Dynaverse.net
Off Topic => Engineering => Topic started by: Nemesis on February 09, 2005, 08:31:44 pm
-
Trojan attacks Microsoft's anti-spyware
Link to full story (http://news.com.com/Trojan+attacks+Microsofts+anti-spyware/2100-7349_3-5569429.html?tag=nefd.top)
Virus writers have created a malicious program that can disable Microsoft's new anti-spyware application, security experts warned on Wednesday.
Antivirus experts, who are calling the Trojan "Bankash-A," say it is the first piece of malicious software to attack Windows AntiSpyware, which is still in beta.
That didn't take too long did it?
-
Trojan attacks Microsoft's anti-spyware
Link to full story ([url]http://news.com.com/Trojan+attacks+Microsofts+anti-spyware/2100-7349_3-5569429.html?tag=nefd.top[/url])
Virus writers have created a malicious program that can disable Microsoft's new anti-spyware application, security experts warned on Wednesday.
Antivirus experts, who are calling the Trojan "Bankash-A," say it is the first piece of malicious software to attack Windows AntiSpyware, which is still in beta.
That didn't take too long did it?
What with all the smug anti-MS folks encouraging these malformed personality thugs I'm not surprised either.
-
What with all the smug anti-MS folks encouraging these malformed personality thugs I'm not surprised either.
Like the Microsoft Executives calling the GPL "viral" calling Linux and Open Source developers "UnAmerican" and "Communist"? Smugness and "anti-the other guy" are on both sides. At least most of the Linux and open source executive types act better when talking about competitors than Gates and Ballmer do. (Read some of the interviews done with Linus Torvalds as the premier example.) Gates and Ballmer with these insults sound rather like "malformed personality thugs" (using your phrase) to me.
If you were an open source developer how would you react to Microsoft calling you "UnAmerican" and "Communist"? Would you just shrug your shoulders and ignore it or would you retaliate or at least laugh when Microsoft gets tripped up?
After all the criminal activity Microsoft has committed (and been convicted of) can you really blame people for disliking them? When someone makes a habit of being obnoxious like Microsoft has for the last 15 years (at least) they develop enemies. Do you really expect people not to gloat a little when an enemy falls on his face?
But consider this. When Microsoft didn't pay the registrar for the Hotmail domain name who figured it out? Who paid the registration fee and got Hotmail back up? It was a Linux hacker. (Christmas 2 years ago I believe). Did he try and hijack the name as he could have? No. He didn't even insist that Microsoft repay him for the registration fee (though they did). As I recall he wasn't even nasty and insulting about Microsoft screwing up. Microsoft was very tight lipped in their comments at the time, very sparing in what should have been vocal praise of the guy who helped them out.
When The SCO Group began their campaign of FUD against Linux and started multiple lawsuits who went to them to license Unix rights for millions of dollars? Rights that they had no apparent need for. Who went to at least one investment group and encouraged repeatedly investments of 10s of millions of dollars in SCO? Money without which SCO could not persue the case. Here is a quote from the presiding Judge on SCOs case vs IBM: (Key phrase highlighted in Red by me)
"Nevertheless, despite the vast disparity between SCO's public accusations and its actual evidence -- or complete lack thereof -- and the resulting temptation to grant IBM's motion, the court has determined that it would be premature to grant summary judgment on IBM's Tenth Counterclaim."
Who did all this, keeping lawsuits that seem to be baseless in motion (the Daimler/Chrysler one has been thrown out, others are in varying stages but looking bad for SCO)? If you haven't guessed, it was Microsoft. Does that not look like Microsoft is using SCO to fight Linux for them?
Given that Microsoft is funding directly and indirectly a frivolous attack on Linux by SCO lasting nearly 2 years so far can you really blame Linux developers and users being rather angry at Microsoft and quite willing to laugh when Microsoft gets a pie in the face? Even though those same laughing people don't support the criminals creating such programs as this trojan. Then again it has been said "set a theif to catch a theif" and this is one criminal attacking another.
-
Like the Microsoft Executives calling the GPL "viral" calling Linux and Open Source developers "UnAmerican" and "Communist"?
I knoiw you're not going to like this, but as asinine as it sounds what they say isn't that far off the mark. Many of those who claim to support open source are doing so for one of several reaosns:
1.) They think all software should be free and believe piracy is a legitimate act of file and application sharing.
