Big Brother Checking On Your PC Daily [Archive]

Ed Hansberry

06-11-2006, 09:30 PM

<a href="http://www.informationweek.com/internet/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=188703441">http://www.informationweek.com/internet/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=188703441</a> "Microsoft Corp. is being criticized for distributing its Windows XP anti-piracy tool in a way that may leave many PC users in the dark as to what they are actually downloading. In addition, the software maker has come under fire for failing to make it clear to people installing Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA) that the application communicates with Microsoft on a daily basis." So it isn't enough we have to activate the PC, the software also checks back with MS every day to ensure you are still not a thief, because yesterday you might have been honest but today, you could be a criminal. "In its defense, Microsoft said people downloading the application are presented with an end user license that they can accept or reject. Choosing the latter will abort the process." :rotfl: Abort the process? Are they kidding? Last time I went to Microsoft Update, I couldn't get the latest security update without installing the spyware... I mean Windows Genuine Advantage. :roll: Well, once the current beta is done, they will only check every two weeks. :?

UnnDunn

06-11-2006, 10:19 PM

The software communicates with Microsoft to check if it should activate itself or not. So Microsoft can stop it from running in the event that some major flaw is discovered.

No information about you or your computer is transmitted during this process.

This is typical behavior for many, many applications of its type. But for some reason, because it's Microsoft, everyone is up in arms about it.

Ed Hansberry

06-11-2006, 11:00 PM

UnnDunn

06-11-2006, 11:59 PM

The software communicates with Microsoft to check if it should activate itself or not.
Right, because when it activated yesterday, I was honest. But today, I might be a crook. Why does it need to activate itself at all if I am not downloading anything from MS, like critical updates? Why, right now as I type this, is there a piece of software waiting for me to suddenly get illegal?Again, this is typical of copy-protection software from dozens of companies and dozens of products. Why the sudden hate?

I don't like copy protection as much as you don't, but crying foul at Microsoft for doing it is disingenuous and is a double standard.

ADBrown

06-12-2006, 12:23 AM

Again, this is typical of copy-protection software from dozens of companies and dozens of products.

And it's wrong then, too. But for one thing, I personally haven't seen other programs which do this the way that this thing seems to. At most, I've seen apps that tried to check in with a server once, not every day, or not even every two weeks.

txcas

06-12-2006, 01:08 AM

http://www.informationweek.com/internet/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=188703441

"Microsoft Corp. is being criticized for distributing its Windows XP anti-piracy tool in a way that may leave many PC users in the dark as to what they are actually downloading. In addition, the software maker has come under fire for failing to make it clear to people installing Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA) that the application communicates with Microsoft on a daily basis."

So it isn't enough we have to activate the PC, the software also checks back with MS every day to ensure you are still not a thief, because yesterday you might have been honest but today, you could be a criminal.

"In its defense, Microsoft said people downloading the application are presented with an end user license that they can accept or reject. Choosing the latter will abort the process."

:rotfl: Abort the process? Are they kidding? Last time I went to Microsoft Update, I couldn't get the latest security update without installing the spyware... I mean Windows Genuine Advantage. :roll: Well, once the current beta is done, they will only check every two weeks. :?

:sleeping: Who cares? Scan me today, scan me tomorrow, scan me every day, scan me multiple times a day. The process is transparent, does not affect functionality, and no personal data is sent. All my PCs have their own legal copy of Windows so I will worry about more important things. :sleeping:

thanos255

06-12-2006, 01:52 AM

So Microsoft can stop it from running in the event that some major flaw is discovered.

When you say stop 'IT' do you mean Windows itself or the Update Process.

I am not going to pretend that this is something I am surprised at, but I do find it very offensive.

So basically if I completely lock up my house, and the city or state (who is the entity that actually owns the physical land) wants to come in my house because it is sitting on their land, they can just come inside whenever they want....?

I would LOVE to complain more about this, to rant and rave about how illegal, immoral, unethical, and just plain arrogant and rude it is....but lets be honest...could I really stop it if I wanted to?

Unless I disconnect my INTERNET connection, probably not.....

frankenbike

06-12-2006, 02:14 AM

If the day comes when Linux is really ready for prime time (and it is a loooooooooong way off if you aren't using it for a server), I'll make the switch.

Microsoft is busy protecting its interests. One day, people will have a true alternative to turn to that isn't quite so aggressive in defending its intellectual rights. Then maybe, as has happened in so many other businesses, they'll be protecting a shrinking share of their business.

All that has to happen in the future is for someone to develop a way for Linux to support Windows software fully, and the courts to uphold their right to do so and to stay current, and it's all over. The government is mostly standing behind MS, but government priorities can change. Intellectual property rights are not exactly spelled out in the Constitution, and that means it takes a simple majority of Congress to change the rules in the US. Internationally, it's even easier to change once the US changes over.

And China is poised to dominate international politics in the next few years, and they're no fan of intellectual property rights.

It may be decades away, or it might be a couple of years from now, but Microsoft will have a day of reckoning (along with the oil companies). That's just inevitable.

I'm not one of those who think Microsoft deliberately releases flawed software in a scheme to keep "legitimate" customers crawling to their door step for "security updates". But I can understand those who think this is a purposeful part of their anti-piracy strategy, and even my sister who has no grudge against MS thinks so.

But for now, they've got the market. Whenever I have to use Linux machines, it's painful. And when it comes to intellectual "rights", Apple's even worse than MS. So I'm as stuck with MS as most. But I'm not loyal to them, and I'm not their fan.

thanos255

06-12-2006, 02:25 AM

If the day comes when Linux is really ready for prime time (and it is a loooooooooong way off if you aren't using it for a server), I'll make the switch...

Very well said.

I agree with everything you said.

Something else will come along eventually.

I live in Linux Country (Provo, Utah) This is where Novell is located. My brother in law heads a dept in development. You cannot get a bigger opponent of Microsoft, but if you go to his house...all three of his computers INCLUDING his WORK ASSIGNED LAPTOP is a Windows Laptop.

Why?? Well there are many reasons...... I think the above post describes it perfectly.

***huge quote trimmed by mod JD***

UnnDunn

06-12-2006, 03:16 AM

So Microsoft can stop it from running in the event that some major flaw is discovered.

When you say stop 'IT' do you mean Windows itself or the Update Process.The Windows Genuine Notification tool. ie. the thing that pops up the "Counterfeit Windows" messages.

