Author: Ian Aston
Date: 16:49:45 10/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 26, 2001 at 20:23:47, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >First, Tom compared Windows XP with Win2k, not with Win9x/ME family. I believe >WinNT/Win2k also will not work on your 386 system with 5Mb of RAM. > >Second, I don't understand what you are talking about "privacy issues". Product >activation is *anonymous* >(http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/default.asp?url=/WINDOWSXP/home/using/productdoc/en/WPA_privacypolicy.asp). >Of course you can say "I don't believe MS", but then I'll ask you "Are you >believeing ingredient list that is printed on the box with cereal? And how MS >differ from cereal maker?". You don't have to ring Kellog's to ask if you can eat their cornflakes. IA > >Eugene > >On October 26, 2001 at 19:12:03, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On October 26, 2001 at 17:21:16, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On October 26, 2001 at 02:10:40, Christophe Theron wrote: >>> >>>>On October 24, 2001 at 14:59:48, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 24, 2001 at 13:31:20, Torstein Hall wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 24, 2001 at 00:23:56, William Penn wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>I wonder if you considered the privacy issue with Windows XP? You must "phone >>>>>>>home" to activate it, and you cannot reinstall it without doing the same. >>>>>>>Microsoft accesses and stores in their archives certain private information >>>>>>>about you and your computer system, then has the ability to grant or deny you >>>>>>>access to Windows XP and your own computer! At least that is what I hear, so I >>>>>>>am leary of it. >>>>>>>WP >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I have planned to let XP rest for a while and let others buy a MS xx.00 product. >>>>>>Then perhaps I can see where this privacy issue is going and get some >>>>>>"experience reports". >>>>> >>>>>XP is a refresh of Win2k, which has been lauded as an incredibly stable, >>>>>full-featured OS. It is hardly a xx.00 product. >>>>> >>>>>-Tom >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Are you working at or for Microsoft, Tom? >>> >>>Yes. :) >>> >>>>Are you willing to take responsability for whatever problem people will have >>>>using the new RAM-eater from the "micro" soft (sic) company? >>> >>>Funny you should mention that, WinXP uses less memory than Win2k. (Although more >>>than Win9x.) Runs fine with 64MB. Doing a darn sight better than, say, Apple's >>>OS X. :) >> >> >> >>OK, then you definitely work for MS. Most observers mention the need to have >>256Mb of memory and a very fast processor in order to run XP. >> >>Windows 95 runs on my 386sx 20MHz, and it has only 5Mb of memory. I just have to >>wait a little minute every time I want to open an explorer window. But I swear >>W95 works on my 386sx 20MHz notebook. >> >> >> >> >>>>I think that the wait-and-see attitude is the wisest thing to do in this case. >>>>The concerns expressed by William and Torstein sound extremely justified to >>>>me. >>> >>>Concerns don't bother me. Concerns based on bad information bother me. Like the >>>idea that XP is a x.0 product, that Microsoft keeps a database of personal >>>information about you, that you have to call up MS every time you want to >>>reinstall the product or change your hardware. Concerns about all of this are >>>invalid. >> >> >> >>If I leave the door of my house open 24h a day, 7 days a week, I have very >>little chances, where I live, to be killed by a burglar in the middle of my >>sleep. >> >>But I close my door all the time. >> >> >>Why should I let a chance to Microsoft to have a look at what's going on inside >>my computer? >> >>The question "are they going to have a look or not" is totally secondary. >> >>It's my computer, it's my stuffs, and they are already forcing me to do a lot of >>things I would not like to have to do, so it's already going much too far right >>now with Windows 98 or Windows Me. >> >>It's really funny that people who want to keep some privacy are the ones who >>need to justify themselves nowadays. >> >>"I don't want you to have a look at my private data" >> >>"Why? Trust me, I'm not going to use it anyway. Are you paranoid? Come with me, >>you need to be examined by a specialist" >> >>or >> >>"Why? Do you have something to hide? So you could be a terrorist then..." >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>I'm the last person to tell somebody to use Windows, but if you don't use it, >>>I'd prefer that your reasons be based on accurate information. :) >> >> >>Come on. I have seen where Microsoft is taking us over the years, and as the >>justice is not willing to stop them, the only way to keep a little bit of >>privacy and control over our information systems is to realize what's going on >>and to resist. >> >>A few months ago I was joking with Eugene and mentionned that some day your >>Windows CE or PocketPC coffee machine will need an Internet connection to >>download software updates on a regular basis (or it will stop working). >> >>Who wants to bet on the year this is going to happen? >> >> >> >> Christophe
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.