Think about the guys who run Microsoft. Look at how they treat the business of business. If you approached every negotiation and deal as an opportunity to screw the other side, wouldn't you automatically assume everyone was out to screw Microsoft? The sooner these goombahs retire, the better.

In China, most windows users, do not need any stinking WGA.

Windows Genuine disAdvantage is one of the reasons I am now a happy Ubuntu Linux user. I have had it with those guys.

jason-look what they're doing to VCSY!

By: yo-eleven
26 Aug 2007, 12:59 AM EDT
Msg. 158404 of 158404

Thanks to willow for kicking the chocks out from under these wheels.

Note "Katmai" contains much the same semantic "code words" paralleling the kind of capabilities in IBM's DB2 9.

http ://www.itjungle. com/two/two051607-story03.html
Microsoft Talks Up SQL Server 'Katmai'
Published: May 17, 2007
by Alex Woodie

Note this article comes precisely 3 weeks after VCSY sued Microsoft for infringing 6826744.

The image of capabilities claimed by both patents 6826744 and 7076521 can be teased out of the MBA inspired wording in the article and subsequent marketing material on the SQL Server 2008.

Now, I realize skeptics will pooh pooh that assertion and claim Microsoft is simply using "their own technology" to achieve these capabilities.

We know IBM claims the virtualization technology in DB2 9 (codename Viper) is "licensed" (IBM's own words) and the sense is not that IBM licensed it to itself as it would be illogical to say it that way. The sense is that IBM is licensing the capability in DB2 9 (codename Viper) from "somebody" other than IBM.

After watching Microsoft squiggle and squirm over the XML question and watching them flub the very platform upon which MSFT claim to be devoting their interoperability capability (Open Office XML or OOXML - the XML format going through so many travails and butt puckering attempting to gain international standard status) it is fairly apparent Microsoft could not do before VCSY broke the ice and called their hand in April 23 or they would have many months before. Magically, they suddenly are able to do.

I contend Microsoft HAS NO innate technology to achieve these capabilities or they would have deployed such far before now to help their long suffering shareprice over the intervening years since they first claimed to "own XML" with a particular patent on folder automation prior to the SiteFlash patent grant in November 2004.

No show? No act.

Note the article's reference to the WinFS capabilities:

"This widening of file-type support sounds a lot like the type of capability that Microsoft was touting with Windows File System (WinFS), the revolutionary file system that was to debut with Windows "Longhorn." WinFS, of course, was removed from Longhorn after running into development problems. After surviving for a time as a separate development effort, it has entirely disappeared from view."

Those who've been following our track on WinFS as a fluorescent marker must ask themselves: "what 'development problems' might have been conquered since 2004?" hve been conquered to enable this capability to finally be included in an actual Microsoft product?

Nothing has changed in data architectures. 521 is still a more effective way of virtualizing than any other method and I DO challenge anyone with half a wit to argue the other side of that contention.

744 is still a more effective way of affiliating "thousands" of governed users.

So, what "development problem" could restrain Microsoft from producing a capability they were able to crow about and show off as far back as 2003? And what development advancements have happened since then when Microsoft has failed to show any new technology since?

So, to put the issue more bluntly, my question would be: "Why has Microsoft chosen to hide such capability from 2004 until now... only to release such after they are sued for using technology that would necessarily need to accomplish both the essential benefits of 744 and 521?"

I suspect the only "development problem" sufficient to stop an engineering office with billions at its disposal dead in the tracks would be a lawyer with a tight pucker string.

Beyond that, there is nothing that should have stopped the march of XML development in Microsoft that is suddenly broken free once the lawyer had a chance to talk to the only patented methods that offer a comprehensive means of presenting the mass of proprietary data within something like SQL server onto the web to "thousands" of data users in non-structured data.

Sounds a whole lot like massive affiliation of a virtualized platform to me.

Now, I may be spoiling a whole lot of MBA plans and managerial tension and lawyerly finesse, but, to put it even more bluntly, I don't give a rat's ass.

I don't happen to be under the duress of any N.D.A. (non-disclosure agreement) and I CERTAINLY have not a gnat's nipple of a concern for Microsoft's honor or face. In fact, to the contrary, I believe manufacturers should be called to account for their behaviour toward customers and the public and the damage they end up doing with their shenanigans and I don't care who or how big they presume themselves to be or how high above embarrassment they deign their encrusted "dignity" to have evolved.

If you can do it, it ain't bragging.

If you can't do it, get off the horse and let somebody else ride.

Joe
I most strongly object to your first sentence.
"Today's bizarre widespread Windows Genuine "validation" failure is just another Microsoft penalty against legitimate customers."

You are "supposed" to be impartial, this statement alone shows that you are not !!

"Just another Microsoft penalty", you really should choose your words more wisely if people are to at least "think" that you are impartial.

Joe FUD Watch 8/26/2006.

What he said: "I might be more sympathetic if Microsoft offered customers more "genuine advantage." But there are really no substantial differences in what Microsoft offers customers now than before WGA. The idea was to treat customers as special, to reward them for being honest by offering them extras. Instead, Microsoft has for the most part taken stuff that had been available to everyone and put a validation gate in front of it. Passing validation gets access."

Why it is FUD:
Most of Microsoft's programs can only be installed if the computer passes the WGA check. So, of course legitimate customers are getting something extra. In fact, the entire essay smells of FUD, as Neil points out. The idea is to appeal generate uncertainty and fear about Microsoft's validation process with the intention of making alternatives such as Linux and OS X appear superior.

