Difference between revisions of "Microsoft/Windows/XP"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→EULA: objections, yer honor...) |
(→Notes: windows kill switch) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[computing]]: [[operating system]]s: [[Windows (Microsoft)|Windows]]: [[Windows XP]]{{seed}} | [[computing]]: [[operating system]]s: [[Windows (Microsoft)|Windows]]: [[Windows XP]]{{seed}} | ||
+ | ==News== | ||
+ | * '''2006-06-27''' [http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=84 Is Microsoft about to release a Windows "kill switch"?] by Ed Bott | ||
==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||
===EULA=== | ===EULA=== |
Revision as of 18:40, 2 July 2006
computing: operating systems: Windows: Windows XP
This page is a seed article. You can help HTYP water it: make a request to expand a given page and/or donate to help give us more writing-hours!
|
News
- 2006-06-27 Is Microsoft about to release a Windows "kill switch"? by Ed Bott
Notes
EULA
The EULA which displays during installation of Windows XP Pro says, among other things:
- (1.2) A fresh install will only work for 30 days after installation unless you "activate" it by contacting Microsoft and giving them certain information. The nature of this information is not explained, but presumably includes some kind of individual license code.
- (1.3) XP can't be used to access more than 10 other computers or standalone devices (e.g. networked printers) on a network. (This is XP Pro, folks; I have to wonder what the limitations are on the Home edition.) You're also not allowed to give access to your files or shared printer to more than those same 10 devices.
- (2.1) Microsoft has ultimate control over what Secure Content you're allowed to play. Any time you download a license for new Proected Content, Microsoft could turn off your ability to play others already downloaded. What is the arbitration process if you believe Microsoft has erroneously turned off your access to a download you paid for? The EULA mentions none, so unless there are existing laws which trump the EULA, you may be SOL.
- (2.1) You are also forced to upgrade your DRM components anytime Microsoft or the Secure Content Owners wish it. What if the latest version causes problems on your particular hardware? What if they decide to add stuff to the component which kicks up a fuss if you have too much "unprotected content" on your computer? Of course, one could argue that they could do this from the very beginning, but then you would be forewarned and might decide not to get involved with building up your library of Secure Content. The automatic component updates (and the centralized "off-switch", for that matter) means that they can wait until people are hooked before doing this.
Relevant verbatim quotes from the EULA (formatted slightly for easier reading):
1. GRANT OF LICENSE. Microsoft grants you the following rights provided that you comply with all terms and conditions of this EULA:
|
...
2. DESCRIPTION OF OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS
|
...
|
...
5. NO RENTAL/COMMERCIAL HOSTING. You may not rent, lease, lend or provide commercial hosting services with the Software. |
Minor Quibbles
- 1.1 If you have a computer with more than 2 CPUs, you're not allowed to install XP unless you can prevent it from using the additional CPUs. This is a minor quibble today, when few personal computers have as many as 2 CPUs, but it may well be an issue in a few years. Will they change the EULA to reflect popular needs?
- 2.3 What if the latest versions of these components include blocks of certain sites or services "for your protection"? You can't prevent the new version from being installed, and you can't uninstall them. Microsoft owns your machine as long as it has XP on it. So far, they haven't seriously flexed their ownership muscles. Do they have any incentive not to, when it suits them? This is a minor quibble only because it has already been raised with regard to the DRM control.