Vista I will not be buying

Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

I apologize for the rant.

http://snipurl.com/hbl7

I have made my decision

Vista I will not be buying.

No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.

I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.

If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.

Greg Ro
188 answers Last reply
More about vista buying
  1. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    > I apologize for the rant.
    >
    > http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >
    > I have made my decision
    >
    > Vista I will not be buying.
    >
    > No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    > computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    > got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >
    > I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >
    > If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.

    So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
    media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
    in any way?

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  2. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:

    >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    >> I apologize for the rant.
    >>
    >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >>
    >> I have made my decision
    >>
    >> Vista I will not be buying.
    >>
    >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >>
    >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >>
    >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    >
    >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
    >media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
    >in any way?

    Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
    steal.

    The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
    That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
    to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
    period.

    Let use this analogy.
    Some one builds you a home.
    They put a private room in
    Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
    access to it. Even through it is in your own house.


    Greg Ro
  3. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7e73d9526770f6989dcb@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    >> I apologize for the rant.
    >>
    >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >>
    >> I have made my decision
    >>
    >> Vista I will not be buying.
    >>
    >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >>
    >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >>
    >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    >
    > So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
    > media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
    > in any way?

    I'm not sure exactly what restrictions Vista will have, as well as other
    electronic devices, but some of us have an "issue" with what is considered
    fair use. Will Vista prohibit me from burning a backup CD of software or
    music? I'm entitled to do so, IMO. This is not a piracy issue in my case,
    although I can see it being so for some others.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Leythos wrote:
    > In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com
    > says...
    >> I apologize for the rant.
    >>
    >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >>
    >> I have made my decision
    >>
    >> Vista I will not be buying.
    >>
    >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >>
    >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >>
    >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux
    >> system.
    >
    > So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to
    > steal media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to
    > limit you in any way?

    Hey Lameboy! PA and WGA already screw people who have stolen nothing at
    all. More copy-protection will garner more problem for people doing
    absolutely nothing illegal.

    So F*#K YOU and all your BILLIONAIRE Hollywood & Redmond buddies. You
    are a total brownshirt for the corporate copyright elite.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  5. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7e73d9526770f6989dcb@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

    > In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...

    >> I apologize for the rant.
    >>
    >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >>
    >> I have made my decision
    >>
    >> Vista I will not be buying.
    >>
    >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >>
    >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >>
    >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.

    > So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
    > media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
    > in any way?

    That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts himself
    more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
    keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.

    DS
  6. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    GregRo wrote:
    > I apologize for the rant.
    >
    > http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >
    > I have made my decision
    >
    > Vista I will not be buying.
    >
    > No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    > computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    > got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >
    > I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >
    > If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    >
    > Greg Ro

    I hope you can sleep at night if Microsoft goes bankrupt.

    --
    If there is a Tourist Season, how come we can't shoot them?
  7. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    relic wrote:
    > GregRo wrote:
    >> I apologize for the rant.
    >>
    >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >>
    >> I have made my decision
    >>
    >> Vista I will not be buying.
    >>
    >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >>
    >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >>
    >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux
    >> system. Greg Ro
    >
    > I hope you can sleep at night if Microsoft goes bankrupt.

    LOL! The software piracy rate was much higher in 1994 than it was in
    2000 before MS implimented its copy-protection, PA. I don't seem to
    remember that MS was anywhere close to bankruptcy!

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  8. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    GregRo wrote:

    > I apologize for the rant.
    >
    > http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >
    > I have made my decision
    >
    > Vista I will not be buying.
    >
    > No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    > computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    > got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >
    > I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >
    > If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    >
    > Greg Ro

    Who cares what you do - stick or don't stick - who cares.

    --
    Rock
    MS MVP Windows - Shell/User
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Hello, Thanks for the information.
    Certain people do not understand the erosion of basic rights. No matter what
    they state they "just don't get it".
    Microsoft may have future problems but not with file sharing or copying in
    the U.S. or Europe. Their problem will be with China, India and Google.
    take care.
    beamish.

    "GregRo" wrote:

    > I apologize for the rant.
    >
    > http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >
    > I have made my decision
    >
    > Vista I will not be buying.
    >
    > No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    > computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    > got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >
    > I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >
    > If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    >
    > Greg Ro
    >
  10. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
    @yes.lycs.com says...
    > On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
    >
    > >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    > >> I apologize for the rant.
    > >>
    > >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    > >>
    > >> I have made my decision
    > >>
    > >> Vista I will not be buying.
    > >>
    > >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    > >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    > >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    > >>
    > >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    > >>
    > >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    > >
    > >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
    > >media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
    > >in any way?
    >
    > Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
    > steal.
    >
    > The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
    > That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
    > to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
    > period.
    >
    > Let use this analogy.
    > Some one builds you a home.
    > They put a private room in
    > Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
    > access to it. Even through it is in your own house.

    Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
    want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have a
    legal right to it - what part are you left without?

