Microsoft is not the police and no they have no right to check, at least not without your explicit permission. The police are enforcement agents put in place by publicly elected officials and they are checked for balance by the court system and the laws of the nation we live in. These individuals are not permitted to enter your home (as your computer is an extension of your home) and search you for stolen goods. Even the police can't do that even if they KNOW themselves that you are in possession of stolen goods. It is about proving it. Another check and balance is by the court system to bring to trail those they believe they can win a case against. They are only allowed to charge you with crimes they can actually prove. They are not allowed to say that they think you are and that they can collect any information they want during that time.
This process is akin to the government taping your telephone against your wishes and collecting information. It is akin to the phone company taping your phone and listening to see if you commit crimes and then dropping your service. It doesn't happen. The phone company doesn't observe your private conversations even if they think you might be committing a crime because established law and procedures leaves that sort of police action in the hands of the police selected by those agents put in place by the elected officials.
This is a police action, period. It is a violation of your privacy and to allow them to monitor you is an attack on your home.
You gave them information when you activated Windows, you gave them information when you validated your copy for updates but when you told them no to the WGN program and others you told them it was not acceptable to send any information back about your computer.
When are you guys going to get it through your head. You are relinquishing your privacy and that of your children's future privacy because you want to win some obviously flawed debate about whether it hurts you.
This is infact, Orwellian and it is extremely bad practice. When you say no, it means no. It doesn't mean do it anyway because no one can prove it and no one can stop it.
It is a violation of privacy and Microsoft is sending information back to their location for storage or not against the wishes of an individual.
If you break the law it is still up to the police and the courts to follow legal procedure to catch you and prove you broke the law and then to punish you commensurate with the proven charges. Even if you steal something and they know you stole it they can't do anything about it till they prove it. Part of that process is to get the legal search warrants and other court orders to permit them to do this.
Microsoft is a civil organization which is usurping the rules of law that were well established. In fact, they are effectively searching everyone's home every time to prove they are not in possession of stolen goods. The government can't do that. Microsoft should not either.
Any information sent to them without our express permission is a violation of our privacy whether they store it or not. It is not permissible for them to blatantly flaunt in our faces the fact that there is no one there to stop them and if you try you won't have the resources to do so.
Again people, remember the computer you have is an extension of your home. It is not a playground for microsoft to do what they want. Would you allow them to come into your home to inventory your belongings and then make you account for all those things you may purchase after the fact? Would you let them check on you any time they choose? Hell no. You would never let anyone into your home to do that. So, why on fucking hearth are you letting them search your computer to inventory your system to send private information back to their offices? Is it because it isn't an inconvenience to you to allow them to do this? Because you have no recourse to stop them?
So, you say that it doesn't hurt you to have them to enter your home and search it and report back to their offices? So, then would it hurt you to allow the government to do this if they could do it in such a non-invasive way? How about putting hidden camera's in say 20% of homes and no one knows they are there so you have at least an 80% chance of not being spied on!?! Would that be acceptable to you? Hell, 1 if 5 chance of being someone that is observed by the government. Once you got used to it, wouldn't it be acceptable to have the government then say 40% and up it over the next 10 years to 60% and then all the way? You would have become accustomed to having the government spy on you?
I think you understand what I'm getting at. This is the same thing. You would not let the government do such a thing, and even some people feel cameras in public are a violation of our privacy.
Microsoft is not the government and they have no rights to do what they are doing. They should not be collecting any information unless you explicitly permit it.
As I have said in other posts. This is about them collecting as many pieces in their databases as possible. Having this information gives them a lot of leverage.
Have you heard about how the patent office has claimed that file sharing software is a threat to national security? How about a monopoly power that has control over 90% of the worlds computers able to go into your computer and home unchecked by any sort of mechanism that is designed for checks and balances? You think that is less a threat to national security than it is to allow people to share information between 1 or 2 or more party members. Either the comments by the patent office are totally ludicrous or no one is willing to accept that this sort of unchecked behavior by a company in control of 90% of the worlds computers is a threat to national security.
Foolish is what Ballmer is made of. He claimed to financial analysts that the caution on Vista sales is for at least 2 reasons: 1) corporate pricing was too low, and 2) piracy.
This was stated by him in the past couple days, if not today.
Both are flawed. on item 1. Windows Vista is very expensive. Giving forecasts on certain pricing to corporate is what companies do. They forecast on those prices so that is really a moot point unless corporate just isn't purchasing. Then the low cost would make a difference, as they feel they should have made it higher so that the lack of corporate sales didn't affect the bottom line so much.
On item 2. According to Microsoft pirating is impossible under Vista. Well, even if that is about 3 months outdated it still is an issue that needs to be addressed. What is the average number of pirated installs vs. legit installs of Vista. Are people choosing to pirate instead of purchasing? Is it easy for the average person to pirate Vista and is the future potential of loosing activation worth it to the average user?
The answer to those is unknown so Microsoft can't be using that as a legitimate reason why their forecasts are so far off. Even if it was EASY to pirate Vista (which Microsoft said 3 months ago was impossible) it would have to be much easier than to pirate XP, which although is semi-easy to pirate if you can get the corporate product key or you can snatch a key from some unsuspecting person it is possible to get locked out by virtue of the WGA/WGN spyware programs.
So, essentially it isn't possible to claim that corporate pricing and pirating is the cause of Ballmer's and Microsoft's woes. It has to be something else. That something else, at least to me, is pretty obvious. It is the restrictions on use, the violation of privacy (constantly claiming you are a thief -- incessant checking of your workstation using spyware programs (WGA/WGN)), the high cost to the consumer (parts as well as purchase price of Vista).
When I talk to people, and I do so every day as I own a computer repair shop, I hear that they want nothing to do with Vista. I even have people that bring in the computers they bought with Vista on them to have them wiped and to have XP installed instead. The reasons they give are the same I read about day in and day out on the web. Microsoft accuses them of being a thief, Microsoft is spying on them, the technology in it will interfere, the costs to upgrade are too high, the cost of the OS is excessive, there's no compelling reason to upgrade. Vista is just a pretty interface on top of a massive spyware program.
I'd have to say that Ballmer is very foolish and to try to pawn off on the financial community two very flawed reasons for Vistas lack of success is just pathetic. Microsoft is on a downhill slide. The fact that Linux and OSX just might be made valid viable attractive has to be affecting every thing they do. On top of that they have known for a couple years that Microsoft would not see growth anywhere near what it has seen in the past. I think one could forecast some very serious financial problems with Microsoft in the next couple years and that they need to get people switched over to Vista so they can better control your computer and purchases so that the major stock holders have time to divest themselves and reinvest in other arenas.
Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer are killing Microsoft. Every DRM/CRM implementation makes Windows a lot less attractive to everyone. Every attempt to monitor our use is looked upon as a violation of our privacy (which it is) and is an accusation that we are a thief or will be a thief sometime down the road. When they don't care that they are invading our homes we realize they are too far gone to even consider giving a second chance. When they can use their monopoly power to extort business, other countries, and private citizens then that's the time everyone must look up and say "no". They know they have you by the short ones because they know that i
Their active x control installation has nothing to do with the WGN installation and the cancellation of it. The "activex" control is just the tool that allows them to invoke the WGA process. Even if you agreed to install it, you didn't agree to let Microsoft (via the cancellation of the installation of a different program) send information about your computer back to their location. When you choose to cancel you choose to NOT allow them to collect and redirect that info to their location. That's the purpose of cancellation.
The use of WGA/WGN is a violation of your privacy and it is similar to a police action. Your computer is an extension of your home and to allow Microsoft to put WGN on your computer is akin to allowing them to put a camera into your home to monitor you. Just because they don't get any physical pictures doesn't mean the process isn't the same.
This is a non-governmental private entity taking a police action against you, even tho you are a legal owner of the product, by monitoring your computer (hence your home). The purpose of the WGA/WGN is to collect information in order for Microsoft to update their database. Everyone knows this deep down. The more of these records they have the easier it is for them to identify pirates. It is unethical to collect that when tell them that you do not want them to make you a participant.
