WGA Hacked?! Get a Fair and Balance Perspective!

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

It is for nothing but MS flexing its muscles over its paying customers.
WGA is separate from WPA. The former know as Validation, and the latter
as Activation. And they ar both separate and distinct from Registration.
And MS expects all its paying customers to learn the difference, learn the
differing rules of each, and to fetch when MS tell them to. It's getting
to the point where the OS is technically easier to use, than knowing and
complying with all of MS rules & policies surrounding its copy-protection
schemes!

--

Kurt the customers don't need to know or understand anything in particular,
activation can be one click and once they have the control installed then
WGA will be invisible to them too.
Only those not using genuine licensed product will have an issue.

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

 

[kurttrail]

The authentication check takes almost no time at all once you have the
Active X control installed.

LOL! And then it rechecks itself before every download request.

The added time is noticable even with a broadband connection.

see
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/update/genuine.mspx
and
http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/downloads/FAQ.aspx?displaylang=en
for more information on WGA

WGA allows us to provide downloads and added value components etc to
those who use genuine Windows products.

ROFL! Pure Marketing BS!

Ya'll can provide downloads and added value components without WGA if
you want. In fact, you have in the past!

Anyone not using a properly purchased and licensed copy of Windows.

LOL! Cool! Let's give all the pirated OS over to the spammers and
organized criminals as Zombies!

Though in pratice, WGA will only confuse tha average consumer,
especially all those that have had the copy-protection of WPA hidden
from them by their OEMs!

No that was just activation - WGA is something else see the link I
provided above.

See. Registration, Activation, Validation! Oh My! What's next? Blood
testing?!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

Kurt the customers don't need to know or understand anything in
particular, activation can be one click and once they have the
control installed then WGA will be invisible to them too.

LOL! I forgot, ya'll really hope people don't understand it all, so
that when they have problems, they'll think they have to buy another
copy of the same software that they really don't need.

PA is almost invisible from a majority of users because the major OEMs
hide it from them, but WGA will NOT be hidden from END USER that already
have WinXP installed computers

Only those not using genuine licensed product will have an issue.

Total effin' lie! Legitimate users have already had and posted
differing problems with WGA in its voluntary form! I can't wait until
it is mandatory!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Alias]

"kurttrail" wrote

Total effin' lie! Legitimate users have already had and posted differing
problems with WGA in its voluntary form! I can't wait until it is
mandatory!

I can wait. The longer, the better. I have a legit Win XP but I will not
take the test that assumes I am guilty until proven innocent as my XP may,
even though I have a legit Win XP, fail the test and then what?

On the other hand, I know someone that has a pirated XP and it passed the
WGA test ... go figure.

Alias

 

[Steve N.]

Kurt the customers don't need to know or understand anything in particular,
activation can be one click and once they have the control installed then
WGA will be invisible to them too.
Only those not using genuine licensed product will have an issue.

Mike, of course MS has the right to ensure that installations of their
software are legitimate before providing support (product updates are
support), and that justifies the use of PA and WGA, however there are
many documented cases where these mechanisms have failed to identify
legitimately licensed installations, leaving legitimately licensed users
in a lurch.

What, if anything, is MS doing to correct these flaws? So far all I've
seen MS do is make it more difficult, particularly with regard to OEM
installations and "unauthorized" product keys. It no longer only applies
to major OEMs, either. Every OEM pre-install I have seen lately that is
not pre-activated encounters this.

And while we're at it, please print the keys on the COA in a font large
enough to read without a magnifying glass and quit using character
strings like "8B3B8".

Steve

 

[David Candy]

They don't care about piracy. It is not about valid licensing. It is about
blurring the line between MS and you so you need to pay MS regular money
(which is what they care about - the regular part). This is a long term goal
of MS (well over 10 years) and most of their efforts have failed. Some are
Application servers (they still perserve I saw a trial program using this
technology), MSN (was not the internet at first), yearly rental of Office in
Australia (cancelled last year), Windows update, PA, and WPA. They seem to
have taken a long term approach of training consumers (Symantec watched MS
and did do it - one has to pay symantec regular sums of money to use their
product, but the products are different and MS don't naturally lead to
regular payments).

