1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

How bad has Windows registration gotten?

Discussion in 'PC Hardware' started by Eric, Oct 8, 2003.

  1. Eric

    Eric Guest

    As a long-time Macintosh zealot, I've been avoiding this for eternity(I
    was raised on Apple ][ & Apple /// from birth then straight to Macs ever
    since), but the diminishing returns of OS X-only computing combined with
    the PPC's practical parity with 80x86 versus the constantly decreasing
    suckiness and cost of MS/80x86(not to mention the fact of that
    BeOS/HP-UX/IRIX/AmigaOS are all dead) make it increasingly likely that
    my next major computer purchase will be 100% IBM compatible(Even if only
    as a game machine).

    The primary thing that has me worried is stuff I keep hearing in reviews
    and such about the newest versions of MS Windows(and even some pieces of
    hardware) actually REQUIRING a unique, individually trackable ID to be
    supplied, essentially branding an indellible label to you via the
    internet with your name, telephone number, street address and more
    attatched to it in MS's creepy database.

    How true is this stuff? Is it actually compulsory? Is there a (legal)way
    to get around it? Is Microsoft getting enough flack where they're
    probably going to back off for a while?





    Eric,
     
    Eric, Oct 8, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Eric

    Gfretwell Guest

    indellible label to you via the
    You can always give MS a phony name, they only want your money. Your IP address
    is probably a more telling identifier. Recent events demonstrate that your ISP
    will give you up in a heartbeat with nothing more than an administrative stroke
    of a pen.
     
    Gfretwell, Oct 8, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Eric

    Mark Dodel Guest

    -> How true is this stuff? Is it actually compulsory? Is there a (legal)way
    -> to get around it? Is Microsoft getting enough flack where they're
    -> probably going to back off for a while?
    ->

    Well they say they will only use the information for software
    registration purposes only. But do you believe anything that microsft
    says? You have to register WinXP Home within, I think, its 30 days to
    use it, or it won't work anymore, at least that was what the popup
    said when I re-installed it. It checks your system to make sure that
    you are installing it on the same hardware if you previously installed
    the same license. Not sure if the same applies to winXP Pro. The
    EULA makes it clear that microsoft can check your system to make sure
    that you are in compliance.

    But why would anyone use any software from an ethically challenged
    criminal monopolist organization is beyond me. Why not try Linux,
    FreeBSD (what MacOS X is based on) or eComStation
    <http:\\www.ecomstation.com> ? None of those check in with their
    maker to tell them what you are doing, and as a benefit none of those
    stupid windoze virus will work on any of these platforms. You can try
    these out under MacOS by using VPC, if you can still find the MAC
    version now that microsoft has bought it from Connectix to kill it.


    Mark


    --
    From the eComStation of Mark Dodel

    http://www.os2voice.org
    Warpstock 2003, San Francisco, October 18-19th -
    http://www.warpstock.org
     
    Mark Dodel, Oct 9, 2003
    #3
  4. Eric

    cb Guest

    Mark Dodel wrote in message ...
    <snip>

    Let me just make one thing clear, there is a very big difference between
    'registration' and 'activation'. Windows XP Home/Pro and Windows Server 2003
    (all versions) require that you 'activate' your copy once its installed. All
    this does is create a unique ID number for your machine and it ties it to
    your Product Key, then sends that to Microsoft. It DOES NOT send any
    personal information to MS at all, no address, no name, no phone number. The
    ID and Product Key are then used to ensure you do not violate the license
    agreement by installing your copy of Windows XP or 2003 on multiple
    different computers.

    Now if you 'register' Windows (totally optional btw), then you are
    registering your name, address etc with them for technical support, special
    offers etc just like any other product you care to mention.

    Please get your facts straight before giving others false information.

    Thanks,
    Rob
     
    cb, Oct 9, 2003
    #4
  5. As cb so eloquently gibbered on Wed, 08 Oct 2003 at 23:48 GMT:
    I already know the difference and the facts.

    You /activate/ it to run it. It phones home and does the informant
    tricks afterward.

    You /register/ when you want to tattle on yourself. It then phones home
    to verify whether or not you lied when you registered.

    /Both/ let them know whether they should schedule a flight to knock
    your door down for illegal software installation.*

    HTH

    * They won't unless there's a BIG payoff. They want/need a small amount
    of piracy to keep the market strong in other areas for themselves and
    others.

    SEE: http://news.com.com/2100-1023-212942.html?legacy=cnet

    'Gates shed some light on his own hard-nosed business philosophy.
    "Although about 3 million computers get sold every year in China, but
    people don't pay for the software," he said. "Someday they will,
    though. As long as they are going to steal it, we want them to steal
    ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out
    how to collect sometime in the next decade."'
     
    Sinister Midget, Oct 9, 2003
    #5
  6. Eric

    Eric Guest

    So what you're saying is that compared to the traditional
    serial-number-on-a-sticker that's entered into a dialog box on first
    run(and/or install), MS software also sends the serial number back to MS
    and somehow tags your machine with an ID.

    One other thing I wonder; if a new version of Windows or an update or
    something comes out, or even if just some amount of time passes, will
    the intalled copy of Windows XP suddenly refuse to run?
    Ah, so that's just like registering any piece of software(Mac OS,
    Photoshop, etcŠ). And aside from that, Microsoft doesn't obligatorily
    attach a Passport account or something to one's copy of Windows XP?





    Eric,
     
    Eric, Oct 9, 2003
    #6
  7. Eric

    Eric Guest

    No. :)
    Because the hardware is cheap(if not impressive), the software is
    plentiful and everything else(with the possible exception of Apple) is
    dead.
    Because free UN*X, namely GNU/Linux represents everything evil about
    modern computers, while MS Windows at least makes a pretty sincere
    effort to make a GUI for almost every part of their system, and MS
    itself is starting to throw enough clout around to force developers into
    a vague semblance of UI standards compliance. GNU/Linux is the very
    embodiment of utterly useless token GUIs and swollen,
    rote-memorization-driven CLIs, all operating within their own little
    worlds, totally devoid of common design traits.

    The strength that has made it impossible for MS to conquer GNU/Linux,
    it's nebulous cloud of unorganized developers. Is the precise weakness
    that has doomed GNU/Linux to forever fail in obtaining a usable desktop
    interface and widely heeded set of dev guidelines. Any attempts to
    author such a thing will be met with clumsy, chaotic hands trying to
    take it in a dozen direction at once without any leadership or
    self-discipline, tearing it to ribbons in the process.

    If MS-DOS was Apple's historical enemy, MS Windows is Apple's spiritual
    conquest of it. And as UN*X is more like DOS than Windows is like
    Macintosh, UN*X, especially bare-bones UN*X like GNU/Linux, is Apple's
    truest spiritual enemy. Windows is still vilesome, but it has been
    tempered by the GUI legacy of Macintosh, GNU/Linux is still as primative
    as ever.

    The primary reason I'm seeing less worth in Macintosh as a platform is
    precisely because Apple & it's developers are moving backward in
    history, shunning all of their progress made since '83. More programs
    are using X-Windows, more preferences and settings are turning into
    plaintext .INI/.CFG/.plist files, more vital system components turning
    into a loose, disorganized heap of shims and shared libraries, the
    legendary Macintosh Finder turning into a stupid web browser. Macintosh
    is dying by it's creator's hand.

    While Apple has entirely abandoned progress, moving backwards in leaps
    and bounds, Microsoft is still crawling forward millimeter by millimeter
    as they have throughout all of the '90s. That's not terribly good, but
    it's better than nothing.
    Eew!! OS/2!!! ;-)
    Hmm... That is a good point, I suppose I'd have to beef up on an awful lot
    of Windows arcanum in order to turn all of the stupid VBscript defaults
    off, which could be quite difficult.
    Actually, all of the free UN*Xes run on PPCs, along with some other
    oddball OSs like QNX, AmigaOS & older versions of OS/2(Blech) & various
    commercial UN*Xes. Though AtheOS, newer clones of OS/2 and
    BeOS(OpenBeOS, BlueEyedOS, Leonardo...) admittedly don't run on it at the
    moment.




    Eric,
     
    Eric, Oct 9, 2003
    #7
  8. Eric

    Mike Scott Guest

    Your implicit description of FreeBSD as "GNU/Linux" might make some
    people very unhappy. FreeBSD is neither.
     
    Mike Scott, Oct 9, 2003
    #8
  9. Eric

    Eric Guest

    That's not what I said, I said that free UN*X(a catagory which
    _includes_, among other things, FreeBSD and GNU/Linux) represents
    everything evil about modern computers.