2.) Are coropoate CEO, FEO, or other corporate cost cutter and see open source as the absolute perfect opportunity to increase the bottom line--these folks are the biggest proponents of out-sourcing too.
3.) They are simply anti-MS anything. If MS donated 1 billion dollars to children's aid funds these folks would complain that it wasn't 1.1 billion. Nothing MS does is good or good enough.
4.) They see open source as the great equalizer. That open source is the masses ability to throw off the yoke of corporate control.
There are lesser reasons too, but those are, imho, the 4 greatest motivators in the OS movement.
Jerry
-
Oy, Toast, but honestly which one of us reg'lar fo'k can truly afford to pay Microsoft's extortionate prices?
I will, some time soon have a grand total of three (wow, count 'em) PC hooked up in my own little network in my house. Even for the third one, which isn't built yet, I already have my LEGITMATE copy of XP. These comps are for myself, the old lady, and the kids. Do you truly believe we should be paying three times the retail price for the OS? We all are of the same household and live in the same house. So I will go around in bare feet wearing nothing else but a barrel with suspenders so that I am not a lawbreaker? The same goes for the even more pounds of flesh extracting MS Office.
I am not opposed to paying... fairly. Gouging is evil; ask any NYC resident looking for batteries during the last blackout a couple of years back.
-
I knoiw you're not going to like this, but as asinine as it sounds what they say isn't that far off the mark. Many of those who claim to support open source are doing so for one of several reaosns:
Who is more unAmerican?
The open source hackers who choose to contribute something freely to the world? To me the open source authors are more akin to the pioneers who would band together to raise a barn or build a house for the new family in the area. That is not unAmerican to me. That is quite laudable.
Or a corporate criminal who has broken the law again and again and so far has not been punished harshly enough to stop their criminal ways?
Is it communist to help others without being paid? Is it communist to try to make the world better for others as well as yourself? I don't think so.
1.) They think all software should be free and believe piracy is a legitimate act of file and application sharing.
They? Why would "they" bother writing their own if all "they" wanted was to steal it? Why bother promoting open source if your going to steal your software anyway? Your logic seems rather faulty.
2.) Are coropoate CEO, FEO, or other corporate cost cutter and see open source as the absolute perfect opportunity to increase the bottom line--these folks are the biggest proponents of out-sourcing too.
Some are, so what? Though they contribute to open source the projects are almost uniformly started and run by individuals not companies. Who controls Linux? No company and no individual. Any company that tried to take it over would be frozen out by everyone else refusing to obey. Open Office was started by a company (Sun Microsystems) but they don't control it at all. Mozilla spun out of Netscape but AOL does not control Mozilla, Firefox, Thunderbird or Sunbird either.
The major thing is that these companies currently see a future where it can go two ways.
One way is to continue as it has been with Microsoft step by step taking over more and more markets using their monopoly control of the OS to expand into territories created by others. They did it with Word, Excel, Access and Internet Explorer. Would you want to compete with them on those grounds?
The other way is to find a way to join together. Open source allows that. Together they can hope to break the OS monopoly and survive and prosper in a diverse market place. A market Microsoft can survive in that market as well.
If you were one of these CEOs would you try to survive on whatever Microsoft doesn't want yet? Or would you try to find a way to survive and prosper even if it meant working with others.
3.) They are simply anti-MS anything. If MS donated 1 billion dollars to children's aid funds these folks would complain that it wasn't 1.1 billion. Nothing MS does is good or good enough.
Again some are. But then again I have had an American on these boards say Canada has no right to exist. Does that make all Americans anti Canada? I don't think so.
Do you really condemn entire groups because of the actions of a tiny minority?
Also can you blame people who time and again have run into Microsoft trying to control their computers. Can you blame those who have computer problems caused by Microsoft screwing up and have Microsofts solution be "buy an upgrade" or reformat and reinstall - for the 3rd time this week?
4.) They see open source as the great equalizer. That open source is the masses ability to throw off the yoke of corporate control.
It can be. It can also be used to allow more variety in those corporate programs you choose to use rather than are compelled to use and buy.
There are lesser reasons too, but those are, imho, the 4 greatest motivators in the OS movement.
Jerry
Your sweeping with a very wide broom toasty.
How about a 5th reason?
5.) Freedom of choice. Microsoft is like the old Ford. "You can have any colour you want as long as its black". I prefer a rainbow of colours to choose from and a plethora of competing suppliers for those colours.