Think of the phone system. If you buy a phone it's absolutely useless
without wires and exchanges. MS wants your computer to be useless without
MSNs or whatever ends up working.

MS regards OEM software as leased software (last time I saw figures OEM
sales were over 90% of of total sales). They can't get consumers to
regularly pay them so they tie it to the life of the hardware (Source MS OEM
Product Manager for OSs in Australia at the Christmas do in 2003 - they
bribed people to come with free Office XP Professional, I took me mum so she
could get a $1200 product for free as well - she found OEM ranting boring).

MS intends to own you. Mike Brannigan is actually misleading people here,
maybe inadvertantly as he is probably quite junior (I doubt he is a
strategic executive).

 

[kurttrail]

"kurttrail" wrote


I can wait. The longer, the better. I have a legit Win XP but I will
not take the test that assumes I am guilty until proven innocent as
my XP may, even though I have a legit Win XP, fail the test and then
what?
On the other hand, I know someone that has a pirated XP and it passed
the WGA test ... go figure.

Alias

Yes. I can wait too, for my fellow consumers, but I will really enjoy
watching MS get reamed over this. Most people had PA hidden from them
by their OEMs, PA affected home computer builders the most, and we
aren't all that common.

WGA will be most consumers first look at copy-protection in the light of
day, and are gonna be confused as hell over it. MS is just asking for a
lot of customer discontent over this.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[kurttrail]

They don't care about piracy. It is not about valid licensing. It is
about blurring the line between MS and you so you need to pay MS
regular money (which is what they care about - the regular part).
This is a long term goal of MS (well over 10 years) and most of their
efforts have failed. Some are Application servers (they still
perserve I saw a trial program using this technology), MSN (was not
the internet at first), yearly rental of Office in Australia
(cancelled last year), Windows update, PA, and WPA. They seem to have
taken a long term approach of training consumers (Symantec watched MS
and did do it - one has to pay symantec regular sums of money to use
their product, but the products are different and MS don't naturally
lead to regular payments).

Think of the phone system. If you buy a phone it's absolutely useless
without wires and exchanges. MS wants your computer to be useless
without MSNs or whatever ends up working.

MS regards OEM software as leased software (last time I saw figures
OEM sales were over 90% of of total sales). They can't get consumers
to regularly pay them so they tie it to the life of the hardware
(Source MS OEM Product Manager for OSs in Australia at the Christmas
do in 2003 - they bribed people to come with free Office XP
Professional, I took me mum so she could get a $1200 product for free
as well - she found OEM ranting boring).

MS intends to own you. Mike Brannigan is actually misleading people
here, maybe inadvertantly as he is probably quite junior (I doubt he
is a strategic executive).

Very insightful, David. I think you've hit the nail squarely on its
head.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"

 

[Alias]

Yes. I can wait too, for my fellow consumers, but I will really enjoy
watching MS get reamed over this. Most people had PA hidden from them by
their OEMs, PA affected home computer builders the most, and we aren't all
that common.

WGA will be most consumers first look at copy-protection in the light of
day, and are gonna be confused as hell over it. MS is just asking for a
lot of customer discontent over this.

Worse PR MS has ever done.

Alias

 

[David Candy]

It is anti human nature in some ways. People seem to accept it for phones
(yet only banks are hated more than phone companies).

Some psychological theories say that we have many concepts of self. Our
soul/mind, our bodies, our clothes, and our other possesions. Obviously
these are social constructs as well as biologically based. And we think of
our bodies as more important than our clothes but our clothes become part of
our concept of self.

I have never bought stolen goods. The reason for this is that such goods
aren't mine and therefore I don't want them because I can't integrate them
into my concept of self (it's somebody else).