Sorry, Joe, once again, you failed your own FUD check.

I don't even understand what he's trying to say actually. If Microsoft started offering downloads and programs to everyone, whether they have a legitimate or illegitimate copy of Windows, people would have no incentive not to pirate Windows.

You refer to Microsoft's approach as akin to the "guilty until proven innocent approach." OK, how else would you want it to be implemented? No, you have no suggestions. Consider this - at an airport, you have to go through a security check to get to the terminal. Does that mean the FAA is treating all passengers as criminals until they pass the check? What about some of those false alarms? And by the way, it's the same analogy - you fly if you clear the security check.

Apple does not need to have piracy checks in place. Its customers will buy three copies of OS X for one Mac if it means Apple's revenues will go up. On the other hand, Microsoft has to have such a system in place because of the extent to which its software is pirated.

In fact, you put comments with even a single HTML link into a moderation queue. Does that mean you distrust your readers? Do you think they're going to spam this site?

Reflections wrote: "You put comments with even a single HTML link into a moderation queue. Does that mean you distrust your readers? Do you think they're going to spam this site?

There's no comparison. The amount of spam conmmenting is much greater than the amount of legitimate commenting. At least in the US market, most Windows users are legit. Also, everyone can comment, freely, without links. There is no restriction on you the reader. But that process means that hundreds of spam comments without links pour through everyday, and I have to manually delete them all.

Something else, you aren't paying to comment. But people pay to buy Windows. Imagine if after paying for everything, you had to verify ownership once you got each item home. And then reverify ownership every few weeks or every few months. That's really what WGA does.

Joe

"Something else, you aren't paying to comment."

I agree. That may not have been the best example.

"At least in the US market, most Windows users are legit."

OK. So you're saying there should be no validation checks for people in the US and Europe? Does that even send the right message? As it is, I don't think this validation affects 90% of the users - those who have Windows preinstalled on their computers by the OEMs (that's what I think). Most users don't even care - only a small, vocal minority does. I agree that WGA needs work to eliminate false positives because even a single one leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the user. The solution, however is not to say something like, "Americans don't indulge in piracy, only Chinese do." It's like the FAA getting rid of security checks for caucasians because the 9/11 attackers were all of Asian origin.

You customers should want to buy your OS (re: Apple buyers) vs. buy inspite of the conditions imposed (MSFT). Under no circumstances should a legally purchased product (in some cases directly from Microsoft) be considered counterfeit. Microsoft should fail-safe properly. Microsoft has proven again it's earned its real motto: Your frustration. Our fault.

"You customers should want to buy your OS (re: Apple buyers) vs. buy inspite of the conditions imposed (MSFT)."

I am sorry, but that is FUD.
1. There is no incentive to sell illegal OS X copies. Most Apple users love to spend money on the company's products.
2. OS X comes preloaded with Macs anyway. You cannot install it on any other hardware.
3. Apple's products are not as popular in markets where piracy is rampant.
4. There is only a point upto which you can trust your customers unfortunately. Beyond that, they start taking advantage of you.

http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/08/26/1628200.shtml

Title of the above link is "MS Responds To Vista's Network / Audio Problems"

Although its true that the intelligent conversation and argumentation went to hell, thanks to the shills here present (and it in itself is sad.) Really this is very funny to observe their despairing efforts to silence the opinions against MS.

Chips, you nailed it!
When you place quotations or links that direct to any news or comments adverse to MS (without delivering names) you will be able to bring shills out of the shadows, they will give themselves away, because the principal role of a MS' mercenary is the defence of MS. I mean, they are trying to disguise their irregular behaviour through what might seem an issue between two people but if you avoid to either name them or point them out, they will have no excuse and will be found out. (Although I realise sometimes it is necessary to do so.)

Now I find fewer stimuli in issuing my opinions. So I will begin to paste links or short reviews without having the duty to give an answer. And thus, the objectives will be achieves at the same time: To expose MS and uncover its Shills

reflections Says:

"Most Apple users love to spend money on the company's products."

@reflections|:^?)

That statement is '/dev/null' and void for a Linux user.
Most Windows users loves to $pend money on the Micro$oft products.

Carrot and stick, Theory X and Theory Y, Enslavement versus empowerment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_X_and_theory_Y

Microsoft assumes we're all lawless, knuckle-dragging scum, and our only goal is to steal their precious IP at every opportunity. They totally miss the fact that their IP is only a tool, usually one of many, used by people trying to accomplish a greater goal in their daily work.

Apple has always understood this, and with their products, they try not to impede that greater goal. Do they like piracy? Of course not, but they try to strike a balance between their needs as a corporation and their customer's needs to accomplish work.

@n0ne_n0ne: "Most Windows users loves to $pend money on the Micro$oft products"

Heh. Then I guess it's the Open Source community that is responsible for all the piracy. Right?

Why pay for Windows when you get Linux for free... but then you need Windows for some tasks... but, again, you don't want to pay for it!

BTW, one of the commenters on this site has run sophisticated data mining algorithms on this site to come up with the following conclusions:
1. Anyone who disagrees with Joe is a shill.
2. Anyone who respond's to a comment by chips is a shill.
3. Anyone who likes Vista is either an employee or a shill.

These findings were all over the place. I've summarized them so that it's easier for everyone to spot a shill.

Reflections is a Microsoft shill, clown, fanboy... yikes!

QUOTE;
From reflections;
"Reflections is a Microsoft shill, clown, fanboy... yikes!"
----------------------------------------------------
Sounds like an admission to the fact.
----------------------------------------------------

Marco,
You are right, its best to stay on topic, and not make the "shills and their sock puppets" the focus of attention. They win when they change the arguement.

reflections Says:
"I agree that WGA needs work to eliminate false positives because even a single one leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the user."

@reflections|:^?)
It's more than just "a bad taste".

Down time
Lost revenue
Lost productivity
A vote of no-confidence

This issue should not be passed off as a simple annoyance. What about the enterprise with thousands of mobile users or tele-commuters with 'WGA'. The above list will have a greater impact on corporations, than say, 'joe6pack'.

This happened on the weekend. Guess what "every" 'IT' department will be doing Monday morning?

Food for thought:
Ubuntu takes a few servers offline. NO one is affected!
Gentoo takes a few servers offline. NO one is affected!
Micro$oft takes a few servers offline. Billions are affected!

"Sounds like an admission to the fact. "

Of course, it is. How many times do I have to tell you that Microsoft pays me to comment here? They pay for my daily trips to Australia too.

BTW, you both have shown me the way. I will no longer accept money from Microsoft and will instead help you all in your attempts to spot shills on this site. I have also decided to start the "League of Investigative Commenters" whose purpose is only to expose M$ and its shills. It's easy to spot a shill and due to the extensive research carried out by a co-commenter, we have been able to provide you with a cheat sheet. LEt's all work together so that we can all indulge in intelligent conversation and bash M$ all we want without any interference from those pesky shills.

-Reflections

Micro$oft $uck$. Micro$oft's partners $uck. Everything else ROXXXX.

reflections Says:
"Then I guess it's the 'Open Source' community that is responsible for all the piracy. Right?"

@reflections|:^?)
That's oxymoronic.

@reflections|:^?)
let me rephrase that question:
"Then I guess it's the 'People's Republic of China' (PRC) that is responsible for All the piracy. Right?" Bingo, ask Gill Bates, he'll tell ya!

"This issue should not be passed off as a simple annoyance."

You're probably right about that. For businesses, it's more than an annoyance. Hopefully MS will find a way to compensate them.

Comparing WGA with airport security is a awful analogy and I cannot believe it has been used to justify WGA. Checking for a legitimate OS is in a different world then checking if I have a bomb in my bag.

William, please take the time to read and understand my statements before you comment on them. Please. It's the context that matters, not the content.

I never justify WGA. I was responding to Joe's argument that there is nothing to be gained by legitimate Windows users. He also mentioned that there is not much piracy in the US and I used airport security as an example. Don't put words into my mouth, please.

Is Microsoft wrong in trying to fight piracy? Isn't piracy a form of theft? Doesn't piracy affect us, the end consumers too? WGA is their attempt at fighting it and it's not perfect. You guys keep complaining about it, but does anyone have any suggestions on improving it? No. Joe seems to indicate that there should be no checks for genuine customers or Americans. The former is not possible because unless you check, you won't know if the customer is genuine or not. The second will not go down well with other countries.

In short, I AM NOT JUSTIFYING PIRACY BY COMPARING IT TO AIRPORT SECURITY.

The problem with piracy is that it doesn't have a direct impact on the end consumer. People don't realize that piracy directly impacts the price of the item. That's why any company that tries to fight it is seen as anti-consumer. With airport security, you directly see the impact and that's why people accept it and actually appreciate it. That's the big difference between the two and that also explains william's response.

Neil Says:
"Just another Microsoft penalty", you really should choose your words more wisely if people are to at least "think" that you are impartial.

@Neil|:^?)
FYI:
"Microsoft's Licenses Impose a Penalty or Tax Paid to Microsoft on OEMs' Use of Non-Microsoft PC Operating Systems.

21. Microsoft's licenses impose a penalty or "tax" paid to Microsoft upon OEMs' use of competing PC operating systems. "Per processor" licenses require OEMs to pay a royalty for each computer the OEM sells containing a particular processor (e.g., an Intel 386 microprocessor) whether or not the OEM has included a Microsoft operating system with that computer.

22. Microsoft's per processor contracts penalize OEMs, during the life of the contract, for installing a non-Microsoft operating system. OEMs that have signed per processor contracts with Microsoft are deterred from using competitive alternatives to Microsoft operating systems."
http://tinyurl.com/2qpvp9

""You customers should want to buy your OS (re: Apple buyers) vs. buy inspite of the conditions imposed (MSFT)."

I am sorry, but that is FUD."

Definition of FUD:
A marketing or political strategy designed to bring about fear, uncertainty and doubt.

Are you on crack or paid by Microsoft to troll?

Is Microsoft wrong in trying to fight piracy?

No.

Isn't piracy a form of theft?

No, piracy is theft at sea. But who really cares about accuracy anymore???

Doesn't piracy affect us, the end consumers too? WGA is their attempt at fighting it and it's not perfect.

And that imperfection is causing legitimate paying customers to be classified as thieves. Quite a nasty imperfection, I'd say.

You guys keep complaining about it, but does anyone have any suggestions on improving it? No.

Yes, actually. Apple and Linux are offered as alternatives.

Joe seems to indicate that there should be no checks for genuine customers or Americans. The former is not possible because unless you check, you won't know if the customer is genuine or not. The second will not go down well with other countries.