To put it bluntly I dislike abusive monopolies intensely. I want the freedom to choose. Who knows, in a given instance I might even choose Microsoft, I'm not a fanatic. When Microsoft does well I'm quite willing to heap praise on them.
-
Oy, Toast, but honestly which one of us reg'lar fo'k can truly afford to pay Microsoft's extortionate prices?
I will, some time soon have a grand total of three (wow, count 'em) PC hooked up in my own little network in my house. Even for the third one, which isn't built yet, I already have my LEGITMATE copy of XP. These comps are for myself, the old lady, and the kids. Do you truly believe we should be paying three times the retail price for the OS? We all are of the same household and live in the same house. So I will go around in bare feet wearing nothing else but a barrel with suspenders so that I am not a lawbreaker?
Sorry, E, but it is your choice to own 3 computers...it is a luxary and I don't see where any comapny should be compelled or stolen from to support you in a lifestyle obviously beyond your means.
The same goes for the even more pounds of flesh extracting MS Office.
I am not opposed to paying... fairly. Gouging is evil; ask any NYC resident looking for batteries during the last blackout a couple of years back.
Once again. how is an office application like Microsoft Office Professional Edition 2003 that is clearly directed toward to small to medium Professional business office something that you should need in your home. isn't the far cheaper version of Office Academic enough for your needs?
To be clear, your argument is a strawman argument because there does exist affordable versions of all the software you cite.
Best,
Jerry
-
I knoiw you're not going to like this, but as asinine as it sounds what they say isn't that far off the mark. Many of those who claim to support open source are doing so for one of several reaosns:
Who is more unAmerican?
The open source hackers who choose to contribute something freely to the world? To me the open source authors are more akin to the pioneers who would band together to raise a barn or build a house for the new family in the area. That is not unAmerican to me. That is quite laudable.
Or a corporate criminal who has broken the law again and again and so far has not been punished harshly enough to stop their criminal ways?
Is it communist to help others without being paid? Is it communist to try to make the world better for others as well as yourself? I don't think so.
1.) They think all software should be free and believe piracy is a legitimate act of file and application sharing.
They? Why would "they" bother writing their own if all "they" wanted was to steal it? Why bother promoting open source if your going to steal your software anyway? Your logic seems rather faulty.
2.) Are coropoate CEO, FEO, or other corporate cost cutter and see open source as the absolute perfect opportunity to increase the bottom line--these folks are the biggest proponents of out-sourcing too.
Some are, so what? Though they contribute to open source the projects are almost uniformly started and run by individuals not companies. Who controls Linux? No company and no individual. Any company that tried to take it over would be frozen out by everyone else refusing to obey. Open Office was started by a company (Sun Microsystems) but they don't control it at all. Mozilla spun out of Netscape but AOL does not control Mozilla, Firefox, Thunderbird or Sunbird either.
The major thing is that these companies currently see a future where it can go two ways.
One way is to continue as it has been with Microsoft step by step taking over more and more markets using their monopoly control of the OS to expand into territories created by others. They did it with Word, Excel, Access and Internet Explorer. Would you want to compete with them on those grounds?
The other way is to find a way to join together. Open source allows that. Together they can hope to break the OS monopoly and survive and prosper in a diverse market place. A market Microsoft can survive in that market as well.
If you were one of these CEOs would you try to survive on whatever Microsoft doesn't want yet? Or would you try to find a way to survive and prosper even if it meant working with others.
3.) They are simply anti-MS anything. If MS donated 1 billion dollars to children's aid funds these folks would complain that it wasn't 1.1 billion. Nothing MS does is good or good enough.
Again some are. But then again I have had an American on these boards say Canada has no right to exist. Does that make all Americans anti Canada? I don't think so.
Do you really condemn entire groups because of the actions of a tiny minority?
Also can you blame people who time and again have run into Microsoft trying to control their computers. Can you blame those who have computer problems caused by Microsoft screwing up and have Microsofts solution be "buy an upgrade" or reformat and reinstall - for the 3rd time this week?
4.) They see open source as the great equalizer. That open source is the masses ability to throw off the yoke of corporate control.
It can be. It can also be used to allow more variety in those corporate programs you choose to use rather than are compelled to use and buy.
There are lesser reasons too, but those are, imho, the 4 greatest motivators in the OS movement.
Jerry
Your sweeping with a very wide broom toasty.
How about a 5th reason?