If they collect information without you giving them permission in advance then they are in violation of several state's laws. Microsoft has been sued in both WA and CA over this being spyware. When they collect information even if you so no, it is doing the same thing as a spyware program is doing--sending information about you without your knowledge.
You people need to get it through your heads that your computer is an extension of your HOME. Period. No ifs, ands, or buts. That's what your computer is. Microsoft is not entitled to do anything that is not explicitly permissible under law just because they are the OS. Keep in mind that Microsoft is the type of organization that will continue to do this sort of thing until they are told to stop. You tell them to stop by asking your Congressman and Senators to put and end to this sort of behavior. Write letters to them and let them know you are unhappy. They'll get the message.
Microsoft is the kind of company that knows they have all kinds of cash to throw at lawsuits, etc., and they even have money for fines. But when there are laws enacted that send these people to jail then it will stop.
They are invading your home. Do you really want to allow them to do this? Even the police can't enter your home and monitor your activities without a warrant from a court of law signed by a judge.
Linux used to be a hobby for me. For a few years linux was on the fence and one could fall off quite easily. Today though Linux has really matured. The biggest problem still exists--the linux zealot. They kill Linux, they harm the community, and the completely stifle growth on the desktop. The Linux community should shun them hard. They are like an outdated car. They are more broken than they are worth. It's best to move past them instead of trying to fix them. You can't appease a Linux zealot--they are harmful just by their very existence. I think the BSD community needs them now, and they should relent to the desktop.
You know in reality this fanaticism toward total open source is just ridiculous. On the one hand you see everyone saying Linux is only good if you are true open source while the majority say that they want quality commerical games and apps running under it. You can't have both. No one is going to release a commercial application or game as open source. So just consider the OS open source and get the applications/games running so the market share can grow.
I see the zealots holding everyone in a catch 22 with their false logic. We need development and yes that means comemrcial apps. Linux is just an OS. The applications and games are just applications and games. What benefits the users is more important then even open source. Never relinquish the open source product to the commercial venue but realize that the OS is just that, the OS. It is meant to be installed and forgotten. The users don't interact with the OS they interact with the applications and games. If you can get that through those zealot's thick skulls we'll have growth in the market. But that also means a real stand-alone universal distro applications installer.
It's about the USER not about the OS. Never has. These zealots have the same disease that Microsoft has -- OSitis. We, the users are the king. It is us that make or break you. It isn't about the OS. Your OS should provide the services to the apps and games so that we the users can benefit the greatest in the smallest amount of time.
All in all, I use Linux as my main box. My favorite game (Enemy-Territory) plays just fine on it. If I want to get any of my other games installed I can. Not that I can get them all but through Cedega or Wine I can. Keep in mind that there are quality commercial games out there such as Doom 3, Neverwinter Nights, Quake 3, UT2003/2004.
The problem here is DX9 and 10. It is a closed environment which requires a sizeable investment to learn and develop for. With Vista discontinuing support for OpenGL (even though OpenGL is still a widely competent and quality product) it makes it hard for developers to choose to target OpenGL even as a secondary target audience. These are efforts of a Monopoly power using tactics to close down its competition, clearly.
What the hell does he mean "product activation issues". It has nothing to do with product activation. It is about their DRM, their impertinent invasion of your privacy by invading your home to police you to check to see if you haven't stolen their goods.
They are performing the equivalent of a unchecked home searches upon your goods because everyone is a thief until you prove (over and over -- endlessly) that you didn't steal their goods. You are a thief first and a temporary user second.
Why on earth are you attempting to hide the fact that this is about them violating your privacy entering your home and doing search and seizure without a warrant or any checks and balances from the legal system.
When Microsoft uses DRM and/or activation they are invading legitimate people's homes (because your computer is an extension of your home) with complete and total accusation that you are a thief.
The police can't enter your home and search your belongings without a warrant. You are allowing a private entity enter your home to search it because the richest men in the world feel that they are loosing a grip on their dominance and want more time to divest their fortunes into other companies. Yes, I'm saying that Microsoft is loosing it and Gates/Ballmer want more time to sell their stock and reinvest in other companies because when the bottom falls out of Microsoft they don't want to loose their vast fortunes.
He's a paid blogger. His list of features are less than stellar and hardly warrant the bluster he gives them.
It isn't uncommon to have someone gain familiarity with something, and then when switching feel a loss for some things or feel that the old way was better. Humans shun change.
I am entitled to 10 licenses of XP Pro, 10 XP Pro 64 bit and 10 Vista Business and I use Ubuntu on my main box with XP Pro on all the others. This isn't because of not wanting to change, it's because Vista sucks that bad. He doesn't even honestly talk about the draconian nightmarish DRM infections in Vista. No way am I going to relinquish my computer rights to Microsoft and the pathetic content providers. I want less of Microsoft entwined in my system; not more.
BTW, FYI, the WGA Notification program (remake, take-two) has been released and you all should be careful about going to Microsoft's site and accidentally installing it. It does prompt you to install, but it still is malware in the keenest form. The installer uses very deceptive and manipulative language by offering enhanced security when WGA Notification has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with security of any kind.
Microsoft has rereleased the WGA notification program for XP. It went live yesterday. It is masquerading as a security critical update again. This time it has an installer so you are prompted and can cancel but you'll continuously be prompted unless you flag it as a _never install_ update.
IBM has been coming to the rescue for years and has granted hundreds if not thousands of patent licenses to the linux community.
Linux isn't going anywhere. Microsoft would only prevail in getting enforced what it can prove, and even then the precedents that prohibited the Z4 company from keeping MS from selling XP will prevail in the Linux community.
Ballmer is using threats and FUD to keep Linux from expanding further by threatening the distros and then telling the financial analysts that they should not use those products because the distros are a prime target.
It's an idiotic move and it will hurt Microsoft even more. Don't think big corporates have major investments in Linux? Think again. It's massive.
This just shows that Microsoft is going to become the biggest looser.
Look, if one technology is infringing it doesn't mean the whole Linux is infringing. He'd have to prove first that those are infringing and that the distros knew it. He's just trying to keep more distros from popping up and from proliferating. He's trying to provide less incentive to start a new distro that would innovate since most distros lock themselves into an ideology and never reinvent themselves. If he has fewer distros cropping up with innovative things then the old ones will die sooner or later but he's only going to accomplish this by FUD threats. He can't accomplish it by revealing how weak his hand is.
If there's a violation in Linux tell the community. Put up or shut up Ballmer is the only voice he should hear from the community. And yes, there are weapons in various other arsenals that can be wielded against Microsoft.
This is a no win situation for them. They can only succeed by threats. Any action defeats their purpose. Threats fulfill their purpose. The community must ask in one voice: WHERE AM I INFRINGING? That is what will defeat their threats.
Microsoft is faltering under Steve Ballmer. It has had almost 30 years of dominance but with Ballmer in charge it is loosing its edge. This is because Ballmer controls by threats.
How is it that a company such as Microsoft feels they can enter our homes and rifle through our stuff to prove that we are stealing from them? That's what their DRM and WGA is all about. You would never let anyone enter your home, even the police, without a warrant, to go through your stuff in order to prove you have stolen something. Our computers are an extension of our homes. You would never let a private individual come into your home and search it. You should not be allowing Microsoft to do that.
Ballmer knows his Vista is a series of technologies that are used to do just that. I suspect there are many other hidden technologies which they have incorporated into the OS to keep them in control. Well, Vista is a pig with lipstick. Ballmer reminds me of the joke of the farmer who wanted the prize pig at the county fair so he stuck a cork in the pigs ass in order to make it appear larger than it was. One day at the fair the monkey got curious and pulled the cork. Shit went flying. It was quite laughable to see the poor monkey working so hard to get the cork back in the pigs ass.
