--=-cTVK+YRLuCU8I3/uV/s9
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 18:07, Richard L. Proctor wrote:
> On Thursday 08 January 2004 12:02 pm, Derek Neighbors wrote:
>=20
> > 1. The protection schema to prevent "pirating" severely limits your rig=
ht
> > to fair use.  If I remember correctly (it's been a while) you can only
> > install XP on two machines/processors and then it refuses to install
> > anymore.  So if you have a motherboard or processor blow out or heavens=
 to
> > betsy you upgrade.  You could find yourself on a long (and likely
> > expensive) phonecall trying to justify why you have to install XP for t=
he
> > third time.
>=20
> I am constantly repartitioning, changing, installing new hard ware on my=20
> system.  Can't tell you how many times I have installed Windows XP or had=
 to=20
> call Microsoft.  I think at one point they told me I've called 42 times.=20
>=20
> The point though,  is that there was no expensive phone calls.  You call =
the=20
> number on the screen and they quickly give you another code to type in.  =
No=20
> biggy!  I've done this for myself and many customers.
>=20

I said "likely expensive".  At one point they were hassling folks.  In
fact, abcnews or foxnews actually did a story on it.  You may find it
acceptable to have to call to get permission to use something you paid
good money for me, but for me I find that unacceptable regardless of if
it doesn't cost for the support charge.

I don't like being treated like a criminal when I have done nothing
wrong.

> > 2. If you install install service pack 1 for XP, you agree to let
> > microsoft have full access to your computer remotely without notifying
> > you.  It even goes as far as to say they can INSTALL software or UPGRAD=
E
> > software if they feel it necessary[0].  Of course, they state they woul=
d
> > never abuse this.  You could certainly not install sp 1, but then you a=
re
> > open to about 3 or 4 of the known nasties in the wild.
>=20
> This sounds like someone who is using their computer for illegal purposes=
 and=20
> is paranoid?

I will gladly let any law enforcement agency look at my computer.  I
have nothing to hide.  However, I don't feel that any vendor has the
right to access my computer without notifying me and certainly I don't
think they should have reason to be installing software without
notifying me.

To be fair, to date Microsoft has not (to my knowledge) used or abused
either one of these items, but certainly they put them in their EULA for
a reason.
--=20
Derek Neighbors
GNU Enterprise
http://www.gnuenterprise.org
derek@gnue.org

Was I helpful?  Let others know:
 http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=3Ddneighbo

--=-cTVK+YRLuCU8I3/uV/s9
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA//jMNHb99+vQX/88RAvhGAJ9cFWbi4Xcj2ZudHdqyy6MCAlBwpwCfZ1WV
ksYRoEVxmKziTrkbPvt7O6Y=
=BPD9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-cTVK+YRLuCU8I3/uV/s9--