Submitted by PCMag takes a look at the Windows XP SP3 beta. “There’s very little new here, but SP3 increases security and collects all those hundreds of hotfixes you might have been too busy (or cautious) to keep downloading. But make sure you understand the compatibility issues before applying SP3.”
With the increase of security in SP2 and apps not liking it, does this mean a repeat?
What a mess XP security was and is.
Yes, because in the Linux world package upgrades don’t break compatibility at all, now do they?
Who said anything about Linux, no need to go on the defensive when theirs nothing to be defensive about.
emmm, no, no they don’t
Unless of course, you don’t know how to use the package manager.
Unless of course, you don’t know how to use the package manager.
Oh yeah, when something doesn’t work well on Linux – it’s users’ fault. When something breaks on Windows – it’s Microsoft’s fault.
Right on..
You license Windows from Microsoft so yes and if a service pack breaks your system who to blame, oh thats right lets take the easy route and blame drivers. Drivers break everything in Windows, lets not blame that thicko kernel for not handling the driver crash proper.
Edited 2007-10-19 02:11
When something breaks in Linux, I know how to handle it. Maybe fix it myself, maybe send a bug report.
Where do I send a bug report for the blue screens I get in Vista after its last update? Seriously. I guess I’ll just pray the giant will figure out himself there’s something wrong with my computer, because, you know, I am just a stupid user and stuff.
So I guess it is Microsoft’s fault, because there’s nothing I can do to fix it.
They have a service to report bugs. You’ll find it on their website.
How does that excuse a multi billion dollar company for breaking compatibility?
Is there a word for pirating something you already own – so as to not have to put up with activation, copy protection schemes and so on.
Honestly, almost every PC game I own, I’ve got a no-CD patch for. I have spare Windows licences from years of new laptops and salvaged machines, yet I have to run a pirate copy on the actual hardware because everytime I go between the VM hardware and Bootcamp, XP has decided that the hardware has changed (no sh!t sherlock) and has to be activated.
I moved off of Windows because of this kind of crap, but XP is a good OS and I don’t mind using it for games, but I certainly won’t be touching Vista, even with a barge pole.
It just annoys me that yet again, I’m going to have to pirate my legal purchase because Microsoft’s ineffective anti-piracy tactics.
To be fair, they’re only doing it because of the pirates in the first place.
To me, it’s a bit like which comes first, the chicken or the egg.
Yes, it sucks that problems arise, but the pirating users cause this and if you look at the copy protection of games on the PC they too also can break or be inconvenient requiring the CD/DVD to be in the drive.
Also to be fair, piracy is a big reason why Windows continues to be so popular in many parts of the world. The way Microsoft sees it, people who aren’t currently paying for Windows are people who they may someday get to pay for it, so they might as well keep them around.
Still, I can’t help but think that they could have taken anti-piracy measures in a less convoluted, draconian type of way. Admittedly, I’m not really sure what that best way would be. Maybe not calling their anti-piracy system “Genuine Advantage” would be a good starting point. Kind of reminds me of the ridiculous “Genuine Chevrolet” car ads from a while back.
As it exists now, casual pirates may or may not be discouraged, more determined ones will of course get around it, and the rest will be left fuming. And, as the parent post indicates, they’ll end up losing users in the end.
Copy protection does not work. It’s a myth. Eventually someone breaks it. End of story.
You want effective measures against illegal duplication? Here they are: lower the price, increase the value, allow online purchases with minimal effort.
There’s two factors here that could successfuly make people buy more software. The first is value/price ratio. You have to make people feel that the money they pay are right for what they get. Obviously, that’s not the case with Windows. Second, if they have to jump through hoops to get it, they’ll hate it.
Imagine if you could go to a website, enter your CC and obtain a download link for Windows. 30 seconds and $20 later (the most I feel I could spend on Windows), you get your choice between a regular download, BitTorrent download or a CD shipped for free to your door for a couple extra bucks.
I bet a lot more people would get Windows this way, and they’d be glad to know their copy was certified by Microsoft to be free of spyware or backdoors. I don’t think people who get Windows off the net ever consider that the kit they get may be tampered with.
How about if the shipped CD package included extra goodies like stickers or plushie toys or coffee cups? (No Ballmer jokes, please.) That would really make the buyer extra happy. See, this is what a small business would think to do, and I bet you would love getting this kind of attention from a vendor. But no, Microsoft big and strong, me no bother make people like me, me crush you with protection schemes and call you pirate.
This is the same logic that justifies my shaving cream being confiscated at the airport or my phone calls being wiretapped or my president being above the law.
Sure, there are bad people out there, but assuming the worst in people will only bring out the worst in people. You can’t prevent people from doing things that they deeply believe are justified. That’s why you can’t win a war on an ideology or stop an ideologue from waging one.
All you can do is listen, reason, and compromise. The fundamentally bad people are few and far between. Most pirates have particular grievances which, if resolved, could lead to legitimate licensing. Maybe the price is too high. Maybe the terms are too draconian. Maybe the business practices are too confrontational.
There are many reasons why someone would be reluctant to legally license Windows. If Microsoft really wants to turn pirates into valued customers, then they must gain a better understanding of where they’re coming from. Maybe they’ll develop a better understand of themselves in the process.
Edited 2007-10-19 02:00
Everybody makes a choice to pirate or not. We’re not talking about the theft of the essentials of food and water, we’re talking about a computer operating system. A product with billions of dollars of investment.
There are free alternatives out there which don’t require piracy. One chooses to not pay for Windows, regardless of their reasons, which is illegal.
A computer operating system is an essential commodity. Your only choice is whether to buy, pirate, or opt for free software. If there were no way to pirate software, then a big chunk, perhaps over half, of the population would choose free software. But it will always be possible to pirate software.
The same thing would happen if Americans had a choice of public health care and/or if health care could be pirated. When it comes to essentials, the choice to buy or do without is a false choice. People will find a way to get what they need, even if it means breaking the law.
If Microsoft were serious about confronting piracy, they would widely publicize the existence of free alternatives. Otherwise, people will continue to pirate Windows. “Your copy of Windows is not Genuine. Please click to download a free operating system.”
Piracy is illegal. But I’m not talking about the law, I’m talking about Microsoft’s anti-piracy measures, which are nothing but a mild nuisance to licensees and pirates alike. If Microsoft wants to make piracy a legal issue, they can go down that road and become the RIAA. Otherwise, they should just quit their stupid little security measures, because they don’t work and they never will.
In other news, screeners at LAX in Los Angeles missed 75% of the fake bombs in a recent performance evaluation. I’m so glad they deposited my potentially-explosive shaving cream in a garbage can in the middle of Newark Airport. I feel sooo safe now.
To be fair, one of the reasons MS enjoys such heavy market penetration in the first place is piracy.
It’s a wonderful irony really.
Is that like how music piracy is causing losses for record companies? You know, those losses that is in no way at all related to overspending, too high prices and crap products that no-one really wants.
I have spare Windows licences from years of new laptops and salvaged machines
No you don’t. Those are OEM licenses that are nontransferable.
You run XP in VM, then it’s a separate instance and you need a separate license.
sorry mate, about that car stereo you bought, we can’t take it out and fit it again, you’ve changed your car you’ll need to buy it again.
Grr…
I transfer licenses all the time. Please MS come audit my house.
XP SP3 contains all patches released since SP2 release. No new relevant features for end users.
Personally I use the crap out of the address bar I have docked on the task bar.