To be clear, the tool doesn't check in to determine your legit status every day. It does that one time when it is installed; after that it does it when you try to install new software from Microsoft (such as Internet Explorer 7 Beta 2.) When it does check in, it updates a file on your hard drive with your legit status. On subsequent logins, it checks for the presence of that file to determine your legit status. It doesn't go out Microsoft's servers unless the file is not present.

The daily check is only to determine if the tool should run or not, so that Microsoft can disable it discreetly and in a hurry if it causes problems (such as if it generates several false positives.) This is prudent software design, because Microsoft realizes the tool may have bugs, and those bugs could potentially negatively impact customer experience.

And yet, Microsoft gets lambasted for it.

IpaqMan2

06-12-2006, 04:29 AM

I live in Linux Country (Provo, Utah) This is where Novell is located.

Actually, Novell moved their head quarters to California. Provo Utah has as much in common with Novell as Roy or the Ogden area Utah has with Iomega (Use to be their headquarters before they up and left to California too a few years ago).

I think Microsoft has every right to have their software authenticate (dosen't mean hackers for find a way around it though) but to have the software check every day or even every 2 weeks is uncalled for. Why? If my software is legit and passes, then WHY KEEP THE LEASH to honest customer? And yes other software vendors do this too and you know what I don't use their software either because it's just spyware tactics.
(Hurry Linux get you crap together so we can all move over).

DaleReeck

06-12-2006, 04:42 AM

:sleeping: Who cares? Scan me today, scan me tomorrow, scan me every day, scan me multiple times a day. The process is transparent, does not affect functionality, and no personal data is sent. All my PCs have their own legal copy of Windows so I will worry about more important things. :sleeping:

Spoken like the same people who say they don't care if the government listens in on their phone conversations because they got nothing to hide. Well, I am honest too and I still don't want Windows sending data back to anyone. That check to see if the software is legal can easily be "enhanced" over time to see what stuff you are buying, what web sites you go to (if they already don't know that) and what emails you are sending and to who. Do you trust a corporation to do the right thing? I don't. Once you let the foot in the door, they will never leave your computer - or your life. Its a lot easier to give up rights than to get them back.

These days, its becoming harder to distinguish between governments and companies. Both are intent on inturding on your life. You may not worry if some dippy company is doing it, but when the most powerful company in the world starts taking a peek at your business, good luck to us all.

frankenbike

06-12-2006, 05:31 AM

The daily check is only to determine if the tool should run or not, so that Microsoft can disable it discreetly and in a hurry if it causes problems (such as if it generates several false positives.) This is prudent software design, because Microsoft realizes the tool may have bugs, and those bugs could potentially negatively impact customer experience.

And yet, Microsoft gets lambasted for it.

No. They get lambasted for having anything on your home machine that can "phone home". Period.

Any communication between your machine and anything else should be at your discretion, and absolutely not, under any circumstances shape or form, the company that creates the software on your computer. You have no direct control of the information that is sent, and even if Microsoft says it's only sending information relevant to their own interests, that's no excuse for them to essentially hijack your machine to protect their interests.

That's the whole problem with this country (the US) and pretty much everywhere else these days. We put up with this BS. 30 years ago, there would be an uprising if people's refridgerators, the new VCRs and other appliances started phoning the manufacturer.

OTOH, George Orwell's 1984 used to be required reading in a lot of high schools.

lapchinj

06-12-2006, 05:54 AM

Spoken like the same people who say they don't care if the government listens in on their phone conversations because they got nothing to hide. Well, I am honest too and I still don't want Windows sending data back to anyone. That check to see if the software is legal can easily be "enhanced" over time to see what stuff you are buying, what web sites you go to (if they already don't know that) and what emails you are sending and to who. Do you trust a corporation to do the right thing? I don't. Once you let the foot in the door, they will never leave your computer - or your life. Its a lot easier to give up rights than to get them back...

Beautifully put. Yeah, that 'I have nothing to hide' just doesn't fly well with me either.

At the company that I currently work for we have a very serious eval rollout going with Sun's Staroffice and OpenOffice on Windows and also on Linux. Suse 10.0 and 10.1 are the current candidates but a couple of people are looking at Kbuntu and Ubuntu. (I don't think that these two will fly since they're not corporate enough.) As far as being ready for the desktop I don't think that there's any question that they are. The only problem is how non Microsoft software will impact everyday productivity. So far so good and seems to be a very viable alternative.

I read someplace that MS Office has something like a 95% market share so it will take some getting used to using another office product. Most people can't even name another word processor. For us pricing and licensing has a lot to do with the Linux rollouts but the Open Document format seems to be becoming even more important. If microsoft would stop being so self centered and adopt the ODF they could hold on to customers seriously looking at other alternatives to MS Office especially if the only reason is because of the ODF.

Jeff-

iant54

06-12-2006, 07:15 AM

What I don't understand is, if Windows Genuine Advantage is checking my PC on a regular basis, why do I need to allow Microsoft to check it again when I go to their website to download a plug-in to Office?

griph

06-12-2006, 08:11 AM

[:sleeping: Who cares? Scan me today, scan me tomorrow, scan me every day, scan me multiple times a day. The process is transparent, does not affect functionality, and no personal data is sent. All my PCs have their own legal copy of Windows so I will worry about more important things. :sleeping:
You may think so - but many others do not! I agree with Ed - and more so. The Update failed to install - and keeps doing so on my machine, despite the fact I have a perfectly legal copy of XP on it.
There are many people fighting the UK plan to introduce ID cards for humans - despite the potential benefits of them - so why should you think that MS should be free from criticism for introducing a Backdoor Big Brother process such as this!
I'd be interested in hearing from UnnDunn other 'examples' of this behaviour from other SW houses - cos I don't believe it happens much at all!

griph

06-12-2006, 08:18 AM

And yet, Microsoft gets lambasted for it.
Microsoft are getting lambasted because this is a crap piece of work - and it is causing all sorts of problems - failed installs of the Update, false reporting etc - and all you can do is sit there and cry foul! Shame on you - sort the problem - we aren't it - Microsoft is! :roll:

Ed Hansberry

06-12-2006, 10:43 AM

lapchinj

06-12-2006, 01:15 PM

The daily check is only to determine if the tool should run or not, so that Microsoft can disable it discreetly and in a hurry if it causes problems (such as if it generates several false positives.) This is prudent software design, because Microsoft realizes the tool may have bugs, and those bugs could potentially negatively impact customer experience.
Sorry UnnDunn but I don't buy that. Could you imagine if every software package that runs on a PC would take this 'prudent software design' to heart. Just imagine the bandwidth it would use just to be able to discreetly and in a hurry disable any errant application. Sounds like a bizarre excuse at best.

