The PC was not crippled
This kind of hyperbole is why I keep posting in this thread.
You keep posting here to pick one word I choose that you don’t agree with? Alright, WGA was limiting the uses of his machine.
Because you keep spewing posts with comments that are factually wrong or highly slanted to the point of very misleading in a forum for factual inquiry.
How was the use of her computer limited?
I’ll answer this: My desktop wallpaper disappeared (not a big deal); I got a pop-up message about every hour that I could not dismiss until it went away on its own; a permanent message bubble was present on my desktop; WGA “phones home” to Microsoft every day to report on me (what data it is reporting I do not know, but I don’t feel comfortable with any kind of company “monitoring” and reporting on me in this way); and apparently I would not be able to download any further Windows security and critical updates.
Clearly, all of this limited the use of my computer.
I was so uneasy about what may happen to my computer and my data that I stopped using it for several days, which sucked since I do most of my work on this machine.
Really? As far as I know I have made very little statements here. I expressed the opinion that some anti-piracy measures can irritate a product’s legal users. The normal thing to do is to give me a good argument why I am wrong. I find your dismissive replies that stop short of a disguised personal attack a bit annoying. You seem determined to turn a small issue into something bigger than a simple user’s problem that has already disappeared (even if you don’t agree with some of the solutions proposed).
And I do not know exactly what WGA does to a computer when it fails the test, because I’ve never personally had that problem. Yes, it’s quite possible people panic and overreact to some extent. I simply don’t know.
Because the whole point of this board and forum is fighting ignorance, you have chosen to enable it. A user with a completely unreasonable paranoia came here with a problem. Rather than support the proper way, which would have fixed the problem as well as left her hopefully with a reduction in that paranoia, you handed her a solution that fed into that paranoia and ignorance.
So for all you know, you just fed her a solution which will compromise her ability to recieve future security updates leaving her vulnerable to future exploits (a distinct possibility), while admitting limited comprehension of the problem. Since you fed into her paranoia…she went with your solution, the short term one with long term repercussions. Since the virus writing community is so much more trustsworthy than MS, we don’t need to worry about that.
WILL compromise future security updates? How? Better yet, cite please.
I removed WGA when I accidentally allowed it to install several years ago, and have been receiving updates just fine. I deliberately installed WGA just last week to make sure that “Remove WGA” still worked on the latest version of WGA, and I still have no problem with updates - just allowed an update today in fact.
I don’t think that it’s The Piranha Brothers that’s feeding paranoia here…
Speaking to “hacking” software you own to remove some annoyance.
I’ve used software to remove the “Please insert CD” check in some games I purchased. I can’t be bothered to find the CD just to play a 5 year old game for a few minutes.
You dropped the “For all you know” when you quoted me. By his own admission he did not know if it would or not. I know any update marked critical will be downloaded to machines even with WGA failures. However without that, you are not recieving all available updates, only the ones marked critical by MS.
Of course. Is there some threshold of machine crippling at which removing anti-piracy software becomes ok? How about for places where this was legal?
Piracy is bad. So is heroin use. But I don’t want anyone searching my house for heroin with no probable cause, and I don’t want anyone searching my computer for pirated software with no probable cause. And when I explicitly uncheck loading WGA during updates, I don’t want MS installing it without my permission overnight.
I understand the value of software, btw. I managed and helped to sell a piece of EDA software that sold for a price in 6 figures.
This. Very well said.
You know what else is bad? Installing software from unknown sources that was written to enable pirates to continue pirating.
Enjoy your time in Alcatraz, Capone. You’re no better than Dahmer!
Anyways…
As for backups in the cloud, I strongly recommend Dropbox (www.getadropbox.com). Kickass software that automatically syncs in the background.
-Joe
It is software she voluntarily installed to help her uninstall spyware that was installed by Microsoft without her consent. And why is it “unknown”, just because it wasn’t made by the hugest corporation in the history of the universe?
If Walmart sent a security guard to your house to rifle through your shit and make sure you weren’t illegally using any stolen Walmart property, would you be “enabling thieves to continue thieving” if you got an even bigger guard to make the first fucker leave? It’s your house, not Walmart’s; it’s my computer, not Microsoft’s. Stop treating me like a criminal unless you have evidence, and NO, I won’t help you collect any evidence to use against me. Guess that makes me a pirate or something. Arrr.
She gave her consent when she agreed to the [EULA](download.microsoft.com/Documents/UseTerms/Windows Vista SP1_Home Premium_English_e3c0ddb6-379f-4d4c-9667-265d3f714be1.pdf) (pdf).
yup, I’m sure the XP EULA has a similar line
Its their OS not yours, you are allowed to use it based on agreeing with their rules.
Well, someone has to say this.
If you don’t like the way that Microsoft operates, you are not obliged to use their software.
If it will fit your needs, GNU/Linux has a much more enlightened and liberal approach to licensing and copyright.
There is also Sun, who provide an operating system and software to use in a production environment. Some of it is offered free, some needs to be paid for.
This is not to be taken as anti-Microsoft. I use both Linux and Windows and as long as you recognise the restraints imposed by Microsoft, whether or not you like them, then there really isn’t a problem.
Remember that you don’t buy Windows, you buy a licence to use it within the constraints imposed by Microsoft.
I don’t actually use their operating system, so this is just theoretical to me. Just trying to give the WGA defenders my perspective. Anyway, the landlord doesn’t get to break into my apartment and install security cameras and stuff without my permission. And if he buries my “consent” into some standard paperwork nobody ever reads before they move in, that doesn’t absolve him of the fact that he’s still a dick.
Right, and Microsoft have no right to stop you from using your RAM (although Windows 7 might be guilty of that one) or stop you from having the latest graphics cards.
But they do have the right to stop you using their OS if they think you’ve stolen it. It is in the terms you agree to when you install Windows. They even offer a service to set things right if their WGA gives a false positive. Any company that owned as a big an OS market share as Microsoft would be doing the exact same thing.
Apple don’t need to, there’s only one way to get Mac OS.
The house/computer analogy is not accurate.