Windows Validation

[Guest]

Why does Microsoft send Windows Validation updates? Looks to me like once
they validated my Windows the first time, there'd be no need for further
validation.

 

[Rock]

Why does Microsoft send Windows Validation updates? Looks to me like
once
they validated my Windows the first time, there'd be no need for further
validation.

Probably because of changes in how they look for non genuine installations.
Don't install it.

 

[Stan]

Looks to me like once
they validated my Windows the first time, there'd be no need for further
validation.

And if the only reason for the infamous malware WGA was to see if you
have stolen your copy of windows off of yourself, then only one check
per computer/installation would be enough. If it was legit, all it
would have to do is check your setup, and if you pass the thief test,
set a flag on your system so you don't have to keep proving over and
over and over that you didn't steal your copy of windows off of
yourself. On the other had, if you want it to do other malicious
things, then maybe you need it to call home over and over and over and
over not to mention keep updating it every few months to address
additional malcode that has been added.

I think the real crime lies in M$'s Malware, not the honest hard
working people that shelled out hard bucks for Bill's product that
they have to continually keep proving over and over and over and over
and over that they didn't steal it off of themselves after they bought
it and passed the thief test the first time.

Regards,

 

[Guest]

If it was legit, all it would have to do is check your setup, and if you pass the thief test, > set a flag on your system so you don't have to keep proving over and
over and over that you didn't steal your copy of windows off of > yourself.

I think the real crime lies in M$'s "Malware," not the honest hard
working people that shelled out hard bucks for Bill (Gates') product that
they have to continually keep proving over and over and over and over
and over that they didn't steal it off of themselves after they bought
it and passed the thief test the first time.

Regards,

Thanks for the replies. Doesn't anyone besides me and these two believe MS
owes its customers an answer on this?

 

[Bob I]

And if the only reason for the infamous malware WGA was to see if you
have stolen your copy of windows off of yourself, then only one check
per computer/installation would be enough. If it was legit, all it
would have to do is check your setup, and if you pass the thief test,
set a flag on your system so you don't have to keep proving over and
over and over that you didn't steal your copy of windows off of
yourself. On the other had, if you want it to do other malicious
things, then maybe you need it to call home over and over and over and
over not to mention keep updating it every few months to address
additional malcode that has been added.

I think the real crime lies in M$'s Malware, not the honest hard
working people that shelled out hard bucks for Bill's product that
they have to continually keep proving over and over and over and over
and over that they didn't steal it off of themselves after they bought
it and passed the thief test the first time.

Regards,

And if the flag was set to prove legitimacy, what's to keep the the
pirates from setting the flag themselves? Humm?

 

[Bob I]

Thanks for the replies. Doesn't anyone besides me and these two believe MS
owes its customers an answer on this?

An answer to what, another "conspiracy theory"?

 

[jt3]

In their formal announcements of package initially, and of all the changes
subsequently, they have always said that its purpose is to protect 'you the
user' from using illegal software. Presumably this is an obfuscated way of
saying that they would prosecute you if you were using illegal software,
thus for your 'protection' (from MS' actions) you should submit.

Since the outcomes of any such procedure would undoubtedly depend upon how
much money you had to pay your lawyer, perhaps one could say there is some
truth to all this.

As to 'why repeatedly,' the answer implicit in the process repetition is
that the methodology is not reliable.

Some have suggested that it is primarily aimed at preventing the older
practice of home users using a license on a new machine, for example, to
provide another OS copy for an older machine, gratis. This would require
repeated questioning, of course, to be certain. Continued lax licensing
practices for volume installations suggest there is a lot to this theory.

Finally, you don't seriously expect MS to address this issue any further
than their previous utterances, do you?

Joe

pass the thief test, > set a flag on your system so you don't have to keep
proving over and

 

[Uncle Grumpy]

Doesn't anyone besides me and these two believe MS
owes its customers an answer on this?

What answer would satisfy you?

It's apparent that most users don't have your problems.

 

[Rock]

Thanks for the replies. Doesn't anyone besides me and these two believe
MS
owes its customers an answer on this?

If you want an answer from MS call them. This is a peer to peer newsgroup,
not official MS support. So what exactly are you asking?

 

[Stan]

what's to keep the the
pirates from setting the flag themselves?

From everything I read, the pirates don't even have to deal with this
malware because they are a lot smarter than the Clones @ M$ and have a
bypass within minutes of each try by M$ to stop piracy. Thus, the
only fools having to deal with the infamous malware known as WGA are
the honest paying customers over and over and over and over.....

So again I ask. then what is the ACTUAL purpose of the infamous
malware known as WGA if it is useless against the much smarter than
M$, Pirate. Why keep phoning home (now that M$ has finally come clean
with the fact that it does) about what's going on on the systems of
honest people when the Pirates don't need it phoning home to keep it
up and running and updating?