Besides why would I want Microsoft (or any vendor) to decide if I should or shouldn't run some tool that I paid for. Will it come to pass that before I fire up some Microsoft app I have to prove licensing. With all the trouble I've experienced in the past with WGA I couldn't see this policy fly too well with critical applications that run in a hospital for example.

Sorry.

Jeff-

DaleReeck

06-12-2006, 02:01 PM

Besides why would I want Microsoft (or any vendor) to decide if I should or shouldn't run some tool that I paid for. Will it come to pass that before I fire up some Microsoft app I have to prove licensing. With all the trouble I've experienced in the past with WGA I couldn't see this policy fly too well with critical applications that run in a hospital for example.

Plus, if the thing about being able to disable Windows (or parts of Windows) is true, that's another thing I don't want anybody but me in charge of. What if a hacker gets in, unleashes a worm and manages to disable millions of desktops around the world? Microsoft is going to need those billions of dollars of cash they have on hand to defend themselves against lawsuits.

These companies never seem to learn. RealPlayer tried to sneak spyware into one of their versions and then there's the whole Sony DVD debacle. Both companies were shamed by the users into withdrawing the spyware. Now hopefully it will be Microsoft's turn.

***long quote trimmed by mod JD. please trim your quotes.***

DaleReeck

06-12-2006, 02:08 PM

[quote=UnnDunn]
That's the whole problem with this country (the US) and pretty much everywhere else these days. We put up with this BS. 30 years ago, there would be an uprising if people's refridgerators, the new VCRs and other appliances started phoning the manufacturer.

OTOH, George Orwell's 1984 used to be required reading in a lot of high schools.

Unfortunately, Americans talk about fighting for freedom in all parts of the world, yet they seem unwilling to fight for their freedoms right here inside our own borders, acquiescing to anything with the phrase "national security" attached to it. The Romans used to have a saying (paraphrasing) "I would rather die free than live as a slave." Not too many are buying that these days though. Though reading these forums, hopefully there are more of us out there than we think ;)

whydidnt

06-12-2006, 02:36 PM

I think Benjamin Franklin put it best:
"Those willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither security nor liberty."

So what happens in 5 years when M$ hasn't sold as many copies of Vista as they planned, and decides that XP is a "security risk" since it's no longer patched and simply uses this tool to un-validate every copy of Windows, forcing us to go buy their new OS?

Certainly we couldn't envision that today, but laws change, times change and people's attitudes change. The fact that we are today allowing them to control whether or not we can use legitimately purchased software, certainly puts us in the position of them using for some other purpose in the future. Once the door is open, it is very hard to close.

SteveHoward999

06-12-2006, 02:42 PM

Unfortunately, Americans talk about fighting for freedom in all parts of the world, yet they seem unwilling to fight for their freedoms right here inside our own borders, acquiescing to anything with the phrase "national security" attached to it.

What's happened is you have sold your souls to the Devil that is Corporate Dollars.

:soapbox:

All those huge US Corporates have more power than most of the governments in the world, and it is the American people that gave then that power by swallowing endless commercials and allowing Big Money to be the winner in everything instead of Real People.

pivaska

06-12-2006, 03:07 PM

Since I don't connect to the internet first thing in the morning it asks me to connect so that it can do something with go.microsoft.com. Is that what all of this is about?

DaleReeck

06-12-2006, 03:53 PM

Since I don't connect to the internet first thing in the morning it asks me to connect so that it can do something with go.microsoft.com. Is that what all of this is about?

Possibly. When I'm using the wireless network at work (which requires VPN authentication to get outside the University), if I don't authenticate first, I get an error about not being able to connect to that web site.

I may be completely wrong about this and it could be just coincidence, but if I go through the registry and delete references to that web site, it stops doing it. But if I then run Windows Update, the Genuine Advantage "patch" always reappears. Run the update and the go.ms.com references reappear. Hmmmmm. :D

Update: Now that I look at it, I think it is unrelated. The go.ms.com references do stay deleted though I'm still not sure why the Gen Adv patch reappeared. But it was only on one machine and I could not replicate it.

jmulder

06-12-2006, 03:54 PM

I worry that this is part of a move from purchased licenses to a subscription model. After all, why check again if something is licensed unless you expect the answer to change?

Wasn't Office going to be offered as a subscription?

pivaska

06-12-2006, 04:45 PM

Janak Parekh

06-12-2006, 04:56 PM

All those huge US Corporates
Whoa, not so fast. Last I checked, Sony, Vivendi, and many others were not US-based.

It's a side-effect of our globalizing culture, one that will need more attention. But legislation to "solve" it isn't easy -- there are new issues cropping up every day that simply don't have precedent in our history. Legislation can be harmful as well if it's not done right. Unfortunately, our legislators are neophytes about technology, and of course subject to lobbying, so we'll probably continue down this road for a while until we figure out what should be done.

--janak

BugDude10

06-12-2006, 06:34 PM

I have no problem with MS offering additional goodies (e.g., PhotoStory v3) only to those who validate first; I think security patches should be available to everyone (legitimate or otherwise) just to prevent bugs and stuff from being able to spread so easily.

As for the checking-in thing, though, I do have a problem. First, as Ed noted originally, does MS expect me to be legal one day and not the next? And what might trigger a false positive? A current issue I have: I bought a PC from a big OEM with Win XP Pro pre-installed and, as I recall, pre-activated. I was going to do a fresh install of XP Pro to clear out the gunk, but the install said my product key was invalid; it was the same key as on the sticker on the side of my PC. I un-Ghosted the PC, ran a product key check program (actually, two of the them), and got a completely different key. When I tried to re-install with the second key, I got another invalid-key install failure. I know that sometimes product keys get out into the wild, and MS may want to invalidate them when they do; will WGA invalidate my key, and disable my XP, if my key gets out? And why would it need to keep checking anyway? Are bad guys installing legitimate copies of Windows, getting WGA approval, then somehow replacing them with illegitimate copies of Windows?

On the more general software protection issue, I have a problem with what MS might be checking on my PC. Is it checking to see if I've violated its bullsh*t EULA by installing one copy of Outlook on two PCs? Is it also going to check if I've installed one copy of Photoshop or Norton on two PCs?

