>Peter Manis wrote: >It is a license.... you are licensed to use it. You do not own it I own the the cd that my copy of windows xp is on, and I own the computer that was sold to me when I bought it, and no one can take it away from me legally. of course I don't own the rights to the software, but I own a licensed to use my copy of it.
>Microsoft doesn't tell you how to use their stuff... but they implement things >that can identify the owner without having all knowledge of who that person >is. >Dodge does the same with multiple VIN numbers throughout a vehicle which >are on your vehicle registration just like the license code is on your >registration for >Windows. of course you are correct....but I wasn't planning on defining all the legal intricacies of the license. my point was that I think that what microsoft did is underhanded. Furthermore, it is not Dodge that implemented the vin system, it was mandated by government legislation. >Dodge also puts a rev limiter and a top speed limiter on their vehicles, which >is similar to how Microsoft may limit functionality in Windows. Schwin, >Frigidaire and >Dodge are all companies that sell things you would actually >own, none of those items are LICENSED. Dodge doesn't monitor your car and disable it if you hack the speed limiter, they only put it there because of legislative mandates in the health and safety laws. >Unless the software you purchase or receive free of cost does not have a >license that specifically states you may do with it as you please there are >certain >guidelines you must follow and in the case of most software that you >purchase you cannot just give it away. Microsoft has the right to protect >their product, >because it is their product not yours. You can also reject >installing Geniuine Advantage you just won't be able to install updates from >their website, which is the >only place I have ever encountered WGA >interaction. When you received your legally licensed copy of Windows, WGA may >not have existed, but security fixes, >bug fixes, and feature changes >introduced into service packs would be considered additions to the original >software and can have different agreements. Just like >the addition of crypto >algorithms can change export restrictions (which does change the rules of the >game in many ways) and how a company can go from GPL >v2 to GPL v3 at a >specific release of their software. Installing WGA will allow you to install >updates that fix bugs and add features... if you don't agree to it you >can't >install. Very much like not agreeing to the license of MySQL 5.1 (if there >was a license change) would not allow you to use partitioning (since you can't >>install 5.1 without agreeing to a license). First of all, Microsoft is not protecting their product from anyone. That may be their excuse, and many may believe that (including microsoft employees) , but you don't even have to be a hacker to get past genuine advantage. All that stuff you said doesn't change the fact that I don't like it. I don't know what you want to proove, but the fact is that I bought a comnputer, and Microsoft wants to hamstring my computer because I don't like the fact that they are trying to exzert control over my computer. I paid money for my computer, and if they were willing to give me the option of paying for updating my computer, then I would have chosen that rather than to register for genuine advantage. I have never given anyone a copy of my windows xp, and I'm not going to, therefore, I don't appreciate microsofts determination to make me accept genuine advantage, or they will hanstring my computer and potentially make it useless. That is one of the big reasons that I chose to learn linux. As far as I'm concerned microsoft sucks. Furthernmore, they are trying to make even more stringent control with vista, and I am convinced that they, along with the government,(border patrol for example) are trying to control computer information so that, just like in the news media, they will be able to corner the market on their propaganda. >This has nothing to do with Microsoft's practices, if they are being shady >they are being shady, but your reason for disliking WGA is not based on that, >it is based >on apples vs oranges. I don't care if it's a fricken pomegranite.,....I don't like it. > I do agree that security fixes should be installed without the need for WGA > and in a lot of cases you can get these updates from other sources (rollup > packs for >unattended installs for one example) Thank you. >Anytime I have ever installed WGA or used Windows update I have never had any >identifying information on any part of my computer and it does not call home >>according to the monitoring I have in place. A while back it was also >mentioned that they were aparently not getting any idenfiable information, WGA >was simply >used to disable copies that were using illegal keys (could be a >lie). >Microsoft may not be a core topic of socallinux, but licensing and the use of >software is >Btw, this was not meant to sound as agressive as it may sound, but I do hear a >lot of trash talked about Windows at work and outside of work and most of the >>time it is stuff that is either not true, a problem caused by the lack of >experience with the OS (which happens a lot in Linux too) and simply because >people feel >like finding a target and bitching. I use Linux, Mac OS, >Windows, etc, and I have reasons for using each one, and complaints about each >one. While I dislike >practices of Microsoft, and some of the problems that >really should have been addressed in Windows, I do sometimes jump on the "stop >hating on microsoft" >boat from time to time. I also don't want to sound agressive. I just want to point out that my view on this issue is not comming from ignorance, or just needing something to bitch about. I don't believe that microsof has been fair with me. Legally, they may have fulfilled all that is required of them, I'm sure, but you know how lawyers are. Furthermore, when microsoft sews someone, they win even if they are not justly in the right, but because no-one can stand up to them in court. Therefore the legal system, which so many hail as Gospel, is really corrupt. So stick that in your license. The bottom line is that I am unsatisfied with microsoft, and I will not buy any product from them, unless it becomes very advantageous to me, and it is impossible for me to accomplish with some other solution. But in that case, they will only get the pittence of one license which isn't really even paid for on a computer I may buy in the future. (unlikely) On the other hand, I will disuade people to buy microsoft at any opportunity that I am able. Peter, I appreciate all the info that you put in this email, and I realize that it is true, so please don't take my response personal. If you don't want to hate microsoft, that is okay with me. I am not really driven by the passion to hate, but I believe in bringing down the corrupt. Oh the joy of having a simple mind. P.S. _________________________________________________________________ Reveal your inner athlete and share it with friends on Windows Live. http://revealyourinnerathlete.windowslive.com?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WLYIA_whichathlete_us