People form strong bonds with computers. I loathe mine and hate it and MS
with passion (MS for being incompentent in OS design - at least for
Windows - CE is well designed).

The fiction that we don't buy the OS offends the sense of self. MS is
raping/assaulting us, though at a lower level of self than our bodies. This
is why police work is mostly about stealing - people consider it an assault
on a concept of self (a double whammy if it's robbery). It's why people move
after being burgled and why they say similar things, at a lower intensity,
to rape victims.

This is why EULAs generate such opposition. We buy something in a shop (I
last bought software in 1994 - MS has given me all my software for free
since then) and start to make it part of us to find out it's not. This is an
attack by MS on our very concepts of self.

But note these are social constructs. A Roman wouldn't have had problems
with it as Romans only owned their souls - there bodies weren't theirs which
is why you could kill a slave but had to honour their God - Human
relationship (I prefer them to own my soul, as I don't believe in that, and
respect my body). Or so my lecturer said in 1994 in B. App Sc (Health
Education) at Canberra University.

 

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

Yes. I can wait too, for my fellow consumers, but I will really enjoy
watching MS get reamed over this. Most people had PA hidden from them by
their OEMs, PA affected home computer builders the most, and we aren't all
that common.

WGA will be most consumers first look at copy-protection in the light of
day, and are gonna be confused as hell over it. MS is just asking for a
lot of customer discontent over this.

Kurt they'll click one button - once; and that's all they ever will see of
WGA - hardly a huge issue or source of confusion.

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

 

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

Mike, of course MS has the right to ensure that installations of their
software are legitimate before providing support (product updates are
support), and that justifies the use of PA and WGA, however there are many
documented cases where these mechanisms have failed to identify
legitimately licensed installations, leaving legitimately licensed users
in a lurch.

What, if anything, is MS doing to correct these flaws? So far all I've
seen MS do is make it more difficult, particularly with regard to OEM
installations and "unauthorized" product keys. It no longer only applies
to major OEMs, either. Every OEM pre-install I have seen lately that is
not pre-activated encounters this.

And that is why we are trialling this now and if you have an issue we would
encourage you to call in and provide us with the feedback and allow us to
work though the issue with you too ensure these cases are minimised when we
"go live".
from http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/downloads/FAQ.aspx?displaylang=en

Q.
What should I do if I have a problem with the validation process?


A.
If you cannot resolve your problem using this FAQ, then please use the
Contact Us link at the bottom of Microsoft Download Center pages to request
additional assistance.

And while we're at it, please print the keys on the COA in a font large
enough to read without a magnifying glass and quit using character strings
like "8B3B8".

The font used should allow you to differentiate those particular characters.
However please provide this feedback via
http://support.microsoft.com/common/survey.aspx?scid=sw;en;1208&showpage=1&ws=search

Steve

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

 

[Alias]

Kurt they'll click one button - once; and that's all they ever will see
of WGA - hardly a huge issue or source of confusion.

--

Regards,

Mike

If one has paid for one's licence to use XP, there shouldn't be any need for
*any* buttons. You are assuming that the WGA will work on all legit
installations, an assumption that isn't true as is evidenced by the many
"false pirates" PA has found. It's the worse PR move MS has ever made:
assuming their paying customers are thieves until the paying customer proves
otherwise. Can't you see how that will make the paying customer feel a tad
uncomfortable?

Alias

 

[Steve N.]

They don't care about piracy. It is not about valid licensing. It is about
blurring the line between MS and you so you need to pay MS regular money
(which is what they care about - the regular part). This is a long term goal
of MS (well over 10 years) and most of their efforts have failed. Some are
Application servers (they still perserve I saw a trial program using this
technology), MSN (was not the internet at first), yearly rental of Office in
Australia (cancelled last year), Windows update, PA, and WPA. They seem to
have taken a long term approach of training consumers (Symantec watched MS
and did do it - one has to pay symantec regular sums of money to use their
product, but the products are different and MS don't naturally lead to
regular payments).