    Your analogy should be more like:

    You buy a house.
    You want to make crack in it.
    The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
    You start making crack.
    You get your home taken away by the government.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  11. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:20:22 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:

    >In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
    >@yes.lycs.com says...
    >> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
    >>
    >> >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    >> >> I apologize for the rant.
    >> >>
    >> >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >> >>
    >> >> I have made my decision
    >> >>
    >> >> Vista I will not be buying.
    >> >>
    >> >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    >> >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    >> >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >> >>
    >> >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >> >>
    >> >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    >> >
    >> >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
    >> >media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
    >> >in any way?
    >>
    >> Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
    >> steal.
    >>
    >> The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
    >> That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
    >> to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
    >> period.
    >>
    >> Let use this analogy.
    >> Some one builds you a home.
    >> They put a private room in
    >> Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
    >> access to it. Even through it is in your own house.
    >
    >Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
    >want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have a
    >legal right to it - what part are you left without?
    >
    >Your analogy should be more like:
    >
    >You buy a house.
    >You want to make crack in it.
    >The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
    >You start making crack.
    >You get your home taken away by the government.


    My point is I want to have access to everything on may hard drive and
    in my computer.

    If I choose to break a law that is my choice not the operating system.
    I don't need a net nanny that for kids. Which I don't break any laws
    for the record. Microsoft and Hollywood assumes everyone is a
    criminal out to get them.

    What if a virus, spyware, or adware program got into the protected
    area and the virus, spyware or adware protection program could not
    clean it out? This will happen.

    If you want to buy vista go right ahead. I made my decision based on
    those and other articles.

    If every I do get vista is will be only because a job requires or
    Microsoft sent me a free version


    Greg Ro
  12. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7e899d5fa42d47989dd1@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

    > Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
    > want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have a
    > legal right to it - what part are you left without?
    >
    > Your analogy should be more like:
    >
    > You buy a house.
    > You want to make crack in it.
    > The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
    > You start making crack.
    > You get your home taken away by the government.

    The OS has no capability to determine what is legal and what is not. All
    it can do is enforce a configured policy, configured by a person who may or
    may not know what is legal. The whole point of this type of technology is to
    permit the enforcement of restrictions that are *not* found in the law.

    DS
  13. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <uDY#XAarFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, ntotrr@optonline.net
    says...
    > I'm not sure exactly what restrictions Vista will have, as well as other
    > electronic devices, but some of us have an "issue" with what is considered
    > fair use. Will Vista prohibit me from burning a backup CD of software or
    > music? I'm entitled to do so, IMO. This is not a piracy issue in my case,
    > although I can see it being so for some others.

    From what I've read, it only limits actions of what most of us would
    consider pirating materials. Right now, if I stick my CD in the drive
    and have WMP rip it to MP3's, it checks something and lets me do it -
    and adds a license for it to my machine.

    Seems to me that only pirates will have any issues with doing illegal
    things with Vista. Read his link if you want to see.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  14. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Leythos wrote:
    > In article <uDY#XAarFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>,
    > ntotrr@optonline.net says...
    >> I'm not sure exactly what restrictions Vista will have, as well as
    >> other electronic devices, but some of us have an "issue" with what
    >> is considered fair use. Will Vista prohibit me from burning a
    >> backup CD of software or music? I'm entitled to do so, IMO. This
    >> is not a piracy issue in my case, although I can see it being so for
    >> some others.
    >
    > From what I've read, it only limits actions of what most of us would
    > consider pirating materials. Right now, if I stick my CD in the drive
    > and have WMP rip it to MP3's, it checks something and lets me do it -
    > and adds a license for it to my machine.
    >
    > Seems to me that only pirates will have any issues with doing illegal
    > things with Vista. Read his link if you want to see.

    The imagined pirates of the corporate copyright elite, those that
    exercise their legal "fair use" rights.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  15. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "kurttrail" <dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org> wrote in message
    news:OV6ZLOarFHA.1252@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > Leythos wrote:
    >> In article <uDY#XAarFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>,
    >> ntotrr@optonline.net says...
    >>> I'm not sure exactly what restrictions Vista will have, as well as
    >>> other electronic devices, but some of us have an "issue" with what
    >>> is considered fair use. Will Vista prohibit me from burning a
    >>> backup CD of software or music? I'm entitled to do so, IMO. This
    >>> is not a piracy issue in my case, although I can see it being so for
    >>> some others.
    >>
    >> From what I've read, it only limits actions of what most of us would
    >> consider pirating materials. Right now, if I stick my CD in the drive
    >> and have WMP rip it to MP3's, it checks something and lets me do it -
    >> and adds a license for it to my machine.
    >>
    >> Seems to me that only pirates will have any issues with doing illegal
    >> things with Vista. Read his link if you want to see.
    >
    > The imagined pirates of the corporate copyright elite, those that exercise
    > their legal "fair use" rights.