    As for those pansies that try to weasel out of it by claiming that
    one(or both) of them isn't UN*X, that's a load of hooey; while The GNU
    Manifesto _claims_ that it's, uh... not Unix. The Manifesto goes on to
    detail thinly veiled reverse-engineering procedures, it's plainly
    obvious that such a claim is even less truthful than Compaq's
    protestations of innocence in producing a certain rather famous ROM
    chip. FreeBSD on the other hand is, of course. About as UN*X as UN*X
    gets, BSD is the original UN*X, and FreeBSD is one of it's most direct
    descendants.

    In other words, I'm not saying that FreeBSD & GNU/Linux are the same
    thing; they _are_ seperate things, but they are still branches of what
    IS very much the same tree.





    Eric,
     
    Eric, Oct 9, 2003
    #9
  10. Eric

    Bob Eager Guest

    Rubbish. Complete rubbish. UNIX was around long before Berkeley started
    hacking it around. I should know...I was using it.

    If you hate it so much, you must have shares in Microsoft!
     
    Bob Eager, Oct 9, 2003
    #10
  11. Eric

    Mike Scott Guest

    Rubbish. I quote from your posting:

    "Because free UN*X, namely GNU/Linux...."

    which is clear enough.

    'Nuff said.
     
    Mike Scott, Oct 9, 2003
    #11
  12. Eric

    Kershek Guest

    How do you play the latest games under Linux?
     
    Kershek, Oct 9, 2003
    #12
  13. Eric

    Mark Dodel Guest

    -> In article <cLdq6jdb1N4Q-pn2-sZdPnn6xw31e@localhost>,
    -> says...
    -> > But why would anyone use any software from an ethically challenged
    -> > criminal monopolist organization is beyond me. Why not try Linux,
    -> > FreeBSD (what MacOS X is based on) or eComStation
    -> > <http:\\www.ecomstation.com> ? None of those check in with their
    -> > maker to tell them what you are doing, and as a benefit none of those
    -> > stupid windoze virus will work on any of these platforms. You can try
    -> > these out under MacOS by using VPC, if you can still find the MAC
    -> > version now that microsoft has bought it from Connectix to kill it.
    ->
    -> How do you play the latest games under Linux?

    I don't play games and I don't run Linux. But I also don't run any
    virusware from Microsoft. ;-)

    Linux has WINE, which probably runs some of them. eComStation has
    Odin which runs some of them. Or buy a box that isn't connected to
    the net just to run the toy stuff. That way you avoid the malware.
    Or do like microsoft and hide behind a Linux firewall. ;-)

    Mark


    --
    From the eComStation of Mark Dodel

    http://www.os2voice.org
    Warpstock 2003, San Francisco, October 18-19th -
    http://www.warpstock.org
     
    Mark Dodel, Oct 9, 2003
    #13
  14. Eric

    Mark Dodel Guest

    -> Let me just make one thing clear, there is a very big difference between
    -> 'registration' and 'activation'.

    It all phones home to Redmond. Perhaps you are naive enough to trust
    the likes of gates and his criminal band. There has been so much
    shown to date of how they lie, cheat and steal, that if you are smart
    you wouldn't use their virusware at all.

    What happens when msft goes belly up? How will you activate your
    weenieDOS then? This scheme is worse then the old copy protection
    schemes that screwed a lot of people in years past.

    Mark

    --
    From the eComStation of Mark Dodel

    http://www.os2voice.org
    Warpstock 2003, San Francisco, October 18-19th -
    http://www.warpstock.org
     
    Mark Dodel, Oct 9, 2003
    #14
  15. Eric

    Eric Guest

    Hmm... When you're right, you're right. I was off by 9 years:

    "UNIX History(Preview)"
    I don't hate UN*X quite so much as I feel it's time has come and passed
    long ago and it is lingering unnaturally on this earth. It was a great
    experiment in software engineering in it's day(and a MUCH needed
    anathema to MVS), but it's now just an overmodified piece of junk
    holding back pure progress while somewhat innovative designs like BeOS
    flounder.

    Free UN*X is even worse, as instead of inventing anything new, it just
    allows cheapskates to keep grafting the same ancient teetering heap of
    jury-rigged modifications to newer and newer hardware(Further typified
    by most GNU/Linux advocates gravitating toward AMD's obscene 80x86-64).