Right now Vista isn't selling. Ballmer proclaims it is the pirates and threatens everyone. He threatens to kick up the WGA levels in Vista. This is something no one I have heard from even attempts to analyze. What are those levels? Did everyone agree to those extremely strict levels when they purchased Vista. Did they even know that those were there? Are they spying on the user? If so, are they not in violation of many State and Federal laws?
What Ballmer doesn't want to accept is that the reason Vista isn't selling is because it is a bloated piece of DRM lopped on top of XP with a pretty interface which can easily be gotten by using another OS and installing Beryl. What Ballmer doesn't accept is that we don't want their DRM. We don't want their CRM. We don't want those huge hardware requirements to get a simple half-decade long update to XP to run on our computers. We don't want the hassles of their weak security parading as strength. Of course you all have heard about how any malware program with a setup program runs as administrator. That's a HUGE HUGE HUGE security hole and essentially wipes their security off the map. Also their UAC boxes provide virtually no information about what is happening so everyone either turns it off or always allows.
So, we have a not so secure OS that has a pretty face that is filled with what I suspect are hidden technologies that govern the DRM and CRM that the consumer knows nothing about and didn't agree to purchase nor license, and that this is done possibly in violation of State and Federal laws. This makes this a pig with lipstick. It could only happen from a monopoly company. Competition would not allow this.
So now that the argument about piracy of Vista is failing (remember back when Gates and company stated that it would be impossible to pirate Vista?), they are realizing that people are choosing to change to Linux instead of Vista due to a stronger security, open tools, rapid development, a prettier interface, a solid core OS Kernel, and all the features one would expect from an OS of that level (Vista's level), and more. So he simply starts the FUD machine.
Microsoft can't sue anyone until they tell those companies exactly what they are doing wrong or they'll be seen as litigious fools. They have to tell them precisely what the infringements are and give them an opportunity to fix them. Even if they do file suit without doing that it will still require that they show where Linux is infringing and that Microsoft own the IP specific to those infringements. They also have to go against some of the largest corporations in the world.
You should not misinterpret what Ballmer is doing. He's just doing more of this management by threat pract
Microsoft does not support 3d drivers out of the box. You have to use your CD that came with the video card or go and download the manufacturer's drivers from the internet.
Ubuntu, if I recall correctly, didn't support my video cards out of the box. In fact, I can only remember one distro that did. No big deal for me.
What needs to be done is a better mechanism for the human population to get the drivers from sites like nVidia and AMD in order to get the proper drivers installed.
BTW, I would never play the tuxracer game, lol. Let's get real. UT, DOOM, Enemy-Territory is important but tuxracer--makes me laugh.
I know Linux wants to be different from Windows and providing 3d drivers for Linux out of the box would be a great way to do so. Forcing compiles of the OS and other core components is NOT the way to make linux different--it's just stupid.
Talk about a long stretch to reality. First, there's no guarantee that it is just a driver which happens to be written in the manner you state. Second, unless this person has no regard for their data and/or their time then by all means drive that computer into the ground and then just replace it.
But in reality accepting hardware issues as driver related issues when the same type of effect occurs on different OSes then the cause is serious enough to justify professional review for problem resolution.
In other words, it would be misleading to him to allow the problem to occur and irresponsible to promote that sort of attitude about hardware issues. Luckily you aren't an auto or aero mechanic.
BSOD is mostly likely a hardware problem or a driver issue. This is the case nearly 100% of the time. If it is a hardware issue it will cause problems no matter which OS you run.
To correct a misrepresentation here--you will never be sent to a Microsoft web site when you get a BSOD. What you are thinking is when an application crashes. In some cases, but nearly not enough of them, you will be sent a web page giving you some potential cause. My experience is that it is almost never correct and almost never has any useful information.
I am in no way a fan of Microsoft. In fact, there needs to be some parity in the computing world. Microsoft isn't interested in anything other than total domination. Linux has too many zealots that are killing the OS's chance of becoming what it could be.
The America on Linux is a great idea although I think something more than distribution CDs is the answer. It is a start. It is a great idea for an advocacy campaign. As much as Linux gets support from everyone if portion of that support went out (monthly) as advocacy we'd see ever increasing use of Linux in the home.
What American's listen to is security and privacy. If we can show that Linux is more secure and protects your privacy it has a chance to win. Windows is about controlling how you use your content. Linux is about allowing you a choice.
Ubuntu is an exceptional start and it has come a long way from it's first inception. It has shown millions that there's a tremendous potential for Linux on the consumer desktop.
Give us our freedom. The only true way to do this is to have everyone realize that their computer is an extension of their homes. Microsoft is effectively entering your home and rifling through it in order to prove that you are NOT stealing. You don't even have the benefit of the doubt. Every time they check your computer they are telling you they don't trust you and that you are a thief.
If you were checked yesterday, last week, last month, 6 months ago, and you were determined to be legal, any attempt to check you again proves Microsoft believes you are a thief. To enter your home and go through your system, to inventory your system, and then check you is most certainly an indication that they believe you are a thief.
Do you really want a company that stole the technology used to validate your install used to keep you from stealing their IP using their morals and ethics to dictate how you can use your computer? When you consider they stole the IP to keep you from stealing their IP, that is a very telling aspect of Microsoft's morals and business ethics.
Your computer is an extension of your home. Even the police can't enter your home without a warrant issued by a court and signed by a judge. They can't go through your car while it is on your property. Yet, all the while, people are letting Microsoft just enter their homes and accuse them of stealing every time it does so. Would you let any other business or corporate entity enter your home to prove that you didn't steal something from them? If not, if you would not open your doors for inspection by those entities on a regular basis then you should not be allowing Microsoft to do the same thing, PERIOD!
Linux on the other hand is getting stronger and has much greater potential to protect your privacy and legal freedoms. If you want to be advocates of Linux, certainly much of what is said will do to help you, but more than anything you should explain to everyone you approach about linux about how Vista does everything for Microsoft and content providers while doing very little for the consumer, except present them with a pig wearing lipstick.
I own and operate a computer repair shop. This past summer I had an inordinate number of emachines in with blown motherboards. It started with a series of spikes which affected the power supply and then blew the motherboard. For a while there I had so many come into the shop that I didn't know if it would ever stop. The end result was a replacement motherboard -- and not from emachines. I purchased better quality boards with a richer feature-set and installed new power supplies and reinstalled the OS. Most of the time I had to use the code on the side of the case. You should consider that.
This summer's run on emachine deaths is indicative of a very cheap power system in their design and probably should result in a class-action lawsuit itself, if ever the numbers are correlated.
This isn't really a Microsoft reputation represented in that survey. Most people just can't seem to make the distinction between Microsoft and Bill Gates. If they only new.
I'm writing this and wondering if anyone has compiled a list of those things that Microsoft has done that are both good and bad. It would be interesting to see.
A couple notable things that Microsoft has done recently are:
- Ballmer accuses every Linux user of stealing IP from Microsoft (without showing proof and without apologizing when called out to prove it) and indicates each one will soon have a price to pay.
- Microsoft was sued by a company called z4 which had ownership of the IP used to activate software over the internet. z4 won the suit. The judge fined Microsoft an additional $25 million because of NUMEROUS counts of misconduct (much of which didn't make it into the decision but was noted as having happened by the judge). The main misconduct surrounded the fact that Microsoft flooded the court and the plaintiff with paperwork in an effort to hide the evidence which proved the plaintiff's case. Autodesk was also sued but were not fined for misconduct. The judge clearly stated that these instances of misconduct were done because Microsoft felt z4 was incapable of defending its' rights. The end result was that Microsoft was sued by z4 for stealing the very IP used to keep some from illegally using their software (Windows XP and Office). They got caught and it cost the bunch over $100 million in judgment and fines. This case was upheld on appeal including the extra $25 million fine.
- Microsoft recently copied an individual piece of web work invented by an individual for some web related concepts and admitted they had done so some time ago. Then they attempted to patent that very concept they copied. They claimed they had done it by accident. The big question is how does someone patent someone else's idea by accident after admitting they had copied it.
