Replies

Back to the actual license topic, the benchmarking clause worries me. If you want to publish a benchmark, you have to do it on Microsoft's terms. This is a restriction on freedom of speech that has normally been on Microsoft's server products.

That it is enforceable is questionable. Microsoft has used its power to stop unfavorable, although legitimate, benchmarks before. But McAfee lost in court for trying to stop unfavorable reviews using a similar clause.

That it is enforceable is questionable.

Sure enough. May not be enforcable. You wanna take on their legal team? There's a lot of language and clauses there. As the original article on this thread points out, the Vista license is far more onerous than any other in MS history.

Are you guys really so happy that Microsoft reserves the right to inspect every file on your system and delete anything it doesn't like with no recourse for you? BTW, I'll remind you that during the Vista beta, they already deleted files vital for the Norton AV beta to function.

With Apple, I get no activation, no evil license agreement, no deactivations by mistake (which has been documented many times for legit customers), no forced registrations to get Apple's updates like with WinXP's WindowsUpdate, no forced reactivation just because I added a video card or upgraded a processor...the list just goes on and on.

I guess I'm the oddball here but I just don't like unscheduled involuntary proctology exams from my doctor. I don't like my doctor being nosy about everything. That would make me find another doctor. You guys are spread-eagled on the table and apparently loving every minute of it for some reason.