WinXP

[Undertoad]

Originally posted by jaguar
Particualry with the anal retentive definition of computer which menas if i remember coreclty if you purchase a new system you need a new copy of winXP. (correct me if i'm wrong on that)

Not wrong, but it goes even further than that. If you replace enough components in your current system, XP will decide that you now have a new computer and will require verification. It doesn't have to be a motherboard, either...

It all goes back to a tiny little misconception that everyone has about their non-open-source operating systems. They think that they "purchase" the software and that it is then "owned" by them. In fact they do not. They pay some amount (or their vendor pays some amount) for the right to operate Microsoft's OS on their computer. If MS decides they shouldn't run it any longer, then they will not be able to run it any longer. XP just makes that transaction a little easier for MS.

But then there's the question of who owns your DATA. If it's in one of those MS-proprietary formats, such as Word, Excel, etc., you don't really own your data because you don't own software that can read that data.

MS likes the fact that most people think they "own" their software and data because it makes it easier for them to reach saturation point. But if everyone realized that they don't own their software, there would be a mass migration away from restrictive EULAs and proprietary formats. The support people at MS will not explain that you don't own your software as they help you get your XP back up and running after a hardware upgrade or computer change. But if for some reason you can't convince MS to get "your" XP back up and running after a hardware upgrade, you will have no recourse because it is not yours.

Disclaimer: this is not original thought by me, but I read so many pundits and computer columns that I forget who made the point. Maybe Robert X. Cringely at pbs.org, his column is a must-read every Friday.

[russotto]

Originally posted by Tony Shepps


It all goes back to a tiny little misconception that everyone has about their non-open-source operating systems. They think that they "purchase" the software and that it is then "owned" by them. In fact they do not. They pay some amount (or their vendor pays some amount) for the right to operate Microsoft's OS on their computer. If MS decides they shouldn't run it any longer, then they will not be able to run it any longer. XP just makes that transaction a little easier for MS.

Tony, except in Maryland and Virginia (and perhaps even there, given that MSs licenses are probably covered by the laws of the State of Washington, not the state they are sold in), you OWN a copy of that software.

But then there's the question of who owns your DATA. If it's in one of those MS-proprietary formats, such as Word, Excel, etc., you don't really own your data because you don't own software that can read that data.

You own your data also -- right down to the copyright. And assuming you bought Word, Excel, etc, you own a copy of the software which can read it.

computer change. But if for some reason you can't convince MS to get "your" XP back up and running after a hardware upgrade, you will have no recourse because it is not yours.

You will have recourse; you can sue them. Whether you'd be successful is another question, as this is untested legal territory.

[jaguar]

Hmmm from my understanding you own the CD it is on but not the software itself, only the right to use it.

The data is yours. The viewing software on the other hand....

Of course if you sent the file over MSN though they when hold rights to the data... Personally i wouldn't handle anything confidential on an XP system. Although i wouldn't handle anything at all on an XP system anyway.....

[russotto]

Originally posted by jaguar
Hmmm from my understanding you own the CD it is on but not the software itself, only the right to use it.

The data is yours. The viewing software on the other hand....

Of course if you sent the file over MSN though they when hold rights to the data... Personally i wouldn't handle anything confidential on an XP system. Although i wouldn't handle anything at all on an XP system anyway.....

Jag, laws in Australia may differ. But in the US, buying something licensed by one of those shrink-wrap licenses have generally been found to be a "sale" under the Uniform Commercial Code, and for the purposes of the copyright laws. This doesn't mean you own the copyright on the software, but it does mean you own a copy of the software. If Microsoft were to disable it, they could be liable for damages, just as if you bought a painting (or a print thereof) and put it on display and the artist went and spray-painted over it, he would be liable for damages.

There's a law which software companies are trying to get passed in the US called UCITA, which modifies the Uniform Commercial Code as implemented by the states in order to make whatever the software company says have the force of law and take away all obligations the company has to the consumer. But that's only passed in two states so far.

[jaguar]

ah k...
OUr IP etc laws are geting closer to yours all teh time - hell were virtaully the 52nd state wiht this govt

[elSicomoro]

Sorry Jag...you Aussies are in the 60s, after Puerto Rico and 9 of the 10 Canadian provinces.

