[wdilfsm]

hello

I am thinking of changing to a mac and i was wondering if i could ask some questions as this is a knowledgeable forum with well informed people . I am used to pcs and know very little about macs, but with xp and privacy problems ( win activation, eula) i am looking into alternatives. What i would like to ask is does apple have the eula that is an outrage on a persons rights like xp? I have seen that os x includes oss, does this reduce the chance of a phone home link that may be there as in x p?


wdilfsm

[melman101]

I have never experienced phoning home from the mac unless you register your product with apple. There is no activation. OS X doesn't even have serial numbers like XP.

[Millennium]

The OS itself does not indulge in the more unethical forms of antipiracy schemes, such as activation. Indeed, there's no real antipiracy scheme on the OS at all, and the schemes on Apple's own apps do not phone home.

That said, if you are wary of the less-ethical schemes out there, there are certain things to avoid. Microsoft's apps do phone home, but this can be firewalled off and the apps will (as apps should) assume innocence in the face of failure to prove guilt. Be wary of apps which use eSellerate's registration engine, as many of these use an Activation-like scheme. Similarly, many of Ambrosia's shareware apps use an expiring-code system, requiring you to contact them every time you need a new code (more common than one might think).

The other app to be wary of is Roxio's Toast. Toast does not use any unethical schemes, but its EULA demands the right to auto-update. They have not issues any kind of automatic updates, and claim that they never will, but they haven't removed the clause from their EULA either.

[wdilfsm]

Thanks for the heads up on the software to avoid. I dont trust xp and am quite amazed that they are allowed to put activation and the eula like they have done. I am also not sure about whether or not xp has a opening to allow them access to modify your system if they think you are in breach of any of their stipulations. I dont know if o s x works in the smae way, but is the networking part of it os? And are there ways to monitor what is being connected and what is being transmitted? Does anyone have access to os x to allow them to check the code for openings as above?


wdilfsm

[melman101]

You can use a program called Little Snitch (do a google), and it lets you know whenever an app needs to connect to the internet

[Macola]

I was paranoid about XP's activation scheme as well, when it was first released, and stuck with Win98SE on my PC for a while. Unfortunately, activation has become a way of life with many software manufacturers. As mentioned above, some of them implement it in more annoying and draconian ways than others (one example on the Mac platform is Quark).

XP's activation scheme is not as bad as it could be. For example, at first it was supposed to require reactivation whenever you made a minor hardware change to your PC. I've made a bunch of major changes without any problems.

However, you will be much happier with OS X, for many other reasons

[mitchell_pgh]

Short answer: No, OS X doesn't have the same problems XP does

Long answer: No, but that doesn't mean that it could never happen.

[wdilfsm]

macola - activation not as bad as it could be ? All they have to do is stop giving out codes when they next release spyos 2 and whack, you gotta upgrade. Im sure that this behaviour is not out of the spectrum in which microsft play. Can you mention any reasons why i would be pleased with o s x?

mitchellpgh - How could the things that are plaguing xp happen on mac? can you elaborate a little?


wdilfsm

[Macola]

Originally posted by wdilfsm:
macola - activation not as bad as it could be ? All they have to do is stop giving out codes when they next release spyos 2 and whack, you gotta upgrade. Im sure that this behaviour is not out of the spectrum in which microsft play. Can you mention any reasons why i would be pleased with o s x?

Well, it's definitely not as bad as Quark was (where you have to call and reactivate whenever you make a hardware change). For me, XP is a necessary evil, since I train and support my clients on both platforms (I do most of my own work on Macs). And there are actually one or two things I like about XP.

Reasons to be pleased with OS X?

http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/
http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/ma...0/panther.html
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/003/p...sx-10.3-1.html

There are many more, as others here may attest to, but these are a few that I like.

[booboo]

Originally posted by Macola:
. . .
XP's activation scheme is not as bad as it could be. For example, at first it was supposed to require reactivation whenever you made a minor hardware change to your PC. I've made a bunch of major changes without any problems.

Now those sound like 'famous last words' . . .

You can change a few items before XP needs re-activation. I bet the next thing you change . . .

[Macola]

Originally posted by booboo:
Now those sound like 'famous last words' . . .

You can change a few items before XP needs re-activation. I bet the next thing you change . . .

Yeah, I've been waiting

[istallion]

So do people actually think microsoft can at some point make more money selling personal information than maintaining their software empire. Once companies learn they are compelled to release whatever information is harvested, everybody will abandon windows.

[JKT]

Originally posted by wdilfsm:
mitchellpgh - How could the things that are plaguing xp happen on mac? can you elaborate a little?

