Re: Re-Acticatining Windows XP
From: Bruce Chambers (bruce_a_chambers_at_h0tmail.com)
Date: 10/17/04
- Next message: Richard Urban: "Re: Format Hard drive"
- Previous message: Richard Urban: "Re: USB 2.0 problem"
- In reply to: Steve N.: "Re: Re-Acticatining Windows XP"
- Next in thread: Steve N.: "Re: Re-Acticatining Windows XP"
- Reply: Steve N.: "Re: Re-Acticatining Windows XP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:58:40 -0600
Steve N. wrote:
>
> I agree, I don't advocate lying or piracy practices, but then again,
> if MS honored their vast, solid and dedicated user base they
> wouldn't
> subject their customers to such idiocy in the first place.
>
What "idiocy?" Trying to protect intellectual property from
theft? Is the shop-keeper imposing "idiocy" upon his honest customers
because he has to lock the shop at night to protect his merchandise
from his dishonest "customers?" Are you imposing "idiocy" upon your
neighbors because you lock your house's doors and windows to
discourage burglars? Granted, to many honest people, WPA _is_ a minor
inconvenience. But I don't blame Microsoft; I blame the people who've
been violating copyright law and the EULA to distribute software as
they see fit, thereby making some sort of copy protection necessary.
And, of all the various copy protection mechanisms I've encountered,
WPA is actually one of the least inconvenient. Perhaps you'd prefer
one of these other common means of software copy-protection:
1) The hardware dongles that must be attached to the parallel port to
enable an application to work?
2) Faxing a notarized document signed by a company officer certifying
the number of installations before being sent a code to enable the
software?
3) Performing the application installations at bizarre hours of the
night because you have to call another time-zone during the
installation in order to obtain the necessary registration code from a
live company representative?
> WPA issues aside for a moment, why have at least seven different
> releases of Windows XP (Full Retail Pro, Full Retail Pro Upgrade,
> Full
> Retail Home, Full Retail Home Upgrade, OEM Pro, OEM Home, OEM Pro
> Tablet, not to mention all the other possible OEM install media
> variations), at least three of which are the most widely marketed
> and
> severely crippled as far as ease of repair and recovery are
> concerned?
>
Would you want to pay $300 for a full version of WinXP Pro when
all you need is a $200 Upgrade version? (The difference in price
between full and upgrade is a "reward" for product loyalty, by the
way.) Would you want to have to pay $300 for a full version of WinXP
Pro when you don't need or want all of its networking and security
features, and the much less expensive WinXP Home will suit your needs
perfectly? Microsoft, by providing different versions and licensing
options, in providing their customers with some degree of choice. The
Media Center and Tablet PC editions require very specific and
specialized hardware components, so it makes sense, from a business
point-of-view, to provide these as only OEM versions available on
hardware platforms specifically designed for the purpose. How many
people, beyond perhaps a few thousand really dedicated hobbyists
worldwide, would actually want to build their own Media Center or
Tablet PC? There would simply be no "return on investment" for
Microsoft to develop the necessarily more hardware-tolerant versions
of these two products for the retail market. (Personally, I can't
even see _any_ use for a Media Center PC, for which other technical
solutions don't already provide options. And a pad and pencil does
everything I'd ever use a Tablet PC to do, and a lot less expensively.
But that's just me.)
The choice of recovery mechanism is entirely the choice of the OEM
provider, and therefore the choice of the people who purchase their
product. Microsoft has _nothing_ to do with this. Microsoft requires
the OEM distributors of its software to provide a recovery mechanism.
Legally, the OEM has met it's contractual obligation to Microsoft by
providing a means of returning the PC to its ex-factory state, whether
it's a Recovery CD or a Recovery Partition. They are not legally
obliged to provide a true installation CD as part of the sale. Were
Microsoft to try to insist that the OEMs provide their customers a
real installation CD, the OEMs - and most of their customers, to whom
the higher costs would be passed - would start screaming "Monopoly!"
and "Unfair business practices!" at the tops of their lungs.
Reputable, customer-service aware OEMs, like Dell and Gateway, do
provide a full OEM installation CD, that does permit custom
installations and repairs. Many uncaring OEMs, such as Compaq, HP,
and Sony, however, in an effort to save pennies and reduce their
support costs by having to hire support people that can only say "Boot
from the Recovery CD to return your PC to its original condition,"
provide only a CD bearing a disk image of the hard drive as it left
the factory. Essentially, it boils down to a variation of "You get
what you pay for."
> Now toss in all the trouble folks seem to have with WPA and it looks
> to me like MS has made a few big mistakes as far as keeping their
> customers happy goes.
WPA, like anything else, is not perfect. It is unfortunate that a
very few (it's a fraction of a single percentage of all the many
millions of WinXP users -- not counting those who create their own
problems by trying to do something they shouldn't have) do have
problems with WPA. I think (but don't know, as I've no crystal ball)
that Microsoft strives to minimize these problems, while balancing the
effort required against any additional costs that must eventually be
passed on to their customers. In software development, as in all
other endeavors, perfection is a goal, but is also inherently
unattainable. This is simply a fact of life.
> What ever happened to "the customer is always
> right"? What ever happend to the idea of Microsoft Windows making
> computing EASIER for the average person?
>
Does the "average person" have a Unix- or Linux-based PC? Where
are all of the OS/2 Warp workstations? How about the household
Solaris machines? Microsoft achieved its overwhelming market share
precisely because it *did* make computing easier for the average
person. I think that it's become too easy. All too many people have
bought into the various PC/software manufacturers marketing claims of
easy computing. They believe that their computer should be no harder
to use than a toaster oven; they have neither the inclination or
desire to learn how to safely use their computer.
> The average person shopping for a computer these days has no idea of
> the repercussions of buying something that is supplied with no
> viable
> means of doing a simple repair install, running recovery console, or
> doing a hardware upgrade, while keeping their data and installed
> programs intact.
And whose fault is this, other than that of the computer users,
themselves? If a person is too lazy too learn how to safely use and
maintain his/her own computer, he/she shouldn't own one. A computer
is, first and foremost, a tool. Depending upon a computer for to
accomplish one's tasks, while deliberately remaining ignorant of its
proper and safe operation, is like a carpenter or mechanic who refuses
to learn to safely maintain and operate his power tools: a danger to
himself and others.
> They don't have a clue as to the important
> differences between these seven (or more) releases of Windows XP,
> now
> do they?
Then they should put the same product research and thought into
into buying a computer that they use when buying a car or household
appliance.
>
> Steve
-- Bruce Chambers Help us help you: http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once. - RAH
- Next message: Richard Urban: "Re: Format Hard drive"
- Previous message: Richard Urban: "Re: USB 2.0 problem"
- In reply to: Steve N.: "Re: Re-Acticatining Windows XP"
- Next in thread: Steve N.: "Re: Re-Acticatining Windows XP"
- Reply: Steve N.: "Re: Re-Acticatining Windows XP"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