Think of the phone system. If you buy a phone it's absolutely useless
without wires and exchanges. MS wants your computer to be useless without
MSNs or whatever ends up working.

MS regards OEM software as leased software (last time I saw figures OEM
sales were over 90% of of total sales). They can't get consumers to
regularly pay them so they tie it to the life of the hardware (Source MS OEM
Product Manager for OSs in Australia at the Christmas do in 2003 - they
bribed people to come with free Office XP Professional, I took me mum so she
could get a $1200 product for free as well - she found OEM ranting boring).

MS intends to own you. Mike Brannigan is actually misleading people here,
maybe inadvertantly as he is probably quite junior (I doubt he is a
strategic executive).

LOL! The first time I read that last line I thought it said he was
"probably a quiet janitor"!

Good points and you may well be right, after all MS is in business to
make money and make it quickly. Making a product that doesn't require
support and establishing harmoniuos relationsdhip with customers is
counter-productive to that end in the short term.

I await Mike's repsonse to my specific question and suggestions.

Steve

Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:

Winux P wrote:


Compulsory WGA??? What! Who are these people? For what purpose would
this be for? Speed up downloads? Wouldn't it take download time + get
an authenicated check? Rather than just download time?

Who and what would WGA stop from downloading\updating anyway? My
windows is already WGA'd, I thought this happened when MS activated
it.

It is for nothing but MS flexing its muscles over its paying customers.
WGA is separate from WPA. The former know as Validation, and the latter
as Activation. And they ar both separate and distinct from

Registration.

And MS expects all its paying customers to learn the difference, learn

the

differing rules of each, and to fetch when MS tell them to. It's

getting

to the point where the OS is technically easier to use, than knowing and
complying with all of MS rules & policies surrounding its

copy-protection

schemes!

particular,

activation can be one click and once they have the control installed

then

WGA will be invisible to them too.
Only those not using genuine licensed product will have an issue.

Mike, of course MS has the right to ensure that installations of their
software are legitimate before providing support (product updates are
support), and that justifies the use of PA and WGA, however there are
many documented cases where these mechanisms have failed to identify
legitimately licensed installations, leaving legitimately licensed users
in a lurch.

What, if anything, is MS doing to correct these flaws? So far all I've
seen MS do is make it more difficult, particularly with regard to OEM
installations and "unauthorized" product keys. It no longer only applies
to major OEMs, either. Every OEM pre-install I have seen lately that is
not pre-activated encounters this.

And while we're at it, please print the keys on the COA in a font large
enough to read without a magnifying glass and quit using character
strings like "8B3B8".

Steve

 

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

They don't care about piracy. It is not about valid licensing. It is about
blurring the line between MS and you so you need to pay MS regular money
(which is what they care about - the regular part). This is a long term
goal
of MS (well over 10 years) and most of their efforts have failed. Some are
Application servers (they still perserve I saw a trial program using this
technology), MSN (was not the internet at first), yearly rental of Office
in
Australia (cancelled last year), Windows update, PA, and WPA. They seem to
have taken a long term approach of training consumers (Symantec watched MS
and did do it - one has to pay symantec regular sums of money to use their
product, but the products are different and MS don't naturally lead to
regular payments).

Think of the phone system. If you buy a phone it's absolutely useless
without wires and exchanges. MS wants your computer to be useless without
MSNs or whatever ends up working.

MS regards OEM software as leased software (last time I saw figures OEM
sales were over 90% of of total sales). They can't get consumers to
regularly pay them so they tie it to the life of the hardware (Source MS
OEM
Product Manager for OSs in Australia at the Christmas do in 2003 - they
bribed people to come with free Office XP Professional, I took me mum so
she
could get a $1200 product for free as well - she found OEM ranting
boring).

MS intends to own you. Mike Brannigan is actually misleading people here,
maybe inadvertantly as he is probably quite junior (I doubt he is a
strategic executive).

Exactly how am I misleading anyone here ?
Kurt and you are the ones spreading FUD here.

