Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

"Of course you know, this means WAR Gentlemen!" Microsoft makes its move.

<< < (5/6) > >>

Eóin:
Lets face it, ARM for the time being means portable. So what MS are suggesting locking down are Windows 8 tablets. I don't agree with it, but Apple already do it, so do most Android tablet makers. It's the regulators who need to step in and stop this practice.

hulkbuster:
Yup time will tell  i am not complaining about how quickly win 8 is being released but the hardware supporting to run only win 8 is bothersome ...heh XP was released soon after win 2000 and win ME .
But the fittest and the most versatile do survive in computer world too .

I believe win 8 is better in its own way the ARM device and SECURE BOOT thing.
But how many people can afford the devile perhaps thats the single factor for XP s success. Put XP in a win 7 hardware and see how beautifully it works.
b

hulkbuster:
Only time and country with higher GDP Rate will decide its fate.

40hz:
Compare an iPhone to Microsoft's "secure boot" plan and tell me the difference.
-Tuxman (January 21, 2012, 06:52 AM)
--- End quote ---

It's totally unacceptable behavior no matter who is doing it. So why bother comparing? Both are indulging in unnecessary restrictions here. To get into a discussion of whether Apple or Microsoft is worse here is like listening to two STD patients pointing fingers at each other and arguing over who has the worse infection.

Also, Microsoft made clear that there will not be "a force" to lock the system.
-Tuxman (January 21, 2012, 06:52 AM)
--- End quote ---

Microsoft is well known for its veiled threats, ambiguous announcements, position flops, and unannounced policy changes. I've been with them since DOS 3.0. And I've sat in on licensing negotiations with them. Microsoft does not give a single inch on anything unless they feel it is absolutely necessary to do so. And when they do give that inch, they try to take it back as quickly as possible. And usually as quietly as possible. They are probably one of the most consistently ruthless corporations on the planet. If I would give them credit for anything, it would be for their never making any bones about what they are. Compared to Apple's disingenuous and cynical faux-New Age "for the good of all mankind" propaganda, it's almost refreshing. Most people can more easily admire a selfish bastard than they can a lying hypocrite.

Also, Microsoft made clear that there will not be "a force" to lock the system.
-Tuxman (January 21, 2012, 06:52 AM)
--- End quote ---

They are saying that because they know lawsuits and anti-competitive charges would erupt all around them if they did.

But Microsoft also knows that there's a big legal difference between 'necessary' and 'required.' They don't need to make locking hardware a licensing requirement for Windows 8. That would put them on thin ice legally. But Microsoft could easily make it a necessity by giving favorable treatment and inside information to manufacturers who do lock down their systems. That's called 'suasion.' And there's no rule against doing that since participation in such a plan would be wholly "voluntary" on the part of the manufacturers.

It's just like my bank requiring my social security number to rent a safety deposit box. They don't have a legal right to require that number since the law that created social security specifically said a social security number was not to be used for ID. And therefor, I have every right to refuse to give it to them.

And they are perfectly within their rights to refuse to rent me a safety deposit box.

So it's not required for me to give the bank my tax number - but it is absolutely necessary if I want to do business with them. Microsoft is doing the same thing.

And it was a very smart move on their part, as most in the industry will grudgingly admit.

And to my earlier point, Microsoft often changes its position and frequently contradicts its previous statements. So just because they're saying they won't do something now doesn't mean they'll still be saying the same thing later. Because if they want to change something, and they think they can get away with it, they will.

And please note Microsoft initially gave NO advance warning about where they wanted to go with safe boot beyond talking about it as a form of enhanced security. Most people thought it would be totally user controllable when it was first presented. Because that's how it was presented.

But now that we're getting down to actually implementing it, it's becoming increasingly apparent where Microsoft wants to take it.

(Hint: Three rings for the elven kings...)

I would say, let us wait for the first affected machines before following our instinct to blame Microsoft for the apocalypse.
-Tuxman (January 21, 2012, 06:52 AM)
--- End quote ---

I would say let's base our reaction and preparations on our previous experiences, and Microsoft's track record, rather than take the easy way out. Sitting back and hoping for the best is seldom a good strategy in the tech world. Or pretty much anywhere else.

And please... let's not use phrases like "apocalypse" in this sort of discussion. This is not about religion. (Since we're not discussing Apple here.  :mrgreen:)  This discussion is purely about technology, business practices, and market share. Let's keep it there. :)

In these days of Google, Apple and Facebook, Microsoft is harmless.
-Tuxman (January 21, 2012, 06:52 AM)
--- End quote ---

Hardly.




Get it.

-Tuxman (January 21, 2012, 06:52 AM)
--- End quote ---

Get what exactly? Assertions don't establish something as fact. Far better to continue to ask questions and raise objections. Because both the jury and the 'smart money' are still out on this latest development.

Tuxman:
Facts are not the same as assumptions, no matter what they are based on.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page