How exactly WPA is going to be incorporated is still sketchy at this point....
<hr></blockquote>
Actually, WPA is all about turning off Windows at a given point in time.
If Microsoft really cared about piracy, they'd use the same system that Half-Life uses. That has been IMPOSSIBLE to crack because in order to play online, you have to authenticate your serial number with a central server.
Ooops....looks like I let the cat out of the bag here.....
[quote]That's because the routines that handle the GUI are largely hardware based on the Mac. With a PC it's all handled though software. Even on my high end Athlon and P4 systems the windows still flicker.<hr></blockquote>
The Mac interface routines used to be in ROM, but all drawing was done by the processor. That changed to routines being in software with hardware acceleration (like Windows), and it is now a case of routines in software with little hardware acceleration. I'm quite sure it's a matter of how the routines are written rather than where they're stored.
Actually, WPA is all about turning off Windows at a given point in time.
If Microsoft really cared about piracy, they'd use the same system that Half-Life uses. That has been IMPOSSIBLE to crack because in order to play online, you have to authenticate your serial number with a central server.
Ooops....looks like I let the cat out of the bag here.....
<hr></blockquote>
Too simple. Off hand I can spot some problems with that. Half-Life(app) must connect to another half life(app) to play. XP is an operating system. IT has no end to incoordinate. Can M$ force all ISP services LANS, etc to provide a 'must line' to the central server? (that might be a distant future if MS has its way). So you can't force people to connect to a central server. At that point a simple IP blocking to the central server is all you need. That's why WPA is phone in.
But Kuku, if you push people towards online services (xbox anyone?), if broadband becomes widespread enough, it's conceivable that the OS could be written to authenticate itself upon boot. Passport and the associated services are part of this first step. Get people hooked on Microsoft's online services, then, move the OS towards that step.
From the information that is NDA (the nature of which I cannot disclose but I let some of it loose at the War Room in MacMonkey) it's very possible for Microsoft to use WPA for two main tasks:
1) Determine the extent of piracy and use the information gathered to argue that they really are not a monopoly (a monopoly requiring both control over means of production and means of distribution....if piracy of Windows is 50%, for example, Microsoft could argue that they can't control distribution, therefore, the label of "monopoly" can't stick);
2) WPA can be used to prevent people from reinstalling Windows at a later date. For example, Microsoft drops support for Win95 in December. Anyone with Win95 will forever be able to reinstall Win95. However, if a person has WinXP, and, cannot get an authentication code, it's basically useless (without cracks, which, legislation is trying to prevent the use of).
WPA isn't about stopping piracy. To believe so is misguided.
And, groverat, I don't think that Microsoft as a whole is inherently evil, but, some of the things they do certainly are.
I find it incredible to believe that reinstalling an operating system requires so much work to get things back in operating order again (reinstalling programs because registry keys get broken, etc.)
For me, I'm caught between a rock and a hard place. I love the freedom having access to basically unlimited PC hardware gives a person in the x86 world in terms of choice and customization, but, I would say that the MacOS is far superior for easy of use, reinstallation, etc.
If only there was MacOS on x86......
Well, can't have everything in life, otherwise, we wouldn't desire it <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
I never said WPA was just for anti-piracy, though there obviously is something there.
Microsoft always uses multi-prong attacks. Anti-priacy is only just one of them. While everyone knows the basic underlining there is many layers underneath. There is most probably much more to XP that M$ will leverage they critics haven't thought of yet.
There is nothing simple about about microsoft.
Is it just me or is Groverat starting to sound like President Bush? All this Evil doers, justics, and stuff. Sounds like too many batman reruns.
<strong>Is it just me or is Groverat starting to sound like President Bush? All this Evil doers, justics, and stuff. Sounds like too many batman reruns.
~Kuku</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah the president should be lying in court instead
I never said WPA was just for anti-piracy, though there obviously is something there.
Microsoft always uses multi-prong attacks. Anti-priacy is only just one of them. While everyone knows the basic underlining there is many layers underneath. There is most probably much more to XP that M$ will leverage they critics haven't thought of yet.
There is nothing simple about about microsoft.
~Kuku<hr></blockquote>
That's fine. I only wanted to point out to everyone here that there is ALOT more to WPA than what Microsoft is saying publicly. Trust me, it has the potential to get very ugly, and, sadly, before many people realize what's going on, it will be too late.
Ever wonder why the DOJ suddenly decided to settle the anti-trust case?
[quote]The Beta 2 release of the Microsoft .NET Framework Software Development Kit (SDK) includes the .NET Framework redistributable package. The SDK includes everything developers need to write, build, test, and deploy .NET Framework applications ? documentation, tools, compilers, and samples.
The redistributable package runs on Microsoft Windows® XP, Windows® 2000, Windows NT® 4.0, Windows® 98, and Windows® Millennium Edition (Windows Me).<hr></blockquote>
[quote]The SDK runs on Windows® XP, Windows® 2000, and Windows NT® 4.0.<hr></blockquote>
So, far from .NET applications only running on XP, they actually run on anything from win98/NT4 on (and if you wanted, you could probably get the CLR, etc running on win95 as well, since there's very little difference between it and 98...)... and the SDK (software development kit) runs on any NT-kernel OSs form NT4 onwards...
Point is.. MS isn't supporting .NET for Win95 even though it can run on it. There are still tons of people using 95 MS wants them to upgrade. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Most software companies do the same thing.
Comments
How exactly WPA is going to be incorporated is still sketchy at this point....
<hr></blockquote>
Actually, WPA is all about turning off Windows at a given point in time.
If Microsoft really cared about piracy, they'd use the same system that Half-Life uses. That has been IMPOSSIBLE to crack because in order to play online, you have to authenticate your serial number with a central server.