As regards your last comment about me, if you bothered to do any research
you could have found my biog on any number of online sessions at
Microsoft.com etc where you would see that I'm an Enterprise Strategy and
Senior Consultant, in the Windows Platform Infrastructure Delivery Group.

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

 

[David Candy]

You are under 40 or you wouldn't be making stupid statements about fonts.
Don't worry when I was under 40 I couldn't understand why noone liked my
lovely 8 point writing and reluctantly went to 10 pts. I wouldn't be able to
read 10pt today either.

 

[Mike Brannigan [MSFT]]

If one has paid for one's licence to use XP, there shouldn't be any need
for *any* buttons. You are assuming that the WGA will work on all legit
installations, an assumption that isn't true as is evidenced by the many
"false pirates" PA has found. It's the worse PR move MS has ever made:
assuming their paying customers are thieves until the paying customer
proves otherwise. Can't you see how that will make the paying customer
feel a tad uncomfortable?

When you visit the download site we have no way of knowing if you are a
legitimate customer or not. There is no assumption here - you are actually
an unknown state. WGA resolves that state then and for future reference to
ensure that you as a paying licensed customer are able to access the
appropriate content while those using stolen/pirated software can not.
You go to the site first time - click the button and your done. Hardly a
cause for any uncomfortable feeling for the paying customer.

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

 

[Alias]

When you visit the download site we have no way of knowing if you are a
legitimate customer or not. There is no assumption here - you are
actually an unknown state. WGA resolves that state then and for future
reference to ensure that you as a paying licensed customer are able to
access the appropriate content while those using stolen/pirated software
can not.
You go to the site first time - click the button and your done. Hardly a
cause for any uncomfortable feeling for the paying customer.

If, of course, WGA works like it should. PA has proven that that may very
well not be the case. Then the paying customer has to call India and, maybe,
get the validation. That is a PITA, no matter how you want to defend it.

The pirates have circumvented needing to do this so they aren't affected.
Only the paying customers are and that is not right.

Just curious, though, I live in Spain but have an English (USA) XP Pro. If I
ever have to call MS, would I call Spain or India or Latin America?

Alias

 

[David Candy]

FUD is a microsoft tactic learnt from IBM. What untrue thing have I said. I
used to read computer magazines incl trade mags. Everything I've said comes
from MS. This is MS's explicit goal.

Well I can't as MS uses it own software which means I often can't view
anything on your site. I use google's cache of MS site if I have to view
something.

Perhaps you could deal with a 2 year old theft and fraud attempt by MS. I
bought a Microsoft keyboard. It's shit. It's highly directional and really
often takes me 2 or 3 attemps to type anything.
Further it wasn't a IBM PC Compatable keyboard. The keys are in the wrong
place. It's a stupid colour (so one can barely read the keys).

This is plain fraud.

They don't care about piracy. It is not about valid licensing. It is about
blurring the line between MS and you so you need to pay MS regular money
(which is what they care about - the regular part). This is a long term
goal
of MS (well over 10 years) and most of their efforts have failed. Some are
Application servers (they still perserve I saw a trial program using this
technology), MSN (was not the internet at first), yearly rental of Office
in
Australia (cancelled last year), Windows update, PA, and WPA. They seem to
have taken a long term approach of training consumers (Symantec watched MS
and did do it - one has to pay symantec regular sums of money to use their
product, but the products are different and MS don't naturally lead to
regular payments).

Think of the phone system. If you buy a phone it's absolutely useless
without wires and exchanges. MS wants your computer to be useless without
MSNs or whatever ends up working.

MS regards OEM software as leased software (last time I saw figures OEM
sales were over 90% of of total sales). They can't get consumers to
regularly pay them so they tie it to the life of the hardware (Source MS
OEM
Product Manager for OSs in Australia at the Christmas do in 2003 - they
bribed people to come with free Office XP Professional, I took me mum so
she
could get a $1200 product for free as well - she found OEM ranting
boring).

