On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 12:05, Miles Beck wrote:
> Derek Neighbors wrote:
> 
> > You do a disservice to them.  Windows XP is horrible at infringing upon
> > both user rights and privacy.  More so than any other version of Windows
> > by magnitudes.  It borders on malicious to suggest to people to use
> > Windows XP.  If you really feel they need a newer version of Windows, do
> > them a favor and tell them to use Windows 2000.
> 
> Could you explain more how Windows XP infringes in the ways you stated 
> above?
> 
---
not my statement but to me, this refers to the EULA which allows
Microsoft to deny you access to your files, your operating system,
installed applications all being subject to the enforcement of digital
rights claims by others.

Just reading through the EULA itself makes it clear that simply to
install and use a computer with this operating system is a challenge.
With respect to Derek's claim about preference for using Windows 2000
Professional, I am assuming that he refers to using it with patches /
service packs up to but not including SP3 which seemed to require a
users/owners approval of a new EULA, which is similar, if not identical
to the EULA bundled with Windows XP. I think though that Windows 2000
license is transferable.

Interestingly, the laws hold the business owner (or computer owner if it
is personally owned) responsible/liable for the software and usage of
computers and this does not begin nor end with Windows. If I put a copy
of Red Hat software on someone's computer, I feel confident in telling
him that it is fully licensed and he need not worry about infringement
of anyone's intellectual property claims (save for SCO which I pretty
much dismiss out of hand but it is indeed out there). I am not as
confident of the legality of doing the same thing with SuSE.

Craig