5.) Freedom of choice. Microsoft is like the old Ford. "You can have any colour you want as long as its black". I prefer a rainbow of colours to choose from and a plethora of competing suppliers for those colours.
To put it bluntly I dislike abusive monopolies intensely. I want the freedom to choose. Who knows, in a given instance I might even choose Microsoft, I'm not a fanatic. When Microsoft does well I'm quite willing to heap praise on them.
-
Who is more unAmerican?
Nem, if you're going to go down this road then there is no reaosn to continue this discussion. You want to justify theft, lying, and cheating as some panecea of anti-monopoly-ism, and paint it with a patina of some misguided concept of the pioneer spirit, you go right ahead.
You want to cast those who enjoy and use Microsft products as UnAmerican, go ahead. But as far as I'm concerned I am personally insulted..even I wouldn't stoop that low to discribe open source advocates.
*plonk*
-
Toasty, I am by no means well off, but buying MS's stuff is not beyond my means. I think I speak in this regard for lots of people. I just don't think their "pricing structure" is reasonable: I wonder what the price of oil would be if we had many, many more nuclear plants or more large waterfalls around, or have found an efficient solar converter.
If MS, and the other software companies, want to continue this practice of forcing someone to buy yet another copy of the same CDs just because there is another computer in the same household, then I hope, pray, and will push for more competition in all types of software, be it a game or an OS, even open source. I am already toying with StarOffice (OpenOffice). When they get more smooth and beefier, I'll bet a significant part of the world will be using it. I'd even pay for StarOffice over the free OpenOffice even though the "extras" Sun would throw in would either be miniscule or not all that useful for what I do, as when there'll be a meaningful competition, there'll be a lowering of prices.
Hey, Toasty, again, I'm no way rich, but even if I was, I wouldn't throw money away or gladly suffer unfair loss of it. Why can't you admit they are charging outasite prices because they have us currently by the cojones? I don't like the whiners and thieves who want all their software for free or use pirated warez copies. Programmers and their employers do deserve to profit from their work, but there is a line that they ought not cross; it's okay to make something expensive, but when it's waaay expensive, then it's just gouging.
(Edited for grammar)
-
Who is more unAmerican?
Nem, if you're going to go down this road then there is no reaosn to continue this discussion. You want to justify theft, lying, and cheating as some panecea of anti-monopoly-ism, and paint it with a patina of some misguided concept of the pioneer spirit, you go right ahead.
You want to cast those who enjoy and use Microsft products as UnAmerican, go ahead. But as far as I'm concerned I am personally insulted..even I wouldn't stoop that low to discribe open source advocates.
*plonk*
Toasty please quote where I justified theft, lying and cheating, because as far as I can tell I didn't and don't.
Also show where I called those who use Microsoft products unAmerican. At most I called Microsoft and its criminal ways unAmerican.
-
Toasty, I am by no means well off, but buying MS's stuff is not beyond my means. I think I speak in this regard for lots of people. I just don't think their "pricing structure" is reasonable: I wonder what the price of oil would be if we had many, many more nuclear plants or more large waterfalls around, or have found an efficient solar converter.
If MS, and the other software companies, want to continue this practice of forcing someone to buy yet another copy of the same CDs just because there is another computer in the same household, then I hope, pray, and will push for more competition in all types of software, be it a game or an OS, even open source. I am already toying with StarOffice (OpenOffice). When they get more smooth and beefier, I'll bet a significant part of the world will be using it. I'd even pay for StarOffice over the free OpenOffice even though the "extras" Sun would throw in would either be miniscule or not all that useful for what I do, as when there'll be a meaningful competition, there'll be a lowering of prices.
Hey, Toasty, again, I'm no way rich, but even if I was, I wouldn't throw money away or gladly suffer unfair loss of it. Why can't you admit they are charging outasite prices because they have us currently by the cojones? I don't like the whiners and thieves who want all their software for free or use pirated warez copies. Programmers and their employers do deserve to profit from their work, but there is a line that they ought not cross; it's okay to make something expensive, but when it's waaay expensive, then it's just gouging.
(Edited for grammar)
Umm.... Just currious..
you do know that you only needed to buy the 1 copy of the Win XP Pro CD's and then call MS and buy new keys for each system for $35 each right? Why in the world did you even attempt to purchase 3 copies of the CD's that average about $250 a copy when all you needed was to buy the keys ?? That is what i did when I had 4 systems going here.. Bought 1 copy for Win XP Pro Media Center Edition 2004 ($385) and then installed it on 4 separate machines, used the key it came with on 1 system, then bought the other 3 keys for $35 each over the phone with Microsoft...