[russotto]

Originally posted by sycamore
Sorry Jag...you Aussies are in the 60s, after Puerto Rico and 9 of the 10 Canadian provinces.

As far as patents and copyrights are concerned, nearly every country in the world is under the thrall of the Empire of Hollywood, with the United States providing the enforcement division.

[Undertoad]

Another XP bashing note, and Mitch could you verify this?

On slashdot today, in the Ogg Vorbis thread, someone said that MS bundled an MP3 encoder into XP... with a maximum bitrate of either 64 or 128.

IF this is true, I call FOUL FOUL FOUL once again. It's the very worst thing they could do for the consumer, and very obviously is directed at getting more acceptance of their own proprietary formats.

They have three choices: ship a good MP3 encoder (good for consumers), ship no MP3 encoder at all (bad for consumers, but they can DL or buy one simply enough), or ship a BROKEN one (bad for everyone except MS).

[mbpark]

There was a complete outcry over this one since it was max 64Kbps.

Windows Media, in the WMA format, can pull off in 64Kbps what MP3 does in 128.

WMP 8 does have an encoder built in for WMA, and I think it can do MP3 up to 192Kbps. It does not have one for MP3 anymore

However, right now, the licensing scheme in WMA 8 is raising serious havoc with my DVD software (Mediamatics DVD Express), and will not play my DVDs. When I upgraded to Beta 2 from 2000 Professional, I was playing full-screen DVDs on here. For a Pentium II/300, that was pretty cool .

I'm running the encoder on a Praxis CD to hear how it sounds. It's reasonably fast on a slow machine like mine, though it's got nothing on some of the super-encoders I've run on my primary work machine that can do a CD at 320Mbps in under 10 minutes .

This is balanced against the NIC test I did this morning, where I unplugged my Xircom Combo PC Card NIC and replaced it with a IBM Etherjet Cardbus NIC.

Not only did it reocgnize my card, it kept our Win2K domain credentials, kept me logged into the domain, and automatically reconfigured the NIC. It even loaded the drivers from the HD, without prompting me for the XP CD. It did this in under 30 seconds. I didn't have to log out or reboot.

I have never seen an MS OS actually reconfigure a network card without pain, even Windows 2000 Professional (which can and will hiccup when you do this because of how it binds Client For Microsoft Networks to a specific NIC).

We've been dealing with this issue with one of our senior people who uses the same laptop at home and at work, and who brought a NIC from home to use at work that would not work until we did some NIC configuration to get the new card to recognize Client For Microsoft Networks for our domain under Win2K (which removes most of the options). Windows 98 makes you reboot at least once to accomplish the same task, as does NT 4.0.

This was painless, and I've never seen an MS OS pull off near-seamless reconfiguration before (ok, I admit I clicked one button) when switching network cards, especially PCMCIA network cards.

Even the applications didn't hiccup (I tested with Outlook XP running, which when configured for Exchange Server uses more bandwidth than most servers).

However, getting back to this, I encoded a CD to test this. It not only encoded the CD in WMA format, it downloaded the cover art for it and associated it with the directory.

Nice feature, but I wonder what they did to mess with MusicMatch Jukebox or Real (especially RealAudio!).

For every GOOD thing XP has, it's got to have a downside as well.

Mitch

[mbpark]

It doesn't have an encoder in it for mp3 anymore. Just a button with a hyperlink called "mp3 information".

However, they'll be offering it as an add-on when it ships for about $20.

My source for this is the Microsoft Windows Media site.

Mitch

[Undertoad]

OK, thanks. That makes sense - they don't want to pay a licensing fee for every copy of XP sold, so instead they'll make it a for-pay download. That's actually a good solution to the situation.

[mbpark]

Tony,

This covers the per-copy licensing fee that Fraunhofer gets out of the commercial MP3 people who use their codec for encoding, and it allows Microsoft to make extra money selling an encoder. It's $20, which is still a lower price point than MusicMatch jukebox.

However, I anticipate it being bundled with every major manufacturer's CD-R{W} and DVD-R{W} devices, just like MusicMatch and Easy CD-DA Encoder do, and for very few people to actually pay for it as a separate product.

Makes me wonder how much AOLTW owes Fraunhofer for Winamp, since they're supposed to pay for encoding and decoding. I know Apple pays a lot of money to Sorenson for QuickTime.

Mitch