Because Apple is a company and their prime function is to make a profit for their shareholders. If they thought a Microsoft-style product activation system was going to be good for their profits, there would be nothing to stop them from introducing it. However, it is highly unlikely that Apple will go this route as there simply is no need for them to do so. The reason is that they primarily make their money on their hardware sales and because MacOS X can only run on Apple-built Mac hardware. Any loss they make due to piracy of the OS isn't significant to their bottom line. If they were to try and introduce product activation at this point in time, there would be a huge outcry from their extremely vocal user base which would be a PR nightmare for a company with such a small percentage market. That would be very bad for their profits...

[itai195]

Originally posted by istallion:
So do people actually think microsoft can at some point make more money selling personal information than maintaining their software empire. Once companies learn they are compelled to release whatever information is harvested, everybody will abandon windows.

I'm not sure any information is required (or harvested) other than your PC configuration. I'd be more worried about Google in this respect.

I haven't personally had any trouble with XP's authentication scheme, and Microsoft supports their operating systems for 10 years so one needn't worry about being forced to upgrade in order to re-activate. That said, software activation is a draconian measure I'd hoped we would never have to see.

[EnVoy]

I just got a XPPro PC for my wife, she needs it for work. Can someone point me to more info on all these privacy concerns? Thanks...

[Brass]

Originally posted by itai195:
Microsoft supports their operating systems for 10 years

Wow, they still support Windows 3.1? That's painful!

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally posted by EnVoy:
I just got a XPPro PC for my wife, she needs it for work. Can someone point me to more info on all these privacy concerns? Thanks...

*crickets chirp*

(it's all FUD)

[wdilfsm]

itai95 - The eula says that they can get technical information from your computer in any manner. Does not sound like they want to be very specific mm.?

envoy - Take a look at the eula with xp pro. you give them the right to download updates without your actual consent and to collecct technical information and allow other companies to see.

splifdady - Fud? no, the eula is very clear. They have the balls on your computer.


wdilfsm

[Spliffdaddy]

Please read the eula for WinXP.

You're spreading FUD.

Code:
Consent to Use of Data.  You agree that Microsoft and its
      affiliates may collect and use technical information
      gathered in any manner as part of the product support
      services provided to you, if any, related to the Product.
      Microsoft may use this information solely to improve
      our products or to provide customized services or
      technologies to you.  Microsoft may disclose this
      information to others, but not in a form that personally
      identifies you.

[itai195]

Originally posted by Brass:
Wow, they still support Windows 3.1? That's painful!

LOL. No I think it started with Win2k. I'm not sure how much longer Win 98 is going to be supported, it may still be under the old 7 year plan.

[Spliffdaddy]

I believe Microsoft has already announced that there will be no further updates to Win98. Unsure if this means it is no longer supported...but it sounds like it.

[wdilfsm]

spliffdaddy - I will start and say that xp does have some good features, and is not a bad piece of software. Howerver the company microsoft cannot be trusted. This is how i see it. It is not fud. Th e part of the eula that you have showed there says technical data. Do you know what that means? does it actually say where the meaning is ? Who are the other parties? It may not be personally tagged but they may take my name off and use the rest. The part about drm secure content says that they can download updates without you permitting this, and xp can be under the list of secure content. I do not want to give any company that right on my computer. If you do that is fine, but dont call it fud.

I have decided to change to another type of os, and am loking at apple but as they are also a company they can be grouped with microsoft as being bad monpolies. I am trying to find out what i can and make a decision for what i want. xp looks to be the start of a slippery slope.


wdilfsm

[itai195]

Originally posted by wdilfsm:
The part about drm secure content says that they can download updates without you permitting this, and xp can be under the list of secure content. I do not want to give any company that right on my computer. If you do that is fine, but dont call it fud.

2.1 Digital Rights Management. Content providers are using the digital rights management technology contained in this Software ("DRM") to protect the integrity of their content ( "Secure Content") so that their intellectual property, including copyright, in such content is not misappropriated. Portions of this Software and third party applications such as media players use DRM to play Secure Content ("DRM Software"). If the DRM Software's security has been compromised, owners of Secure Content ("Secure Content Owners") may request that Microsoft revoke the DRM Software's right to copy, display and/or play Secure Content. Revocation does not alter the DRM Software's ability to play unprotected content. A list of revoked DRM Software is sent to your computer whenever you download a license for Secure Content from the Internet. You therefore agree that Microsoft may, in conjunction with such license, also download revocation lists onto your computer on behalf of Secure Content Owners. Microsoft will not retrieve any personally identifiable information, or any other information, from your computer by downloading such revocation lists. Secure Content Owners may also require you to upgrade some of the DRM components in this Software ("DRM Upgrades") before accessing their content. When you attempt to play such content, Microsoft DRM Software will notify you that a DRM Upgrade is required and then ask for your consent before the DRM Upgrade is downloaded. Third party DRM Software may do the same. If you decline the upgrade, you will not be able to access content that requires the DRM Upgrade; however, you will still be able to access unprotected content and Secure Content that does not require the upgrade.