I think he's just railing against the "imperfection" that causes legitimate customers to be categorized as thieves. And that is a little more than a minor annoyance.
The odd thing is that in the early days, Microsoft encouraged illegal copying. It caused more people to be exposed to their software and to come to learn it and depend upon it. They reasoned that once this market penetration was widespread enough, the legitimate (paying) customers would be indignant enough to somehow stop the thievery. But it hasn't worked out that way. The first part worked very, very well, but the second part hasn't worked out so well.
Microsoft thought that software was like drugs: Hand out freebies in the beginning. And then when the users are hooked you can start charging them and they will have become dependent enough to not seek alternatives. But software isn't like physical products and the Internet can be used to copy software in a way that cannot happen with a physical product. In this case, Mr. Gates miscalculated, never understanding the power of networking, and started something that he now cannot control.

Here's a question for all you WGA advocates. If Microsoft was able to implement a 100% perfect piracy prevention tool, would they gain or lose market share?

Of course Steve Ballmer already answered that question when he proposed selling a bundle of Microsoft products in Asia, for around $5. WGA is just another example of a retarded approach to piracy that has outlived its usefulness.

Brian Says:
"Yes, actually. Apple and Linux are offered as alternatives."

@Brian|:^?)
see answer in the above post:
"Microsoft's Licenses Impose a _Penalty_ or Tax Paid to Microsoft on OEMs' Use of Non-Microsoft PC Operating Systems."

"Are you on crack or paid by Microsoft to troll?"

I am using Joe's definition of FUD where anything that you disagree with is labeled as FUD. It's pretty convenient.

" You guys keep complaining about it, but does anyone have any suggestions on improving it? No."

"Yes, actually. Apple and Linux are offered as alternatives."

I don't know how they are suggestions for improving Microsoft. Oh well! However, I do agree that false positives are more than a minor annoyance.

"Microsoft's Licenses Impose a _Penalty_ or Tax Paid to Microsoft on OEMs' Use of Non-Microsoft PC Operating Systems."

That's old. They cannot do it anymore.

Ed T Says:
"If Microsoft was able to implement a 100% perfect piracy prevention tool, would they gain or lose market share?"

@Ed T|:^?)
Micro$oft would lose the dominant of mind share. They have already started losing mind share to alternatives.

nOne_nOne
You took my comment "Just another Microsoft penalty" out of context, because in actual fact if you read what Joe Wilcox said, it was he who actually I was quoting you idiot !

Chips
"Marco,
You are right, its best to stay on topic, and not make the "shills and their sock puppets" the focus of attention. They win when they change the arguement." You should talk, you are the KING of changing the subject when you are proven wrong.

Joe
"The amount of spam conmmenting is much greater than the amount of legitimate commenting. At least in the US market, most Windows users are legit. Also, everyone can comment, freely, without links. There is no restriction on you the reader. But that process means that hundreds of spam comments without links pour through everyday, and I have to manually delete them all.

Something else, you aren't paying to comment. But people pay to buy Windows. Imagine if after paying for everything, you had to verify ownership once you got each item home. And then reverify ownership every few weeks or every few months. That's really what WGA does."
Firstly how about really doing some editing around here, like when people post under another name ???
Secondly if people had to pay to post here, you know what would happen ...yes that's right ...NO POSTS ! Specially from guys like CHIPS !

Brian
Yes WGA is microsoft's way of fighting software piracy, and that is why people who don't want to pay for what they use are unhappy about it, most notably Linux users who use Windows as well, why do they use Windows as well as Linux... simple... Linux cannot do everything like Windows can.
Free Software people would like everything that they use for free, in otherwords they are what we call in Australia ...Bludgers !!
Let everyone pay for everything we don't want to, we only want to be leeches on society that's the creed for the FSF.

" You guys keep complaining about it, but does anyone have any suggestions on improving it? No."

"Yes, actually. Apple and Linux are offered as alternatives."

I don't know how they are suggestions for improving Microsoft.

They improve Microsoft by taking away market share from Microsoft, which in turn causes Microsoft to spend some of its energies and untold billions of dollars into actually improving their products.
Without competition, a monopoly tends to do nothing that detracts away from squeezing more money from the market.
Or was that just a trick question? :-)

Improve WGA? Sure, eliminate it. Use the existing DMCA and copyright laws to deal with the big outfits that flaunt the law. And while they're at it, sell Vista ultimate (or whatever it's called) for the same price OEM's pay to load it on HDs (about $50), and sell Office retail at the student price.

If Microsoft spent more time and money innovating, they might improve their products at a rate that makes the newer versions more desirable.

reflections Says:
"That's old. They cannot do it anymore."

@reflections|:^?)

Maybe you want to enlighten us on their new technique that, "They cannot do it anymore" until they get caught, and, cannot do it anymore.

Now what, Micro$oft tells OEMs, 'Don't put non-Micro$oft PC on the front page of your webite'.

Neil Says:
"...it was he who actually I was quoting you idiot !"
"Secondly if people had to pay to post here, you know what would happen ...yes that's right" ... Only the M$ shills would be posting, Duh!
@Neil|:^?)
You're an ID-10-T
check your ID, 'What's in your wallet?'

Neil,

Yes WGA is microsoft's way of fighting software piracy, and that is why people who don't want to pay for what they use are unhappy about it, most notably...

people who actually did pay for Windows but were still called thieves by the Windows Genuine Advantage program. Legitimate users who paid, Neil. Not people who stole Windows, as they have no legitimate complaints. But people who legitimately paid for Windows, Neil. People who ACTUALLY PAID for Windows are the ones who are have valid complaints.