As for Office, you could get the regular office pack for the 2k3 wich comes with Outlook, Excel and Word.. it sold for $65 in stores here.. the 10 in 1 Professional Edition sold for $350 here.. but then again there is a free alternative to Office available for DL and it works with Office 2K3 file formats..
Anyhow.. just look around.. there are deals out there for those that actually take time to look.
-
Toasty, I am by no means well off, but buying MS's stuff is not beyond my means. I think I speak in this regard for lots of people. I just don't think their "pricing structure" is reasonable: I wonder what the price of oil would be if we had many, many more nuclear plants or more large waterfalls around, or have found an efficient solar converter.
If MS, and the other software companies, want to continue this practice of forcing someone to buy yet another copy of the same CDs just because there is another computer in the same household, then I hope, pray, and will push for more competition in all types of software, be it a game or an OS, even open source. I am already toying with StarOffice (OpenOffice). When they get more smooth and beefier, I'll bet a significant part of the world will be using it. I'd even pay for StarOffice over the free OpenOffice even though the "extras" Sun would throw in would either be miniscule or not all that useful for what I do, as when there'll be a meaningful competition, there'll be a lowering of prices.
Hey, Toasty, again, I'm no way rich, but even if I was, I wouldn't throw money away or gladly suffer unfair loss of it. Why can't you admit they are charging outasite prices because they have us currently by the cojones? I don't like the whiners and thieves who want all their software for free or use pirated warez copies. Programmers and their employers do deserve to profit from their work, but there is a line that they ought not cross; it's okay to make something expensive, but when it's waaay expensive, then it's just gouging.
(Edited for grammar)
Umm.... Just currious..
you do know that you only needed to buy the 1 copy of the Win XP Pro CD's and then call MS and buy new keys for each system for $35 each right? Why in the world did you even attempt to purchase 3 copies of the CD's that average about $250 a copy when all you needed was to buy the keys ?? That is what i did when I had 4 systems going here.. Bought 1 copy for Win XP Pro Media Center Edition 2004 ($385) and then installed it on 4 separate machines, used the key it came with on 1 system, then bought the other 3 keys for $35 each over the phone with Microsoft...
As for Office, you could get the regular office pack for the 2k3 wich comes with Outlook, Excel and Word.. it sold for $65 in stores here.. the 10 in 1 Professional Edition sold for $350 here.. but then again there is a free alternative to Office available for DL and it works with Office 2K3 file formats..
Anyhow.. just look around.. there are deals out there for those that actually take time to look.
<sarcasm mode>
*GASP* How dare you dispell the notion that MS is outprices and out of reach for the common PC user!
</sarcam mode>
-
Pesty, um, this IS something I've NEVER heard of! I know they don't advertise that! Does it also apply for the academic priced versions?
-
I do not know about Academic or School versions... those products are specifically for 1 machine per student only.. you would have to talk to Microsoft about that.
-
Pesty, um, this IS something I've NEVER heard of! I know they don't advertise that! Does it also apply for the academic priced versions?
I've never heard of that either, in fact when someone I know tried to have an OEM version moved on to another machine (and was willing to pay to do so) she was told my Microsoft that she would have to buy another OEM version or the full version. The operator never suggested buying new keys which is what she was looking for. So I'm guessing at this point that buying new keys only applies if and only if you first buy the full version of WinXP. What it comes down to is Microsoft still knows that they are the only game in town, and will continue taking full advantage of us for as long as they can.
-
I've never heard of that either, in fact when someone I know tried to have an OEM version moved on to another machine (and was willing to pay to do so) she was told my Microsoft that she would have to buy another OEM version or the full version. The operator never suggested buying new keys which is what she was looking for. So I'm guessing at this point that buying new keys only applies if and only if you first buy the full version of WinXP. What it comes down to is Microsoft still knows that they are the only game in town, and will continue taking full advantage of us for as long as they can.
I hadn't heard of it either. I did a google seach and found the relevant Microsoft pages.
Windows XP Home Link (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/howtobuy/addlic.mspx)
Windows XP Pro Link (http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/addlic.mspx)
-
I didn't know that there was a 3 additional key limit (total 4 keys per CD), but I did know that you can purchase additional keys a I had already done that for my older systems (which by chance came out to 4 keys anyways)... I didn't know that they had the online option as I had used Phone to order my keys...