    The libraries, scholars, and legal analysts have been warning for at least
    five years that fair use rights are being destroyed completely by the MPAA,
    RIAA, and a subservient federal system, under both Clinton and Bush.

    see

    www.eff.org
  16. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <3nju9hF1taitU1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    > On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 20:20:22 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
    >
    > >In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
    > >@yes.lycs.com says...
    > >> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    > >> >> I apologize for the rant.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    > >> >>
    > >> >> I have made my decision
    > >> >>
    > >> >> Vista I will not be buying.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    > >> >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    > >> >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    > >> >>
    > >> >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    > >> >
    > >> >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
    > >> >media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
    > >> >in any way?
    > >>
    > >> Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
    > >> steal.
    > >>
    > >> The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
    > >> That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
    > >> to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
    > >> period.
    > >>
    > >> Let use this analogy.
    > >> Some one builds you a home.
    > >> They put a private room in
    > >> Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
    > >> access to it. Even through it is in your own house.
    > >
    > >Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
    > >want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have a
    > >legal right to it - what part are you left without?
    > >
    > >Your analogy should be more like:
    > >
    > >You buy a house.
    > >You want to make crack in it.
    > >The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
    > >You start making crack.
    > >You get your home taken away by the government.
    >
    >
    >
    > My point is I want to have access to everything on may hard drive and
    > in my computer.
    >
    > If I choose to break a law that is my choice not the operating system.
    > I don't need a net nanny that for kids. Which I don't break any laws
    > for the record. Microsoft and Hollywood assumes everyone is a
    > criminal out to get them.
    >
    > What if a virus, spyware, or adware program got into the protected
    > area and the virus, spyware or adware protection program could not
    > clean it out? This will happen.
    >
    > If you want to buy vista go right ahead. I made my decision based on
    > those and other articles.
    >
    > If every I do get vista is will be only because a job requires or
    > Microsoft sent me a free version

    There is no "Protected Area" there is just a restriction on what you can
    copy. Where do you get the idea that there is some magical area reserved
    on your drive?

    Your assumption about "protected area" is wrong, as is your reasoning.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  17. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7e8dd6ef6522b2989dd4@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

    > There is no "Protected Area" there is just a restriction on what you can
    > copy. Where do you get the idea that there is some magical area reserved
    > on your drive?
    >
    > Your assumption about "protected area" is wrong, as is your reasoning.

    Suppose a virus or other piece of malware managed to protect itself such
    that I could not copy it. That would mean that I could not send it to an
    expert for analysis or copy it onto another uninfected machine myself to
    figure out how to disentangle it from my system.

    Right?

    DS
  18. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <11h9p8mlgb14vd4@corp.supernews.com>, none@none.net says...
    > The libraries, scholars, and legal analysts have been warning for at least
    > five years that fair use rights are being destroyed completely by the MPAA,
    > RIAA, and a subservient federal system, under both Clinton and Bush.

    And how is that relevant to Vista? If vista does not stop one from doing
    legal things, then it's not really an issue, is it.


    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  19. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Leythos wrote:
    > In article <11h9p8mlgb14vd4@corp.supernews.com>, none@none.net says...
    >> The libraries, scholars, and legal analysts have been warning for at
    >> least five years that fair use rights are being destroyed completely
    >> by the MPAA, RIAA, and a subservient federal system, under both
    >> Clinton and Bush.
    >
    > And how is that relevant to Vista? If vista does not stop one from
    > doing legal things, then it's not really an issue, is it.

    If you hardware doesn't meet some arbitrary MS/Hollywood requirement,
    then you won't be able to view hi-def video content.

    That is an erosion of my "fair use" rights on the hi-def equipment I
    already own.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  20. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <#Zh8a7brFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
    dontemailme@anywhereintheknowuniverse.org says...
    > Leythos wrote:
    > > In article <11h9p8mlgb14vd4@corp.supernews.com>, none@none.net says...
    > >> The libraries, scholars, and legal analysts have been warning for at
    > >> least five years that fair use rights are being destroyed completely
    > >> by the MPAA, RIAA, and a subservient federal system, under both
    > >> Clinton and Bush.
    > >
    > > And how is that relevant to Vista? If vista does not stop one from
    > > doing legal things, then it's not really an issue, is it.
    >
    > If you hardware doesn't meet some arbitrary MS/Hollywood requirement,
    > then you won't be able to view hi-def video content.
    >
    > That is an erosion of my "fair use" rights on the hi-def equipment I
    > already own.

    I my wide screen TV is not HI-DEF ready, so I suppose that my rights
    have been eroded too.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  21. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in
    news:MPG.1d7e899d5fa42d47989dd1@news-server.columbus.rr.com:

    > In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
    > @yes.lycs.com says...
    >> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
    >>
    >> >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com
    >> >says...
    >> >> I apologize for the rant.
    >> >>
    >> >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >> >>
    >> >> I have made my decision
    >> >>
    >> >> Vista I will not be buying.
    >> >>
    >> >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of
    >> >> the computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or
    >> >> adaware got into that protected area and a virus program could not
    >> >> clean it.
    >> >>
    >> >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >> >>
    >> >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux
    >> >> system.
    >> >
    >> >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to
    >> >steal media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to
    >> >limit you in any way?
    >>
    >> Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
    >> steal.
    >>
    >> The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
    >> That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I want
    >> to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
    >> period.
    >>
    >> Let use this analogy.
    >> Some one builds you a home.
    >> They put a private room in
    >> Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
    >> access to it. Even through it is in your own house.
    >
    > Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
    > want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have
    > a legal right to it - what part are you left without?
    >
    > Your analogy should be more like:
    >
    > You buy a house.
    > You want to make crack in it.
    > The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
    > You start making crack.
    > You get your home taken away by the government.
    >

    The real weak link in all of this stuff from Microsoft is the fact that
    human beings experience the world in an analog fashion. The sound we
    hear - no matter how well protected has to be converted to an audible
    signal and the video we see has to be converted to a visual one - no
    amount of digital protection will stop a fully protected device from
    displaying its picture and speakers producing their sound.

