[geeks] Re: Windows XP?

[Kurt Huhn]

Lionel Peterson <lionel4287 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> --- Kurt Huhn <kurt at k-huhn.com> wrote:
> >  - Win2k won't decide to stop working if you add or remove hardware
> >  - Win2k doesn't have an "activate me or I won't work" feature
> 
> The first one is a dumb thing, it is because the x86 folks REFUSED to
> add a unique CPU serial number to allow software vendors to node-lock
> their software... MS has a right to control the use of the software you
> buy a license to use. You have the right not to buy their software.
> Really, you do. That you don't like the other choices is not MS fault.
> 

Which is why I chose not to use Windows XP - or did you miss that part.

> That last one, are youserious? I have lots of software that requires an
> activation/registration process... Besides, the OS/applications that
> microsoft ships allow something like 30-50 starts before it "disables"
> the software you have choosen not to activate/register.
> 

Very serious.  I have no objection to nodelocked *software*, but how does
one efectively nodelock an OS?  If there is no consant with which to lock
the node, where does the lock come from?  What happens when the file or
database that controls the nodelocking of the OS fails?

> 
> You put them in that position when you installed their software as your
> OS. The OS defines/limits what you can do, you put yourself in jail,
> and now you are made at the folks that built the jail???
> 

I did not install the software that uses activation, nodelocking.  Please
reread my message.  

> > I add RAM, add a DVD drive, and remove the older CD drive in favor of
> > a faster CDRW - suddenly Windows decides that it must be on another
> > computer and needs to be reactivated?!?!  Not kidding, this actually
> > happened to someoen I worked with.
> 
> Yeah, and they were able to reactivate, weren't they? The problem is???
> 

The problem is the hassle, the situations where it may not be possible to
reactivate before the license manager shits itself.  The problem is in the
sense of control, whether percived or real, that Microsoft wants to
excercise over the system you're useing - the system that is *yours*, bought
and paid for, that MS has no business sticking it's nose into.


> > Furthermore, why should I trust an OS that MS says tries to keep
> > record of all the software that gets installed on it,
> 
> Sounds like package management to me - those bastards!
> 

To date, I know of no package manager that will disable a package at the
behest of "the home office".  

> > as well as digital media and other content?
> 
> MS is the great white of class action lawyers, and avoiding the wrath
> of content owners lawyers is a reasonable goal for a responsible
> organization.
> 

Oh?  Explain Apple's position please?  MS has enough money and lawyers of
it's own to properly defend itself against the Hollywood lawyers should it
choose to do so.  "Responsible" would be telling the media fascists to go
fuck themselves instead getting into bed with them and allowing them to
ass-rape your customers.  Your argument holds no water.

> > What to prevent that 'license manager' from breaking and
> > fucking up my media, my software, and my data?
> 
> What prevents any MS OS fgrom doing exactly the same?
> 

No previous OS from MS has had the this function *as part of the OS*.  If
the OS dumps, fine, I reinstall.  If the license manager dunps and I can't
get access to my data, am I suppose to reinstall?  Do you have experience
with license managers?  I'm guessing htat you've never been up for two days
straight fighting with one to get some precious production data out of a
piece of software dependent upon one.

> > Yes I know it can be cracked, but why should I spend my time trying
> > to find a way around MS's b0rken software?
> 
> WHy would you install their broken software?
> 

I didn't.

> > Greedy motherfuckers....
> 
> Uh, duh! ;^)
> 
> Kurt, I hope you realize I was in full Dave McGuire mode while writing
> this, that and I jsut finished reading Rebel Code (a decent read, but
> don't pay full price for the book - it was worth the $8 I paid, but not
> the $27.95 the publisher tried to get when it first came out...)...
> 
> Complaining about the choices you made, well, reflect badly on you. I
> know, you choose not to install XP, and that reflects well, but your
> rant was a bit misplaced, IMHO.
> 

Well, that is you opinion, and you're entitled to it - even if it is wrong.

-- 
Kurt                 " Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got to flagellate 
kurt at k-huhn.com        myself with a soldering iron."
                                                   --Kris Kirby