And as for the more general "big brother" issue, it's all well and good that you've got nothing to hide from the DHS looking for terrorists by monitoring e-mail or telephone conversations, but what if someone from DME (Department of Morality Enforcement) finds out you're cheating on your spouse, or someone from DEL (Depoartment of Employer Loyalty) finds out you're looking for another job from your work PC? Lawyers call this the "slippery slope" -- when does something legitimate slide into something abusive? In America, we're presumed innocent until proven guilty, and we have the right not to be forced or coerced into incriminating ourselves. If MS thinks I'm doing something wrong, then prove it -- but don't potentially sabotage my PC in your fishing expedition.

Just my $0.02.

lapchinj

06-12-2006, 08:04 PM

So far in Open Office and StarOffice the only parts that have an issue are the macros. Some of the more intense ones need to be reworked a bit. The only other reason that I don't do a complete switch is Outlook and my PDA. If I could snyc up with something else I probably would.
I'm not a 'real' user of macros or any intense stuff so it has no effect on me. The only time it makes a difference is when someone sends me some intence docs or xls files. Other than that I've been pretty happy with StarOffice.

On the Windows platform my main mail app is already Thunderbird and Outlook second. On Suse it's Evolution and if this app was available on Windows I would drop Outlook and find a way to feed my PDA. Like you the reason I don't go completely away from Outlook is mainly my PDA and terrific spam and virus software. But sooner of later that will change. More and more software vendors are trying to catch the train on the MS alternatives.

Jeff-

UnnDunn

06-13-2006, 10:02 AM

Christ almighty...

Microsoft IS NOT "monitoring" or "checking" your PC daily. Period. It's not looking over your shoulder, checking if you are legit from one day to the next. They're not going to kill your PC at the first sign of trouble, and they don't have spies watching your every move and recording your every keystroke.

I bet each and every person complaining in this thread has at least half a dozen applications on their computers which periodically check to see if there are new versions of the application.

WGA Notifications does essentially the same thing. It checks daily to see if there's a new version of its settings file, and downloads it. It performs exactly the same operation your RSS feedreader does when it updates a feed. It doesn't send anything about your PC to Microsoft beyond your IP address, and other HTTP housekeeping information. Every server you talk to on the Internet has the same information about your computer. Heck, PPCThoughts has this information in its Apache log. Are you going to call Jason Dunn "big brother" now?

Microsoft did neglect to mention that this daily check takes place, and for that they have apologized and taken great pains to clarify the situation.

WGA Validation is the one that sends more extensive information about your Windows installation to Microsoft. It does this one time when you first install it, and thereafter only when you visit Windows Update or attempt to install Microsoft software which requires it (such as Internet Explorer 7 Beta 2 or Windows Media Player 11.) In all cases, Microsoft will tell you in no uncertain terms that your Windows install is being validated, and they make it very clear on this page (http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/downloads/FAQ.aspx?displaylang=en) what information is sent and what is done with it.

If you are going to blast Microsoft for violating your privacy, at least know what you are talking about first; don't just regurgitate what you read on some Microsoft-bashing, Linux advocacy site.

Ed Hansberry

06-13-2006, 11:26 AM

The daily check is only to determine if the tool should run or not, so that Microsoft can disable it discreetly and in a hurry if it causes problems (such as if it generates several false positives.) This is prudent software design, because Microsoft realizes the tool may have bugs, and those bugs could potentially negatively impact customer experience.
Prudent design? and yet MS is changing how it works from daily to fortnightly. Is that not prudent? why would MS go from prudent to foolish design? there is NO reason for the software to run at all until it is time to download. it can check then, with my permission, to see if it needs to run or shut itself down.

Still waiting to her UnnDunn if this design is so great and prudent, why MS is changing it?

Also, as for the apps on my machine "calling home" lookiing for upgrades, only those that I have checked the box allowing such behavior. Can you point me to the checkbox I can enable or disable on WGA that gives me a similar choice? :?:

UnnDunn

06-13-2006, 12:36 PM

Still waiting to her UnnDunn if this design is so great and prudent, why MS is changing it?

Because as the testing cycle winds down and all the bugs are stamped out, there is less need for a "kill switch" to disable it. Eventually there will be no need for the update check, and it'll be turned off. That is what you wanted, right?

Also, as for the apps on my machine "calling home" lookiing for upgrades, only those that I have checked the box allowing such behavior. Can you point me to the checkbox I can enable or disable on WGA that gives me a similar choice? :?:

If you think the only apps that call home are the ones you've explicitly given permission, boy are you mistaken. Microsoft are not the first to put in a mandatory check, and they certainly won't be the last. if you don't like it, then I suggest you unplug your computer from the net.

aroma

06-13-2006, 01:48 PM

Because as the testing cycle winds down and all the bugs are stamped out, there is less need for a "kill switch" to disable it. Eventually there will be no need for the update check, and it'll be turned off. That is what you wanted, right?

If you think the only apps that call home are the ones you've explicitly given permission, boy are you mistaken. Microsoft are not the first to put in a mandatory check, and they certainly won't be the last. if you don't like it, then I suggest you unplug your computer from the net.

If this app is so buggy that it has to check in every day for an update or "kill switch", then DO NOT make it a manditory install for me to be able to update my legally purchased software.

And regardless of how many companies do something similar, that does NOT make it any more right. Unfortanately for MS, when you are the big dog in the business, you are going to take the heat, even if you aren't the only one doing it.

lapchinj

06-13-2006, 07:45 PM

If you think the only apps that call home are the ones you've explicitly given permission, boy are you mistaken. Microsoft are not the first to put in a mandatory check, and they certainly won't be the last. if you don't like it, then I suggest you unplug your computer from the net.
Sorry, nothing outgoing aside from what I'm letting and MS (who doesn't ask). Any application that is found on my machine calling out that cannot be turned off in their options will be uninstalled. Unfortunately I can't do that with MS.

If you are going to blast Microsoft for violating your privacy, at least know what you are talking about first; don't just regurgitate what you read on some Microsoft-bashing, Linux advocacy site.
This site is far from a 'Microsoft-bashing, Linux advocacy site'. I think the people here reflect the average Windows user, do not have cramps and have adequate knowledge about what they're talking about.

Cheer up, discussion is what make this site so great and informative.

Jeff-

UnnDunn

06-14-2006, 03:53 AM

If you are going to blast Microsoft for violating your privacy, at least know what you are talking about first; don't just regurgitate what you read on some Microsoft-bashing, Linux advocacy site.
This site is far from a 'Microsoft-bashing, Linux advocacy site'. With a headline like "Big Brother Checking your PC daily" and blatant alarmist copy almost reminiscent of the average Slashdot posting, one could be forgiven for thinking otherwise.

There is nothing "Big Brother-like" about what Microsoft is doing. To suggest or imply otherwise is being unfair to Microsoft.