    I have an inline scan converter that the VGA output from the computer
    attaches to - and then passes on to the computer. While inside the
    little gizmo - it splits the video out to a NTSC standard output I have
    attached to the VCR/DVD recorder. I bought a signal splitter for $2.00
    for the audio and run one line into the VCR/DVD and the other into the
    computer. Slower method of capture of course - real-time, instead os
    just capturing bits - but works fine.

    The articles I have read have stated Microsoft might fuzzy up the picture
    so that HDTV quality would not be there - but would equal DVD-quality at
    present-levels. I can live with that.

    This "new" scheme is just that - a new "scheme" - the articles have
    stated it will only work on Windows Media - so Microsoft is probably
    salivating on how much money they can make selling something that will
    not work - just as surely as DRM does not. Yes it works digitally - but
    again folks live in an analog world and it does not work. Being doing
    this for years with internet audio I wanted to capture - just hook the
    audio out into my Dolby Digital Tape Recorder and capture on metal oxide
    tape with excellent sound - and digital too!!

    cya

    a fools game from Microsoft on DRM
  22. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    evieg <evieg@noway.com> wrote in
    news:Xns96C2C42295B47eviegcom@207.69.189.191:

    > Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in
    > news:MPG.1d7e899d5fa42d47989dd1@news-server.columbus.rr.com:
    >
    >> In article <eX08k9ZrFHA.3604@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>, webworm12
    >> @yes.lycs.com says...
    >>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:47:33 GMT, Leythos <void@nowhere.lan> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> >In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com
    >>> >says...
    >>> >> I apologize for the rant.
    >>> >>
    >>> >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >>> >>
    >>> >> I have made my decision
    >>> >>
    >>> >> Vista I will not be buying.
    >>> >>
    >>> >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of
    >>> >> the computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or
    >>> >> adaware got into that protected area and a virus program could
    >>> >> not clean it.
    >>> >>
    >>> >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >>> >>
    >>> >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux
    >>> >> system.
    >>> >
    >>> >So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to
    >>> >steal media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor
    >>> >to limit you in any way?
    >>>
    >>> Quit putting words into my mouth. I did not say I had the right to
    >>> steal.
    >>>
    >>> The OS should not be able to control what I do or don't do period.
    >>> That not the operating system responsibility. That is mine. I
    >>> want to see everything and have access to everything on the computer
    >>> period.
    >>>
    >>> Let use this analogy.
    >>> Some one builds you a home.
    >>> They put a private room in
    >>> Only Microsoft and Certain people can use it. You are not allowed
    >>> access to it. Even through it is in your own house.
    >>
    >> Lets see, you buy an OS, it permits you to do anything legal that you
    >> want, you can copy music, you can copy video, all as long as you have
    >> a legal right to it - what part are you left without?
    >>
    >> Your analogy should be more like:
    >>
    >> You buy a house.
    >> You want to make crack in it.
    >> The government has rules against it - you have a choice.
    >> You start making crack.
    >> You get your home taken away by the government.
    >>
    >
    > The real weak link in all of this stuff from Microsoft is the fact
    > that human beings experience the world in an analog fashion. The
    > sound we hear - no matter how well protected has to be converted to an
    > audible signal and the video we see has to be converted to a visual
    > one - no amount of digital protection will stop a fully protected
    > device from displaying its picture and speakers producing their sound.
    >
    > I have an inline scan converter that the VGA output from the computer
    > attaches to - and then passes on to the computer. While inside the
    > little gizmo - it splits the video out to a NTSC standard output I
    > have attached to the VCR/DVD recorder. I bought a signal splitter for
    > $2.00 for the audio and run one line into the VCR/DVD and the other
    > into the computer. Slower method of capture of course - real-time,
    > instead os just capturing bits - but works fine.
    >
    > The articles I have read have stated Microsoft might fuzzy up the
    > picture so that HDTV quality would not be there - but would equal
    > DVD-quality at present-levels. I can live with that.
    >
    > This "new" scheme is just that - a new "scheme" - the articles have
    > stated it will only work on Windows Media - so Microsoft is probably
    > salivating on how much money they can make selling something that will
    > not work - just as surely as DRM does not. Yes it works digitally -
    > but again folks live in an analog world and it does not work. Being
    > doing this for years with internet audio I wanted to capture - just
    > hook the audio out into my Dolby Digital Tape Recorder and capture on
    > metal oxide tape with excellent sound - and digital too!!
    >
    > cya
    >
    > a fools game from Microsoft on DRM

    Just an extra note:

    if all else fails - I just point my Sony Digital Camcorder at the screen
    making certain of correct settings, etc and a perfect copy also the
    achieved.
  23. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    >
    > Just an extra note:
    >
    > if all else fails - I just point my Sony Digital Camcorder at the screen
    > making certain of correct settings, etc and a perfect copy also the
    > achieved.

