techdirt.com— "While WGA doesn't seem nearly as bad as the Sony rootkit, Microsoft's slow response to complaints could create backlash against the company in the same way that Sony BMG faced a ton of backlash."
Jun 30, 2006View in Crawl 4
Meanwhile people who don't subscribe to Digg, Slashdot, or other techy news, probably don't know about this issue, and so won't uninstall it, even though it effects Windows users indiscriminantly.
"With MS, you know exactly what you are installing and what it's used for."You may indeed know about it when it installs, but guess what? So do all the hackers. Guess what happens when MSs mandatory version with the kill switch gets rolled out this fall? Those hackers are going to be falling all over themselves trying to be the *ONE* to crack it, no not to break it, but to acess it and shut down all the legit users systems. Guess who will be the ones that still have functioning systems? The pirates and privacy advocates (and *nix users) that wouldn't stand for this in the first place.
I have to say I am really not surprised about the WGA. I have detested MS since they fooled me into buying Windows ME. Shame on them for that. Shame on me if I expect anything different for the next go around. MS has made me a recent linux newbie. Ubuntu rules!
I don't think that the intent of the title was to say that it is a rootkit (and reading the text of the article they don't seem to say it is), merely asking a question of whether it will turn out legally for Microsoft as the rootkit thing was for Sony; it seems similar to an expression I have heard some people say, along the lines of "will something be someone's Waterloo".The title isn't very clear though, so I suppose the intented meaning could be either.
@darkechoIf you have automatic updates enabled it is deceptively installed.If your like most techs, you review the update via windows update, articles in the knowledge base, check news.microsoft.com for posted problems, make decisions as to whether you'd like to install it, wait for an update or use a work around you've already implemented globally such as turning off active scripting. Perhaps, like myself, you've click the box to hide this update only to have it reappear the very next month. Like that spyware/rootkit crap Microsoft now sells after beta testing it on millions of unsuspecting people with auto-update turned on. If Microsoft turns off my legal copy of XP, refuses to provide me with critical updates, in the fall because I refuse to install this s**te I'll format my windows partitions.
I am confused (about a great many things). I have read that "...if WGA is not installed, you will be shut down in 30 days." How are they to know whether or not it is installed if something else is not already checking and reporting back that it is not installed? If you installed a non-Activating flavor of XP and are applying updates outside of Windows Update, you should still be insulated from any (official and legal) knoledge of wheather or not you are running WGA.
jameshalesJun 30, 2006
Meanwhile people who don't subscribe to Digg, Slashdot, or other techy news, probably don't know about this issue, and so won't uninstall it, even though it effects Windows users indiscriminantly.
criterionJun 30, 2006
"With MS, you know exactly what you are installing and what it's used for."You may indeed know about it when it installs, but guess what? So do all the hackers. Guess what happens when MSs mandatory version with the kill switch gets rolled out this fall? Those hackers are going to be falling all over themselves trying to be the *ONE* to crack it, no not to break it, but to acess it and shut down all the legit users systems. Guess who will be the ones that still have functioning systems? The pirates and privacy advocates (and *nix users) that wouldn't stand for this in the first place.
greyghost487Jun 30, 2006
WGA isnt a rootkit. No digg. as a matter of fact bury story.
brianinabqJun 30, 2006
I have to say I am really not surprised about the WGA. I have detested MS since they fooled me into buying Windows ME. Shame on them for that. Shame on me if I expect anything different for the next go around. MS has made me a recent linux newbie. Ubuntu rules!
asmodeusJun 30, 2006
I don't think that the intent of the title was to say that it is a rootkit (and reading the text of the article they don't seem to say it is), merely asking a question of whether it will turn out legally for Microsoft as the rootkit thing was for Sony; it seems similar to an expression I have heard some people say, along the lines of "will something be someone's Waterloo".The title isn't very clear though, so I suppose the intented meaning could be either.
muddleJun 30, 2006
@darkechoIf you have automatic updates enabled it is deceptively installed.If your like most techs, you review the update via windows update, articles in the knowledge base, check news.microsoft.com for posted problems, make decisions as to whether you'd like to install it, wait for an update or use a work around you've already implemented globally such as turning off active scripting. Perhaps, like myself, you've click the box to hide this update only to have it reappear the very next month. Like that spyware/rootkit crap Microsoft now sells after beta testing it on millions of unsuspecting people with auto-update turned on. If Microsoft turns off my legal copy of XP, refuses to provide me with critical updates, in the fall because I refuse to install this s**te I'll format my windows partitions.
scottgrabsJul 1, 2006
I am confused (about a great many things). I have read that "...if WGA is not installed, you will be shut down in 30 days." How are they to know whether or not it is installed if something else is not already checking and reporting back that it is not installed? If you installed a non-Activating flavor of XP and are applying updates outside of Windows Update, you should still be insulated from any (official and legal) knoledge of wheather or not you are running WGA.