“Microsoft introduced additions to Windows XP designed to make the operating system better tuned for peer-to-peer applications. The software giant on Wednesday unveiled a beta, or testing version, of the Windows XP Peer-to-Peer Software Development Kit. The programming tools are designed to let software providers or corporate developers more easily build peer-to-peer applications on top of Windows XP.” Read more at ZDNet.
but i wouldn’t put my bet’s on it
Why not?
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/110111_gatesjapan26.shtml
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=2910
Hmmm…P2P and DRM. So what exactly is MS trying to say?
Hmmm…P2P and DRM. So what exactly is MS trying to say?
An SDK that checks DRM every time a file is passed to another user maybe? I;m guessing that the DRM stuff is checked on every send_file(), recv_file(), and write_to_disk().
I wonder why the Windows P2P update installs IPv6? Maybe this is Microsoft’s way of “trojan horsing” IPv6 support.
Here is an interesting review of Microsoft’s related threedegrees software with screenshots:
http://cheerleader.yoz.com/archives/000419.html
Only a fool would utilize any software from Microsoft these days.
There are basically no rights to fair use left, so almost any use of P2P is illegal and likely a felony that would result in federal prison sentence.
As we’ve found with Microsoft Update which sends Microsoft a list of all the software on your system, Media Player, strange “security” updates, Microsoft Bug Report, etc., Microsoft is illegally and unethically invading your system, gathering information, and sending it back to Microsoft and hence to the Department of Justice.
So if you have any non-DRM P2P software installed and have used Microsoft Update, you are quite likely on the RIAA’s list of “unindicted felons”.
I would stay far away from Microsoft software. This is an evil company.
–ms
“Rendezvous enables automatic discovery of computers, devices, and services on IP networks. Also known as Zero Configuration networking or Zeroconf, Rendezvous uses industry standard IP protocols to allow devices to automatically find each other without the need to enter IP addresses or configure DNS servers. Rendezvous is an open protocol, which Apple has submitted to the IETF as part of the ongoing standards-creation process. In order to provide a true zero configuration experience, Rendezvous requires that devices implement three essential things”.
I am glad apple is still in buisness. It gives them something to copy.
Dan
Actually I think it’s a good idea piggybacking IPv6. This will get the protocol to the clueless morons (sorry, but Joe Average is not gonna install IPv6 until finally gets a new OS revision when his old one is 6yrs outdated).
It seems like they are stealing p2p from Kazaa.
Kazaa and M$ are ghm “partners” now =]
This is like the phone thing…
1’st partnership
then secred stealing…
Key politicians chided universities on Wednesday for not doing enough to limit peer-to-peer piracy, calling unauthorized copying a federal crime that should be punished appropriately.
http://news.com.com/2100-1028-986143.html?tag=fd_top
The penalty is usually up to a $250,000 fine and up to 5 years in prison, by the way.
As I was saying, Microsoft P2P is a trap. Microsoft is not after Kazaa, they are after YOU.
–ms
Some of us aren’t rich bastards and cannot afford to buy a 20$ CD for one song on it that we like! Actually, I use P2P to see if I like more than one song off of a CD and if I like say 5, I go out and buy the CD once I have the cash…so technically i am just previewing the CD
… anyways my 2 cents…
Key politicians chided universities on Wednesday for not doing enough to limit peer-to-peer piracy, calling unauthorized copying a federal crime that should be punished appropriately.
http://new s.com.com/2100-1028-986143.html?tag=fd_top
The penalty is usually up to a $250,000 fine and up to 5 years in prison, by the way.
As I was saying, Microsoft P2P is a trap. Microsoft is not after Kazaa, they are after YOU.
–ms
Michael, your claim is preposterous. Microsoft is releasing a way for developers to better create p2p applications for various purposes, such as collaboration or sharing of company files. Granted, it does make it easier to write a gnutella servent or kazaa client, but that isn’t its only use. Take threedegrees as an example. It lets a group of friends play music for each other, even when not everyone has a copy of the song. And it’s RIAA sanctioned. MS is also not in cohorts with the DOJ. In case you missed it, the DOJ is suing microsoft.