These are just 3 recent situation. Clearly Microsoft isn't being distinguished from Bill Gates' philanthropy.
Now we have a world-wide nightmare created by releasing Vista with all of its' DRM and CRM. Clearly these are attempts by Microsoft to write their own laws. They implemented the same WGA into Vista that was rejected in XP. The end result is exactly the same: you were verified yesterday, you were verified last week, you were verified last month, you were verified 6 months ago, and now you are being accused of being a thief again today--and you should conform to their requirements because you don't want to be seen as a thief by your peers. This is the equivalent of Microsoft making their own laws (without the checks and balances in our legal system) and then enforcing them by coming into your home (which your computer is an extension of your home) and rifling through your things in order to prove you are a thief of their product. Even the law doesn't have the right to enter your home of vehicle without a warrant issued by a court and signed by a judge--yet with Microsoft's (and other content provider's DRM/CRM implemented in Vista) they have written their own laws to allow them to do just that. They have also hidden these pieces of information from the average user so that most don't know that they are agreeing to this sort of draconian activity before they purchase and install Vista.
Gates has clearly stated that content consumption primarily what computers are being used for. What he says is part of that strategy to gain dominance in that market.
Luckily Gates and company have never been good at services so we shouldn't see much from them in terms of them controlling our TVs, etc. What Gates and company are good at is strong-arming vendors to pre-install their OS on your new computer.
If you think about your computer, your possession and then you think about your home you'll see that your computer is just an extension of your home. No more would you let advertisers paste advertisements onto the walls of your home (unless you do it for them) then you would let advertisers take over your computer. You would not let Microsoft employees or agents enter your home to search it so you should see that allowing DRM to exist on your computer is the same as doing just that.
Your computer is an extension like your filing cabinet. It is like your CD collection. It is like your games collection. If you consider all legal and part of your home you would never allow a company such as Microsoft to enter it to inspect your filing cabinet, your CDs, nor your games collection, even if they claim they would never look at anything other than those things. It is a violation of your privacy to not fight against such a thing while watching it happen.
We don't allow private companies to make and enforce their own laws. Just as everyone would love to own their own bank we know every large corporate entity would love to own their own bank, to grant them loans, to set their own interest rates, etc, to collect income off their own interest rates. We don't allow corporate entities to make nor enforce the laws. We elect government to do just that. We know that corporate entities would greatly abuse you. There's no standards of conduct on them set by the law. If we let them make their own laws and enforce them in your home I'd feel that we'd be sanctioning the likes of HP pretexting employees.
You see, the big thing about what happened with HP was that they felt they could do what they wanted and that they could get away with it if only those ordering it were given plausible deny-ability. What really was bad about this wasn't that they violated the rights of free speech and the freedom of the press nor that they participated in illegal acts (in some states), but that they told every single employee that they were subjects (in their personal lives) of the business they worked for. This told every employee that they had no rights when it came to the employer.
This abuse is only an example of what is happening with DRM and content rights management. It tells you that you are subservient to the content provider and that they have the right to enter your home to investigate you and to take action against you even if you were never even in violation.
You need just understand that your computer is an extension of your home.
Think about someone using their vehicle to steal from some business. The way DRM and CRM works is that the owners of those materials can search your car without your permission and can boot your car so that you can't do anything of the sort with it again, even if this inhibits legitimate use of your vehicle for other purposes. Even law enforcement agencies can't search your car without evidence and a warrant while the car is located on your premises. They can't open a door, they can't search through the trunk, they can't do anything to it. While on your property probable cause would be extremely difficult to prove.
Your computer is an extension of your home.
CRM and DRM are the equivalent of allowing companies to make and enforce their own laws and to violate your rights and your privacy. It allows them to do this without the true legal system (with all its procedures and policies, without selective training and strict adherence to the rules of law) having even taken part.
When you can come to grips with the fact that your computer is an extension of your home you'll understand why you can't let DRM/CRM exist in any form. It should be your responsibility to ensure that your children's future is free of private laws created by private companies which are not designed to protect you as an individual (instead giving priority over the company and content rights holder).
Everything that is done in the computer would can be equated to the world we move in. You need only think about it as part of the real world instead of some cyber-world where you can give or take what happens.
For the most part what is being said is not true. XP Home and Pro upgrades either required an install or verification by inserting a CD into the drive for verification. IMHO there's no compelling reason to upgrade to Vista so the best bet is to ensure that your family, friends, and customers know that upgrading to Vista is primarily unnecessary as it offers no real compelling reason to upgrade and a significant cost in time and money to actually upgrade.
Chinese purification of the net is like shitting in the drinking water. Nothing they can do will affect it but for the worse and they will be the ones responsible for making the mess. Those in charge over in China must have sick minds if they think they can rule the net and determine what is clean and what isn't. Pathetic is all I can say.
I'm using linux right now even though I have over 20 legal licenses of Windows XP. I also ensure that all my software that I install is paid for. Every game, every utility, every productivity application is paid for. I resent having to prove that I am not a thief to microsoft and I know alot of my customers feel the same way after I tell them how and what Microsoft does.
I have added a wireless card to a desktop and right after that I was prompted telling me that my computer had changed dramatically and that I had to contact Microsoft to resolve the issue. It stopped me from logging in till I did this. I contacted them, took another 20 minutes of my life and had to swear on my life that I was not stealing this from microsoft.
Maybe you guys don't understand. Bill Gates believes that everyone is a thief and you must prove you are not.
Again, more commentary on the machines I work with and what I have to deal with when validating computers for customers. First, Microsoft's tool was extremely inaccurate. There are a plethora of examples written about how wrong their tool accuracy was. Those examples were abounding on the internet just before Microsoft pulled the tool from the update server.
Here's a contributing problem. They had some problems validating Royal installs on machines such as those from Dell, Gateway, HP/Compaq.
Another contributing problem was that HP shipped tons of machines with only a recovery partition without any CDs. This meant that if the HDD when out the customer had to validate their install using the code on the sticker affixed to the side of the case. Often times these codes were not validated and the WGA tool would pop up telling me it was invalid.
In fact, when I tried to validate an install the other day I got various messages from Microsoft telling me that the code was invalid when it was taken directly from the case. Although this was not done reported by the WGA tool their activation tool told me repeatedly that the code was not valid, even after calling Microsoft to get the install activated.
Those numbers they are touting are completely and utterly wrong. They are attempting to gain emotional ground and support for their nefarious acts. They don't even care to try to be accurate because it simply makes their requirements easier to push down the throats of those of who believe these numbers inaccurate.
I fix computers every day, hundreds every year. Maybe 1 in 200 are pirated and most often they didn't know or their family member did it for them. I generally tell them they should make it legal. I also tell them I am not the police and I could care less about Microsoft's profits, nor do I care to protect Microsoft. I never will. But I let them know that I can fix their computers (when the OS is involved) if they have a legal copy. Most purchase a legal copy.
Of the 20 licenses I have here one would then have to say that I have 4 illegal copies of the OS. This is also not true. All 20 are legal.
Averaging this out it would indicate those numbers are EXTREMELY bloated and COMPLETELY UNTRUE AND INACCURATE.
Microsoft is a content provider albeit a bit player. Bill Gates has proclaimed that computers are far less used to create content--they are more often used to consume it. He's basing his whole strategy on this idea. That's why they are implementing so much DRM voluntarily.
And for those who constantly ask for proof of something instead of looking for themselves, well you need to get an education. People can't afford to take the time to constantly educate you. Rather you should be providing evidence contrary to the supposition rather than demanding someone prove to you. This isn't a court of law. If you don't believe them and you won't take the time to research their points and dispel them posting your comments is pointless. It's like claiming the world is round and you asking them to prove it every time because you don't agree. Just like that is common knowledge and the fact that this site tends to focus on technology it isn't our fault you aren't educated sufficiently enough to know the details or research them yourselves.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft is not the police and no they have no right to check, at least not without your explicit permission. The police are enforcement agents put in place by publicly elected officials and they are checked for balance by the court system and the laws of the nation we live in. These individuals are not permitted to enter your home (as your computer is an extension of your home) and search you for stolen goods. Even the police can't do that even if they KNOW themselves that you are in possession of stolen goods. It is about proving it. Another check and balance is by the court system to bring to trail those they believe they can win a case against. They are only allowed to charge you with crimes they can actually prove. They are not allowed to say that they think you are and that they can collect any information they want during that time.
This process is akin to the government taping your telephone against your wishes and collecting information. It is akin to the phone company taping your phone and listening to see if you commit crimes and then dropping your service. It doesn't happen. The phone company doesn't observe your private conversations even if they think you might be committing a crime because established law and procedures leaves that sort of police action in the hands of the police selected by those agents put in place by the elected officials.
This is a police action, period. It is a violation of your privacy and to allow them to monitor you is an attack on your home.
You gave them information when you activated Windows, you gave them information when you validated your copy for updates but when you told them no to the WGN program and others you told them it was not acceptable to send any information back about your computer.
When are you guys going to get it through your head. You are relinquishing your privacy and that of your children's future privacy because you want to win some obviously flawed debate about whether it hurts you.
This is infact, Orwellian and it is extremely bad practice. When you say no, it means no. It doesn't mean do it anyway because no one can prove it and no one can stop it.
It is a violation of privacy and Microsoft is sending information back to their location for storage or not against the wishes of an individual.
If you break the law it is still up to the police and the courts to follow legal procedure to catch you and prove you broke the law and then to punish you commensurate with the proven charges. Even if you steal something and they know you stole it they can't do anything about it till they prove it. Part of that process is to get the legal search warrants and other court orders to permit them to do this.
Microsoft is a civil organization which is usurping the rules of law that were well established. In fact, they are effectively searching everyone's home every time to prove they are not in possession of stolen goods. The government can't do that. Microsoft should not either.
Any information sent to them without our express permission is a violation of our privacy whether they store it or not. It is not permissible for them to blatantly flaunt in our faces the fact that there is no one there to stop them and if you try you won't have the resources to do so.
Again people, remember the computer you have is an extension of your home. It is not a playground for microsoft to do what they want. Would you allow them to come into your home to inventory your belongings and then make you account for all those things you may purchase after the fact? Would you let them check on you any time they choose? Hell no. You would never let anyone into your home to do that. So, why on fucking hearth are you letting them search your computer to inventory your system to send private information back to their offices? Is it because it isn't an inconvenience to you to allow them to do this? Because you have no recourse to stop them?
So, you say that it doesn't hurt you to have them to enter your home and search it and report back to their offices? So, then would it hurt you to allow the government to do this if they could do it in such a non-invasive way? How about putting hidden camera's in say 20% of homes and no one knows they are there so you have at least an 80% chance of not being spied on!?! Would that be acceptable to you? Hell, 1 if 5 chance of being someone that is observed by the government. Once you got used to it, wouldn't it be acceptable to have the government then say 40% and up it over the next 10 years to 60% and then all the way? You would have become accustomed to having the government spy on you?
I think you understand what I'm getting at. This is the same thing. You would not let the government do such a thing, and even some people feel cameras in public are a violation of our privacy.
Microsoft is not the government and they have no rights to do what they are doing. They should not be collecting any information unless you explicitly permit it.
As I have said in other posts. This is about them collecting as many pieces in their databases as possible. Having this information gives them a lot of leverage.
Have you heard about how the patent office has claimed that file sharing software is a threat to national security? How about a monopoly power that has control over 90% of the worlds computers able to go into your computer and home unchecked by any sort of mechanism that is designed for checks and balances? You think that is less a threat to national security than it is to allow people to share information between 1 or 2 or more party members. Either the comments by the patent office are totally ludicrous or no one is willing to accept that this sort of unchecked behavior by a company in control of 90% of the worlds computers is a threat to national security.
Foolish is what Ballmer is made of. He claimed to financial analysts that the caution on Vista sales is for at least 2 reasons: 1) corporate pricing was too low, and 2) piracy.
This was stated by him in the past couple days, if not today.
Both are flawed. on item 1. Windows Vista is very expensive. Giving forecasts on certain pricing to corporate is what companies do. They forecast on those prices so that is really a moot point unless corporate just isn't purchasing. Then the low cost would make a difference, as they feel they should have made it higher so that the lack of corporate sales didn't affect the bottom line so much.
On item 2. According to Microsoft pirating is impossible under Vista. Well, even if that is about 3 months outdated it still is an issue that needs to be addressed. What is the average number of pirated installs vs. legit installs of Vista. Are people choosing to pirate instead of purchasing? Is it easy for the average person to pirate Vista and is the future potential of loosing activation worth it to the average user?
The answer to those is unknown so Microsoft can't be using that as a legitimate reason why their forecasts are so far off. Even if it was EASY to pirate Vista (which Microsoft said 3 months ago was impossible) it would have to be much easier than to pirate XP, which although is semi-easy to pirate if you can get the corporate product key or you can snatch a key from some unsuspecting person it is possible to get locked out by virtue of the WGA/WGN spyware programs.
So, essentially it isn't possible to claim that corporate pricing and pirating is the cause of Ballmer's and Microsoft's woes. It has to be something else. That something else, at least to me, is pretty obvious. It is the restrictions on use, the violation of privacy (constantly claiming you are a thief -- incessant checking of your workstation using spyware programs (WGA/WGN)), the high cost to the consumer (parts as well as purchase price of Vista).
When I talk to people, and I do so every day as I own a computer repair shop, I hear that they want nothing to do with Vista. I even have people that bring in the computers they bought with Vista on them to have them wiped and to have XP installed instead. The reasons they give are the same I read about day in and day out on the web. Microsoft accuses them of being a thief, Microsoft is spying on them, the technology in it will interfere, the costs to upgrade are too high, the cost of the OS is excessive, there's no compelling reason to upgrade. Vista is just a pretty interface on top of a massive spyware program.
I'd have to say that Ballmer is very foolish and to try to pawn off on the financial community two very flawed reasons for Vistas lack of success is just pathetic. Microsoft is on a downhill slide. The fact that Linux and OSX just might be made valid viable attractive has to be affecting every thing they do. On top of that they have known for a couple years that Microsoft would not see growth anywhere near what it has seen in the past. I think one could forecast some very serious financial problems with Microsoft in the next couple years and that they need to get people switched over to Vista so they can better control your computer and purchases so that the major stock holders have time to divest themselves and reinvest in other arenas.
Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer are killing Microsoft. Every DRM/CRM implementation makes Windows a lot less attractive to everyone. Every attempt to monitor our use is looked upon as a violation of our privacy (which it is) and is an accusation that we are a thief or will be a thief sometime down the road. When they don't care that they are invading our homes we realize they are too far gone to even consider giving a second chance. When they can use their monopoly power to extort business, other countries, and private citizens then that's the time everyone must look up and say "no". They know they have you by the short ones because they know that i
Their active x control installation has nothing to do with the WGN installation and the cancellation of it. The "activex" control is just the tool that allows them to invoke the WGA process. Even if you agreed to install it, you didn't agree to let Microsoft (via the cancellation of the installation of a different program) send information about your computer back to their location. When you choose to cancel you choose to NOT allow them to collect and redirect that info to their location. That's the purpose of cancellation.
The use of WGA/WGN is a violation of your privacy and it is similar to a police action. Your computer is an extension of your home and to allow Microsoft to put WGN on your computer is akin to allowing them to put a camera into your home to monitor you. Just because they don't get any physical pictures doesn't mean the process isn't the same.
This is a non-governmental private entity taking a police action against you, even tho you are a legal owner of the product, by monitoring your computer (hence your home). The purpose of the WGA/WGN is to collect information in order for Microsoft to update their database. Everyone knows this deep down. The more of these records they have the easier it is for them to identify pirates. It is unethical to collect that when tell them that you do not want them to make you a participant.