Ed Hansberry

06-14-2006, 10:20 AM

This site is far from a 'Microsoft-bashing, Linux advocacy site'. With a headline like "Big Brother Checking your PC daily" and blatant alarmist copy almost reminiscent of the average Slashdot posting, one could be forgiven for thinking otherwise.

There is nothing "Big Brother-like" about what Microsoft is doing. To suggest or imply otherwise is being unfair to Microsoft.
1) MS is checking in daily
2) it is checking in with a piece of software designed to monitor me

those are the facts. Your defense of them on this borders on fanboy status. you can't be an MS employee because i've never met an MS employee that would go near this far to defend such a big brotherish tactic. WGA is the definition of a big brother program, both in its asinine execution of ramrodding this insidious beta code down our throats to get security patches for holes in the OS big enough to drive a tractor trailer through, as well as the design in the code itself which has the sole purpose to monitor what I do with my own PC, because heaven forbid I should make too many hardware changes to my PC and WGA decides my upgraded PC isn't the same and now i'm a pirate. I mean, lets just toss out the window what the "P" in PC stands for. and let me help you out there - it does NOT stand for "Property of Microsoft." WGA is far more invasive that product activation.

if you don't think WGA is big brotherish in both design and execution, then not only have you drank the koolaid, you are swimming in a vat of it performing synchronized swimming maneuvers with members of MS's legal team, and you are gold medal material.

{clap}{clap}{clap}ok, attention everyone! Positions please. Lets take the counterclockwise Nutcracker on Ice move from the top. get back in the pool and this time I want to see some emotion! make me want to jump in the koolaid with you!!! and a-one, and a-two, and a-three, and GO!

gtx1000

06-14-2006, 05:53 PM

Your defense of them on this borders on fanboy status.

As a non-affiliated lurker, I don't think UnnDunn sounds like a fanboy at all. In fact, he's the only one who's discussing what the product actually does. I'm all for privacy and "down with Big Brother" but the rest of the posts are remarkably devoid of factual content.

UnnDunn

06-14-2006, 07:53 PM

This site is far from a 'Microsoft-bashing, Linux advocacy site'. With a headline like "Big Brother Checking your PC daily" and blatant alarmist copy almost reminiscent of the average Slashdot posting, one could be forgiven for thinking otherwise.

There is nothing "Big Brother-like" about what Microsoft is doing. To suggest or imply otherwise is being unfair to Microsoft.
1) MS is checking in daily
2) it is checking in with a piece of software designed to monitor me

those are the facts.

Those are distortions.

1)This application checks for new updates, the same way any internet-aware application does.
2)The application that performs the check is not designed to monitor you.

Your defense of them on this borders on fanboy status. you can't be an MS employee because i've never met an MS employee that would go near this far to defend such a big brotherish tactic. WGA is the definition of a big brother program, both in its asinine execution of ramrodding this insidious beta code down our throats to get security patches for holes in the OS big enough to drive a tractor trailer through, as well as the design in the code itself which has the sole purpose to monitor what I do with my own PC, because heaven forbid I should make too many hardware changes to my PC and WGA decides my upgraded PC isn't the same and now i'm a pirate. I mean, lets just toss out the window what the "P" in PC stands for. and let me help you out there - it does NOT stand for "Property of Microsoft." WGA is far more invasive that product activation.

if you don't think WGA is big brotherish in both design and execution, then not only have you drank the koolaid, you are swimming in a vat of it performing synchronized swimming maneuvers with members of MS's legal team, and you are gold medal material.
Your characterization of Microsoft's anti-piracy technologies smacks of someone who has spent too much time surfing Slashdot and not enough time actually researching how those technologies operate.

Microsoft does not monitor, track or otherwise spy on you or your computer. Period. That is a fact. [/list]

aroma

06-14-2006, 09:03 PM

Microsoft does not monitor, track or otherwise spy on you or your computer. Period. That is a fact. [/list]

Please wait one moment while I step aside before the lighting strikes.

UnnDunn

06-14-2006, 09:35 PM

Microsoft does not monitor, track or otherwise spy on you or your computer. Period. That is a fact. [/list]

Please wait one moment while I step aside before the lighting strikes.Please demonstrate to me how Microsoft does spy on you through Windows, if you believe it does. Use specific examples of applications, describe the nature of their communication with Microsoft, and demonstrate how that communication constitutes "spying." If your assertions are true, this should be easy to do.

griph

06-14-2006, 11:57 PM

The thread is rapidly going to hell in a handbasket. Blimey! I wouldn't be at all surprised if it ended up in HoFAS! 8O

Ed Hansberry

06-15-2006, 12:11 AM

http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2006/synchronizedswimming.jpg

lapchinj

06-15-2006, 12:18 AM

http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/hansberry/2006/synchronizedswimming.jpg
Is this supposed to something like the swan song before the curtain falls 8) ?

Jeff-

UnnDunn

06-15-2006, 02:47 AM

I find it interesting that everyone accuses me of beig a fanboy, yet no-one can seem to post any factual information to refute my claims.

You will note that, aside from a Slashdot-related jibe, I have not attacked anyone here.

Again, if you have concrete information that proves Microsoft is spying on you, feel free to post it. I would love to be proved wrong.

Ed Hansberry

06-15-2006, 03:28 AM

UnnDunn

06-15-2006, 04:18 AM

I find it interesting that everyone accuses me of beig a fanboy, yet no-one can seem to post any factual information to refute my claims.
ok...
Microsoft does not monitor, track or otherwise spy on you or your computer. Period. That is a fact.
From the very article I linked to, had you bothered to read it:

"The program's validation feature, however, does pass along more information, notifying the company whether a computer is running a pirated copy of Windows, and identifying the manufacturer of the hardware, and its settings for language and locale. The software rechecks the computer every 90 days to make sure nothing has changed."

Which part of monitoring, tracking or otherwise spying doesn't register with you? Hint: that is a rhetorical question. no need to reply. Now, be careful, you are splashing a bit much.

WGA Validation is the one that sends more extensive information about your Windows installation to Microsoft. It does this one time when you first install it, and thereafter only when you visit Windows Update or attempt to install Microsoft software which requires it (such as Internet Explorer 7 Beta 2 or Windows Media Player 11.) In all cases, Microsoft will tell you in no uncertain terms that your Windows install is being validated, and they make it very clear on this page what information is sent and what is done with it.I said this back on page 4 of this thread. Next.