MS intends to own you. Mike Brannigan is actually misleading people here,
maybe inadvertantly as he is probably quite junior (I doubt he is a
strategic executive).

Exactly how am I misleading anyone here ?
Kurt and you are the ones spreading FUD here.

As regards your last comment about me, if you bothered to do any research
you could have found my biog on any number of online sessions at
Microsoft.com etc where you would see that I'm an Enterprise Strategy and
Senior Consultant, in the Windows Platform Infrastructure Delivery Group.

--

Regards,

Mike
--
Mike Brannigan [Microsoft]

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
rights

Please note I cannot respond to e-mailed questions, please use these
newsgroups

They don't care about piracy. It is not about valid licensing. It is about
blurring the line between MS and you so you need to pay MS regular money
(which is what they care about - the regular part). This is a long term
goal
of MS (well over 10 years) and most of their efforts have failed. Some are
Application servers (they still perserve I saw a trial program using this
technology), MSN (was not the internet at first), yearly rental of Office
in
Australia (cancelled last year), Windows update, PA, and WPA. They seem to
have taken a long term approach of training consumers (Symantec watched MS
and did do it - one has to pay symantec regular sums of money to use their
product, but the products are different and MS don't naturally lead to
regular payments).

Think of the phone system. If you buy a phone it's absolutely useless
without wires and exchanges. MS wants your computer to be useless without
MSNs or whatever ends up working.

MS regards OEM software as leased software (last time I saw figures OEM
sales were over 90% of of total sales). They can't get consumers to
regularly pay them so they tie it to the life of the hardware (Source MS
OEM
Product Manager for OSs in Australia at the Christmas do in 2003 - they
bribed people to come with free Office XP Professional, I took me mum so
she
could get a $1200 product for free as well - she found OEM ranting
boring).

MS intends to own you. Mike Brannigan is actually misleading people here,
maybe inadvertantly as he is probably quite junior (I doubt he is a
strategic executive).

Mike Brannigan [MSFT] wrote:

message

Winux P wrote:

Compulsory WGA??? What! Who are these people? For what purpose would
this be for? Speed up downloads? Wouldn't it take download time + get
an authenicated check? Rather than just download time?

Who and what would WGA stop from downloading\updating anyway? My
windows is already WGA'd, I thought this happened when MS activated
it.

It is for nothing but MS flexing its muscles over its paying customers.
WGA is separate from WPA. The former know as Validation, and the
latter
as Activation. And they ar both separate and distinct from Registration.
And MS expects all its paying customers to learn the difference,

learn
the

differing rules of each, and to fetch when MS tell them to. It's getting
to the point where the OS is technically easier to use, than knowing
and
complying with all of MS rules & policies surrounding its copy-protection
schemes!

--


Kurt the customers don't need to know or understand anything in particular,
activation can be one click and once they have the control installed then
WGA will be invisible to them too.
Only those not using genuine licensed product will have an issue.


Mike, of course MS has the right to ensure that installations of their
software are legitimate before providing support (product updates are
support), and that justifies the use of PA and WGA, however there are
many documented cases where these mechanisms have failed to identify
legitimately licensed installations, leaving legitimately licensed users
in a lurch.

What, if anything, is MS doing to correct these flaws? So far all I've
seen MS do is make it more difficult, particularly with regard to OEM
installations and "unauthorized" product keys. It no longer only applies
to major OEMs, either. Every OEM pre-install I have seen lately that is
not pre-activated encounters this.

And while we're at it, please print the keys on the COA in a font large
enough to read without a magnifying glass and quit using character
strings like "8B3B8".

Steve

 

[kurttrail]

Kurt they'll click one button - once; and that's all they ever will
see of WGA - hardly a huge issue or source of confusion.

When it fails. When they'll have to revalidate. When requesting a
download and having the page it rechecked and the redirecting. Over why
their legit OS doesn't validate and their buddy that has a pirated OS
had no problem validating.

And many, many more.


--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com/mscommunity
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei"