On Mar 20, 8:44 pm, flyer <f...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Article on Win2000, applies to Vista, but in SPADES.
>
> Fascistic OS? Hardly an exaggerated claim.
>
> "Microsoft has other silent "back doors" into your system, and UCITA,
> which Microsoft lobbied for intensely, gives them the right to enter your
> system without your permission, even to the point of completely disabling
> software you depend on."
Actually, it goes all the way back to MS-DOS and even the early
versions of Word. Shortly after the Mac SE was released, a "virus"
was flashing up on the screens of Mac owners' screens. It said "Tree
of Evil bears no fruit, trashing disks now". After some
investigation, it turned out that it wasn't a virus, it was
Microsoft's antipiracy measures. It turned out that Microsoft was
writing a bad sector to the hard drive, then checking the bad sector.
If the bad sector disappeared, it indicated that it was a pirate
copy. The problem was that Mac used a SCSI drive, which meant that
the bad sectors were repaired immediately. When a few folks
threatened lawsuits, Microsoft simply said "have your lawyer read the
EULA and explain why you can't sue us". Sure enough, the EULA gave
Microsoft permission to make ANY alterations they felt appropriate to
ANY file. The good news was that as soon as Microsoft realized what
had happened, they sent registered owners new software that did not
have the "tree of evil" (or at least didn't trigger so easily). It
turned out that only a few hundred Macs were affected in this way, but
it did indicate that Microsoft was not above actually destroying
someone's computer if they felt that their software was being pirated.
This was Microsoft's choice, and they did tell customers that they
could, and would do this. Microsoft has been consistent about that
for the duration. If they believe that their license has been
violated, they can shut you down. Just try logging into MSN using
GAIM.
> http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/w2keval.html
>
> MS planned, coded, and executed disabling of YOUR computer.
Again, this is not new. In MS-DOS 6.0, Microsoft disabled the
computers of those who had installed stacker using MS-DOS 5.0.
Eventually, Microsoft lost a judgement and had to pay Stack about 200
million dollars. Still, it kept Microsoft in the running when
competition was threatening to open the market. It was probably one
of the less profitable sabotage efforts by Microsoft.
With Windows 95, upgrade attempts wiped out Windows 3.1 completely,
along with OS/2, Linux, or anything else on the hard drive.
Unfortunately, many people didn't know that they had to back up the
hard drive - to 1.4 megabyte floppies. As a result, thousands,
perhaps even a few million users, lost their personal data and other
software. This was probably one of the more profitable forms of
sabotage, because it assured Microsoft a solid position and locked out
other competitors including OS/2, Linux, UnixWare, Solaris, FreeBSD,
NetBSD, and OpenBSD. Microsoft assured a solid lock on the market for
10 more years, worth about $600 billion, and the total cost, including
legal expenses, settlements, and everything else, was less than $6
billion. Even most of this was paid in the form of coupons for FUTURE
versions of microsoft software, actually tightening the lock on
threatened markets.
Windows NT 4.0 service pack 2 had a very deliberate bug which caused
Cyrix chips to literally overheat and MELT. IBM figured out exactly
what Microsoft had done, and Microsoft tried to say that his
information was inadmissable, but the judge didn't see it that way.
Microsoft had SP3 out within a week, and settled for "undisclosed
terms".
IBM discovered that Microsoft had embezzled funds and code from the OS/
2 project, using code and people dedicated to OS/2 for Windows NT.
Eventually, Microsoft and IBM settled for "undisclosed terms".
Microsoft has paid public settlements exceeding $5 billion over the
last 15 years, which again is a drop in the bucket compared to the 600
$BILLION in revenue, at 85% MARGINS.
Microsoft is recurring proof that CRIME DOES PAY, when you are willing
to be completely audacious about it.
It looks like Haliburton and Blackwater are following in Microsoft's
footsteps.
Enron and WorldCom just weren't audacious enough.
> How can anyone even consider using this junk? It used to be the only
> choice. But no more with Linux on the scene.
Microsoft probably hates the fact that Linux is threatening to erode
their market. Even if volumes stay high, it could adversely impact
prices. The bigger problem for Microsoft, is that Linux is making
existing corporate licenses for Windows 2000 and Windows XP a
practical alternative to switching to, or purchasing new licenses, for
Vista.
At the moment, even with most OEMs now realizing that they have to
make machines "Linux Friendly" to sell them to large corporations and
power users, they still have the need to ship the machines with some
appropriate version of Windows. The irony is that that Vista is
actually hurting retailers. Many buyers are now ordering machines via
the web, where they can order machines with Windows XP, rather than
Vista.
This may be one of the reasons that CompUSA is closing roughly 1/2
their stores. Could BestBuy be next?
|
|