Ed Hansberry

06-15-2006, 11:00 AM

Microsoft does not monitor, track or otherwise spy on you or your computer. Period. That is a fact.
From the very article I linked to, had you bothered to read it:

"The program's validation feature, however, does pass along more information, notifying the company whether a computer is running a pirated copy of Windows, and identifying the manufacturer of the hardware, and its settings for language and locale. The software rechecks the computer every 90 days to make sure nothing has changed."

Which part of monitoring, tracking or otherwise spying doesn't register with you?

WGA Validation is the one that sends more extensive information about your Windows installation to Microsoft. It does this one time when you first install it, and thereafter only when you visit Windows Update or attempt to install Microsoft software which requires it.I said this back on page 4 of this thread. Next.
at least every 90 days. it monitors and tracks. sorry this is difficult for you. I am through with your word games. have a nice dilusion.

aroma

06-15-2006, 01:12 PM

"The program's validation feature, however, does pass along more information, notifying the company whether a computer is running a pirated copy of Windows, and identifying the manufacturer of the hardware, and its settings for language and locale. The software rechecks the computer every 90 days to make sure nothing has changed."

Add to that your BIOS make and version, serial numbers of your HDs...

hrana

06-16-2006, 12:57 AM

If it hasn't been posted, please go read the Groklaw article (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20060608002958907) on this issue... Ed is 100% correct in what he is saying.

UnnDunn, do everyone a favor a read the entire post--it has all the hard facts you need from a paralegal who knows what she is talking about. Once you finish with that please come back and own up to being wrong.

lapchinj

06-16-2006, 02:27 AM

I would just like to post a couple of URL's to add a little support to what Ed and others have been saying. Two very thorough artiles by non microsoft bashing and Linux loving types.

Genuine Advantage is Microsoft spyware
By Brian Livingston
http://www.windowssecrets.com/comp/060615/

Images: Microsoft's shoddy Windows Genuine Advantage Installation Process
posted by David Berlind
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?page_id=3170&page=13

I think that this should clear up a lot of the misconceptions flying around and highlight Microsofts really big PR blunder. Just goes to show you that when someone is locked into a particular vendor you are at their mercy. Bottom line is that if I don't agree to download and accept Microsofts terms I cannot update my machine(s) with criticle patches and updates. I'm sorry that this sounds like Microsoft bashing but to me it smells from coercion :deal: .

Jeff-

Ed Hansberry

06-16-2006, 02:57 AM

Oh man, now you people are throwing logic and facts into this. :roll:

:lol:

lapchinj

06-16-2006, 03:03 AM

Oh man, now you people are throwing logic and facts into this. :roll:

:lol:
That's why these forums exist Ed. You should know this the best. If there are no facts we all may as well to to a bar and live it up - no logic, no facts and no pain :beer: .

Jeff-

lapchinj

06-16-2006, 05:30 PM

Hellooooooooooo, anybody there?????????

Damn! I hope I didn't kill this thread 8O

Jeff-

crairdin

06-16-2006, 09:01 PM

Forget privacy concerns, spyware, stolen machine cycles, and whether America has sold out to big business. The real problem with WGA is that it doesn't always work! I have a PC here with a completely legal Windows installation that all of a sudden is telling me it's not genuine.

So now without the benefit of a search warrant, a trial before a jury of my peers, or a writ of habeas corpus the functionality of my PC has been co-opted by Microsoft. Right now it lets me continue working after I tell it I'll deal with it later. But will it shut me down at some point?

And since this is the computer I use to display aviation charts and instrument approach procedures when I fly, will Microsoft choose to delete my supposed non-genuine copy of Windows when I'm in the clouds, 500' above the ground descending to an airport in a thunderstorm?

Say what you will about the "politeness" of WGA, the real problem is that it doesn't work. It's a virus without a patch.

Craig

Rob Alexander

06-17-2006, 12:20 AM

Rob Alexander

06-17-2006, 12:24 AM

And as for the more general "big brother" issue, it's all well and good that you've got nothing to hide from the DHS looking for terrorists by monitoring e-mail or telephone conversations, but what if someone from DME (Department of Morality Enforcement) finds out you're cheating on your spouse, or someone from DEL (Depoartment of Employer Loyalty) finds out you're looking for another job from your work PC? Lawyers call this the "slippery slope" -- when does something legitimate slide into something abusive?

It doesn't have to be something that's so 'in your face' as these examples either. Consider this possibility. The government taps your emails under the guise of looking for terrorism. 'I have nothing to hide' you say 'and I'm afraid of terrorists even though I stand a much better chance of dying in my car than from a terror attack,' and so you decide it's okay.

However, you also are not a fan of the party currently in power and write emails expressing that to others. How easy would it be for the NSA to flag those emails for key words and put together a list of voters whose registrations should be 'scrutinized'? Answer, very easy. Think that's far-fetched? It's documented that the registrations of over 350,000 voters in Ohio, the overwhelming majority registered with the party opposing that of the state's Attorney General, were invalidated just before the last presidential election in 2004.

Now I'm not going down that road because 1) this isn't a forum for politics and 2) that's not my point. My point is that you simply cannot be complacent about your civil rights because people will try to take them away if you let them. It has happened throughout the history of our country, it is happening right now and it will continue to happen. That you have nothing to hide has nothing to do with it. People with an agenda can be very clever and can do amazing things with seemingly innocuous information. As with my hypothetical voting example (and it is hypothetical), you may not even see the relationship between the right you gave up and the negative outcome. You'll be surprised and angry that your name doesn't appear on the voter roles, but you'll never know that the reason is because of the emails you wrote.

I can understand someone not seeing such a relationship, but I cannot understand someone actually willing to say 'I'm not doing anything wrong, so I don't care about my rights'. What an insult it is to the memory of every man and woman who has died defending our freedoms, that so many people think so little of those freedoms as to give them up because they can't be bothered to protect them.

This has gone a bit off-topic from the MS privacy issue in particular, but it's really the same issue. To whom do you give full access to your personal information and do you trust them to only use it as they promise they will?

My final thought is that I think this intrusion is going to seem like pretty small fish next to the things MS has planned for Vista. I'm thinking more and more that XP is likely to be my last version of Windows. I'll keep using XP for a number of years, then shift partially or fully (depending on how things go) to Linux after that.

Ed Hansberry

06-17-2006, 02:46 AM

Damn! I hope I didn't kill this thread 8O

Not at all. undunn was apparently un-done though.

developerzero

06-17-2006, 03:09 AM

I don't mean to sound rude, but everyone just SHUT UP AND READ THE DAMN ARTICLE BEFORE POSTING!!!!! You're all so obsessed with lambasting Microsoft, that you can't even see the truth when you don't want to see it.