    Windows may be nasty, ramnants of MS-DOS may still be lurking under it's
    veneer, but at least Microsoft had the guts to gut most of it for
    Windows NT, the free UN*X h@x0rz never have and never will do any
    serious trashing and replacement.

    Apple was once famed for doing it(At great, permanent personal expense)
    and saving the computer industry from oblivion several times in the
    process. But OS X is Apple giving up, without them, without their
    progeny(BeOS, Eazel, etc...), no one seems to have the courage to start
    fresh combined with the financial backing to get some solid apps and the
    discipline to keep from corrupting their vision(AtheOS has some of the
    courage and maybe a tiny bit of the discipline needed, but none of the
    backing).

    Maybe it's the structure of American capitalism(Commodore, Acorn, Atari,
    Sharp, Fujitsu & others held on for years in Europe/Japan after
    IBM/MS's assault in the USA), maybe MS is just too dominant now for
    anyone but Apple to weather their continual assertions of might.

    No one is even _trying_ to move forward other than (to as small a degree
    as they can manage)Microsoft. OS X isn't much worse than Windows, but
    it's certainly little better.




    Eric,
     
    Eric, Oct 10, 2003
    #15
  16. Eric

    Eric Guest

    Note the "Namely", I was using GNU/Linux as the foremost example of free
    UN*X.





    Eric,
     
    Eric, Oct 10, 2003
    #16
  17. Eric

    Eric Guest

    Or a Mac OS 9 firewall.




    Eric,
     
    Eric, Oct 10, 2003
    #17
  18. Eric

    Bob Eager Guest

    I just use my memory!
    I would agree with that....particularly a few years back. I'm still not
    convinced that Linux did anything except fragment what development there
    already was. There is nothing innovative in Linux.

    In my lectures on operating system theory, I drop in litrtle readings
    from the UNIX-Hater's Handbook - always good fun and sometimes actually
    useful (e.g., finally an explanation of how to use 'find'.)

    I think there has been quite a lot of development at the kernel level,
    and more than just that required for new hardware.

    But, the user level development is fairly pathetic. No significant shell
    development for many years, and very little advance on the GUI front.

    Perhaps I'm spoilt...and I don't want to start another OS war. But, I
    was using my desktop in front of some students with week, without even
    thinking about it. I turned round to discover them open mouthed at what
    I was doing....they had usied only Windows and UNIX. They were impressed
    at the user interface's use of a live object paradigm, with object
    creation, subclassing, inheritance, etc. When I told them It was not
    Windows, UNIX, or a Mac....!. As I said, I'm not into starting a war so
    the system I am using is left as an exercise for the reader!
    Well, it wasn't really that, even; they bought in the lead designer of
    VAX/VMS. Microsoft rarely do anything original these days. A lot of
    stuff in NT/2000 was designed long before. For example, VMS suffered
    from a badly fragmenting file system, and one company made money selling
    defragmenters; now their market is users of NTFS...
    I agree.
     
    Bob Eager, Oct 10, 2003
    #18
  19. That would be only a problem if Microsoft goes belly up between the
    time you purchase Windows and you activate it. Not very likely (if it is
    at all likely that Microsoft goes belly up and ignoring the fact that in
    that case non-activation is a rather small problem compared to all
    others). Also, very few people purchase Windows seperately and AFAIK
    (but could be wrong) Windows is already activated on pre-installed
    systems.

    Anyway, hatred/love towards an OS/supplier is rather silly.

    [FWIW, I am *not* a Microsoft/Windows fan. I've been using/supporting
    UNIX for 20 years, and the last Microsoft products that I bought were
    MS-DOS 3.3. and Windows/386.]
     
    Frank Slootweg, Oct 10, 2003
    #19
  20. Eric

    Eric Guest

    Yeah, MS is probably going to be around until the sun swollows the
    earth. :)

    Something I'm more worried about is what MS's rumblings say about this;
    if one activates their copy of Windows XP, uses it for however long, and
    then MS Windows.NET is released, will the copy of XP grind to a halt?
    Corporations, for-profit or not, are still groups of human beings,
    software, no matter how large, is still authored by influential people.
    Those people, virtuous or vile, creative or myopic, dedicated or erratic
    ARE what make or break an OS and/or corporation, even today. And they
    must be judged for their acts.




    Eric,
     
    Eric, Oct 10, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.