Linux users who use Windows as well, why do they use Windows as well as Linux... simple... Linux cannot do everything like Windows can.

Yep, very, very true. In particular, video production software and avionics and flight-support software are usually only available only for Windows and Mac and are not available for Linux. But the suitability of Linux was nowhere in my post, so if you want to argue with someone who thinks Linux can do everything then go find someone else to argue with.

Free Software people would like everything that they use for free, in otherwords they are what we call in Australia ...Bludgers !!

In any large category, such as the "Free Software People" to which you refer, there are as many different opinions as there are people. You can lump everyone who uses Free Software into this category, but that would be wrong and would prove no point at all.

Let everyone pay for everything we don't want to, we only want to be leeches on society that's the creed for the FSF.

No, you are wrong. The FSF does want their software to be freely available, but they do NOT advocate stealing anything at all. They offer their own software with their own terms and conditions attached to it.
I personally and professionally make it a point to abide by the terms and conditions of every piece of software that I use. If it's from Microsoft or Apple or Panda or TurboTax or CorelDRAW or whoever, I willingly and gladly pay whatever is required by the owner and fully abide by the license agreements. If it's GPL'd software, I also gladly and willingly abide by its license, which means that I do not take GPL'd code and insert it into my own closed-source products just because the source code is laying there in front of me. Whatever the license and terms and conditions, I gladly and willingly abide by them.
And if I don't like a piece of software based on its term and conditions, and I refuse to abide by those terms and conditions, then I do not use it even if I like its functions. Because that would be wrong.
So for example, I don't want to pay for each copy of SlickEdit I would use at work and at home, so instead I use GNU Emacs. It does some things better, other things not nearly as well, but it does the job for me. I will NOT use SlickEdit without paying for it regardless of how much I might like it.
If there are others do not follow such a path, then that's a completely different situation and one that I cannot correct. I admit that I am flattered to think that you view me as the Almighty Divine Being who created people and can somehow correct their thieving behavior. But alas, I am just a person such as yourself, and have no special powers to cure (or even explain) the myriad ways in which people prey on each other. But thank you for the compliment anyway!

n0ne_n0ne
Typical ... you poke fun ...but you don't answer the question... what's the matter.. can't !!
And I said no one would pay...certainly not me anyway.
The M$ shills as reflections said once is incredable, why... anyone going against the anti microsoft view is tagged a shill.
The same thing could be said of people like you n0ne_n0ne. Who do you shill for ...Linux ??
You should check yours ,,, at least I am brave enough to use my real name, unlike you no brain, no intelligence either.

A question ... When is a Shill not a shill ??
Answer when its a Linux Shill !
Because they don't get paid, everthing is free !
Mind you neither do I !!
Tell me do you get paid for working ??
You shouldn't you know, that way Linux people wouldn't have to pay for your work / service.
Mind you, you might find it hard to pay your gas, electricity, water, rent/mortgage, food, etc.
Does the FSF endorse communism ??
Then you guys wouldn't to pay anything for anything.
Mind you these days EVEN the communists pay for these things.

joe is still mad that electronic distribution is here to stay. He was RAILING on it for YEARS at cnet. I know, cause i was quoted, by him, in one of those articles. Yep Joe... do u know who i am? Hint: I'm not uhura. ;-)

Quote'
Neil:
"Does the FSF endorse communism ??"

Nope, but Microsoft does, lol.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/07/23/100134488/

Ryannoyed
I am not sure your not actually "Chips" because only he does what you have just done.
How many alias's do actually operate under ???

And to answer the question, no microsoft just sees another business deal and that is all that is, just because you do business with someone doesn't mean you endorse all that they do in the world.

You were very quick with that ... as usual Chips.

Uhura
Has Joe Wilcox actually been against microsoft all this time, or has it just been of late ??

WGA has been in itself a vehicle that encourages users to move to Pirated Software. After going through the activation process and being called a pirate by MS, this well not help the cause.

WGA in itself, along with DRM schemes, are going to be cracked. Actually, all already have been in some fashion or other.

Even the protections in Windows Vista have been cracked. But here, the good news for MS is that Vista is not in demand by Pirates, as it needs mostly only the newest hardware to run it on. So therefore, MS like Apple, sells its newest OS, to those who buy a new computer. The amount of people who buy a boxed version of Vista, is hugely less than went XP came out.

In this respect, Vista is similar to Mac OS X, in that most people will get Vista only on a new computer. Mac uses a trusted computing chip on the motherboards of their Mac computers. And code built into the Mac OS X system to check for this chip. While MS cannot do this, because they don't make the hardware, they could do something else.

Already their versions of Vista and XP (OEM's) that come with a new machine, cannot be moved to another computer.

The WGA is a very bad plan on the part of MS, one which will lose them people down the road.

http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/08/26/1735203.shtml

From the above link, titled; "Airbus 380 To Have Linux In Every Seat"

"I am not sure your not actually "Chips" because only he does what you have just done."

"You were very quick with that ... as usual Chips."

Neil.
Hey, now I'm insulted. What's wrong with you? Have you developed a form of Chipsophobia or something? With all the nonsense in your last post, you just gave me the occasion to bring up the link and I seized it. It was meant as a joke, hence the "lol" at the end. If you didn't give Chips all the attention he's so craving for, maybe, just maybe, he would get bored and stop posting the way he does. You have quite some nerve to even assume that I'm him.

