RE: Windows XP

More Comments inline...

>>>> We are getting into some VB development where (apparently) platform
>matters.
No question with VB it would matter... won't you need to participate in the
.NET initiative to use VB7.0?

>>>> The last statement is false. IIRC, five devices within a
>180 day period.
>You have to call up and have them reset your "ID number". The
>NIC is the
>most important one to NOT change in this process. I have yet
>to test this,
>but several of the computer magazines have tested this, and I
>guess have not
>have too many problems with it, even from the geek stand point.
OK, that's not quite as bad as I'd thought, but I still don't like the idea
that MS gets to track my hardware configuration.  I paid them for the
software, its none of their business if I decide to upgrade my PC.  This
could be especially bad for the hobbyist if he is changing a lot of
components.

>>>> This scenario is illegal anyway. The license states that
>it can ONLY be
>installed on one machine. However if little Jimmy knows a lot about the
>internet, he might find one of the hundreds of hacks to
>disable the hardware
>tracking. ;-)
Speeding, tax evasion, and under-age drinking are illegal as well, but the
reality is that most people participate in one or more of these activities
at one time or another, some on a frequent basis.  The social mores apply
acceptable parameters above and beyond what the law states.  Speeders don't
get pulled over for doing 56 in a 55.  Saving $100 on your taxes by claiming
a questionable exemption is normal.  A 20-year old soldier in a war zone
having a beer probably wouldn't be harassed.  Sex outside of wedlock is so
commonplace that some people laugh at the 'barbaric' notion that they could
get in trouble for it but not too long ago it was a crime in most states.

So on to the intellectual debate!  License Schmicense! :-)  I paid for the
software *for home use*, I should be able to install it to my heart's
content *at home*.  You want to go after businesses for not abiding
licensing contracts, go for it... but leave the home consumer out of it.  A
business is a public concern and is therefore freely open to such scrutiny,
but stay out of my house without a warrant.


>>>> So don't use it. They nag you for a while to register, but
>then they
>stop. You don't HAVE to use it, that is just what they WANT
>you to do.
That's today's Passport, but the MS vision via .NET is much different.
There are already web services that you MUST use Passport to access.  If MS
is able to get as many web developers using .NET as there are developing in
VB for Windows, then eventually MS will have a strangle hold on a large
portion of the web.

>If
>they make you, that would be monopolistic action, and would be
>in even more
>legal trouble.
Right, cause that's been a real problem for them so far... (sorry for the
dripping sarcasm)

>Or if you want to use it, don't give them
>information that
>you don't want tracked. There is no forcing, just very highly
>suggested.
I usually love this argument, especially for defending 1st amendment issues,
but I'm afraid that here it doesn't really work.  The Internet is becoming
more and more like a utility service.  Eventually people will simply need
access.  If the services they need access to require Passport, not using it
isn't an option.  And lying to MS will become more and more problematic as
they build their database of the human existence.

This could get a lot hairier, but I hope not too much.  My basic stance is
that I'm going to do what I can NOW to prevent that domination later, and
for me that means no XP.


Joel