Posted on 05/20/2009 8:55:14 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Microsoft just received a patent on restricting functionality of your PC by making selected portions and functions of the operating system unavailable to the user or his ability to add applications and drivers until they pay up.
A client computer runs an operating system that executes additional applications by loading them using an application loader and executes device drivers for peripheral devices by loading the drivers using a device loader. The operating system restricts the functionality of the operating system, such as by making selected portions and functionality of the operating system unavailable to the user or by limiting the user's ability to add software applications or device drivers to the computer. Additionally, various techniques can be used to remove or reduce the functionality limitations of the computer.
(Excerpt) Read more at hardocp.com ...
Gone are the days when DEC published the code of its proprietary operating system VMS, that is still out there, and still beats any other OS by a mile. A sysadmin must have access to everything in the operating system, period!
Not to worry.
Some 12 year old genius will have a torrent crack available within minutes of the release of the new OS.
This is pretty old news. They want a way for OEM’s to build a single hardware platform for efficiency and sell it at various prices for various performance levels. But they’ll be shooting themselves in the foot if they actually do it. I guarantee some nerd in his mom’s basement will figure out the locking algorithm about 2.21 femtoseconds after the sell the first unit and after that everyone will be buying the Yugo computer and flipping a couple software switches and shazam! it’s now a Porche.
How do you figure they're exposing themselves to liability if that's the express purpose of the reduced version -- less functionality at a lower price? The only thing I can think of that has kind of a similar feel to it was a case involving contact lenses. The maker sold one kind to be used for a long period for one price, and a different model that had to be replaced more often at a lower price. Thing is, they were actually the same lenses. So the people who paid the high price got what they paid for, and the people who paid the low price actually got MORE than they paid for, but weren't told. So IMHO, noone had a complaint, but someone was suing the company and the courts seemed to at least think it had sufficient merit to allow it to move forward.
How do you disable it?
I didn’t know that’s what those dialog boxes were....but I hate them.
Dang it, I have a firewall on my router and Norton 360. I don’t need to wait for that dang box to pop up just to do anything.
LOL!!!! Very droll and jaded, it sounds like the voice of experience. LOL!!! Very funny!!!!!
Get Root !
Sounds like it goes beyond that. I have no problem with the windows authentication thing. If people pirate it, they should expect to not get it...that’s the companies right. And I have downloaded software copies before to try things out before buying them since not everybody has a free trial.
Trust me...Windows code is the stuff of high comedy. I think its kept under such tight wraps b/c its an embarassment and customers would revolt. Theres nothing there you’d want to copy. LOL!!!
You have to logon as the core local machine administrator (because until UAC is turned off no other “administrator” has the authority) go to Control Panel, User Accounts, then you’ll be on a seemingly useless screen but the second item (first one with a shield, indicating it’s security related) should be a link that says Turn User Account Control on or off, click that, the next screen has a check box, uncheck it, hit OK, it’ll request a reboot, and after that your administrators will actually be able to administrate. Of course that also means they’ll be able to install viruses, but that’s the chance we take.
Huh?? When did this occur?
BTW I agree about VMS being the best OS of all time.
Hypothetically, I buy a MSFT abbreviated OS to do security work. MSFT sells a camera program I can use for my security. Watch and monitor my warehouse betweeen certain hours, detect motion, sound alarm, stuff like that. MSFT discontinues the application for whatever reason (which is not uncommon). My intent to use this PC remains the same, now because the competition uses functionality that is intentioanlly 'locked out' by the OS I purchased; I am blackmailed into purchasing another OS to upgrade my security system, which will ultimately perform the same function. For example, I add facial recognition to see that my workers are the only ones moving stuff out the front door.
The stance would be that the hardware was capable of running competitive software, but MSFT used their 'monopoly' status to force me to continue to purchase their products, in an anti-competitive nature, for me to perform a set of functionality that 'could have' been unlimited.
Substitute 'Security' for 'Animation', 'Photoshop', Circuit Design, Media Center, Gaming or whatever. In addition to magnifying the service support efforts (as if XP Media Center, XP Pro 32bit, XP Pro 64bit, Vista Home 32 bit, Vista Home 64 bit, Vista Ultimate 32 Bit, Vista Ultimate 64 bit, Vista Pro, as well as every variety of Win7 - 13 versions there alone) they will not have to support sub-sets of their OS's. This is a can of worms no one should have to open.
When did what occur? VMS source was available on microfiche from the beginning (later on CDs), and there was the internals book by Ruth Goldenberg, a copy of which sits in one of the boxes under my desk.
OK, didn't think of that scenario. Please don't misunderstand, I think this is a terrible idea, I just didn't see any avenues by which this would lead to litigation. Another lawsuit possibility is when the stuff malfunctions and doesn't let you run the stuff you ARE supposed to be able to. MicroShaft is notoriosly bad at authorization-enforcement-software, witness the WGA fiasco.
That seems to me the motivated force for when they developed this...yr 2000....is mentioned .
Filing Date May., 2000
Ya sure why not....
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.