    By the way (BTW)

    When I say screen I mean computer monitor or television set - I do not mean
    going into a Movie Theatre and using a Camcorder. I have looked at some of
    that stuff and it is useless quality. I fully meant creating good quality
    from and within your own environment and Microsoft should stay out of my
    living room. Period.
  24. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <df310r$4pq$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
    says...
    > That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts himself
    > more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
    > keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.

    But the vendor isn't doing anything that would impact anyone that isn't
    doing anything unethical - at least nothing anyone has mentioned points
    to the vendor blocking anything ethical.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  25. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <df315l$4ps$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
    says...
    >
    > "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    > news:MPG.1d7e8dd6ef6522b2989dd4@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    >
    > > There is no "Protected Area" there is just a restriction on what you can
    > > copy. Where do you get the idea that there is some magical area reserved
    > > on your drive?
    > >
    > > Your assumption about "protected area" is wrong, as is your reasoning.
    >
    > Suppose a virus or other piece of malware managed to protect itself such
    > that I could not copy it. That would mean that I could not send it to an
    > expert for analysis or copy it onto another uninfected machine myself to
    > figure out how to disentangle it from my system.

    It doesn't say that it will block access to files at the kernel layer,
    only that you won't be able to pirate them - why would you assume that
    virus scanners and such won't find them or that you can't delete them.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  26. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7edae1c6a8e429989dd8@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <df310r$4pq$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
    > says...
    >> That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts
    >> himself
    >> more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
    >> keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.
    >
    > But the vendor isn't doing anything that would impact anyone that isn't
    > doing anything unethical - at least nothing anyone has mentioned points
    > to the vendor blocking anything ethical.
    ..

    Irrelevant argument and non sequitor.
  27. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    begin  trojan.vbs ... On Tuesday 30 August 2005 11:47 am, Leythos had this
    to say in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:

    > In article <3njnkhF1rd08U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    >> I apologize for the rant.
    >>
    >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >>
    >> I have made my decision
    >>
    >> Vista I will not be buying.
    >>
    >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >>
    >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >>
    >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    >
    > So, what you're saying, is that you want the option to be able to steal
    > media if you choose and it's not the right of the OS vendor to limit you
    > in any way?
    >
    That is correct. Since when is the OS vendor supposed to police other
    vendor's copyrights? The OS vendor is not the court system nor the police
    force ... at least not yet, although I'm sure MickeyMouse is working on
    taking over the state.


    --
    Have you been MicroShafted today?
    To mess up a Linux box, you need to work *at* it.
    To mess up a Windows box, you need to work *on* it.
  28. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    I read the article and it was quite depressing. Should an OS maker be
    "that" involved in "law enforcement?
  29. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:26:50 -0700, "David Schwartz"
    <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:

    > That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts himself
    >more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
    >keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.

    Thank you David. That is exactly my point.
  30. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7edae1c6a8e429989dd8@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

    > In article <df310r$4pq$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
    > says...

    >> That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts
    >> himself
    >> more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
    >> keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.

    > But the vendor isn't doing anything that would impact anyone that isn't
    > doing anything unethical - at least nothing anyone has mentioned points
    > to the vendor blocking anything ethical.

    That may be the vendor's claim, but not only would we have to trust the
    vendor, but it is manifestly clear that this simply isn't true. One of the
    big things you're missing is that the OS vendor doesn't set the policy. The
    OS vendor writes the code that enforces the policy, but the policy is set by
    the content providers. (The people sending you advanced fee fraud scam
    emails.)

    DS
  31. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7edb5649ee2a53989dd9@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <df315l$4ps$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
    > says...
    >>
    >> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    >> news:MPG.1d7e8dd6ef6522b2989dd4@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    >>
    >> > There is no "Protected Area" there is just a restriction on what you
    >> > can
    >> > copy. Where do you get the idea that there is some magical area
    >> > reserved
    >> > on your drive?
    >> >
    >> > Your assumption about "protected area" is wrong, as is your reasoning.
    >>
    >> Suppose a virus or other piece of malware managed to protect itself
    >> such
    >> that I could not copy it. That would mean that I could not send it to an
    >> expert for analysis or copy it onto another uninfected machine myself to
    >> figure out how to disentangle it from my system.
    >
    > It doesn't say that it will block access to files at the kernel layer,
    > only that you won't be able to pirate them - why would you assume that
    > virus scanners and such won't find them or that you can't delete them.

    It is already difficult to delete some viruses and malware. Being unable
    to copy them (so that they can be analyzed on a clean machine or sent to an
    expert) could definitely make things much harder.