And speaking of the link, it's not so out of context. Looking at the deals China gets from MS, maybe it tends to show that widespread piracy can pay some dividends.

Ryannoyed : Maybe it could have been worse, and I could have called you "Neil." LOL, just kidding.

Neil Says:
"...at least I am brave enough to use my real name...,
...you don't answer the question..."

@Neil|:^?)
does the name matters?
hence; Neil is just another poster.

@Neil:
As I stated in my previous post;
"This issue should not be passed off as a simple annoyance. ...
[...]
This happened on the weekend. Guess what "every" 'IT' department will be doing Monday morning?"
Where is the bias in that statement?

To Ryannoyed:
Quote:
"If you didn't give Chips all the attention he's so craving for, maybe, just maybe, he would get bored and stop posting the way he does."
---------------------------------------------------
Very unlikely. As Neil has stated in the past, I am probably an ex MS employee, or someone living in my Mommie's basement, or someone on a religious mission. LOL

Xbox 360 Owners Report Many Problems With Wireless Gaming Receiver;

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=QGFSIV1IHPXQGQSNDLRCKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=201802278

Even more problems?

quote'
Chips:
"Very unlikely."

I know.

"As Neil has stated in the past, I am probably an ex MS employee, or someone living in my Mommie's basement, or someone on a religious mission."

If I had to choose, I'd say 'C' is the right answer. You definitely look like someone who's on a crusade against MS. Searching for every article that makes MS look bad. And I know what I'm talking about since I'm supposed to be you. LOL

To Ryannoyed :
Quote;
"MS. Searching for every article that makes MS look bad. And I know what I'm talking about since I'm supposed to be you."
---------------------------------------------------
Its not hard at all to find articles that make MS look bad, thats at least 9 out of 10 articles on MS. Let face it, not to many people these days have too much good to say about MS. The rest (that like MS) come from MS, or one of its partners, "Just the Facts," sites, or whatever they are calling "Just the Facts" sites now. Probably server something. Maybe "Just the skydive live now seven," or some other clever name. The Name was changed on these sites to fool people into buying into their FUD. The same way MS repackages software and MSN/Windows Live.

C would be partly correct, but actually, I don't hate MS like some people try to paint me. The best thing that could happen is for MS to improve. MS needs input back in order to do this. Also, as far as "A," there is nothing lower than an ex Micro$oft employee, unless its a currently employed M$ employee.

Then again, its a very nice family basement. Even have my own pool table. LOL

http://www.tuxmachines.org/node/19408#comment-6075

The above post is titled; "Microsoft WGA servers are fixed, but no word on what went wrong"

A link on that page will get you to Mary Jo Foley's article, in which she says she will post back on the problem, when she knows.

Maybe they updated the "windows" server and crashed it?

Maybe they updated the "windows" server and crashed it?

Or, maybe there was a network problem, the WGA server couldn't contact itself, and at that point the WGA server thought it was a pirated copy and disabled itself.
To paraphrase a journalist whose name I cannot recall, "If they don't tell us, we're free to speculate".

To Brian:

If they fixed it, then they already know what was wrong with it. Maybe, Micro$oft is looking for the right "spin" to put on the story.

More than likely, someone hacked it. But then an employee could have spilled coffee on it, or the cleaning lady could have unplugged it? LOL

Go to Flickr.com and search for Joe Wilcox, you will find some interesting pictures :D
Dont get surprised, after all we all knew that he was just an apple fanboy :(

Think we are looking at a case of identity theft in that last post.

Is that legal on this site?

"Its not hard at all to find articles that make MS look bad, thats at least 9 out of 10 articles on MS."

And chips is only making it easier by posting the links here.

"...there is nothing lower than an ex Micro$oft employee, unless its a currently employed M$ employee."

No. There are thieves, rapists, child molesters, terrorists...

No? OK. You win. Nothing lower than a Micro$oft employee.

"I don't hate MS like some people try to paint me. The best thing that could happen is for MS to improve."

Hehe. Seems like you're trying to justify it to yourself. Well, whatever spares you a trip to a therapist.

"Maybe they updated the "windows" server and crashed it?"

You think so? Maybe they were running Ubuntu.

So-called Joe Wilcox wrote: "Go to Flickr.com and search for Joe Wilcox, you will find some interesting pictures :D
Dont get surprised, after all we all knew that he was just an apple fanboy :("

The real Joe responds: Flickr is where I put some photos, because of its popularity. Yes, there is a small collection of photos from the launch of Apple's first store in 2001. Over at SmugMug, where I post all my photos, you also will find photos from the Windows Vista launch event in New York. I'm a journalist, I go to events, report on them and take photos. There's nothing Apple or Microsoft fanboy about it. :)

The real Joe Wilcox

Microsoft: the authentic smell of failure
"The issue could have been much worse for Microsoft if the meltdown had occurred on a weekday, as many more machines would have potentially being affected. Nonetheless, it still demonstrates the essential stupidity of setting up a system which requires legitimate users to endlessly prove that they're not criminals, shifting the burden of intellectual property protection away from Microsoft and onto its customers."
http://apcmag.com/7025/microsoft_the_authentic_smell_of_failure

Reflections, I have not put words into your mouth. It was yourself who compared WGA to airport security and you're still doing it.

One is to protect revenue from IP infringement and the other is to protect lives. You cannot compare the two.

"Reflections, I have not put words into your mouth. It was yourself who compared WGA to airport security and you're still doing it."

Pah. You just don't get it. I WAS NOT JUSTIFYING WGA BY COMPARING IT TO AIRPORT SECURITY, which is what you suggested. OK? OK? God! You just don't listen. It's like you want to pick up arguments with me for no reason.

This type of information is most helpful. Particularly when end-user comments are added.

Thanks again for doing a wonderful job of keeing everyone informend.

"Maybe they updated the "windows" server and crashed it?"
Quote from Reflections:
You think so? Maybe they were running Ubuntu.
----------------------------------------------------
He may actually be correct, in that M$ might have been using a version of Linux or BSD to run its validation servers. As its mostly very well known that MS Windows Servers do not do well handling a lot of client, and therefore should not be used on large systems.
----------------------------------------------------
So Joe Wilcox, (the real one) as asked, is stealing someones identity OK on this site? I know it was your identity here in question, but there is a larger question here?

It would "might" be worth the hassel of validation (XP-forget Vista) if they spent the same effort to get the their product to work correctly (and safely) were their efforts to stop piracy (any body want some real copies of '95, '98 and ME?). Me, I've seen the light, I'm moving to Linux. All you third party products, if it doesn't work on Linux forget it.

WGA remains the only reason left that will prevent me from ever purchasing XP. I still use 2K on my system at home, and when it gets to the point that 2K no longer functions for my needs, I will be switching to some flavor of Linux.

The computer game Bioshock was released recently with similar "protections" and to a similar outcry. Especially since the validation system was only partially functional and customer service for each party (both the creators of the "feature" and the distributors of the game) would send frustrated game owners to the other party and not offer any form of relief.

One thing that is often ignored is that you cannot stop piracy on the computer. Until technology changes radically, there will be piracy. It currently takes hacker groups less than a day to crack most protections, and that time only gets shorter as communication and competition between the groups grows. In fact, the more difficult the protection, the more interested in cracking it those groups become.

You can stop casual piracy. A simple CD-key is all that is required to stop Joe 6Pack from making copies for all of his friends. Stronger measures are often not measurably more effective but are actually counterproductive.

Not only is there lost revenue from people who will refuse to purchase the product on principle (such as myself), but there are costs associated with the development of mostly-useless DRM, the customer service and additional programming required for when the system doesn't work as advertised, the ill-will generated by excessive and intrusive measures, and also the likelihood of a class action lawsuit down the line when enough people get fed up and decide that it's time to take a stand.

^-.-^

Link below is titled: "WGA failure highlights major flaw in Microsoft's anti-piracy strategy"

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070827-wga-failure-highlights-major-flaw-in-microsofts-anti-piracy-strategy.html

Bottom line in the article, reads: "This is no way to treat customers."

The interesting thing about volume licensing keys is that you may have one whether you know it or not.

Consider that big-name laptop in front of you. If you upgraded it using a version of Vista provided by your vendor, how did you not have to enter an activation key after rebooting? Answer: It's got a volume licensing key, which could fail at any moment.

I really don't like the idea of my hardware being used to protect Microsoft IP. The whole idea of have to contact them for an 'genuine advantage' looks like a joke...

Year after year our PCs keeping being outdated because of Microsoft work is never completed, demanding a lot of upgrades to close holes the security folks keep finding and publicizing. I just wonder, what about the holes not made public?

Companies should exist to serve the population, they should be thankful for our businesses with them, but with Microsoft it is like the other way... we have to serve them, buying the same OS over and over... For example, when I retire my PCs with Windows XP, I'll have to pay another license with whatever junk they have in the market, still not completed because people will find holes in it... They should instead, allow me to use the old license from those retiring XP and apply just a portion of upgrade fee over it. All my computers are bought in companies like BestBuy and Circuit City; therefore, they should know me by my first name and not treat us like 'presumed criminals'.

I do sometimes think someone has a sense of humour at MS HQ. Only someone with a really warped sense of humour would think up of marketing an intrusive technology as a benefit to the end consumer.

What advantage does the customer get from MS reducing piracy? Other than a few essential updates or some 2nd rate MS wallpaper then you don't really get a lot back from MS for helping it fight the war on piracy. But then, you only remember the "Vista Ultimate" goodies that were promised to realise how hollow MS promises are.

Reflections used a rather flawed airport security analogy. With airport security they only check your passport and ID when YOU decide to travel. When you get a passport you don't sign an agreement that allows airport security to come round to your house whenever they want and let themselves in and rifle through your house to check "everything is order" do you?

I bough Vista on my card from store. I have a receipt. You wouldn't let the salesperson from that store whenever they want, even in your absence, and check your receipt matches the OS on your system. So why do we let MS get away with it.

Probably because any argument against the monopoly that is Microsoft brings out rather strange an unusual behaviour from certain people. They seem to defend MS to the bitter death above and beyond what any reasonable person would do for any other company.

I find this behaviour frankly unbelievable. Why would anyone seek to shield a company from its customers criticism? Some people get really emotional about it as well often losing sight on the argument in the process. I may be wrong but I think people like that either work for the company you are criticising (A very rational reason why they would act that way, and a commendable one at that) or they have some obsession with that company.

I can only assume that people who fall into the latter suffer from some sort of Stockholm syndrome. They choose to defend their captors whilst being held hostage by them. Some of the reactions by some people when others use M$ would be comical if were not so sad.

