Vista's Legal Fine Print Raises Red Flags (All your computer are belong to us.)

The Toronto Star ^ | January 29, 2007 | Michael Geist

[quidnunc]

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.

-snip-

[Echo Talon]

blah, blah, blah... intel or AMD underclocks the chip and sells it for X amount of $'s and you're OK with that... thats fine with me... I'll stick with a PC where I can get the Performance out of the chip that it is capable of producing at a reliable rate.

[antiRepublicrat]

No more famous than your endless defenses of the Russian hackers

The troll stalker arrives. Must remember, "Don't feed the troll. Don't feed the troll. ..."

[antiRepublicrat]

Not true, since free software typically includes *no warranty* and passes the liability to the user

Vista Home/Ultimate EULA:

G. NO OTHER WARRANTIES. The limited warranty is the only direct warranty from Microsoft. Microsoft gives no other express warranties, guarantees or conditions. Where allowed by your local laws, Microsoft excludes implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement.

In any case, what we're talking about is protecting yourself from the maker of the software. You have to protect yourself from proprietary vendors, and that costs time and money. It is a factor too often not included in TCO comparisons. My last company had a well-paid slot devoted to license tracking.

You only have to protect yourself from an open source copyright holder if you are going to redistribute the code.

[antiRepublicrat]

Tiger Server, though fine for many tasks and performing some rather unique functions, does not stand up to Windows 2003 Server in many enterprise tasks

Are you talking about general tasks, or specific software it doesn't run, like Exchange? And since it's BSD, what does Linux do that it can't?

[antiRepublicrat]

Some funny, and good replies there. I especially like the one about SP1 on the horizon. I wouldn't trust major software from any company that doesn't start working on the next update as soon as they're done with the current version (and sometimes even before).

Security and convenience are inversely proportional, Macs typically prompt the user including for passwords before making any significant changes as well.

In this case, it's in the way they do it. Vista's warnings pop up far too often, which will likely result in users just clicking OK out of habit. They are also often not very descriptive, and they are absolutely modal -- no getting anything done until you take care of that box. OS X's warnings don't come up quite so often, are non-modal, and they clearly explain what's happening.

[George W. Bush]

Are you talking about general tasks, or specific software it doesn't run, like Exchange? And since it's BSD, what does Linux do that it can't?

I was thinking particularly about studies done on using it in production web server farms. Tiger Server, while fine for smaller intranets and such and coming stock with Apache and all the usual web server stuff, simply doesn't scale well compared to the excellent Linux offerings. Even Windows Server does much better at load-balancing and other tasks in production environments. You just wouldn't run Amazon or Google on Tiger Server.

OTOH, Apple has some nice stuff for Grid, a service that lets you create server farms easily to do stuff like rendering. And they have really good stuff for connecting, say, a dozen computers each with a half-dozen external and soft synthesizers together via networking and MIDI to create an integrated professional music studio. They have stuff to share devices like CD/DVD burners to all the machines on the network.

So Mac has a few advantages, more in the arts and scientific area, that PCs don't quite match. But Windows and Linux servers in heavy networking or webserving environments are not going to be replaced by Tiger Server. Still, Tiger Server works fine for small to medium intranets so it's not useless, just not designed or intended to take on the server market.

[George W. Bush]

OS X's warnings don't come up quite so often, are non-modal, and they clearly explain what's happening.

With OS X, you have to give an administrator password to alter the system and do installations. This is also how you should always run with Windows. If you run as administrator all the time, when (not if) a virus or malware does get in your browser or sneak in via some hole in the firewall or such, then the virus/malware inherits the security permissions of the current user and can then install itself and alter settings permanently.

Most Windows users with puny firewall and a NAT router and free antivirus/antispyware software are pretty safe from attack if they just don't run as administrator all the time. Create a user account and use that for work. Only do a Fast Switch to administrator to alter the system or install software. It's incredible to me that people always switch their Windows machines to administrator mode and leave them there forever. It's like unlocking your door but leaving it closed and then being surprised to find a burglar in the house. Duh! You actually have to keep the door locked! Don't run as administrator!

Beyond the admin/user thing, OS X is like Linux/UNIX/BSD in requiring the most fundamental changes to be done as a root administrator. I would guess that 99% of all Mac users couldn't tell you how to even get root on a Mac. It's just very rare for a user to need that and dangerous to let Grandma run as root.

Microsoft should have gone to a setup like OS X's long ago. It's not even hard to do. And businesses and government certainly lock those machines down. It could be done with Windows in the home just as easily. So many problems with virus/malware could have been avoided with so few simple changes. This policy would also help with a lot of service calls I've made where it's clear they turned Junior loose on the Internet and he downloaded or clicked Ok or installed all kinds of crap from the Internet. If he had to have an administrator password to do that, it would have stopped him.

I try to educate people into having one administrator account and the rest of the bunch being user accounts. Man, does that cut down on the headaches and problems.

[antiRepublicrat]

Only do a Fast Switch to administrator to alter the system or install software.

Or simply use RunAs.

[antiRepublicrat]

Even Windows Server does much better at load-balancing and other tasks in production environments.

I have to disagree with that. I've used Windows NLB in production, and it sucked badly. Anyone doing large-scale NLB should be doing hardware NLB in the first place.

[George W. Bush]

You need to keep it simple. A Fast Switch is easy to explain, easy to remember.

What I find is that I must constantly find the easiest and most memorable way to help people do the right thing to help themselves.

[George W. Bush]

I've used Windows NLB in production, and it sucked badly.

I didn't suggest it was better than Linux. But it has its uses in some shops.

[antiRepublicrat]

You need to keep it simple. A Fast Switch is easy to explain, easy to remember.

I take it that was to me. I just right-click, select "Run as..." and type in the administrator info. Fast User Switching won't work on a domain, so RunAs is what I'm used to.

[Golden Eagle]

Most Windows users with puny firewall and a NAT router and free antivirus/antispyware software are pretty safe from attack if they just don't run as administrator all the time.

Which is exactly how I'm configured to run at both work and at home, as a limited user. As a matter of fact as this conversation has continued, your only real gripe of significant merit has turned out to be how Windows is configured by default, to give the default user full admin rights. You should have just said from the beginning "Windows users should not login as admin" and we'd have actually agreed instead of it having to be beaten out of you 150 posts later. ;-)

[George W. Bush]

You never read the article, did you? Or the other threads on the same topic.

[Golden Eagle]

Find me a respectable US publication and not some foreign BS. You don't fall for that crap do you? LOL I hope not.

[Silicon Cowboy]

Well.... it is Mac or Linux for me when I get my next machine. Vista's going nowhere near my HD.