Posted on 1/29/2007, 11:50:34 PM by Petruchio
Vista's legal fine print raises red flags
Jan 29, 2007 04:30 AM Michael Geist
Vista, the latest version of Microsoft's Windows operating system, makes its long awaited consumer debut tomorrow. The first major upgrade in five years, Vista incorporates a new, sleek look and features a wide array of new functionality, such as better search tools and stronger security.
The early reviews have tended to damn the upgrade with faint praise, however, characterizing it as the best, most secure version of Windows, yet one that contains few, if any, revolutionary features.
While those reviews have focused chiefly on Vista's new functionality, for the past few months the legal and technical communities have dug into Vista's "fine print." Those communities have raised red flags about Vista's legal terms and conditions as well as the technical limitations that have been incorporated into the software at the insistence of the motion picture industry.
The net effect of these concerns may constitute the real Vista revolution as they point to an unprecedented loss of consumer control over their own personal computers. In the name of shielding consumers from computer viruses and protecting copyright owners from potential infringement, Vista seemingly wrestles control of the "user experience" from the user.
Vista's legal fine print includes extensive provisions granting Microsoft the right to regularly check the legitimacy of the software and holds the prospect of deleting certain programs without the user's knowledge. During the installation process, users "activate" Vista by associating it with a particular computer or device and transmitting certain hardware information directly to Microsoft.
Even after installation, the legal agreement grants Microsoft the right to revalidate the software or to require users to reactivate it should they make changes to their computer components. In addition, it sets significant limits on the ability to copy or transfer the software, prohibiting anything more than a single backup copy and setting strict limits on transferring the software to different devices or users.
Vista also incorporates Windows Defender, an anti-virus program that actively scans computers for "spyware, adware, and other potentially unwanted software." The agreement does not define any of these terms, leaving it to Microsoft to determine what constitutes unwanted software.
Once operational, the agreement warns that Windows Defender will, by default, automatically remove software rated "high" or "severe," even though that may result in other software ceasing to work or mistakenly result in the removal of software that is not unwanted.
For greater certainty, the terms and conditions remove any doubt about who is in control by providing that "this agreement only gives you some rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all other rights." For those users frustrated by the software's limitations, Microsoft cautions that "you may not work around any technical limitations in the software."
Those technical limitations have proven to be even more controversial than the legal ones.
Last December, Peter Guttman, a computer scientist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand released a paper called "A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection." The paper pieced together the technical fine print behind Vista, unraveling numerous limitations in the new software seemingly installed at the direct request of Hollywood interests.
Guttman focused primarily on the restrictions associated with the ability to play back high-definition content from the next-generation DVDs such as Blu-Ray and HD-DVD (referred to as "premium content").
He noted that Vista intentionally degrades the picture quality of premium content when played on most computer monitors.
Guttman's research suggests that consumers will pay more for less with poorer picture quality yet higher costs since Microsoft needed to obtain licences from third parties in order to access the technology that protects premium content (those licence fees were presumably incorporated into Vista's price).
Moreover, he calculated that the technological controls would require considerable consumption of computing power with the system conducting 30 checks each second to ensure that there are no attacks on the security of the premium content.
Microsoft responded to Guttman's paper earlier this month, maintaining that content owners demanded the premium content restrictions. According to Microsoft, "if the policies [associated with the premium content] required protections that Windows Vista couldn't support, then the content would not be able to play at all on Windows Vista PCs." While that may be true, left unsaid is Microsoft's ability to demand a better deal on behalf of its enormous user base or the prospect that users could opt-out of the technical controls.
When Microsoft introduced Windows 95 more than a decade ago, it adopted the Rolling Stones "Start Me Up" as its theme song. As millions of consumers contemplate the company's latest upgrade, the legal and technological restrictions may leave them singing "You Can't Always Get What You Want."
There are a lot of good reasons to switch to a Macintosh - it's a clearly superior product at the same price; This article does a good job of outlining another.
Thanks, but no Macintosh. I've gone Linux. It's great. It's free.
Microsoft seems pretty intent on driving users away from its products. That said, I'm sure the registry hacks to shut off all of these "features" will be available on the Net shortly.
That's why I went backwards to Windows2000 Professional.
There are a couple of problems with that statement: First, Macintoshes sell for a significantly higher price than equivalent PC's. Second, if it were a "clearly superior" product, I think they would have more than a ten percent market share. Third, what's so #&$@ing hard about building a mouse with more than one button and a scroll wheel?
Hear, hear. Wiped Windows off my comp last month and having a blast with the Linux distro known as Ubuntu. Hell, even if I still had Windows, I wouldn't jump to Vista just yet. Let them fix out the kinks first before taking the plunge.
That's like being the best cellist in Missoula.
I wonder what Microsoft would do if thousands of buyers were to purchase a copy, tear open the package, then return it to the store saying they would not agree to the terms ?
BS. Windows is still the 800-pound gorilla -- refusing to release content in a form compatible with it is suicide. Microsoft surrendered to somebody doing a Blazing Saddles self-hostage-taking.
It's fine for some things, but it can't do others (like offer a Windows development platform for Windows programmers like myself). Besides, Macs are expensive and Apple is a monopoly within the Mac market.
The fine print says: "Don't buy me! Run like hell."
I'll be sticking with xp. I could care less to spend any more money on a new os.
I'm doing Kubuntu. It can't be beat. I'm resisting the urge, so far, to delete my XP drive, but I can feel my resistance weakening. I even got my older brother hooked on it. He's sold on it, and also considering wiping his XP.
Wild horses couldn't drag me to Vista.
I'm happy with XP. I'll sit this one out at least until the first service pack.
I'm running XP right now and everything works very well.
I never upgrade to a new OS till at least SP1 is released.
Great, another thing to deal with....
My current computer is dying the death of a 1000 cuts. I have lost the on board modem due to an electrical strike. A year later the on board network card MAC address is all zeros. Today about half of my USB ports quit working. I found a laptop replacement. I'm just holding out as long as I can to get the most bang for my buck.
Do I buy a more powerful but cheaper laptop with Vista or the less powerful more expensive XP model????? Maybe the more powerful Vista machine and downgrade it to XP...
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.