Finally, microsoft gathers generally anonymous usage statistics. Not to be an apologist, as they shouldn’t without your express permission, but winamp does the exact same thing. Watch as it connects to home every time you start it. In conclusion, your claims are wildly exaggerated and untrue.
-Chris
PS. After your first post I thought you might just be confused because any data collected by microsoft *could* become the property of the DOJ under a subpoena. Bu MS wouldn’t volunteer the information. They don’t want their customers and developers getting arrested.
I have a long experience with Microsoft. And I know 100% as a fact, no conjecture, that they do share information quite readily with the DOJ. Without a subpoena. They share information because Microsoft is making a major push into DRM and IP law enforcement.
Microsoft recently settled with the DOJ… with close to no penalties or consequences of note. This is for a company that was found guilty.
Of all the major software companies, Microsoft funds more attacks on private citizens for license violations than all the other software companies put together. Microsoft is well known for having some of the most abusive end user licenses of any software maker. Microsoft champions UCITA which would take away almost all a consumer’s rights.
Beyond personal attacks, Microsoft has also had the BSA and other organizations attack city governments and other civil organizations when Microsoft thinks they are not paying enough in licenses.
When you run Windows Update, Microsoft uploads a list of all the installed software on your machine without permission and without telling you.
When you install Winamp, there are clear privacy choices on the install. After that, it doesn’t contact anyone. Microsoft Media Player on the other hand installs a legion of DRM software that you CANNOT uninstall. Yes, that is right. It says this on Microsoft’s website.
I could go on and on listing examples of Microsoft’s heinous
privacy violations.
Microsoft P2P is just a ruse to install heavy duty DRM. Take a look at one person’s impression of 3degrees:
http://cheerleader.yoz.com/archives/000419.html
I hope you can actually learn more about Microsoft. They are not a good company. They are universally hated for a reason, after all.
>>>>I have a long experience with Microsoft. And I know 100% as a fact, no conjecture, that they do share information quite readily with the DOJ. Without a subpoena.
So is everybody else after 9-11.
>>>>Of all the major software companies, Microsoft funds more attacks on private citizens for license violations than all the other software companies put together.
That’s because Microsoft sold more software than all the other software companies put together. Put it in the other way —- if I were a small software company and I belong to the BSA, I would want Microsoft to pay more money (even more than its fair share) on enforcement.
>>>>Microsoft is well known for having some of the most abusive end user licenses of any software maker.
Compare to Network Associates whose EULA forbids you to write reviews of their products without prior consent by Network Associates — Microsoft’s EULA is very friendly.
http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2002/0207nysnai.html
>>>>When you install Winamp, there are clear privacy choices on the install.
WMP9 has even clearer privacy choices than winamp.
Microsoft shared data with the DOJ a long time before 9-11.
Hmmm. I see Winamp 2.81 has one checkbox for basic anonymous usage stats.
Microsoft’s Privacy tab in WMP9 offers 6 checkboxes and a “Cookies” button that is just about perfectly unclear to the user.
Microsoft tempts the user to supply usage data by labeling this section of the Privacy Tab “Customer Experience Improvement Program” and then the checkbox is labeled “I want to help make Microsoft software and services even better by sending usage data to Microsoft”
Microsoft’s EULA’s have the same sort of stuff that Network Associates has. In Microsoft’s case, it is anti-benchmarking.
Microsoft is not a very friendly company. They are a ruthless evil company that steals from other companies and competes illegally.
>>>>Microsoft’s Privacy tab in WMP9 offers 6 checkboxes and a “Cookies” button that is just about perfectly unclear to the user.
Privacy advocates LOVE wmp9 —- it empowers the user with clear choices. You can choose the precise level of information going out, not just on or off.
>>>>Microsoft’s EULA’s have the same sort of stuff that Network Associates has. In Microsoft’s case, it is anti-benchmarking.
Network Associates’ EULA has BOTH anti-benchmarking AND anti-review. My point is that EVERY silicon valley company has EULA’s as bad as Microsoft, sometimes maybe even worst than Microsoft.
