I can't use it anymore. They have no right. If I sell a computer, or give a computer away. I can't just up and tell the customer/person they can't use it anymore. They would laugh in my face. That is my point. Software is no different. The government is a 3rd party issue relating to the car, but not to the highway. The government can't tell me that I can't own a car, or not drive it on my own property.
Ok. Just because someone agrees to install spyware without reading the EULA that makes it not spwyare? That doesn't make much sense. Spyware is Spyware, wether you agree to install it or not. If most people knew, and read the EULA, I am pretty sure most of them would not be dumb enough to install it.
:)
:)
No there are no laws protecting licenses, there are only laws protecting those who believe in copyright. If you buy 10 copies, and put it on 10 computers, then that is it. You are within legal boundries. Lincenses you don't have to keep track of. Microsoft is not the law, and the law doesn't work for Microsoft.
There was a story here on Slashdot a few weeks back on this subject where Microsoft tried to extort money from a guy that had all legal copies, and they wanted him to detail his so called 'licenses'. He refused, and Microsoft backed down. As for me. Im a Independant, Christian, GPL loving Marxist, Anarchist, Extremeist, Software/Music/Movie Pirate, that runs OS X & Slackware Linux, Symbian, and Palm OS, and the Flock Browser. (No VxWorks for me) My car's chip actually runs Linux too believe it or not.
Ok, if MS destorys just MS data, that means that the software ceases to function reguardless if it were harmed or not, I see your point here. How could one remedy this (current install) without buying windows, I guess is a better way for me to ask this?
Yes, and since then software is racked on shelves for people to buy. People have no idea that they can get better things for free anymore. Its sad the way Bill Gates, and capitalist facists ruined software.
BTW, Thanks for your contribution to mozdev. The world needs more OSS developers.
Oh, to get updates. Ok. That wasn't made clear anywhere in the article, nor was it mentioned in a prior post. Luckily it is possible for Windows Update, and it's service to be removed from the CD before deployment with nlite, and other such freely available software. A properly loaded, and protected machine should not need updates at all, unless something terrible happens. Especially if you are not networked in any way, form, or manner.
They are actually morally right and you are wrong.
How is this so? I don't understand. Is it because they own some copyright? Does that make them right? Does being a copyright holder make you immune to spyware laws and litigation?
If you have 40K worth of windows software, you better make sure to buy that 100USD copy of MS Windows, my friend.
So because I have somthing on my machine, which is only a part of a working whole, that gives them the right to destroy what they want, even if it is NOT theirs? This is like saying the RIAA has the right to hack your machine because you have mp3s on your drive.
Just because a company is found guilty of anti-competitive practices, it does not give you a right to infringe on copyrights and violate licenses.
Research your history. Licenses don't matter. If you buy 200 copies. And put it on 200 machines. the License means nothing since you paid for it. There are no laws to protect the license philosophy since it is just a idea... Kind of like your facist liberal beliefs.
My bet is that MS is actually morally and legally right here.
Explain Please. If you pirate, then they are just as much as a vandal as you if they destroy your data. I believe its 50/50. Not 0/100. Either that, or your logic is distorted.
If I am not mistaken, Microsoft was the one who INVENTED the idea of copyrighting software, and selling it. Before Microsoft we just passed software around, and it wasn't illegal. You were probably born after that, and are too young to know about it. But that changed when Bill Gates got rich. So you are telling me that becuase Bill Gates started the idea of copyrights on software, changes how people obtain software, then lobbies to have the law changed in his favor, the pirates are the criminals? Why? Becuase Bill Gates says so? Because Bill Gates has this 'copyright', and it gives him unlimited power to get vigilante all over your box, reguardless if he is wrong?
Mod me down if you wish. Ill remember it as well when your time comes. The law is the law, no matter what I, or you believe. You say hes right, I say hes wrong. But because the law says I can't do this, or that, doesn't make it LEGAL for him to respond in an illegal manner.
Copyrights don't give you power to break the law. No matter what philosophy you believe.
It also says that Microsoft can modify the contract at any time. But it doesn't say that I can't modify the contract.
So what you are saying is that because I don't want something on my machine that came later without warning, that I can't use something I paid for? What about those that don't even have XP networked, or routed to a internet connection? Is Microsoft going to snail mail them a CD?
You make absolutely no sense in your illogical statements.
So just because you 'believe' in 'copyright' you have the authority to break the law as well, and install spyware on someone's PC?
I am going to simplify what you are saying.
"I broke into your house and stole your guitar. So that gives you the right to break into my office, and burn it down." To my knowledge vigilante justice does not work too well in a court of law.
I don't know what delusional world you live in. What makes you think just because you own a copyright, and have a god complex that you have power over other people's property?
This is exactly why software patents should not exist. It makes people think they have some kind of power over others.
Imagine I sold you a peice of software. I told you you HAD to install spyware that phones home to us, and lists all the software installed on your machine. If you don't install it, I will disable your ability to run said software.
Lets say for a tick that your OS is pirated. Lets say you have $40,000 worth of software you BOUGHT. If Microsoft turns windows off, and you loose said software, then Microsoft is guilty of vandalizm, and by that THEY have broken the law.
WPA, by current law is illegal. It is spyware. And lets not forget we are talking about a company that has commited over 8,500 crimes, not to mention a current monopoly that has been found guilty of Anti-Trust violations, since it's start in the 1970s.
Is this a question of who is wrong and who is right? My bet is that that the law is not in favor of Microsoft on this one.