Great info there Nemesis.
All I did was use the number from the install for registration by phone.
-
Great info there Nemesis.
Without your posting that Microsoft had such a policy I could not have found the links. Thanks for that info. I will see to spreading it around.
This is a policy Microsoft should advertise. They would probably cut out a lot of pirated home and small business copies this way.
-
Like the Microsoft Executives calling the GPL "viral" calling Linux and Open Source developers "UnAmerican" and "Communist"?
I knoiw you're not going to like this, but as asinine as it sounds what they say isn't that far off the mark. Many of those who claim to support open source are doing so for one of several reaosns:
1.) They think all software should be free and believe piracy is a legitimate act of file and application sharing.
2.) Are coropoate CEO, FEO, or other corporate cost cutter and see open source as the absolute perfect opportunity to increase the bottom line--these folks are the biggest proponents of out-sourcing too.
3.) They are simply anti-MS anything. If MS donated 1 billion dollars to children's aid funds these folks would complain that it wasn't 1.1 billion. Nothing MS does is good or good enough.
4.) They see open source as the great equalizer. That open source is the masses ability to throw off the yoke of corporate control.
There are lesser reasons too, but those are, imho, the 4 greatest motivators in the OS movement.
Jerry
Personally that's not my reason...in fact, a LOT of people I know were turned off by the authorization thing. It wasn't that we dislike MS (just check which OS I'm using now, which is WinXP) but the whole authorization affair...well that's something that just turns me off. When a company decides to distrust it's customers to the point of punishing them (no matter how minor you think that punishment is...a few minutes of my time...vs. no time at all...and if I don't, within 30 days I get locked out of MY OWN COMPUTER...talk about someone stealing the stuff, sure they own the OS, but they sure as heck don't own any of my writings, my personal accounts, or anything else) which in turn doesn't even really phase the REAL hackers (heh, malaysia has XP and most of the time no authorization or anything, and they and China account for 90% of the REAL piracy), that was about the biggest turnoff I've had.
The authorization item along with the automatic updates and that backdoor item are probably the #1 and #2 items which made more and more people start looking for alternatives. It's probably why some OS and even companies (cough...Apple...cough) made it through some dark times.
-
Personally that's not my reason...in fact, a LOT of people I know were turned off by the authorization thing.
That's not your reason for what, Dash. Priracy?
FWIW, Dash, if you're involved in software priracy may I suggest not posting it on a public board even if you FEEL JUSTIFIED because you dislike the company.
-
Personally that's not my reason...in fact, a LOT of people I know were turned off by the authorization thing.
That's not your reason for what, Dash. Priracy?
FWIW, Dash, if you're involved in software priracy may I suggest not posting it on a public board even if you FEEL JUSTIFIED because you dislike the company.
That is quite a leap there ToastyO, he could have been talking about his dislike for Microsoft. Just because someone dislikes Microsoft (which is what I think Dash was talking about) doesn't mean that person is automatically pirating software. I don't really like Microsoft but I have bought and paid for everything I have that carried a price tag.
I really hope that Linux or Apple will get back into the game, it is the only thing that will force Microsoft to be competitive. But we have to wait for that until Linux becomes more user friendly and/or Apple allows the Mac OS to run on the PC platform. Even then those platforms will suffer until game companies start coding for those OS's.
As for Linux being accused of forcing Microsoft out of business, so what. Microsoft better adapt and compete or it will die. Nobody really cared that much when Pony Express went out of business. If people want to blame someone for all the Linux support then they should look at the RIAA and MPAA. Microsoft (and Apple) had no problem joining with Record/Movie labels to try and remove any and all "fair use" rights that the people have or had depending how you look at it. The RIAA/MPAA want to remove any right I have to make backup copies of the things I have bought. Or even the rights to play those things on my computer, MP3 player, or even take a movie over to a family or friends house to watch during a get together. All of that is simply wrong and Microsoft and Apple support it, so it is no wonder that people are looking for alternatives. Now let me point out something just so no one jumps to conclusions. I do not, nor have I ever put my movies, music, or software up on file shares for trading. Nor do I allow other people that I know to copy movies, music, or software.
-
Great info there Nemesis.
Without your posting that Microsoft had such a policy I could not have found the links. Thanks for that info. I will see to spreading it around.
This is a policy Microsoft should advertise. They would probably cut out a lot of pirated home and small business copies this way.