    DS
  32. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    MS is not the only one that's going to have a problem with China. Due to
    the fact that we have now taught the Chinese how to build everything for us,
    and we have a huge trade imbalance to show for that, not to mention their
    already huge and very rapidly growing military strength, and their coziness
    with Russia of late, my thoughts are that we should all be more concerned
    about our own tails, and not worry so much about microsoft's behind.


    "beamish" <beamish@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:9AE20570-3250-4010-BF1C-89AE94D72490@microsoft.com...
    | Hello, Thanks for the information.
    | Certain people do not understand the erosion of basic rights. No matter
    what
    | they state they "just don't get it".
    | Microsoft may have future problems but not with file sharing or copying in
    | the U.S. or Europe. Their problem will be with China, India and Google.
    | take care.
    | beamish.
    |
    | "GregRo" wrote:
    |
    | > I apologize for the rant.
    | >
    | > http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    | >
    | > I have made my decision
    | >
    | > Vista I will not be buying.
    | >
    | > No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    | > computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    | > got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    | >
    | > I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    | >
    | > If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    | >
    | > Greg Ro
    | >
  33. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Rock" <rock@mail.nospam.net> wrote in message
    news:eLaIwUdrFHA.1252@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > GregRo wrote:
    >
    >> I apologize for the rant.
    >>
    >> http://snipurl.com/hbl7
    >>
    >> I have made my decision Vista I will not be buying.
    >>
    >> No one is not going to tell me. I can't have access to a part of the
    >> computer or the hard drive. Imagine if a virus, spyware or adaware
    >> got into that protected area and a virus program could not clean it.
    >>
    >> I'm Sticking with xp & windows 98se forever.
    >>
    >> If I have to get a new computer it will be either mac or linux system.
    >>
    >> Greg Ro
    >
    > Who cares what you do - stick or don't stick - who cares.
    >
    > --
    > Spock
    > MS MVP Windows - Shell/User
    >

    No one, but then again

    Who cares what you do - care or don't care - who cares.

    Quite ironic Spock.

    - Winux P
  34. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <3nlq5tF24h70U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    > On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:26:50 -0700, "David Schwartz"
    > <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:
    >
    > > That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts himself
    > >more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have the
    > >keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.
    >
    > Thank you David. That is exactly my point.

    While I agree with your view - and don't believe they should be
    installing anything that the RIAA wants, since it doesn't impact those
    that don't violate the laws (at least as I read it), I don't have any
    significant issues with it.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  35. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Leythos wrote:
    > In article <3nlq5tF24h70U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com
    > says...
    >> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:26:50 -0700, "David Schwartz"
    >> <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>> That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts
    >>> himself more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who
    >>> should have the keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses
    >>> himself. I would too.
    >>
    >> Thank you David. That is exactly my point.
    >
    > While I agree with your view - and don't believe they should be
    > installing anything that the RIAA wants, since it doesn't impact those
    > that don't violate the laws (at least as I read it), I don't have any
    > significant issues with it.

    LOL! When it screws up, as all usage-limiting technology does, it will
    impact those that haven't violated any law. True pirates will get
    around it, only law-abiding people will get screwed.

    --
    Peace!
    Kurt
    Self-anointed Moderator
    microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
    http://microscum.com/mscommunity
    "Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
    "Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"
  36. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7f9ff7fd75877b989ddd@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

    > While I agree with your view - and don't believe they should be
    > installing anything that the RIAA wants, since it doesn't impact those
    > that don't violate the laws (at least as I read it), I don't have any
    > significant issues with it.

    Tell me, how can a computer tell what is fair use and what is not? Are
    you for real?

    DS
  37. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7f9ff7fd75877b989ddd@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <3nlq5tF24h70U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycosy.com says...
    >> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:26:50 -0700, "David Schwartz"
    >> <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:
    >>
    >> > That's not what he's saying. What he's saying is that he trusts
    >> > himself
    >> >more than he trusts his OS vendor. It's a question of who should have
    >> >the
    >> >keys to his computer, him or Microsoft. He chooses himself. I would too.
    >>
    >> Thank you David. That is exactly my point.
    >
    > While I agree with your view - and don't believe they should be
    > installing anything that the RIAA wants, since it doesn't impact those
    > that don't violate the laws (at least as I read it), I don't have any
    > significant issues with it.
    >

    Not the point. The point is MS has NO BUSINESS being a copyright cop.
    'Course, this fits right in with the principles behind PA and WGA: assuming
    paying customers are thieves. So, this will prevent someone from sharing
    some music but I am sure it won't prevent the real thieves from copying any
    more than it prevented them from pirating XP.

    Alias
  38. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <#hu2igkrFHA.3440@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    maskedandanonymous.org says...
    > So, this will prevent someone from sharing
    > some music but I am sure it won't prevent the real thieves from copying any
    > more than it prevented them from pirating XP.

    I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
    "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....

    I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
    licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
    kids.


    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  39. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7fa6f1d723731f989de0@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

    > In article <#hu2igkrFHA.3440@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > maskedandanonymous.org says...

