IE7 - Offered as Update - No WGA

[DrATty]

...I let WGA onto my system ages ago because I actually have a licensed copy of windows ...

Mine are legitimate too. As long as you installed it deliberately, knowing exactly what it involved, that's fine. The first release was a critical update and I doubt many users knew what it involved.
I've had problems with WGA under Vista (legitimate copies) and don't use Vista now partly because of this.
At the end of the day, I don't like being snooped on, find it inconvenient and think it's just the beginning of something more sinister.
I've seen public-facing monitors saying they're running stolen software (they weren't) and I've spent the early hours explaining that updating several computers with new disks and RAID arrays doesn't make me a pirate (I'm not.)
Soon we'll be calling MS to explain why we want to watch a film in the dining room when we watched it in the living room just yesterday. I hope not but if we all just roll over and accept these 'advantages' they'll become more intrusive.
My original post was more about MS's attempts to sneak WGA onto PCs without the user knowing.
I'm sceptical as to just how innocent WGA is (or will become) after MS used (and continues to use) such underhand methods to try to install it.

[redlight]

DrATty I totally agree and I reckon the reason MS did want third party firewalls on Vista was because Vistas own firewall lets most of your software phone home without alerting you.
After I installed Kaspersky I was amazed at the amount of stuff it was letting through.
It should be my decision as to whether I allow my installed software to access the internet or not.
I do not want MS or any other company monitoring everything I do.

[DrATty]

I use Kaspersky and though I had a virus to start with, both with XP and Vista.

[Capt Doufos]

WGA reports illegal copy of windows if you time and date is out. We get it at work all the time!

If the date doesn't match the WGA check server and it can't check it reports back you have a conterfeit copy of windows and you need to vist the website to buy a new copy. This is with our Volume Licence Key!!! We pay a fortune to MS a year for licencing and we have to put up with this!

[directhex]

WGA reports illegal copy of windows if you time and date is out. We get it at work all the time!

If the date doesn't match the WGA check server and it can't check it reports back you have a conterfeit copy of windows and you need to vist the website to buy a new copy. This is with our Volume Licence Key!!! We pay a fortune to MS a year for licencing and we have to put up with this!

well, frankly, tough ****

if you don't like a product, use an alternative

[DrATty]

...it reports back you have a conterfeit copy of windows and you need to vist the website to buy a new copy...

This is the part that made my blood boil when I was re-installing Windows. First it said I had installed Windows too many times. Note that it didn't mention it meant on different computers; just too many times. Clicking on help takes you straight to a page where you can buy Windows. This is a cynical ploy to make money. You've installed Windows too many times and you need a new copy. Once you're on the help page it's not made obvious that it's actually MS that thinks your installing your copy on lots of PCs. It's a good thing that the activation line is automated.
I wonder if we'll ever know how many people have been duped into paying twice or more for the same licence.

[directhex]

I wonder if we'll ever know how many people have been duped into paying twice or more for the same licence.

it's their own fault & they deserve it for not reading their license - if they don't know their rights, then it's their own fault for losing them

[Steve]

it's their own fault & they deserve it for not reading their license - if they don't know their rights, then it's their own fault for losing them

I can't imagine all that many consumers fancy reading the Windows EULA... or the GPL v2 for that matter.

[directhex]

I can't imagine all that many consumers fancy reading the Windows EULA... or the GPL v2 for that matter.

when did ignorance become an excuse, though?

would you sign a contract you hadn't read?

[DrATty]

I think of MS EULAs as a wish list. Parts of the Windows OEM EULA were deemed un-enforceable a while back. The MCE2005 EULA says which parts of the OS phone home and that it's OK to turn them off. If they make WGA compulsory for XP that would be interesting. I have a contingency anyway. I can't keep up with the cost of MS software and am in the process of moving Office tasks to a Linux base. I can play X3 on Linux so I'll be happy.
Seriously though, I don't see why a user taken to MS's anti-piracy site in error should be expected to think "It didn't say this in the EULA, I must check further. Phew, it's OK, just a misunderstanding." MS know that it must catch innocent users out and does little to avoid it. I don't imagine many pirates even see the pages in question and they aren't gong to pay up. If MS say one million pirates bought Windows through this site I'd say 900,000 were bought by confused licensed users.

[magneticman]

opera smacks both in the face

[CrazyMonkey]

I also do not want any company or anyone monitoring what i am doing. That is the reason why people pay for security applications, they do not want there private doings exposed. All in all it's too much hassle to keep your Windows OS WGA free.

My solution: Linux - There are perfectly adequeate MS Office alternatives, there is also no cost for the OS.

[danroyle]

My solution: Linux - There are perfectly adequeate MS Office alternatives, there is also no cost for the OS.

my one small concern with your suggestion would be games support on linux is not great and is there any remote possibility that it would get directx10 capabilities


otherwise i love linux but would not use it on my gaming rig

[Capt Doufos]

well, frankly, tough ****

if you don't like a product, use an alternative

Bit harsh tbh!!!

It's not I don't like the product, I think they could have put more consideration into the whole WGA thing.

It's not my choice of product anyway, I just have to support it!!

[DrATty]

I do use Linux now. However, when I bought XP I had to activate it; period. It didn't phone home. I don't see why I should have to use WGA now. Updates are bug fixes after all.
I've been using computers for over 30 years now. The accepted wisdom has always been that they are just machines and only do what we tell them to do.
What changed? A Vista PC can connect to the Web, send data unknown to MS, decide that you can't listen to your music collection any more, delete your movies, revoke the drivers for a couple of pieces of your hardware, download a few updates and re-start without saving what you were doing. It then re-boots, calls you a thief and stops working. All of this without user intervention. This is progress?... and we're debating the rights and wrongs of it all. Did it all just happen too quickly.

[directhex]

Bit harsh tbh!!!

It's not I don't like the product, I think they could have put more consideration into the whole WGA thing.

It's not my choice of product anyway, I just have to support it!!

more consideration? here's the lovely thing - they don't need to! people will bend over and take it anyway

that's the whole *point* of running a monopoly!