Heh. I now have THREE copies of XP in my house. Bill Gates and his bean counters are ROFL at me. I don't think they want to let too many people know. Yes, it should cut down on piracy, but I think they feel they can squeeze corporate and government users for a bulk of their profits and use ignorance (as in my case) and the need to activate to rake in the rest, so that the pirates, though representing a lot of money they won't get, is not that important to them anymore, as they are already doing... not too poorly at all.
-
Heh. I now have THREE copies of XP in my house. Bill Gates and his bean counters are ROFL at me. I don't think they want to let too many people know. Yes, it should cut down on piracy, but I think they feel they can squeeze corporate and government users for a bulk of their profits and use ignorance (as in my case) and the need to activate to rake in the rest, so that the pirates, though representing a lot of money they won't get, is not that important to them anymore, as they are already doing... not too poorly at all.
This would not affect the big companies or governmnet sites. They already have site licenses, volume discounts and the old "we're thinking of moving to Linux" discount. :)
All I can see it doing is increasing revenues for Microsoft, decreasing piracy and making people think better of "the Evil Empire". So of course Microsoft won't do it.
-
Personally that's not my reason...in fact, a LOT of people I know were turned off by the authorization thing.
That's not your reason for what, Dash. Priracy?
FWIW, Dash, if you're involved in software priracy may I suggest not posting it on a public board even if you FEEL JUSTIFIED because you dislike the company.
That is quite a leap there ToastyO, he could have been talking about his dislike for Microsoft. Just because someone dislikes Microsoft (which is what I think Dash was talking about) doesn't mean that person is automatically pirating software. I don't really like Microsoft but I have bought and paid for everything I have that carried a price tag.
I really hope that Linux or Apple will get back into the game, it is the only thing that will force Microsoft to be competitive. But we have to wait for that until Linux becomes more user friendly and/or Apple allows the Mac OS to run on the PC platform. Even then those platforms will suffer until game companies start coding for those OS's.
As for Linux being accused of forcing Microsoft out of business, so what. Microsoft better adapt and compete or it will die. Nobody really cared that much when Pony Express went out of business. If people want to blame someone for all the Linux support then they should look at the RIAA and MPAA. Microsoft (and Apple) had no problem joining with Record/Movie labels to try and remove any and all "fair use" rights that the people have or had depending how you look at it. The RIAA/MPAA want to remove any right I have to make backup copies of the things I have bought. Or even the rights to play those things on my computer, MP3 player, or even take a movie over to a family or friends house to watch during a get together. All of that is simply wrong and Microsoft and Apple support it, so it is no wonder that people are looking for alternatives. Now let me point out something just so no one jumps to conclusions. I do not, nor have I ever put my movies, music, or software up on file shares for trading. Nor do I allow other people that I know to copy movies, music, or software.
Beside this becoming another platform for you to leap into another rant about your dislike for ALL THINGS Microsoft can you possibly expalin why you think you're better at answering my question to Dash about his post than Dash himself?
Do you somehow understand him better than he does?
Jerry
-
Beside this becoming another platform for you to leap into another rant about your dislike for ALL THINGS Microsoft can you possibly expalin why you think you're better at answering my question to Dash about his post than Dash himself?
Do you somehow understand him better than he does?
Jerry
Well lets see you wrote:
I knoiw you're not going to like this, but as asinine as it sounds what they say isn't that far off the mark. Many of those who claim to support open source are doing so for one of several reaosns:
1.) They think all software should be free and believe piracy is a legitimate act of file and application sharing.
2.) Are coropoate CEO, FEO, or other corporate cost cutter and see open source as the absolute perfect opportunity to increase the bottom line--these folks are the biggest proponents of out-sourcing too.
3.) They are simply anti-MS anything. If MS donated 1 billion dollars to children's aid funds these folks would complain that it wasn't 1.1 billion. Nothing MS does is good or good enough.
4.) They see open source as the great equalizer. That open source is the masses ability to throw off the yoke of corporate control.
There are lesser reasons too, but those are, imho, the 4 greatest motivators in the OS movement.
Jerry
To which Dash responded:
Personally that's not my reason...in fact, a LOT of people I know were turned off by the authorization thing.
It's not that I'm better able to understand him, it just that I am able to read.