The application is currently in beta.

Microsoft said the phone-in feature is to check for updates and is a kind of safety feature in case Microsoft has to suddenly disable the program. The latter scenario would occur if the program, for example, started to report pirated versions of Windows XP on computers that had legitimate copies. No other information is passed on to Microsoft through this feature, the company said.

:twak: BETA!!! The reason it "phones home" is to tell Microsoft how well it is working, and to ensure there aren't any bugs. :twak:

The program's validation feature, however, does pass along more information, notifying the company whether a computer is running a pirated copy of Windows, and identifying the manufacturer of the hardware, and its settings for language and locale. The software rechecks the computer every 90 days to make sure nothing has changed.

:twak: This is to make a note of what hardware you are running with the software, to ensure it runs equally well on all configurations (who hasn't had a piece of software crash because of a configuration issue or conflict with a driver?). And it rechecks to update in case you have changed a piece of hardware (new $1000 graphics card anybody?).:twak:

Finally, it clearly states:
The company plans to change the settings of the application in its next release, so that it dials in to Microsoft every two weeks, the spokeswoman said. The call-in feature would be disabled permanently when the program is generally available worldwide later this year.
so it will stop "phoning home" as soon as it is out of beta.
:twak:

You people need to learn how to read, and how to trust. Stop yelling at others, and start looking at yourselves. The problem isn't (completely) with the companies, but instead, it is with the consumers who can't follow the rules. If people didn't steal software, than Microsoft (and other companies) wouldn't have to do stuff like this.

Now, I do agree that many of these companies do go a little (or way) over-the-top ( ::cough:: Apple, Sony ::cough:: ::cough:: ), and that it was a little sneaky the way they installed it, but consumers need to take a little more responsibility with their actions. You cannot complain just because you are too damn lazy to read the License Agreement, or better yet, do manual updates and just tell Windows Update not to remind you to install it again (you can do that). :deal:

What Microsoft should have done is sent out a one-time message via the update system to ask if anyone wants to join in on the beta (they really shouldn't have just thrown it in like it was a necessary, full program).

Oh, and you CAN uninstall it. Just go to add/remove programs, check show updates, and look near the bottom. #Silly

One last thing: :rock on dude!: Rock on UnnDunn, gtx1000, and Microsoft,:werenotworthy: for their awesome programs that most of us are using (and is the maker of the OS for the devices this site is based on). :bangin:

Edit: And by trusting more, I really mean just a little bit. At least look (and think) before you leap.

Sheena

06-17-2006, 05:36 PM

Trust? Microsoft? Corporations? Manufacturers? Government? Are you kidding? 8O Their interest is not us, it's their bottom line, $$$. And for politicians it's just getting (re)elected, same difference. Unfortunately for them, that requires *our* $ and votes, so they have to try & cater to our needs, offer what we need (or what they can convince us we need) as expensive as possible, as frequently as possible, with the least amount of effort & investment in their part. Hence the bugs, the packages, the "support".

MS has a great monopoly & of course they want to protect it. Why be happy with 75% of the market when you can have it all? Piracy is certainly a problem for them, but not from users like you & me, but from other big organizations doing mass-produced copies of their software & selling them all over the world. That's why legal copies are offered so much cheaper in places like China, trying to get people to buy them instead of the stolen ones. There's little of that here but *we* pay full price (+ a few surcharches for their "losses").

Now, why should I care? Because I use their products? I already paid good $$$ for them, several times in fact because they force me to upgrade when I don't need/want to. Only once in a while they offer something innovative enough that I actually want it. Their monopoly squashes the competition & developers of software/hardware we may find useful have to play by their rules to be able to succeed. Looking at my computer right now, maybe 1/2 of the software I own is designed to fix a MS problem or add an ordinary functionality it lacks.

Trust them? Why? Because they say so or wrote it somewhere? It's not a binding contract. If it's ever proven it was not true, they'll claim a typo or a mistaken assumption, or plain "times change". How many of you have registered on a site that swears they'll never sell your data & some time later get bought by another organization with different standards? They're manufacturers & we're consumers, it's not a parent-child relationship, ok? We don't *owe* them anything. If they provide a good enough service, a path will be beaten to their door & we'll happily throw our hard-earned $ at them & tell all our friends to do the same. As it stands now maybe half of us are forced to use MS because of their stranglehold in the market, not for personal preference. That's hardly a recommendation.

'whydidnt' mentioned MS abandoning XP & the possibility of their invalidating the versions no longer supported. If anyone thinks that's farfetched, be aware that they're already doing something similar this very year. Starting in October, if you haven't upgraded XP to SP2, you won't be able to get critical patches or any other updates. I had no intention of upgrading until I bought a new computer, but now I either get a very buggy upgrade I don't need (at least it's free), or run the risk of getting hacked. But XP will still work. They say.

Liberties of any kind are hard to get, must be paid for with lives, blood & tears, and are constantly eroded with any excuse. Alas, the "I have nothing to hide, go ahead & spy on me" is a typical attitude. A very lazy one too. And the blind trust it implies on how others will use the information obtained is plain stupid. We live in the information era, data is everything. If are not able to have a say on how our own is obtained & used, we're literally giving away property.

Regarding misuse of data, the mildest example I can think of is this: How about the "beneficial" tracking of which pages you surf to show you only the ads you may be interested on? The gathering of personal information when you shop online so you can get special customized offers? Sure you may get those, but have you had any spam lately? Anything you may want in that deluge?

I for one refuse to let go of my rights without at the very least a lot of bitching & moaning. If MS or anyone else wants my $, let alone my trust, they better earn it. So far they're doing a piss-poor job at it.

Rosie :soapbox:

lapchinj

06-18-2006, 03:40 AM

:twak: ...BETA!!! The reason it "phones home" is to tell Microsoft how well it is working, and to ensure there aren't any bugs.

:twak: ...This is to make a note of what hardware you are running with the software...

:twak: ...so it will stop "phoning home" as soon as it is out of beta.

:twak: ...If people didn't steal software, than Microsoft (and other companies) wouldn't have to do stuff like this.

:twak: Edit: And by trusting more, I really mean just a little bit. At least look (and think) before you leap.

1- I'm not paid as a beta tester
2- It's none of their business what I'm running. See #1
3- They shouldn't be phoning home with my system specs to begin with. See #1
4- I don't steal software. The majority of theft occurs in the non-western world. So find a way to make this beta run on their copies of MS software.
5- Enron comes to mind.