    >> So, this will prevent someone from sharing
    >> some music but I am sure it won't prevent the real thieves from copying
    >> any
    >> more than it prevented them from pirating XP.

    > I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
    > "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....

    > I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
    > licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
    > kids.

    I'm sorry that you don't see the difference, but it is perfectly obvious
    to the rest of us. The first could easily be a legal example of fair use.
    The second is clearly illegal.

    If you don't see the difference between legal conduct and illegal
    conduct, your opinion that the software will only prevent conduct that is
    illegal is quite meaningless, no?

    DS
  40. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <df4p95$oo9$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
    says...
    > > I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
    > > "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....
    >
    > > I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
    > > licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
    > > kids.
    >
    > I'm sorry that you don't see the difference, but it is perfectly obvious
    > to the rest of us. The first could easily be a legal example of fair use.
    > The second is clearly illegal.

    Actually, I see the difference, but I disagree that there is a "real"
    difference. I don't see any "real" difference between two kids making
    copies of CD's and giving the copy to the other and a pirate making a
    copy and selling it to anyone. In both cases there was an unpaid for
    copy entering the market.

    > If you don't see the difference between legal conduct and illegal
    > conduct, your opinion that the software will only prevent conduct that is
    > illegal is quite meaningless, no?

    But I do understand your position, I just don't see it in "degrees" of
    being legal or not - making a copy for a friend is just as much illegal
    as is selling a copy. If the software blocks it, more power to it, as
    long as the software doesn't keep me from playing while doing so
    according to the sellers rules. Software won't prevent it, as others
    have mentioned, it will just make it harder for the "casual" thief to do
    it, which means that less people will become thieves.


    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  41. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7fb56feef9754d989de6@news-server.columbus.rr.com...

    > In article <df4p95$oo9$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
    > says...

    >> > I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
    >> > "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....

    >> > I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
    >> > licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
    >> > kids.

    >> I'm sorry that you don't see the difference, but it is perfectly
    >> obvious
    >> to the rest of us. The first could easily be a legal example of fair use.
    >> The second is clearly illegal.

    > Actually, I see the difference, but I disagree that there is a "real"
    > difference. I don't see any "real" difference between two kids making
    > copies of CD's and giving the copy to the other and a pirate making a
    > copy and selling it to anyone. In both cases there was an unpaid for
    > copy entering the market.

    The two kids making copies of CD's and giving the copy to the other
    could be an example of legally permissible fair use. For example, the second
    copy could be for a legitimate research purpose or for nonprofit educational
    purposes.

    It's exactly because it is hard to tell the real difference between
    these two cases that it's impossible for an automated mechanism to prevent
    only illegal copying.

    >> If you don't see the difference between legal conduct and illegal
    >> conduct, your opinion that the software will only prevent conduct that is
    >> illegal is quite meaningless, no?

    > But I do understand your position, I just don't see it in "degrees" of
    > being legal or not - making a copy for a friend is just as much illegal
    > as is selling a copy.

    If you are making a copy for a friend to use for a nonprofit research
    purpose, it's not illegal. There are no degrees of legal or not, fair use is
    legal, period.

    > If the software blocks it, more power to it, as
    > long as the software doesn't keep me from playing while doing so
    > according to the sellers rules. Software won't prevent it, as others
    > have mentioned, it will just make it harder for the "casual" thief to do
    > it, which means that less people will become thieves.

    So it is now your position that it the software will block some legal
    activity and that this is perfectly fine with you? That is not the position
    you took previously.

    DS
  42. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7fa6f1d723731f989de0@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <#hu2igkrFHA.3440@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    >> So, this will prevent someone from sharing
    >> some music but I am sure it won't prevent the real thieves from copying
    >> any
    >> more than it prevented them from pirating XP.
    >
    > I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
    > "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....
    >
    > I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
    > licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
    > kids.

    You don't know the difference between sharing and selling? Why am I not
    surprised?

    The cassette tape did not mean the end to the music companies. The video
    cassette did not mean the end to Hollywood. MS made BILLIONS with Win 9x and
    W2K even though they could be casually copied.

    You are wrong, Leythos, your patronizing and phony morality notwithstanding.

    The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
    pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.

    Alias
  43. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <eV5o#tkrFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    maskedandanonymous.org says...
    > The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
    > pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.

    tell that to the hundreds of girls in the Sororities that swap songs and
    such that don't pay for them.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  44. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Alias wrote:
    >
    > The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
    > pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.

    Why does this sound like the old gun control argument?

    eg crooks dont buy guns from legit stores but get them anyway and
    continue to use them.
    A law abiding citizen has to jump through many hoops to get a gun for
    his hobby tho.
  45. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <4315fd61$0$200$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>, |@|.| says...
    > Alias wrote:
    > >
    > > The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
    > > pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.
    >
    > Why does this sound like the old gun control argument?
    >
    > eg crooks dont buy guns from legit stores but get them anyway and
    > continue to use them.
    > A law abiding citizen has to jump through many hoops to get a gun for
    > his hobby tho.