>>>>Microsoft is not a very friendly company. They are a ruthless evil company that steals from other companies and competes illegally.
So is everybody else. You only hear about Microsoft because they have a bunch of billionaire enemies who are fanning it. Look at all those wall street firms — every single one of them pay a small fine and admit NO WRONG-DOING. Just because Microsoft was convicted for anti-trust — doesn’t mean that all the other companies are less guilty, they were able to settle with a small fine and admit no wrong-doing because they don’t have billionaire enemies.
I’m not saying Microsoft is the only evil company out there. However, you are using the ‘the other guy is evil too!” argument to defend being evil. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
In the software and OS world, Microsoft is the biggest company, a recognized monopoly, and it has been well documented in the DOJ anti-trust investigation that Microsoft used illegal means to get there.
Privacy advocates don’t like ANY Microsoft technology that I’m aware of. Show me the quotes. For instance, it is still impossible to remove the DRM or the system scanner from WMP9, both of which are strikes against privacy.
–ms
I just don’t they are turning into a road builder. Anyone can make the cars. Their’s might be the shinnest but your custom work, or the custom work of others will still be an option.
http:/www.fudged.org
P2P originally was a technology marketed to small businesses that wanted to maximize resource utilization across a relatively small number of client machines where connection speeds are not a problem. P2P software also allowed the setup of administration shell interfaces for users and enabled those with privilege to remotely access the other clients. As the number of clients decreases, it tends to favor P2P over the client/server. As the size of the net increases, the relative cost of the server implementation decreases. Nowadays, servers are relatively cheap compared to 10 years ago. Also, with P2P, if any node in the net goes down, some files or apps may not be available. Also, any type of compressed file format (especially MP3 or WMA) can be easily corrupted and act like a virus, which will disrupt hard drive read-write actions, and could possibly necessitate a reinstall on one or more clients. Then, one has to figure that today, these LAN P2P nets are going to be exposed to the internet, outside the company walls. Today, 70% of all internet users in the US are on dial-up. This is the true threat for the Wincartel companies (and the RIAA) today; the fact that cheap and fast broadband isn’t happening (Listen for Brother Bill to keep harping on this one). The Japanese would be stupid beyond belief if they placed any faith or trust whatsoever in Brother Bill. With Win-XP, the NSA could save a lot of money on spy satellites, not that the American taxpayer would ever notice. Broadband users should note that data-rates for non-business users on DSL are likely to decrease as there are no Quality-of-service guarantees; another problem for Brother Bill. Keep in mind also that MP3 and WMA are propriatary file formats, you’ll have to pay royalties if you want to encode/decode or distribute with them.
>>>>Privacy advocates don’t like ANY Microsoft technology that I’m aware of. Show me the quotes. For instance, it is still impossible to remove the DRM or the system scanner from WMP9, both of which are strikes against privacy.
Privacy issues were settled with the feds at the FTC complaint. The issue isn’t the technology itself, it’s the presentation to the end users with choice. You can encode any wma files without drm restrictions.
By putting privacy issue on the front burner, Microsoft can eliminate RealPlayer and AOL. RealPlayer is only a baseball strike away from bankruptcy. If microsoft increase its privacy options in wmp9, then it forces realplayer to do the same — but then realplayer would have less revenue because they can’t sell customer information collected. Samething for MSN. If MSN increase its privacy options then AOL has to do the same — then AOL would have less revenue. Microsoft has 40 billion dollars to wait for RealPlayer and AOL to run out of money.
We, for one, *will* be using this P2P API (and replacing our current P2P infrastructure).
We use it for the discovery, management and distribution of work-packets around the network to make best use of available PCs in a healthcare environment for distributed image processing.
P2P isn’t just about kids ripping off music CDs, it is a really cool technology that will, in my estimation, pervade the networked world for all sorts of tasks.
>>>>In the software and OS world, Microsoft is the biggest company, a recognized monopoly, and it has been well documented in the DOJ anti-trust investigation that Microsoft used illegal means to get there.
No — it is well documented that Microsoft used means that are contrary to american anti-trust laws with respect to browsers (and only browsers) to maintain (and not create) its monopoly.