William,
I think you hit the nail on the head. A very nice and well-reasoned post.
I think there are a number of factors at work:

Microsoft's goal has always been to squeeze as much money out of software as they can. They are a finance company at their heart, not a software company. Of course, this is not bad in and of itself. Any business strives to do the same thing.
Microsoft got really, REALLY, REALLY good. So good, in fact, that they became a Monopoly. And while that is the goal of most busineses, it is bad for competition and is specifically frowned on by various laws.
Since Microsoft is a Monopoly, their software is everywhere. A lot of folks make a nice living by latching on to this Monopoly. But their software APIs are very complicated, arcane, and difficult to master. Once mastered, even the merest suggestion of alternatives such as Unix, Linux, or Mac will result in raw emotional outbursts. Because any threat to this complicated house of cards will spell doom (or at least, a lot of relearning) to those masses.
Microsoft does almost a perfect job of keeping competition suppressed, which is how their developer community can be assured of continuity.
BUT, Microsoft seriously missed the Internet. And this was a huge mistake because they completely missed the initial seeds of their future competition. The FSF software base wouldn't exist in its widespread form without the Internet. TCP/IP, BSD Unix, and the Linux kernel all thrived due to the Internet's low barriers to communication and collaboration.
And now those once-tiny seeds have grown into a substantial threat. Even Apple owes a lot of its success to its underlying base of BSD Unix and the FSF software.

Now, people can quote me numbers about how Microsoft's profits for the first 3 hours of each year exceed Linux-base revenue for an entire year (or whatever the figures are today). But when Balmer throws chairs and makes vague patent threats, and when people who comfortably base their incomes on the Microsoft Windows market foam at the mouth, then there must be serious competition. Because most of the highly emotional rants come from people who are otherwise very bright and successful. So they wouldn't be upset unless they perceived a threat. And they wouldn't be so emotional if they weren't horribly afraid of that thread. Regardless of any numbers that are thrown around to "disprove" any threat.
WGA looks to me as one more example of how Microsoft is afraid. And the WGA server outages hint that Microsoft is not only afraid, but it is also in panic mode. And panic is never a good mode to be in. Never.

"I can only assume that people who fall into the latter suffer from some sort of Stockholm syndrome. They choose to defend their captors whilst being held hostage by them. Some of the reactions by some people when others use M$ would be comical if were not so sad."

What is sad is that you've now resorted to indirect attacks to disguise your lack of an argument. I'm not the one who needs help here. It's you. I think you're so obsessed with me that you're unwilling to let go. On numerous occassions I've indicated that I do not want to continue this. That doesn't seem to stop you. Stop behaving like an obsessed kid and grow up, William.

Reflections please don't flatter yourself by thinking my post was a dedication solely directed at you. It most certainly wasn't. You do however reconfirm my stereotypes of the MS obsessive, like a dog with a bone some people. They just cannot help themselves.

There he goes again.

:-)

There who goes Reflections, your strawman?

"There who goes Reflections, your strawman?"

Hey, hey, hold it there. You're not MY strawman. Don't get your hopes high.

Still no word on cause of WGA outage or Microsoft’s future prevention plans
Posted by Mary Jo Foley

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=677

Quotes;

"Microsoft officials say they are continuing to investigate how the outage occurred, as well as why someone on the support team inappropriately told users the outage wouldn’t be resolved until August 28. If the team already knows what happened, so far, it’s not saying.

Meanwhile, Windows users affected by the outage are asking some good questions:

* Why did Microsoft seemingly have no redundancy/backup WGA systems in place? Is it up to users to have their own WGA disaster recovery plans in case this kind of outage happens again?
* Why doesn’t Microsoft offer a WGA warning which states there might be a problem with Microsoft’s WGA system, rather than immediately assuming users are running counterfeit software when the WGA check fails?
* Should a single failure to validate via Microsoft’s WGA mechanism result in a user losing Aero, Windows Defender, etc.? Why not make these “punishments” take affect after two or three failures to validate? Shouldn’t innocence be presumed rather than guilt?"
--------------------------------------------------

Micro$oft fixed the WGA server problem, so it rather obvious that Micro$oft knows what the problem was. What do they have to hide?

I think this is a minor annoyance relative to my experience with Vista Ultimate. I am using Vista as my primary desktop OS to run my business and it is by far the most robust MS has ever released. Frankly, it just doesn't screw up. Granted, I built myself a new machine exclusively to run it and that is well beyond what most users are able to do. My usage is focused on business productivity in an Active Directory domain environment and for that Vista is excellent. The biggest disadvantage with Vista is the inability or unwillingness to abandon legacy software or hardware. That is more a reflection of the fact that people don't do change easily. In my view, in this particular instance, the benefits outweigh the costs of making the change.

For the benefit of Reflections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman

For the benefit of William:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man_%28literal%29

I said, "There he goes again", referring to you and your obsession with me. You asked me if HE was my strawman. That doesn't make sense unless you're referring to a man made of straw. I don't think arguments have genders. So, once again, you're not my straw man.

"Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted. "

Sounds like something you're adept at, William. Twist my words, interpret them to your liking and refute them. :-)

Why don't you two just get together, whip 'em out, and get it over with already?

Microsoft does this because the USER's like to go and STEAL there software they worked hard to create. So there doing something about it. Its not microsoft's fault that WE keep stealing there stuff.

If we wouldnt be greedy and actuly pay for something someone took a long ass time to create then they wouldnt need this..

Dont blame microsoft, Blame the User's.