On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Paul Saenz <[email protected]> wrote: >>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.
then why do you continue to use hotmail.com? > > 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. Share > now! > _______________________________________________ > LinuxUsers mailing list > [email protected] > http://socallinux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxusers > > -- -Chris
