Posted on 02/17/2005 7:32:53 AM PST by N3WBI3
As some of you may know, Microsoft is planning to totally restrict access to the Microsoft download center to all non-genuine windows users. So you would expect some check for pirated copies of windows to be involved. If you visit the download center with IE you get an activex control, but if you try with Firefox, you'll have to download a little program, that returns a code you have to copy into the download page, to get access to the download you selected. By quickly looking at the program, I noticed it looks for a registry key, this key is...
SOFTWARE\Wine\Wine\Config
the wine configuration key. the Windows Genuine Advantage program press release says that in the second half of 2005, all users connecting to the Microsoft download center or to windows update will have to validate their copy of windows. Interestingly if you run the validation program on wine, and the version of windows you're emulating is prior to 2000 or is windows server 20003, you get a message saying a validation code couldn't be found, because of technical difficulties or because you're running an unsupported operating system. If you set winver to win2000, you'll get a validation code that doesn't work, this may be a bug in wine, or in the validation program. A valid and working code is returned if the version is set to xp. Still, even if this is only an initial attempt, they appear to want to discriminate wine users, while this may be acceptable for operating system components/updates, this is probably a violation of anti-trust law for all other downloads. It's also the first time Microsoft acknowledges the existence of Wine.
No, YOUR analogy is the flawed one. In your analogy, buyers of Chevy-compatible transmissions originally purchased from Ford are being denied warranty coverage by a corporation from whom they didn't buy in the first place. Wine users aren't being denied upgrades to Wine, they're being denied support for a product ORIGINALLY PURCHASED FROM MICROSOFT (Office), merely because they also own and run a product with which Microsoft competes (Wine).
The original analogy is correct.
That one works pre-MAC OS X. Now they're just watching everyone else play catch-up.
Does this restrict Cedega as well? Cedega is a pay software and they pay MS to use their DLLs and what-not.
Give me a break. First of all, this isn't an "us" versus "you" guys proposition. As a user of serveral different operating systems, I can take whichever side in a discussion I think is correct. Just because I don't spout "Microsoft is an evil empire" on every propellerhead thread doesn't make me a "Windows" guy, so don't attempt to cubby-hole me and I'll return the courtesy.
I'm sure you've been on enough of those threads to know that there's FUD on both sides of the fence. I've heard "OpenOffice is as good or better than MS Office" more times than I can count.
as good or better does not mean perfect, but it is as good for 95% of users. Does that mean its perfect?
Give it a rest...
So, where is the "Grant of License" not being honored?
No. You would still be able to by the F150 and put it in your garage.
Now you may notice I have also post the clayton act which says:
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to be a party to, or assist in, any transaction of sale, or contract to sell, which discriminates to his knowledge against competitors
This is not MS saying that if it does not run on wine too bad (I would be all for that, its their right) This is MS going out of its way to discriminate against non windows users for no reason other than to hurt an competitor. Would this violation of the clayton act be worth fighting in court , probably not, but if you took your kneepads off a minute you might be able to see at best this is a crumby way to treat customers, and at worst illegal..
Are you mystified by the meaning of "is" as well? Thank you for responding to my post. Perhaps we'll correspond again when there is something substantive to discuss.
Microsoft blocks some license keys, especially bulk licensing or OEM keys, that are known to be compromised from updates. If you have a valid key and don't wish to re-install, LabMice.net has some instructions for changing the license key for a Windows installation. Or else, you can call to get a valid key.
...unless you equate the car with your whole computer system, the engine with the O/S and Office -- or any other application for that matter -- with the transmission.
Use your imagination. I think you'll see what I was getting at.
What? This one, from the message to which you replied?
let's say they took your money for the truck, you brought the truck home, it died in your driveway that day, and had to be towed back to the dealer. The dealer says "Oh, the truck's ignition control module was deactivated by the Chevy proximity sensor.
First, nobody claimed Office dies. MS just stops updates. This is much more analogous to denying warranty work -- my analogy -- than to a complete failure of the product, rendering it entirely useless -- his analogy.
Also, the operating system is directly involved with the function of an application like Office, unlike the relationship of one truck to another. Its more like an engine to a transmission. :-)
Thanks for the web site, I'll check it out tonite.
Hmm so me saying my neon is good enough to get me to work is like saying its the perfect car and works for everyone? Please nobody has ever said the software is perfect, and nobody even even implied it. Fact it you make a busk2k like statemnet 'linux geeks claim there are no bugs in Linux' and based it on nothing..
Whos on crack? Do you think because someone is using windows or mac micrososft is assured that the copy of office is legal? Hell whole nations have a street inducstries that sell illegal copies of windows and office.
If MS was just saying you have to register your product to get updates (much like RHN) that would be fine. it means you can license a product once by its serial number and that entitlement will allow you to get updates.
If you think a court is going to have a problem with this, you need a dose of reality.
Please read the clayton act...
Fact is MS is going after WINE and WINE only, its not going after apple, or windows users who pirate office, or anyone else just one product. This is not about hurting piracy this is about hurting a product that is just becoming mature enough to be useful.
If I have an old copy of Office 2000 that I bought but want to run on Linux am I a pirate?
It seems to me that Microsoft has every right to do this on updates to the core operating system, and subsystems therein. They have no obligation to provide an update service to those who do not purchase their software.
Doing it for freely provided add-on software would seem to me to probably be fine, too.
However, doing it for something like Office would seem legally questionable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.