Jeff-

developerzero

06-22-2006, 09:46 AM

1- I'm not paid as a beta tester
2- It's none of their business what I'm running. See #1
3- They shouldn't be phoning home with my system specs to begin with. See #1
4- I don't steal software. The majority of theft occurs in the non-western world. So find a way to make this beta run on their copies of MS software.
5- Enron comes to mind.

Jeff-

1) No one is paid to beta test (least, not anyone I know of). If you don't want to test the software, don't run it. I, personally, love beta software. It's basically free software.

2) It is their business if you are beta testing their software.

3)See #s 1&2.

4)I never claimed you did, but software theft is almost as popular here in America as it is in other countries; it just isn't well-known.

5) That is part of "looking". Someone should have been doing their jobs and watching what was going on with Enron. (and don't you dare try to make a claim that I am supporting them. I live in Oregon, and was screwed with the rest of the region in relation to PGE (which I believed should have become a public entity, and would have had it not been for the typical mudslinging and dirty tactics of the Republican Party)).

As for everything else: if you don't like the software DON'T USE IT!!!!! Noone is holding a knife to your head, forcing you to use a computer. Go to a fleemarket, garage sale, goodwill, or eBay and buy a damn typewriter if you don't like it, but DON'T COMPLAIN!!!!

Ed Hansberry

06-22-2006, 10:50 AM

1) No one is paid to beta test (least, not anyone I know of). If you don't want to test the software, don't run it.
try getting security updates from Windows Update without it. :roll:
As for everything else: if you don't like the software DON'T USE IT!!!!! Noone is holding a knife to your head, forcing you to use a computer. Go to a fleemarket, garage sale, goodwill, or eBay and buy a damn typewriter if you don't like it, but DON'T COMPLAIN!!!!
don't use windows? that is the most absurd comment i've seen in this thread - well, except for the comments denying what WGA does. only the most aggressive of anti-ms zealots will suffer the interoperability issues faced by Mac/Linux platforms in a Windows environment. Even now, Apple lets you dual boot Mac and Windows because they know for many, without some access to Windows, they simply can't get the job done. Besides, complaining is what is getting MS to change its WGA practices.

but I am sure thare are a lot of companies out there that are happy to know there are consumers like you that, once you've purchased their product, you will never complain about it.

lapchinj

06-22-2006, 01:59 PM

1) No one is paid to beta test...
Not completely true. There are different incentives given to individules and companies to beta test software.

...If you don't want to test the software, don't run it...
I was not given a choice. And if I didn't run the software I wouldn't be able to patch Windows.

...typical mudslinging and dirty tactics of the Republican Party...
I don't think anyone wants to go that direction. There are other sites for those kinds of discussions.

...don't use windows? that is the most absurd comment i've seen in this thread - well, except for the comments denying what WGA does. ...
Yeah it sounded a bit funny (peculiar).

Jeff-

Sheena

06-22-2006, 05:39 PM

"Utility Nukes Windows Genuine Advantage Callbacks"
[url]http://news.yahoo.com/s/zd/181561;_ylt=AkMnfIZfv5B1qsE9ysDebLgDW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBhcmljNmVhBHNlYwNtcm5ld3M-

Has anyone seen this? I saw the article today in Yahoo! News, but the link to the utility claims it's in maintenance. I'm sure other programmers are out there already working on their own versions of a fix for this.

BTW, for any pirates out there, the utility doesn't stop the original validation, but after WGA has checked that your copy is legal it stops it from re-checking & calling home.

Bravo for hackers everywhere. We can always count on you. :clap:

Rosie

Ed Hansberry

06-29-2006, 02:51 AM

Microsoft removes the daily "Phone Home" component.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1982954,00.asp

lapchinj

07-04-2006, 01:52 PM

Microsoft removes the daily "Phone Home" component.
I was wondering if I should keep my mouth shut and let this thread die or...
Anyway I decided on the latter. The magic word here is 'daily'. Now they only do it every 14 days (???). And of course they didn't ask if I wanted to continue beta testing their software while holding my OS hostage. The WGA hasn't changed my habbits much but I guess I really didn't have any big hassles not being able to validate Windows. The people I've spoken to that have had issues with WGA are not so quite so happy (although all they can do is yell at the wall) and are pretty psssssd at my laid back reaction to the whole affair. I guess if I was really hit by this WGA virus (which is what it is) I would also not be so quiet or complacent.

MS basically threw us a carrot hoping that we would go away. I think that this thread stalled since we weren't really able to accomplish anything by continuing the rants :frusty: . But I had to say something just to register my displeasure about beta #2 of the call home testing virus.

Jeff- :soapbox:

desertrat_blog

07-14-2006, 04:57 PM

All those huge US Corporates
Whoa, not so fast. Last I checked, Sony, Vivendi, and many others were not US-based.

With Sony at least, I believe that the infected discs were sold only in the US (or were meant only for the US market).

Janak Parekh

07-14-2006, 05:15 PM

Whoa, not so fast. Last I checked, Sony, Vivendi, and many others were not US-based.

With Sony at least, I believe that the infected discs were sold only in the US (or were meant only for the US market).
You misunderstood my initial point. SteveHoward was ranting about the tendency of "US Corporations" to do "evil things". However, large companies are a global phenomenon, and are not specific to the US.

And, in any case, the two companies I mentioned above (and EMI, headquartered in the UK) have been instrumental in pushing DRM in Europe and Canada as much as, or even more than, in the US. Copy-controlled CDs were first introduced in Europe IIRC.

--janak

desertrat_blog

07-14-2006, 06:43 PM

BETA!!! The reason it "phones home" is to tell Microsoft how well it is working,

How does phoning home tell MS "how well it is working"?

and to ensure there aren't any bugs.

By that definition all MS crap are beta and by extension all have a right to phone home?

This is to make a note of what hardware you are running with the software, to ensure it runs equally well on all configurations (who hasn't had a piece of software crash because of a configuration issue or conflict with a driver?). And it rechecks to update in case you have changed a piece of hardware (new $1000 graphics card anybody?).
And it has to do this even when unprovoked? Why not check only when the BSoD appears (granted, this would mean it would check several times a day - and yes this is tongue-in-cheek because when you get BSoDed the system will be too stuffed to phone home).

The problem isn't (completely) with the companies, but instead, it is with the consumers who can't follow the rules. If people didn't steal software, than Microsoft (and other companies) wouldn't have to do stuff like this.

Does that mean the police have the right to arrest everyone then release those that have not committed a crime - and repeat this exercise every 90 days?