If they collect information without you giving them permission in advance then they are in violation of several state's laws. Microsoft has been sued in both WA and CA over this being spyware. When they collect information even if you so no, it is doing the same thing as a spyware program is doing--sending information about you without your knowledge.
You people need to get it through your heads that your computer is an extension of your HOME. Period. No ifs, ands, or buts. That's what your computer is. Microsoft is not entitled to do anything that is not explicitly permissible under law just because they are the OS. Keep in mind that Microsoft is the type of organization that will continue to do this sort of thing until they are told to stop. You tell them to stop by asking your Congressman and Senators to put and end to this sort of behavior. Write letters to them and let them know you are unhappy. They'll get the message.
Microsoft is the kind of company that knows they have all kinds of cash to throw at lawsuits, etc., and they even have money for fines. But when there are laws enacted that send these people to jail then it will stop.
They are invading your home. Do you really want to allow them to do this? Even the police can't enter your home and monitor your activities without a warrant from a court of law signed by a judge.
Linux used to be a hobby for me. For a few years linux was on the fence and one could fall off quite easily. Today though Linux has really matured. The biggest problem still exists--the linux zealot. They kill Linux, they harm the community, and the completely stifle growth on the desktop. The Linux community should shun them hard. They are like an outdated car. They are more broken than they are worth. It's best to move past them instead of trying to fix them. You can't appease a Linux zealot--they are harmful just by their very existence. I think the BSD community needs them now, and they should relent to the desktop.
You know in reality this fanaticism toward total open source is just ridiculous. On the one hand you see everyone saying Linux is only good if you are true open source while the majority say that they want quality commerical games and apps running under it. You can't have both. No one is going to release a commercial application or game as open source. So just consider the OS open source and get the applications/games running so the market share can grow.
I see the zealots holding everyone in a catch 22 with their false logic. We need development and yes that means comemrcial apps. Linux is just an OS. The applications and games are just applications and games. What benefits the users is more important then even open source. Never relinquish the open source product to the commercial venue but realize that the OS is just that, the OS. It is meant to be installed and forgotten. The users don't interact with the OS they interact with the applications and games. If you can get that through those zealot's thick skulls we'll have growth in the market. But that also means a real stand-alone universal distro applications installer.
It's about the USER not about the OS. Never has. These zealots have the same disease that Microsoft has -- OSitis. We, the users are the king. It is us that make or break you. It isn't about the OS. Your OS should provide the services to the apps and games so that we the users can benefit the greatest in the smallest amount of time.
All in all, I use Linux as my main box. My favorite game (Enemy-Territory) plays just fine on it. If I want to get any of my other games installed I can. Not that I can get them all but through Cedega or Wine I can. Keep in mind that there are quality commercial games out there such as Doom 3, Neverwinter Nights, Quake 3, UT2003/2004.
The problem here is DX9 and 10. It is a closed environment which requires a sizeable investment to learn and develop for. With Vista discontinuing support for OpenGL (even though OpenGL is still a widely competent and quality product) it makes it hard for developers to choose to target OpenGL even as a secondary target audience. These are efforts of a Monopoly power using tactics to close down its competition, clearly.
What the hell does he mean "product activation issues". It has nothing to do with product activation. It is about their DRM, their impertinent invasion of your privacy by invading your home to police you to check to see if you haven't stolen their goods.
They are performing the equivalent of a unchecked home searches upon your goods because everyone is a thief until you prove (over and over -- endlessly) that you didn't steal their goods. You are a thief first and a temporary user second.
Why on earth are you attempting to hide the fact that this is about them violating your privacy entering your home and doing search and seizure without a warrant or any checks and balances from the legal system.
When Microsoft uses DRM and/or activation they are invading legitimate people's homes (because your computer is an extension of your home) with complete and total accusation that you are a thief.
The police can't enter your home and search your belongings without a warrant. You are allowing a private entity enter your home to search it because the richest men in the world feel that they are loosing a grip on their dominance and want more time to divest their fortunes into other companies. Yes, I'm saying that Microsoft is loosing it and Gates/Ballmer want more time to sell their stock and reinvest in other companies because when the bottom falls out of Microsoft they don't want to loose their vast fortunes.
He's a paid blogger. His list of features are less than stellar and hardly warrant the bluster he gives them.
It isn't uncommon to have someone gain familiarity with something, and then when switching feel a loss for some things or feel that the old way was better. Humans shun change.
I am entitled to 10 licenses of XP Pro, 10 XP Pro 64 bit and 10 Vista Business and I use Ubuntu on my main box with XP Pro on all the others. This isn't because of not wanting to change, it's because Vista sucks that bad. He doesn't even honestly talk about the draconian nightmarish DRM infections in Vista. No way am I going to relinquish my computer rights to Microsoft and the pathetic content providers. I want less of Microsoft entwined in my system; not more.
BTW, FYI, the WGA Notification program (remake, take-two) has been released and you all should be careful about going to Microsoft's site and accidentally installing it. It does prompt you to install, but it still is malware in the keenest form. The installer uses very deceptive and manipulative language by offering enhanced security when WGA Notification has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with security of any kind.
Microsoft has rereleased the WGA notification program for XP. It went live yesterday. It is masquerading as a security critical update again. This time it has an installer so you are prompted and can cancel but you'll continuously be prompted unless you flag it as a _never install_ update.
IBM has been coming to the rescue for years and has granted hundreds if not thousands of patent licenses to the linux community.
Linux isn't going anywhere. Microsoft would only prevail in getting enforced what it can prove, and even then the precedents that prohibited the Z4 company from keeping MS from selling XP will prevail in the Linux community.
Ballmer is using threats and FUD to keep Linux from expanding further by threatening the distros and then telling the financial analysts that they should not use those products because the distros are a prime target.
It's an idiotic move and it will hurt Microsoft even more. Don't think big corporates have major investments in Linux? Think again. It's massive.
This just shows that Microsoft is going to become the biggest looser.
Look, if one technology is infringing it doesn't mean the whole Linux is infringing. He'd have to prove first that those are infringing and that the distros knew it. He's just trying to keep more distros from popping up and from proliferating. He's trying to provide less incentive to start a new distro that would innovate since most distros lock themselves into an ideology and never reinvent themselves. If he has fewer distros cropping up with innovative things then the old ones will die sooner or later but he's only going to accomplish this by FUD threats. He can't accomplish it by revealing how weak his hand is.
If there's a violation in Linux tell the community. Put up or shut up Ballmer is the only voice he should hear from the community. And yes, there are weapons in various other arsenals that can be wielded against Microsoft.
This is a no win situation for them. They can only succeed by threats. Any action defeats their purpose. Threats fulfill their purpose. The community must ask in one voice: WHERE AM I INFRINGING? That is what will defeat their threats.
Microsoft is faltering under Steve Ballmer. It has had almost 30 years of dominance but with Ballmer in charge it is loosing its edge. This is because Ballmer controls by threats.
How is it that a company such as Microsoft feels they can enter our homes and rifle through our stuff to prove that we are stealing from them? That's what their DRM and WGA is all about. You would never let anyone enter your home, even the police, without a warrant, to go through your stuff in order to prove you have stolen something. Our computers are an extension of our homes. You would never let a private individual come into your home and search it. You should not be allowing Microsoft to do that.
Ballmer knows his Vista is a series of technologies that are used to do just that. I suspect there are many other hidden technologies which they have incorporated into the OS to keep them in control. Well, Vista is a pig with lipstick. Ballmer reminds me of the joke of the farmer who wanted the prize pig at the county fair so he stuck a cork in the pigs ass in order to make it appear larger than it was. One day at the fair the monkey got curious and pulled the cork. Shit went flying. It was quite laughable to see the poor monkey working so hard to get the cork back in the pigs ass.
