Am 08. Jan, 2004 schw=E4tzte Miles Beck so:
> 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 Window=
s
> > 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, d=
o
> > them a favor and tell them to use Windows 2000.
>
> Could you explain more how Windows XP infringes in the ways you stated
> above?
The license for XP ( and recent service packs ) requires you to authorise m=
$
breaking into your system whenever it wants without cause. Theoretically,
it's looking for unauthorized use of software. It gets to determine if your
use of their software is authorized. There's no appeal.
This isn't HIPAA compliant. HIPAA regs require keeping data secure and
private. Having a vendor with free reign to access the data isn't keeping i=
t
secure or private.
HIPAA deals with medical info. Do you really want *any* 3rd party to be abl=
e
to wander in and look at your medical information? Sure, the 3rd party migh=
t
not be looking for your data, but m$ can make copies of the data for
scrutiny. Who knows what happens once that data leaves the doctor's office.
lawyer-client privileges? Well, the lawyer can comply with the law and not
let anyone look at your data or the lawyer can comply with the law and let
m$ have access.
Read the EULA. BTW, recent service packs for other m$ OSen change the EULA,
so installing the service packs does all of the above.
ciao,
der.hans
--=20
# https://www.LuftHans.com/ http://www.AZOTO.org/
# Keine Ahnung, was ich dir sagen soll,
# keine Ahnung und keinen (.)plan. -- die Toten Hosen
(text/plain)