Bend over Boys, Microsoft is coming at ya

According to the Applies To section of the article, it only affects the various flavors of XP—which makes me even more grateful than usual that I’m a semi-Luddite who never up(?)graded from Win2K.

But I can’t get too complacent, so I guess I’d better start spending more time on my Ubuntu system just in case. (IMHO, that is one product where you can see improvement from one release to the next.)

I am not a big fan of Microsoft, but I am not sure what the big deal is here. If you want WinXP/Win2k Pro updates, then you have to validate you have a licensed copy of the software. That is nothing new – there’s been software doing that for at least 20 years. If you don’t want WGA-crapware on your machine, then you don’t have to apply any of the patches. You could make a case that many of these patches are security fixes or bug fixes and that Microsoft is obligated to provide them for free, but eventually there has to be a limit to that support. I also don’t think it is a big deal for Microsoft to expect you to validate your license if you want to install some of their new, free software (e.g. MediaPlayer 10); again, you have a choice.

I am not fond of WGA phoning home secretly, but that is really easy to block for anyone that is concerned. And practically, others that aren’t concerned are probably not likely to care about the data that is sent home.

For computers that aren’t hooked up to the internet, this is probably a non-issue. They don’t need the security fixes and they’ll never get WGA in the first place.

Maybe everyone is just venting about the way Microsoft is implementing their policy? Afraid that they will half-ass it and make it hard on the legal, casual user while pirates work around the problem and carry on. I can definitley appreciate that, since that always seems to be the case with all copy/license protection.

In any case, I think NoClueBoy got it in post #3.

For starters, Microsoft bailed on the Vanguard project, opening the door for SOE to get a foot in the door.

For this alone, they are are evil and must be punished.

However, here, the issue that has serious pissin-me-off potential is the notion that MS might attempt to disable legitimate software I currently use if I refuse to accept some bullshit privacy invading doodad they decide to add after the fact.

I installed the WGA patch a while ago, and it hasn’t caused me any problems. Maybe I’m just lucky, but I never get any of the problems with Windows that some people bitch about. I think some of you guys just have bad computer karma or something. My mother tells me stories of a coworker of hers who regularly gets errors that no one else in the building ever gets.

In any event, I know that my copy is legitimate, and I don’t begrudge MS for trying to stop the piracy of its software.

If I could install jdoom on WB Linux, I’d be ready to leave this clambake. :slight_smile:

I get the after-the-fact aspect, but you can avoid that by not downloading updates. In other words, the software that came on the CD you original purchased (or harddrive, etc.) is still uncontaminated by WGA. It will never get disabled and it continues to live up to your expectations. The issue is that you are no longer running that exact software and the software that you download today will install WGA. But I think that is fair enough, if someone wants free updates and fixes, then they also get all of the other crap bundled with it.

Part of what makes it confusing is that the software updates are downloaded via the internet. If the updates came via CD and were handed out for free at say, BestBuy, I don’t think anyone would complain. People would say, “Don’t like WGA? Then don’t grab the free CD update at BestBuy and install it on your computer.” The same is true with internet downloads, except it is a bit more subtle. On the other hand, if the updates were automatic and installed without consent – that would be a serious issue (for me at least). Instead, I have a little yellow shield in my system-tray that I continue to ignore.

Today, my work computer tried to run windows update. I did not consent to update and it tried again. The second time seemed successfule. This has happened before, and would not be remarkable, but this computer has windows update service firmly disabled. The company I work for regression tests all updates and then applies them through an automatic process of its own. But now, somehow Microsoft is trying to install updates itself. WTF?

I’d disagree about it being fair for me to have to accept something I do not want to get fixes for problems in the software I paid for in good faith. I might not get quite as fired up about sueing the bastards…

But I would still give Melinda (mistakenly called Martha above) a ride on “Space Mountain”…WOOOOOOOOOOO!

If you’re just surfing the web, doing e-mail, or maybe some light office-type apps you’d do fine in Linux. If you’re an avid game player (stuff like Sims 2, Half-Life 2, Need For Speed Most Wanted) Linux doesn’t have all that much to offer.

Your PC is phoning home about this even as we speak. Er, post.

Unless you subscribe to Cedega (

That’s pretty cool, except for the subscription part. At least it’s not much money. I don’t have any problems with Windows, but if I kept getting spyware and viruses I would definitely consider downloading and installing Linux and paying Cedga $5 a month instead of McAfee or Norton a monthly anti-virus updates fee.

Did I just read its page right? I can play World of Warcraft online live like I do now, but on a linux box???
PLEASE tell me it works perfectly - I am disgusted with wincrap and pretty much the only thing keeping me using wincrap is world of warcraft…

The almost daily diatribes I launch about Bill has driven to buy a Mini so I can try Steve. We’ll see if OSX is really as friendly as you hear. From my very limited experience, it’s been exaggerated.

FUCK!!! I turned my computer on this morning and got the notification that my Windows is NOT GENUINE!
But it sure as hell IS genuine!!
What is going to happen to my computer???