Right now Vista isn't selling. Ballmer proclaims it is the pirates and threatens everyone. He threatens to kick up the WGA levels in Vista. This is something no one I have heard from even attempts to analyze. What are those levels? Did everyone agree to those extremely strict levels when they purchased Vista. Did they even know that those were there? Are they spying on the user? If so, are they not in violation of many State and Federal laws?
What Ballmer doesn't want to accept is that the reason Vista isn't selling is because it is a bloated piece of DRM lopped on top of XP with a pretty interface which can easily be gotten by using another OS and installing Beryl. What Ballmer doesn't accept is that we don't want their DRM. We don't want their CRM. We don't want those huge hardware requirements to get a simple half-decade long update to XP to run on our computers. We don't want the hassles of their weak security parading as strength. Of course you all have heard about how any malware program with a setup program runs as administrator. That's a HUGE HUGE HUGE security hole and essentially wipes their security off the map. Also their UAC boxes provide virtually no information about what is happening so everyone either turns it off or always allows.
So, we have a not so secure OS that has a pretty face that is filled with what I suspect are hidden technologies that govern the DRM and CRM that the consumer knows nothing about and didn't agree to purchase nor license, and that this is done possibly in violation of State and Federal laws. This makes this a pig with lipstick. It could only happen from a monopoly company. Competition would not allow this.
So now that the argument about piracy of Vista is failing (remember back when Gates and company stated that it would be impossible to pirate Vista?), they are realizing that people are choosing to change to Linux instead of Vista due to a stronger security, open tools, rapid development, a prettier interface, a solid core OS Kernel, and all the features one would expect from an OS of that level (Vista's level), and more. So he simply starts the FUD machine.
Microsoft can't sue anyone until they tell those companies exactly what they are doing wrong or they'll be seen as litigious fools. They have to tell them precisely what the infringements are and give them an opportunity to fix them. Even if they do file suit without doing that it will still require that they show where Linux is infringing and that Microsoft own the IP specific to those infringements. They also have to go against some of the largest corporations in the world.
You should not misinterpret what Ballmer is doing. He's just doing more of this management by threat pract
Microsoft does not support 3d drivers out of the box. You have to use your CD that came with the video card or go and download the manufacturer's drivers from the internet.
Ubuntu, if I recall correctly, didn't support my video cards out of the box. In fact, I can only remember one distro that did. No big deal for me.
What needs to be done is a better mechanism for the human population to get the drivers from sites like nVidia and AMD in order to get the proper drivers installed.
BTW, I would never play the tuxracer game, lol. Let's get real. UT, DOOM, Enemy-Territory is important but tuxracer--makes me laugh.
I know Linux wants to be different from Windows and providing 3d drivers for Linux out of the box would be a great way to do so. Forcing compiles of the OS and other core components is NOT the way to make linux different--it's just stupid.
Talk about a long stretch to reality. First, there's no guarantee that it is just a driver which happens to be written in the manner you state. Second, unless this person has no regard for their data and/or their time then by all means drive that computer into the ground and then just replace it.
But in reality accepting hardware issues as driver related issues when the same type of effect occurs on different OSes then the cause is serious enough to justify professional review for problem resolution.
In other words, it would be misleading to him to allow the problem to occur and irresponsible to promote that sort of attitude about hardware issues. Luckily you aren't an auto or aero mechanic.
BSOD is mostly likely a hardware problem or a driver issue. This is the case nearly 100% of the time. If it is a hardware issue it will cause problems no matter which OS you run.
To correct a misrepresentation here--you will never be sent to a Microsoft web site when you get a BSOD. What you are thinking is when an application crashes. In some cases, but nearly not enough of them, you will be sent a web page giving you some potential cause. My experience is that it is almost never correct and almost never has any useful information.
I am in no way a fan of Microsoft. In fact, there needs to be some parity in the computing world. Microsoft isn't interested in anything other than total domination. Linux has too many zealots that are killing the OS's chance of becoming what it could be.
The America on Linux is a great idea although I think something more than distribution CDs is the answer. It is a start. It is a great idea for an advocacy campaign. As much as Linux gets support from everyone if portion of that support went out (monthly) as advocacy we'd see ever increasing use of Linux in the home.
What American's listen to is security and privacy. If we can show that Linux is more secure and protects your privacy it has a chance to win. Windows is about controlling how you use your content. Linux is about allowing you a choice.
Ubuntu is an exceptional start and it has come a long way from it's first inception. It has shown millions that there's a tremendous potential for Linux on the consumer desktop.
Give us our freedom. The only true way to do this is to have everyone realize that their computer is an extension of their homes. Microsoft is effectively entering your home and rifling through it in order to prove that you are NOT stealing. You don't even have the benefit of the doubt. Every time they check your computer they are telling you they don't trust you and that you are a thief.
If you were checked yesterday, last week, last month, 6 months ago, and you were determined to be legal, any attempt to check you again proves Microsoft believes you are a thief. To enter your home and go through your system, to inventory your system, and then check you is most certainly an indication that they believe you are a thief.
Do you really want a company that stole the technology used to validate your install used to keep you from stealing their IP using their morals and ethics to dictate how you can use your computer? When you consider they stole the IP to keep you from stealing their IP, that is a very telling aspect of Microsoft's morals and business ethics.
Your computer is an extension of your home. Even the police can't enter your home without a warrant issued by a court and signed by a judge. They can't go through your car while it is on your property. Yet, all the while, people are letting Microsoft just enter their homes and accuse them of stealing every time it does so. Would you let any other business or corporate entity enter your home to prove that you didn't steal something from them? If not, if you would not open your doors for inspection by those entities on a regular basis then you should not be allowing Microsoft to do the same thing, PERIOD!
Linux on the other hand is getting stronger and has much greater potential to protect your privacy and legal freedoms. If you want to be advocates of Linux, certainly much of what is said will do to help you, but more than anything you should explain to everyone you approach about linux about how Vista does everything for Microsoft and content providers while doing very little for the consumer, except present them with a pig wearing lipstick.
I own and operate a computer repair shop. This past summer I had an inordinate number of emachines in with blown motherboards. It started with a series of spikes which affected the power supply and then blew the motherboard. For a while there I had so many come into the shop that I didn't know if it would ever stop. The end result was a replacement motherboard -- and not from emachines. I purchased better quality boards with a richer feature-set and installed new power supplies and reinstalled the OS. Most of the time I had to use the code on the side of the case. You should consider that.
This summer's run on emachine deaths is indicative of a very cheap power system in their design and probably should result in a class-action lawsuit itself, if ever the numbers are correlated.
This isn't really a Microsoft reputation represented in that survey. Most people just can't seem to make the distinction between Microsoft and Bill Gates. If they only new.
I'm writing this and wondering if anyone has compiled a list of those things that Microsoft has done that are both good and bad. It would be interesting to see.
A couple notable things that Microsoft has done recently are:
- Ballmer accuses every Linux user of stealing IP from Microsoft (without showing proof and without apologizing when called out to prove it) and indicates each one will soon have a price to pay.
- Microsoft was sued by a company called z4 which had ownership of the IP used to activate software over the internet. z4 won the suit. The judge fined Microsoft an additional $25 million because of NUMEROUS counts of misconduct (much of which didn't make it into the decision but was noted as having happened by the judge). The main misconduct surrounded the fact that Microsoft flooded the court and the plaintiff with paperwork in an effort to hide the evidence which proved the plaintiff's case. Autodesk was also sued but were not fined for misconduct. The judge clearly stated that these instances of misconduct were done because Microsoft felt z4 was incapable of defending its' rights. The end result was that Microsoft was sued by z4 for stealing the very IP used to keep some from illegally using their software (Windows XP and Office). They got caught and it cost the bunch over $100 million in judgment and fines. This case was upheld on appeal including the extra $25 million fine.
- Microsoft recently copied an individual piece of web work invented by an individual for some web related concepts and admitted they had done so some time ago. Then they attempted to patent that very concept they copied. They claimed they had done it by accident. The big question is how does someone patent someone else's idea by accident after admitting they had copied it.
