Posted on 02/19/2009 1:30:25 PM PST by Chet 99
Remember when Vista was announced, and Microsoft decided to release six different versions of the operating system, much to the confusion, disappointment, and ridicule of potential buyers? Well guess what? Microsoft is back with the Windows 7 strategy. What has it learned in the last three years? Pretty much nothing.
While Microsoft is touting the "two primary editions" of Windows 7 -- a Home Premium edition and a Professional (intended for business) edition -- the fact is it's sticking with the same six different versions (or SKUs, stock-keeping units) that it had for Vista.
The real difference is that Windows 7 Home Basic -- the much-reviled stripped-down version of Vista that was designed for bare-bones PCs -- is now being shunted to emerging markets only, though it will still exist. But to confuse matters, a Windows 7 Starter edition, which will run only three applications simultaneously, will also be available.
(Excerpt) Read more at tech.yahoo.com ...
That's $2,500 to $25,000 just for the circumvention. Are you willing to pay just because you tested ripping a DVD? Just hope they don't get you on copyright infringement, up to $150,000 (you copied it to your hard drive without permission, right?).
The people who created the tool you used are subject to $500,000 and/or five years for the first offense, $1,000,000 and/or ten years for subsequent offenses, if they made so much as a penny off it. That would include selling the tool, donations to the project, ad revenue from their web site, etc.
You don't think there's something wrong with that?
There is a section of the DMCA, 1201 (c), which states "Nothing in this section shall affect rights, remedies, limitations, or defenses to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title."
Bringing that up in your defense is what you'd probably call whining. But that clause has been pretty much ignored by the the courts, prosecutors and companies in pursuing people who try to exercise it.
Show me where that's ever happened to anyone, ever, for making a test copy and maybe then I'll consider it an actual concern, but until then it just sounds like you bellyaching you can't rip off other people's work infinitely.
The people who created the tool you used are subject to $500,000 and/or five years for the first offense
Somebody needs to tell Office Depot and Walmart then, cause they sell these ripper tools right off the shelf. They load right up and work in Vista too, despite all the crying we constantly hear that nothing in Vista ever works right, and the laws are so unfair on those that try to steal. Beg for sympathy from me and I'll laugh in your face LOL.
You are wise.
Oh, so you admit that the BSOD if basically a legend of old. Thanks.
Now you are unwise. AntiRepublicrat is right on the money regarding DRM.
Just because Win comes stock set to reboot on BSOD doesn't mean it isn't there. And a restart-loop on fault isn't any better, and is often worse, as one cannot get an error code.
And BSOD stops are still quite common if Win fails in the boot process before the reg is fully loaded, and on driver/hardware failures.
So yes, folks still know the BSOD.
For the record, that was Win950B... Other than that, you are on the money.
And, how would you propose that Windows repair hardware failures?
Uh, only once and it was not a Windows problem.
That was not the point- You suggest the BSOD is never seen, which is patently false, and then use the one condition I proposed which is beyond hope as your rebuttal.
Windows usually repairs nothing on a BSOD, auto-restart or not. If Win is not fully loaded, the BSOD is still a full_stop, regardless of the error. If Win has loaded enough to use the auto-restart key, the usual result is a fault-restart loop.
The only difference auto-restart has made is that the user has no idea what is happening, and if Safe isn't available, the tech has nothing but bootlog.txt for diag, without resorting to a miniWin bootable in order to access the error log to get the stop code. Or one can use a miniWin bootable to shut off Auto-restart-on-fail in the host reg in order to get a BSOD and find the stop code that way.
Either way, the point remains that Win offers a full_stop BSOD in conditions where win is not fully up yet, which was my point. The BSOD is alive and well.
But rarely seen or heard from.
I, too, find that assertion to be beyond credibility. The only way that seems possible to me is if you started your new Windows machine ten years ago, encountered a BSOD, rubbed it off and installed Linux.
I find it to be anything but rare. I see them every day.
Blue screens every single day? I haven't seen one in years, and the few times I did ever see one I or someone else immediately fixed it. Why would you continue to leave systems that are that poorly configured in that state?
I am a service tech. The machines with the BSODs are coming across my bench. My own machines do not have such problems, but even I would not make the claim that my gear has only given one BSOD in ten years.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
I’m sure you can attest that at least 40-50% of BSOD has more to do with user error or ignorance. People that blindly install crap on their system or people I have seen that have multiple instances of AOL on their computer. Sometimes I feel sorry for Windows and their hardware with all that crap conflicting with each other.
I’m an IT manager of a large enterprise and we have problems of some sort every day too, but never, or hardly ever, any blue screens. UAE/GPF errors were more common with Windows 98 and are usually only the result of poor 3rd party peripheral or application behavior, and we’re just careful about what we let people buy and load without us testing it first. If you’ve got tons of them still happening it’s probably 1 particular item that many users have that is causing it, either that or outdated HW/OS. Doesn’t sound like a great place to work, good luck getting it sorted out.
I will agree with that heartily, but only in part- A good portion of "why" Windows is so susceptible to installation and user errors is a poorly defined user space. Until Vista (Maybe XP SP-3, too), any 'ol thing could get to Ring0, alter kernel tables, and etc... User space, program space, all shared in one big mess. Vista behaves itself much, much better in this regard (it really is a great improvement), but even so, is miles away from a reasonable method.
Secondly, dumbing down the GUI is an incredible mistake. M$ all but admits it's users to be stupid. I ran into an old warhorse of a secretary on a phone help session the other day... What a treasure. She was around for Win3x and was really quite comfortable in a cmdbox after I explained the need for quotes around pathnames. Completely capable in all aspects, just lacking specific knowledge.
So in large part, M$ brings it upon themselves...
Sometimes I feel sorry for Windows and their hardware with all that crap conflicting with each other.
Again, their own fault. Cornering the hardware market has consequences. Drivers should not be in the OS at all. They should be in the card, and should be universal. It ain't no damn piano.
I am not working *for* anyone. It is my own company. I serve SOHOS and residential, without the convenience of control of the users or the machines. Mine is the real world on the ground, and I like it fine. It gives one a unique perspective on troubleshooting and repair that one rarely encounters in the preemptive "castle" mentality of IT Depts.
One of my favorite pastimes is new viral strains found in the wild, crossing my bench- something I would not be given the time to deconstruct were I given the benefit of a steady paycheck.
Have a good evening.
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.