Re: WGA Hacked?! Get a Fair and Balance Perspective!

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:%23FcXPrkYFHA.2380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> Third, I have to validate and worry that I will be refused validation when
> I want to use my computer, not explain to some MS operator that I really
> did pay for it and I really am not a thief.
>

You do not "have" to validate - since you do not "have" to download any of
the free content we provide you as a value add to the opertaing system.
Your choice to not download any of this content does not impact your ability
to use your computer.

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

"Alias" <aka@[notme]maskedandanonymous.org> wrote in message
news:%23FcXPrkYFHA.2380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Steve N." <me@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:fwsle.932$MI4.2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:
>>
>>> "Steve N." <me@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:qglle.88$q4.65@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>>Mike, of course MS has the right to ensure that installations of their
>>>>software are legitimate before providing support (product updates are
>>>>support), and that justifies the use of PA and WGA, however there are
>>>>many documented cases where these mechanisms have failed to identify
>>>>legitimately licensed installations, leaving legitimately licensed users
>>>>in a lurch.
>>>>
>>>>What, if anything, is MS doing to correct these flaws? So far all I've
>>>>seen MS do is make it more difficult, particularly with regard to OEM
>>>>installations and "unauthorized" product keys. It no longer only applies
>>>>to major OEMs, either. Every OEM pre-install I have seen lately that is
>>>>not pre-activated encounters this.
>>>
>>>
>>> And that is why we are trialling this now and if you have an issue we
>>> would encourage you to call in and provide us with the feedback and
>>> allow us to work though the issue with you too ensure these cases are
>>> minimised when we "go live".
>>> from http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/downloads/FAQ.aspx?displaylang=en
>>>
>>> Q.
>>> What should I do if I have a problem with the validation process?
>>>
>>>
>>> A.
>>> If you cannot resolve your problem using this FAQ, then please use
>>> the Contact Us link at the bottom of Microsoft Download Center pages to
>>> request additional assistance.
>>>
>>
>> Do your own beta testing and quit springing it on paying customers.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>And while we're at it, please print the keys on the COA in a font large
>>>>enough to read without a magnifying glass and quit using character
>>>>strings like "8B3B8".
>>>
>>>
>>> The font used should allow you to differentiate those particular
>>> characters.
>>
>> It doesn't. Period. Poeple have been complaining about this for years!
>>
>>> However please provide this feedback via
>>> http://support.microsoft.com/common/survey.aspx?scid=sw;en;1208&showpage=1&ws=search
>>>
>>
>> YOU report it. What is your purpose here anyway, to merely divert issues
>> by spouting off MS's party line or to try and actually IMPROVE things and
>> actually help SOLVE problems like (most of) the rest of us do?
>>
>> I'm not your beta tester and I have no responsibility to report anything
>> to MS. Why should *I* or anyone else have to bother? Again, what, exactly
>> is your role here? This is a peer support group. I challenge you to be a
>> peer.
>>
>> I mean no disrespect to you Mike, but as an MS employee maybe *you*
>> should take some responsibility in these issues and instead of saying "go
>> to this url and do blahX3", say "I am forwarding your concerns to the
>> appropriate people" and follow up. I.E. actually *DO* something about it!
>>
>> You still didn't answer my question, in fact you evaded it, which again
>> was:
>> "What, if anything, is MS doing to correct these flaws?"
>>
>> Making *us* test it for you is not an acceptable answer or situation.
>>
>> Steve
>
> Monopolies, like the Kings and Queens of olde, think that their subjects
> should not only jump hoops but pay to do it with a smile. If another OS
> that could compete with MS were to ever appear on the scene, MS would be
> begging us to download their royal permissions to licence and use their
> software. Methinks King Billy has let his power, riches and monopoly go to
> his head and, at the end of the day, this kind of bad PR will be the fall
> of his Empire.
>
> WHY SHOULD A PAYING CUSTOMER HAVE TO PROVE HE HAS PAID FOR SOMETHING THREE
> TIMES TO THE PERSON HE OR SHE BOUGHT IT FROM ???
>
> First I prove it buy pulling out my hard earned cash and am told after I
> buy it that I have bought permission to use it, not own the software even
> though every store and every web site calls the OS "software". When I am
> informed of this in the install process, it is too late to get a refund.
> Catch 22, anyone?
>
> Second, I have to activate and worry that I will be refused activation
> when I want to use my computer, not explain to some MS operator that I
> really did pay for it and I really am not a thief.
>
> Third, I have to validate and worry that I will be refused validation when
> I want to use my computer, not explain to some MS operator that I really
> did pay for it and I really am not a thief.
>
> That's degrading, insulting and entirely uncalled for. If MS can't catch
> pirates because pirates are smarter than they are, that isn't the paying
> customer's problem!
>
> Alias
>


.

Loading