And I don't hate all things Microsoft I'm calling them as I see them, just as you are doing. We obviously see things differently is all. I certainly don't think this is something to get worked up enough to start throwing negative karma around, but then I guess it is just another thing we see differently. ::) ;D
-
And I don't hate all things Microsoft I'm calling them as I see them, just as you are doing. We obviously see things differently is all. I certainly don't think this is something to get worked up enough to start throwing negative karma around, but then I guess it is just another thing we see differently. ::) ;D
Are you suggesting I gave you neg karma? On what basis do you make that assumption?
Did a birdie tell you such a thing?
-
Are you suggesting I gave you neg karma? On what basis do you make that assumption?
Did a birdie tell you such a thing?
LOL, this is one of only two threads I have posted in since the end of January when my brother died. Kind of narrows it down a bit don't you think??!? ::) ;D
The thing is, I wasn't even trying to attack you earlier. I just pointed out that you were unfairly accusing Dash of something that he never stated. I never thought it was a big deal, it just looked like you misread what Dash said.
As for me using this thread or any other thread as a "platform" to attack Microsoft, well that is just not true. If you look again I not only tied Microsoft to the RIAA/MPAA but Apple as well. In fact you will even see the part where I pointed out Linux and the Mac's shortcomings. When it comes to bashing operating systems, I will cheerfully tap out a bash session on any and all operating systems. All operating systems have their short comings (well except for maybe Win2000 ;D ) and I try to make sure that I am a equal opportunity basher.
-
Are you suggesting I gave you neg karma? On what basis do you make that assumption?
Did a birdie tell you such a thing?
LOL, this is one of only two threads I have posted in since the end of January when my brother died. Kind of narrows it down a bit don't you think??!? ::) ;D
Then you had to assume it was me. Somehow I don't get the impression that you're normally an "assumptive" kind of person.
The thing is, I wasn't even trying to attack you earlier. I just pointed out that you were unfairly accusing Dash of something that he never stated. I never thought it was a big deal, it just looked like you misread what Dash said.
I didn't think you were attacking me.
I just don't see where Dash needs you to interpret his posts for him. I asked him and not you what he meant by his post. I'm not sure where my pique with you appointing yourself dash's spokesperson can be interpretted as some reaction to a personal attack? It's not like you see him as some hapless poster who needs you to rescue him from the hazards of debate, do you? I certainly don't.
As for me using this thread or any other thread as a "platform" to attack Microsoft, well that is just not true. If you look again I not only tied Microsoft to the RIAA/MPAA but Apple as well. In fact you will even see the part where I pointed out Linux and the Mac's shortcomings. When it comes to bashing operating systems, I will cheerfully tap out a bash session on any and all operating systems. All operating systems have their short comings (well except for maybe Win2000 ;D ) and I try to make sure that I am a equal opportunity basher.
Jerry
-
Then you had to assume it was me. Somehow I don't get the impression that you're normally an "assumptive" kind of person.
Not assumption, but simple deduction. I seriously doubt that someone would slam me about asking questions about anti-virus in the other thread. And you are right I am not normally an assumptive kind of person.
I didn't think you were attacking me.
I just don't see where Dash needs you to interpret his posts for him. I asked him and not you what he meant by his post. I'm not sure where my pique with you appointing yourself dash's spokesperson can be interpreted as some reaction to a personal attack? It's not like you see him as some hapless poster who needs you to rescue him from the hazards of debate, do you? I certainly don't.
I wasn't interpreting Dash's posts, I was pointing out to you that you may have been too quick to judge. And I have stated as much in my previous post. As I stated before in not so many words, no interpreting was needed only the ability to read.
-
Then you had to assume it was me. Somehow I don't get the impression that you're normally an "assumptive" kind of person.
Not assumption, but simple deduction. I seriously doubt that someone would slam me about asking questions about anti-virus in the other thread. And you are right I am not normally an assumptive kind of person.
I didn't think you were attacking me.
I just don't see where Dash needs you to interpret his posts for him. I asked him and not you what he meant by his post. I'm not sure where my pique with you appointing yourself dash's spokesperson can be interpreted as some reaction to a personal attack? It's not like you see him as some hapless poster who needs you to rescue him from the hazards of debate, do you? I certainly don't.
I wasn't interpreting Dash's posts, I was pointing out to you that you may have been too quick to judge. And I have stated as much in my previous post. As I stated before in not so many words, no interpreting was needed only the ability to read.
Oy! I'm truly disappointed you're not comprehending my point. I know WTF Dash wrote...
Oh nevermind. This will only lead to a circular argument.