Sounds like you can opt out of using Microsoft's DRM content altogether and have no trouble.

[wdilfsm]

xp is classed as secure content. So they can install new releases, and i can choose to not let them do that. If i do, how can i keep secure? They have access, it is pretty easy to see. They have activation, they have the s co, they have the data collection. How much more do you need to see that they are making it so you are forced to do as they want. I have looked at it from both ways, and there is no way around what they do. You seem to just be in favour of xp. Do you have some ulterior motive that you want to tell me about?


wdilfsm

[itai195]

Originally posted by wdilfsm:
xp is classed as secure content. So they can install new releases, and i can choose to not let them do that. If i do, how can i keep secure? They have access, it is pretty easy to see. They have activation, they have the s co, they have the data collection. How much more do you need to see that they are making it so you are forced to do as they want. I have looked at it from both ways, and there is no way around what they do. You seem to just be in favour of xp. Do you have some ulterior motive that you want to tell me about?

I must just not be seeing what you're seeing. Portions of XP (eg Windows Media Player) are classed as secure content, not the entire system. Your POV is striking me as paranoia, just as it appears my POV strikes you as favoritism. So be it. I don't know that you'll be much happier with a Mac and to some extent any use of the Internet is going to cause you to give up some measure of privacy. Have you considered Linux?

[wdilfsm]

I dont know why you cant see what i am seeing, because it is there in the eula. I do not think that i am paranoid, i just see what they are doing and do not want to be tied to something that seems to be going down a very narrow drm palladium type street. I dont know if i will be happy with a mac either, but i would like some opinions on how to keep it scure and track what is being sent out. Also what bits of it are open source. I have looked at linux and i think that it is not streamlined for main usage. The support for hardware is not as good, and i really dont know much about the system in general. I have not ruled it out completely, and i would be intersted to hear any opinion on that as a choice for desktop work. I know that using the internet will give some privacy, but i dont think that it is the same as deciding on os.


wdilfsm

[klinux]

Originally posted by Millennium:
The OS itself does not indulge in the more unethical forms of antipiracy schemes, such as activation.

How is Windows XP's activation scheme unethical? Annoying? Yes. Unethical? Hardly.

Originally posted by booboo:
You can change a few items before XP needs re-activation. I bet the next thing you change . .

So you know this for a fact because you experienced it yourself or are you spreading your fantasy? Like Macola, I tinker with PC hardware a lot and never had to reactivate. No need to spread myth here.

Originally posted by wdilfsm:
So they can install new releases, and i can choose to not let them do that. If i do, how can i keep secure? They have access, it is pretty easy to see. They have activation, they have the s co, they have the data collection. How much more do you need to see that they are making it so you are forced to do as they want. I have looked at it from both ways, and there is no way around what they do.

Uh, talk about paranoia here. I am not defending XP here you can secure an XP system without downloading ANY of Windows' updates and it is all free. Pass it on to all your Windows using friends (only after you had try your best to convince to switch to OS X first, of course).

Essential
1. Zonealarm - controls any inbound and outbound traffic
2. Grisoft AVG - free antivirus
3. Friefox - free IE alternative

Secondary
4. eMail - use webmail or Thunderbird, Eudora, etc. Anything but OE or Outlook
5. Multimedia playback - VLC for video and iTunes for audio!
6. Office applications - OpenOffice

With these software you can pretty much eliminated 99.9% of security problems without needing to do an update, should you feel the need to be so paranoid.

Originally posted by wdilfsm:
You seem to just be in favour of xp. Do you have some ulterior motive that you want to tell me about?

Yikes, you caught me! How did you find out that I have an ulterior motive?? Who told?

I will come clean here.

Microsoft pays me $100k a year to troll the Mac boards and covertly gather all Macnn user names and IP. I then type this up in Word and send this information to Steve (Ballmer, not Job) and Bill via Hotmail. This activates a top-secret covert Windows team who will scan all ports on your IP and force you to update your Windows XP to, gasp, Service Pack 2!

Only after we forced the update then will we deactive your PC because we have, as you found out, the "access" and the "secure content" on your PC. We will then sell your personal information (even though we do not collect any during the acitvation process but we got it somehow because we are evil and have access to the CIA database).

We are evil and we know it. You think it is a coincidence that Jobs got treated for cancer AND the iMac stock ran out and got delayed?

Yes, Windows XP is behind all of this. Stop me if you can but you know you can't.

Mu ha ha ha ha ha....

[itai195]

I laughed

[Brass]

Originally posted by itai195:
LOL. No I think it started with Win2k. I'm not sure how much longer Win 98 is going to be supported, it may still be under the old 7 year plan.

I see... so they've never yet supported anything for 10 years, but say they will for Win2K and up. Fair enough - we can always trust MS.