The Artima Developer Community
Sponsored Link

Agile Buzz Forum
Punishing the class

0 replies on 1 page.

Welcome Guest
  Sign In

Go back to the topic listing  Back to Topic List Click to reply to this topic  Reply to this Topic Click to search messages in this forum  Search Forum Click for a threaded view of the topic  Threaded View   
Previous Topic   Next Topic
Flat View: This topic has 0 replies on 1 page
James Robertson

Posts: 29924
Nickname: jarober61
Registered: Jun, 2003

David Buck, Smalltalker at large
Punishing the class Posted: Jan 28, 2005 6:47 AM
Reply to this message Reply

This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Agile Buzz by James Robertson.
Original Post: Punishing the class
Feed Title: Cincom Smalltalk Blog - Smalltalk with Rants
Feed URL: http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/rssBlog/rssBlogView.xml
Feed Description: James Robertson comments on Cincom Smalltalk, the Smalltalk development community, and IT trends and issues in general.
Latest Agile Buzz Posts
Latest Agile Buzz Posts by James Robertson
Latest Posts From Cincom Smalltalk Blog - Smalltalk with Rants

Advertisement
I know what Microsoft is trying to accomplish with this policy. Their goal is to have invalid Windows users get the real thing. There's a problem though - by denying patches - including security patches - to invalid users, they are actually punishing the rest of us. How? Well, those systems that don't receive these patches will be more vulnerable to the various worms, viruses, and trojans that are out there. That means that they will be more likely to become unwitting zombies - and thus a hazard to the rest of us.

Now, you might ask why these users are unwitting - don't they know that they have an illegal copy of Windows, pretty much by definition? Maybe not - here's what Ed Foster has on that:

Part of it is the type of user the program is aimed at. According to Microsoft officials, almost one of every four Windows users in the U.S. and other developed countries is using a non-genuine version. And the majority of those don't realize it, because the counterfeit copies are often very hard to tell from the real thing. And they will be the ones who Windows Genuine Advantage tags as having ungenuine software, because those who did consciously get a cracked copy of XP probably aren't going to bother trying to validate their copies.

So we're not talking about people who were trying to rip off Microsoft. Instead, an awful lot of people who paid their money for Windows in good faith are going to discover that somebody along the line - a distributor, a reseller, an OEM -- cheated them. They are just as much victims of the counterfeiters as Microsoft. More actually, because they were in less of a position to defend themselves. Perhaps we should call them Windows' Genuinely Disadvantaged.

Take the PC I'm writing this on - I got it from corporate. I had nothing to do with installing Windows on it, and I'm taking it on faith that our IT group has a valid license. In my case, I'm pretty sure that they do, but I'm also sure that there are end users out there who receive pre-installed systems that are not legal - but were received in good faith. This change by Microsoft hurts the rest of us, because it leaves that population more open to attack

Again, I understand why Microsoft is doing this - I just think that they are letting their legal department run ahead of common sense.

Read: Punishing the class

Topic: A Negative Take on Collections Previous Topic   Next Topic Topic: Joint Smalltalk / Python meeting in Ottawa

Sponsored Links



Google
  Web Artima.com   

Copyright © 1996-2019 Artima, Inc. All Rights Reserved. - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use