Ooops....looks like I let the cat out of the bag here.....
wow, that has to be the most one sided set of replies I've ever seen. RoadWarrior, you've now got some title somewhere in ubbland
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Actually, I've been watching this thread while it developed and thought I'd add a few comments towards the end.
Great.
The Mac interface routines used to be in ROM, but all drawing was done by the processor. That changed to routines being in software with hardware acceleration (like Windows), and it is now a case of routines in software with little hardware acceleration. I'm quite sure it's a matter of how the routines are written rather than where they're stored.
Actually, WPA is all about turning off Windows at a given point in time.
If Microsoft really cared about piracy, they'd use the same system that Half-Life uses. That has been IMPOSSIBLE to crack because in order to play online, you have to authenticate your serial number with a central server.
Ooops....looks like I let the cat out of the bag here.....
<hr></blockquote>
Too simple. Off hand I can spot some problems with that. Half-Life(app) must connect to another half life(app) to play. XP is an operating system. IT has no end to incoordinate. Can M$ force all ISP services LANS, etc to provide a 'must line' to the central server? (that might be a distant future if MS has its way). So you can't force people to connect to a central server. At that point a simple IP blocking to the central server is all you need. That's why WPA is phone in.
~Kuku
sssh!
From the information that is NDA (the nature of which I cannot disclose but I let some of it loose at the War Room in MacMonkey) it's very possible for Microsoft to use WPA for two main tasks:
1) Determine the extent of piracy and use the information gathered to argue that they really are not a monopoly (a monopoly requiring both control over means of production and means of distribution....if piracy of Windows is 50%, for example, Microsoft could argue that they can't control distribution, therefore, the label of "monopoly" can't stick);
2) WPA can be used to prevent people from reinstalling Windows at a later date. For example, Microsoft drops support for Win95 in December. Anyone with Win95 will forever be able to reinstall Win95. However, if a person has WinXP, and, cannot get an authentication code, it's basically useless (without cracks, which, legislation is trying to prevent the use of).
WPA isn't about stopping piracy. To believe so is misguided.
I find it incredible to believe that reinstalling an operating system requires so much work to get things back in operating order again (reinstalling programs because registry keys get broken, etc.)
For me, I'm caught between a rock and a hard place. I love the freedom having access to basically unlimited PC hardware gives a person in the x86 world in terms of choice and customization, but, I would say that the MacOS is far superior for easy of use, reinstallation, etc.
If only there was MacOS on x86......
Well, can't have everything in life, otherwise, we wouldn't desire it <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
<strong>Shut up Kuku, Microsoft is evil and everything they do is to make users cry and babies starve.
sssh!</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't remember any one even saying anything close to this.
Someone get this kid an education.
"Farce? What's that, some kind of candy?"
<strong>Thanks for the newsflash, Captain Obvious.
Someone get this kid an education.
"Farce? What's that, some kind of candy?"</strong><hr></blockquote>
I never said WPA was just for anti-piracy, though there obviously is something there.
Microsoft always uses multi-prong attacks. Anti-priacy is only just one of them. While everyone knows the basic underlining there is many layers underneath. There is most probably much more to XP that M$ will leverage they critics haven't thought of yet.
There is nothing simple about about microsoft.
Is it just me or is Groverat starting to sound like President Bush? All this Evil doers, justics, and stuff. Sounds like too many batman reruns.
~Kuku
<strong>Is it just me or is Groverat starting to sound like President Bush? All this Evil doers, justics, and stuff. Sounds like too many batman reruns.
~Kuku</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah the president should be lying in court instead
TheRoadWarrior,
I never said WPA was just for anti-piracy, though there obviously is something there.
Microsoft always uses multi-prong attacks. Anti-priacy is only just one of them. While everyone knows the basic underlining there is many layers underneath. There is most probably much more to XP that M$ will leverage they critics haven't thought of yet.
There is nothing simple about about microsoft.
~Kuku<hr></blockquote>
That's fine. I only wanted to point out to everyone here that there is ALOT more to WPA than what Microsoft is saying publicly. Trust me, it has the potential to get very ugly, and, sadly, before many people realize what's going on, it will be too late.
Ever wonder why the DOJ suddenly decided to settle the anti-trust case?
<a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/default.asp?url=/downloads/sample.asp?url=/msdn-files/027/000/976/msdncompositedoc.xml"; target="_blank">http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/default.asp?url=/downloads/sample.asp?url=/msdn-files/027/000/976/msdncompositedoc.xml</a>;
some excerpts:
[quote]The Beta 2 release of the Microsoft .NET Framework Software Development Kit (SDK) includes the .NET Framework redistributable package. The SDK includes everything developers need to write, build, test, and deploy .NET Framework applications ? documentation, tools, compilers, and samples.
The redistributable package runs on Microsoft Windows® XP, Windows® 2000, Windows NT® 4.0, Windows® 98, and Windows® Millennium Edition (Windows Me).<hr></blockquote>
[quote]The SDK runs on Windows® XP, Windows® 2000, and Windows NT® 4.0.<hr></blockquote>
So, far from .NET applications only running on XP, they actually run on anything from win98/NT4 on (and if you wanted, you could probably get the CLR, etc running on win95 as well, since there's very little difference between it and 98...)... and the SDK (software development kit) runs on any NT-kernel OSs form NT4 onwards...
That candy bar was the the funniest piece of humour I've seen here ever! I laughed and snickered for a min. and a half.
God I've missed this forum.
Groverat,
People who start saying " shut up " in their arguments know they have already lost .
<strong>Sinewave,
That candy bar was the the funniest piece of humour I've seen here ever! I laughed and snickered for a min. and a half.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I was basically making fun of myself..so everything is ok
I saw XP at a local computer store and you know what? There was no wanna-have-feeling like it was on Mac OS X!
Guess what I use...