These are just 3 recent situation. Clearly Microsoft isn't being distinguished from Bill Gates' philanthropy.
Now we have a world-wide nightmare created by releasing Vista with all of its' DRM and CRM. Clearly these are attempts by Microsoft to write their own laws. They implemented the same WGA into Vista that was rejected in XP. The end result is exactly the same: you were verified yesterday, you were verified last week, you were verified last month, you were verified 6 months ago, and now you are being accused of being a thief again today--and you should conform to their requirements because you don't want to be seen as a thief by your peers. This is the equivalent of Microsoft making their own laws (without the checks and balances in our legal system) and then enforcing them by coming into your home (which your computer is an extension of your home) and rifling through your things in order to prove you are a thief of their product. Even the law doesn't have the right to enter your home of vehicle without a warrant issued by a court and signed by a judge--yet with Microsoft's (and other content provider's DRM/CRM implemented in Vista) they have written their own laws to allow them to do just that. They have also hidden these pieces of information from the average user so that most don't know that they are agreeing to this sort of draconian activity before they purchase and install Vista.
Gates has clearly stated that content consumption primarily what computers are being used for. What he says is part of that strategy to gain dominance in that market.
Luckily Gates and company have never been good at services so we shouldn't see much from them in terms of them controlling our TVs, etc. What Gates and company are good at is strong-arming vendors to pre-install their OS on your new computer.
If you think about your computer, your possession and then you think about your home you'll see that your computer is just an extension of your home. No more would you let advertisers paste advertisements onto the walls of your home (unless you do it for them) then you would let advertisers take over your computer. You would not let Microsoft employees or agents enter your home to search it so you should see that allowing DRM to exist on your computer is the same as doing just that.
Your computer is an extension like your filing cabinet. It is like your CD collection. It is like your games collection. If you consider all legal and part of your home you would never allow a company such as Microsoft to enter it to inspect your filing cabinet, your CDs, nor your games collection, even if they claim they would never look at anything other than those things. It is a violation of your privacy to not fight against such a thing while watching it happen.
We don't allow private companies to make and enforce their own laws. Just as everyone would love to own their own bank we know every large corporate entity would love to own their own bank, to grant them loans, to set their own interest rates, etc, to collect income off their own interest rates. We don't allow corporate entities to make nor enforce the laws. We elect government to do just that. We know that corporate entities would greatly abuse you. There's no standards of conduct on them set by the law. If we let them make their own laws and enforce them in your home I'd feel that we'd be sanctioning the likes of HP pretexting employees.
You see, the big thing about what happened with HP was that they felt they could do what they wanted and that they could get away with it if only those ordering it were given plausible deny-ability. What really was bad about this wasn't that they violated the rights of free speech and the freedom of the press nor that they participated in illegal acts (in some states), but that they told every single employee that they were subjects (in their personal lives) of the business they worked for. This told every employee that they had no rights when it came to the employer.
This abuse is only an example of what is happening with DRM and content rights management. It tells you that you are subservient to the content provider and that they have the right to enter your home to investigate you and to take action against you even if you were never even in violation.
You need just understand that your computer is an extension of your home.
Think about someone using their vehicle to steal from some business. The way DRM and CRM works is that the owners of those materials can search your car without your permission and can boot your car so that you can't do anything of the sort with it again, even if this inhibits legitimate use of your vehicle for other purposes. Even law enforcement agencies can't search your car without evidence and a warrant while the car is located on your premises. They can't open a door, they can't search through the trunk, they can't do anything to it. While on your property probable cause would be extremely difficult to prove.
Your computer is an extension of your home.
CRM and DRM are the equivalent of allowing companies to make and enforce their own laws and to violate your rights and your privacy. It allows them to do this without the true legal system (with all its procedures and policies, without selective training and strict adherence to the rules of law) having even taken part.
When you can come to grips with the fact that your computer is an extension of your home you'll understand why you can't let DRM/CRM exist in any form. It should be your responsibility to ensure that your children's future is free of private laws created by private companies which are not designed to protect you as an individual (instead giving priority over the company and content rights holder).
Everything that is done in the computer would can be equated to the world we move in. You need only think about it as part of the real world instead of some cyber-world where you can give or take what happens.
For the most part what is being said is not true. XP Home and Pro upgrades either required an install or verification by inserting a CD into the drive for verification. IMHO there's no compelling reason to upgrade to Vista so the best bet is to ensure that your family, friends, and customers know that upgrading to Vista is primarily unnecessary as it offers no real compelling reason to upgrade and a significant cost in time and money to actually upgrade.
Chinese purification of the net is like shitting in the drinking water. Nothing they can do will affect it but for the worse and they will be the ones responsible for making the mess. Those in charge over in China must have sick minds if they think they can rule the net and determine what is clean and what isn't. Pathetic is all I can say.
I'm using linux right now even though I have over 20 legal licenses of Windows XP. I also ensure that all my software that I install is paid for. Every game, every utility, every productivity application is paid for. I resent having to prove that I am not a thief to microsoft and I know alot of my customers feel the same way after I tell them how and what Microsoft does.
Lol, couldn't agree more.
I have added a wireless card to a desktop and right after that I was prompted telling me that my computer had changed dramatically and that I had to contact Microsoft to resolve the issue. It stopped me from logging in till I did this. I contacted them, took another 20 minutes of my life and had to swear on my life that I was not stealing this from microsoft.
Maybe you guys don't understand. Bill Gates believes that everyone is a thief and you must prove you are not.
Again, more commentary on the machines I work with and what I have to deal with when validating computers for customers. First, Microsoft's tool was extremely inaccurate. There are a plethora of examples written about how wrong their tool accuracy was. Those examples were abounding on the internet just before Microsoft pulled the tool from the update server.
Here's a contributing problem. They had some problems validating Royal installs on machines such as those from Dell, Gateway, HP/Compaq.
Another contributing problem was that HP shipped tons of machines with only a recovery partition without any CDs. This meant that if the HDD when out the customer had to validate their install using the code on the sticker affixed to the side of the case. Often times these codes were not validated and the WGA tool would pop up telling me it was invalid.
In fact, when I tried to validate an install the other day I got various messages from Microsoft telling me that the code was invalid when it was taken directly from the case. Although this was not done reported by the WGA tool their activation tool told me repeatedly that the code was not valid, even after calling Microsoft to get the install activated.
Those numbers they are touting are completely and utterly wrong. They are attempting to gain emotional ground and support for their nefarious acts. They don't even care to try to be accurate because it simply makes their requirements easier to push down the throats of those of who believe these numbers inaccurate.
I fix computers every day, hundreds every year. Maybe 1 in 200 are pirated and most often they didn't know or their family member did it for them. I generally tell them they should make it legal. I also tell them I am not the police and I could care less about Microsoft's profits, nor do I care to protect Microsoft. I never will. But I let them know that I can fix their computers (when the OS is involved) if they have a legal copy. Most purchase a legal copy.
Of the 20 licenses I have here one would then have to say that I have 4 illegal copies of the OS. This is also not true. All 20 are legal.
Averaging this out it would indicate those numbers are EXTREMELY bloated and COMPLETELY UNTRUE AND INACCURATE.
Microsoft is a content provider albeit a bit player. Bill Gates has proclaimed that computers are far less used to create content--they are more often used to consume it. He's basing his whole strategy on this idea. That's why they are implementing so much DRM voluntarily.
And for those who constantly ask for proof of something instead of looking for themselves, well you need to get an education. People can't afford to take the time to constantly educate you. Rather you should be providing evidence contrary to the supposition rather than demanding someone prove to you. This isn't a court of law. If you don't believe them and you won't take the time to research their points and dispel them posting your comments is pointless. It's like claiming the world is round and you asking them to prove it every time because you don't agree. Just like that is common knowledge and the fact that this site tends to focus on technology it isn't our fault you aren't educated sufficiently enough to know the details or research them yourselves.