    Funny, I bought a couple rifles and only had to complete a simple form,
    wait about 6 minutes, and was able to walk out the door with it - but, I
    also don't have anything in my background that would limit me from
    purchasing a gun legally.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  46. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    Actually the ones it will affect are the small computer stores that built a
    whole buch of computers, but only one copy of XP which they put on all of
    the computers. When I came back to complain about not having an XP disk,
    they tried to give me a copy they had made. I yelled enough that I got a
    retail copy from them, but never got around to installing it since it seemed
    to work okay. Of course I eventually got caught and had to install the
    legal version. I went back to the store and he tried to tell me he was
    'allowed' to do what he did.

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7fcabf62d6f296989def@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <4315fd61$0$200$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>, |@|.| says...
    >> Alias wrote:
    >> >
    >> > The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The
    >> > real
    >> > pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.
    >>
    >> Why does this sound like the old gun control argument?
    >>
    >> eg crooks dont buy guns from legit stores but get them anyway and
    >> continue to use them.
    >> A law abiding citizen has to jump through many hoops to get a gun for
    >> his hobby tho.
    >
    > Funny, I bought a couple rifles and only had to complete a simple form,
    > wait about 6 minutes, and was able to walk out the door with it - but, I
    > also don't have anything in my background that would limit me from
    > purchasing a gun legally.
    >
    > --
    >
    > spam999free@rrohio.com
    > remove 999 in order to email me
  47. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote

    > In article <eV5o#tkrFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    >> The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
    >> pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.
    >
    > tell that to the hundreds of girls in the Sororities that swap songs and
    > such that don't pay for them.

    So what? It was done with cassette tapes and the music industry still made
    trillions of dollars. I was copying songs off the radio back with reel to
    reel tapes in the early 60s and the music industry didn't go belly up. As
    one poster said, one can use the out jack from one's audio card to connect
    to a tape recorder and record off the internet radio or a cd. There's a
    difference between sharing music and selling music. How come you didn't
    address that?

    Alias
  48. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    In article <e97kXIlrFHA.2604@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    maskedandanonymous.org says...
    >
    > "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote
    >
    > > In article <eV5o#tkrFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl>, aka@[notme]
    > > maskedandanonymous.org says...
    > >> The only people who will be inconvenienced are paying customers. The real
    > >> pirates that steal for a living will not, as usual, be affected.
    > >
    > > tell that to the hundreds of girls in the Sororities that swap songs and
    > > such that don't pay for them.
    >
    > So what? It was done with cassette tapes and the music industry still made
    > trillions of dollars. I was copying songs off the radio back with reel to
    > reel tapes in the early 60s and the music industry didn't go belly up. As
    > one poster said, one can use the out jack from one's audio card to connect
    > to a tape recorder and record off the internet radio or a cd. There's a
    > difference between sharing music and selling music. How come you didn't
    > address that?

    Because it has nothing to do with Vista. Just because you "can do"
    something doesn't mean it's legit.

    --

    spam999free@rrohio.com
    remove 999 in order to email me
  49. Archived from groups: alt.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general (More info?)

    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1d7fb56feef9754d989de6@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <df4p95$oo9$1@nntp.webmaster.com>, davids@webmaster.com
    > says...
    >> > I guess I look at it like this - you said "will prevent someone from
    >> > "sharing"... won't prevent the real thieves.....
    >>
    >> > I don't see the difference between someone "sharing" a file against
    >> > licensing rules and and pirates that copy entire CD's and sell them to
    >> > kids.
    >>
    >> I'm sorry that you don't see the difference, but it is perfectly
    >> obvious
    >> to the rest of us. The first could easily be a legal example of fair use.
    >> The second is clearly illegal.
    >
    > Actually, I see the difference, but I disagree that there is a "real"
    > difference. I don't see any "real" difference between two kids making
    > copies of CD's and giving the copy to the other and a pirate making a
    > copy and selling it to anyone. In both cases there was an unpaid for
    > copy entering the market.
    >
    >> If you don't see the difference between legal conduct and illegal
    >> conduct, your opinion that the software will only prevent conduct that is
    >> illegal is quite meaningless, no?
    >
    > But I do understand your position, I just don't see it in "degrees" of
    > being legal or not - making a copy for a friend is just as much illegal
    > as is selling a copy. If the software blocks it, more power to it, as
    > long as the software doesn't keep me from playing while doing so
    > according to the sellers rules. Software won't prevent it, as others
    > have mentioned, it will just make it harder for the "casual" thief to do
    > it, which means that less people will become thieves.

    Sharer: does it to be nice.

    Seller: does it to make money.

    You still don't see the difference?

    MS still has no business being a copyright cop. That's the business of the
    legal system, not a software company. I will be curious to see how Europe
    reacts to this and I am hoping that we will have a legal version of Vista,
    not the illegal one you love so much.

    Last I checked, it is illegal to pass oneself off as a cop and that's what
    Vista will be doing. Course, you won't have a problem with that because MS
    can do no wrong as far as you're concerned.

    Alias
Ask a new question

Read More

Windows Vista Windows XP Product