XP updates require validation ( genuine Microsoft software)

What is genuine Windows validation?
 Validation is a short process that enables you to verify that your copy of Windows is genuine. If you request a genuine Windows download from the Microsoft Download Center, you will be prompted to complete the validation process. You may choose not to validate your Windows and still obtain your requested download. However, validating now will enable faster access to the Download Center in the future when validation may be required. After successful validation, a Microsoft Windows Download Key will be stored on your system for future use. Following the validation process, you'll be taken back to the initial download details page to obtain your requested download

Is Windows activation required?
The validation process also determines if you have activated your copy of Windows. If you have not activated Windows, you will be asked to enter the 25-character product key printed on the Certificate of Authenticity (COA) you received with your PC or software purchase. The product key protects your software from theft, as Windows cannot be activated without it. Windows activation is not required for genuine Windows validation. You may access genuine Windows downloads with either an activated Windows client, or by validating to receive a Microsoft Windows downlad key.

Among the products that validation are beeing used are:

Windows Media Player 10
Windows Media Player 9 Series for Windows Xp
Windows XP Video Decoder Checkup Utilit
Windows Messenger 4.7 for Windows XP
Microsoft Calculator Plus
Codec Installation Package for Windows Media Player 7.1 or later
Windows XP SP2 Deployment Tools for Advanced Users
Update for Background Intelligent Transfer Service
Windows XP SP2 Support Tools for Advanced Users
Photo Story (require validation)

http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/downloads/WhyValidate.aspx?FamilyID=b446ae53-3759-40cf-80d5-cde4bbe07999&displaylang=en

so you take a bizzar system like windows-update and make it longer and more confusing?  as it is you have an online installer that installs an installer that installs the update but sometimes needs to install a new version of the installer the install will work.  then you reboot and do the next step...


"in the future when validation may be required."
-- so will my relatives without internet access be able to update legally?

I'm agaisnt this on so many levels:
1.)  I hate the idea of "activation"
2.)  now vulrabilities on pirated systems will take down the network for everyone AND for a longer time.
3.)  MS doesn't trust its users?
4.)  it lays the foundation for more of the MS "you don't own your computer, you're just using it" DRM stuff.
5.)  software -- especially software i pay for -- should work for me, not against me.

thechris, just wait until 2008 when you won't be able to *boot* unless you've paid your monthly OS license fee...

I really do get the feeling that I no longer own XP but instead rent it ..

In other news, in Longhorn you will have to validate before being given access to notepad. If validation is not given copy and paste will also be disabled.

Blame the thieves.

Mav Phoenix wrote:

Blame the thieves.

you cant steal bits

information wants to be free

i agree this sucks

How nice of MS, well WMP8 isn't looking so bad right now.


I'm actually dualbooting Suse Linux/Xandros with XP/98 now for trial and it really isn't terrible at all, SUse is esp. good since I dl'ed it free, it's at least as good as WIndows 2000!  Best of all I paid 50$ for Xandros (better than Suse ), compared to well I don't even want to say how much for XP >

edit; oops, meant wmpxp

Activation sucks, but believe it or not, Microsoft's activation scheme is by far one of the most painless.  I've dealt with pleanty of programs that required a hardware key to work (dongle on the parallel port).  There are pleanty of programs that need a "license server" installed on your network to work.  There are others that use an "activation" system similar to Microsoft's, but they force you to reactivate for any hardware change, not just major ones.

Bottom line is, you do not own the software.  This is true for all software, even Linux.  You do not own Windows, even if you buy a copy.  You do not own the Linux kernel, even if you download the source code. 

Software is "owned" by its creator.  This is no different than buying a book.  You may have bought a copy of the book, but the words in the book aren't yours.  They belong to the author.  You can't legally start photocopying the book and passing out copies.  If you do that, you are stealing the work of the author.  You aren't stealing anything in they physcial sense, but you are depriving the author/publisher of the income from those copies you made.

You can get all high and mighty, and claim "you can't steal bits", but if you make an unauthorized copy of something, you are stealing it.  If it's not yours, and you take it without paying for it, you are stealing.

Like I said, Microsoft is one of the most mild software companies when it comes to licensing.  Many companies charge extra for a perpetual software license.

jamie wrote:

information wants to be free

That's easy to say, but...

How about your complete medical history, does that "want" to be free?  Would you really want anyone, anywhere to have access to it?

How about your credit card numbers, do they "want" to be free?

What about the launch codes to a nuclear submarine?  Blueprints for the F-22?

After all, these things are just information, so surely they "want" to be free.

"

II. INFORMATION IS A LIFE FORM

Information Wants to Be Free.

Stewart Brand is generally credited with this elegant statement of the obvious, which recognizes both the natural desire of secrets to be told and the fact that they might be capable of possessing something like a "desire" in the first place.

English biologist and philosopher Richard Dawkins proposed the idea of "memes," self-replicating patterns of information that propagate themselves across the ecologies of mind, a pattern of reproduction much like that of life forms.

I believe they are life forms in every respect but their freedom from the carbon atom. They self-reproduce, they interact with their surroundings and adapt to them, they mutate, they persist. They evolve to fill the empty niches of their local environments, which are, in this case the surrounding belief systems and cultures of their hosts, namely, us.

Indeed, sociobiologists like Dawkins make a plausible case that carbon-based life forms are information as well, that, as the chicken is an egg's way of making another egg, the entire biological spectacle is just the DNA molecule's means of copying out more information strings exactly like itself. "

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.03/economy.ideas_pr.html

Way to dodge the question.  Not to mention that the text you posted contains a few factually incorrect statements.

msemack wrote:

Way to dodge the question.  Not to mention that the text you posted contains a few factually incorrect statements.

i didnt dodge anything..  you brought up things that shouldnt be free - but i was refering to info inherently wanting to be free by design - hence that article link

SO, you DON'T think those things should be free?  (That was the question.)

no the question was you taking one sentence out of above post - that was replying to "blame the theives"

re: Blame the thieves.


"you cant steal bits  ( digital = invisible )

information wants to be free  ( by design )

i agree this sucks"

information wants to be free = you cant pour a glass of water into your pants pocket and expect to retrieve it later.. as the "pocket" is designed to hold things not fluid - so i was comparing info=free to digital / net =fundatmental principles that are there - whether used for good or bad

I asked if you thought certain items "wanted" to be free.  You responded by posting a link.  You did not answer what I asked (do you think those things want to be free).

Note, you still haven't answered it.

Also, I don't get how "you can't steal bits", relates to "digital = invisible"...

if you steal something - you take it away

if you copy something - ie bits - they remain

so how can you steal something that stays?

jamie wrote:

if you steal something - you take it away

if you copy something - ie bits - they remain

so how can you steal something that stays?

Suppose you wrote a book, and you depended on the income from that book to survive.  Now, I bought a copy of that book, and started making photocopies of that book, and passing it out to people.  Now, no one is buying your book, becuase they can get it from me.  You go hungry.

I'm "stealing" in the sense that I am taking your hard work, and using it without your permission.  You can also look at it as "stealing" in the sense that I am taking a source of income away from you.