And don't point me to where M$ is posting what they say it is phoning
home.. Remember, before getting caught, they denied that it was even
phoning home in the first place (Boink on M$ credibility #928)....

What is the actual purpose of a program that phones home that is
distributed by a company that has a known track record of shady
practices in the past already, that has over and over lied about the
purpose of certain "Critical Updates" until they finally had to come
clean when exposed (Boink on M$ credibility #929), who's stud duck had
to appear before a Congressional Investigation into the company's
questionable business practices (Boink on M$ credibility #930)?

Nope, it isn't about piracy... that is evident!

This is where your basic run of the mill M$ clone pops up and says
something like "then go with someone else's OS... nobody's making you
use windows" as if trying to justify everything M$ is doing and
reconfirming that everything is...... OK in their cloned little brain
pan.

 

[Noncompliant]

Last update and subsequent validation went like this. Initially was unable
to validate whether or not the message said.

Left PC alone, had to logon again (screensaver). At the logon, big icon
saying my XP was not valid.

Shutdown the PC for the night. At bootup and subsequent use, no
invalidation notices.

So, I'm confused more than ever.

 

[Alias]

An answer to what, another "conspiracy theory"?

No, calling a useless to the end user program a "high priority update"
of course!

Alias

 

[Bob I]

From everything I read,

Then you need to comprehend what you read, seems you zipped right past
incidental piracy.

 

[Alias]

Then you need to comprehend what you read, seems you zipped right past
incidental piracy.

Some call that "fair use". The question is does MS make more money from
these intrusive programs that aim to recoup money from "casual pirates"
than they spend on the activation operators, WPA/WGA/WGA-N/SPP
programers, and Steve Ballmer jumping all over the place on stage.

These so-called anti piracy programs will find Microsoft in the same
boat as Pan AM, TWA, AMOCO and Texaco: out of business. You can't accuse
every single one of your paying customers of being a thief until they
prove otherwise and stay in business for very long.

I used to be a total MS fan. I have used MS since DOS and never thought
I would even consider -- much less use -- Linux but here I am posting
from Ubuntu.

Alias

 

[Stan]

You can't accuse
every single one of your paying customers of being a thief until they
prove otherwise and stay in business for very long.

Especially when you keep doing it over and over and over and over and
over even though the Honest Paying Customers proves they are innocent
over and over and over and over and over... Something that M$
programmed pro-malware clones like Bob seem to have a hard time
comprehending.

Just look back at M$'s track record of deceitful practices concerning
this specific piece of malware.

 

[Bob I]

YAWN.

Especially when you keep doing it over and over and over and over and
over even though the Honest Paying Customers proves they are innocent
over and over and over and over and over... Something that M$
programmed pro-malware clones like Bob seem to have a hard time
comprehending.

Just look back at M$'s track record of deceitful practices concerning
this specific piece of malware.

 

[Alias]

YAWN.

Does your boredom mean you like being accused of being a thief over and
over again until, maybe, you can prove otherwise?

Alias

 

[Ghostrider]

Does your boredom mean you like being accused of being a thief over and
over again until, maybe, you can prove otherwise?

Alias

Perhaps it should have dawned upon some people that such reports may
actually be in the minority. That is, if the purported incidents have
occurred in the manner that they have, that they happened within the
realms of statistical probability. Otherwise, the numbers of untoward
incidents so cited should have created great alarm and adverse reaction
that results in public protests, demonstrations, lawsuits, legislation,
boycotts, and so forth. And not just whimpers of them.

 

[Alias]

Perhaps it should have dawned upon some people that such reports may
actually be in the minority.

Please don't change the subject and see below.

That is, if the purported incidents have

occurred in the manner that they have, that they happened within the
realms of statistical probability. Otherwise, the numbers of untoward
incidents so cited should have created great alarm and adverse reaction
that results in public protests, demonstrations, lawsuits, legislation,
boycotts, and so forth. And not just whimpers of them.

When you install or reinstall XP or Vista, you are asked to prove you're
not a thief *100%* of the time, be it via WPA or WGA or WGA/N. The fact
that you accept it without question or indignation is sad. The fact that
false positives are also a factor makes it even worse, even if it's only
in the "realm of statistical probability".

Alias

 

[Stan]

Does your boredom mean you like being accused of being a thief over and
over again until, maybe, you can prove otherwise?

It's the bargain basement reply you get from these M$ programmed clone
types. They can't make M$'s track record go away so they choose to
ignore it and respond with real intelligent replies like "YAWN" (Dead
give-a-way for recognizing your basic run of the mill M$ clone type).
But what really scares them the most is that..... M$'s track record
is still out there and being fed fervently with each passing day by
none other than M$ itself.

No matter how they try and spin it, hide it or give incredibly
intelligent replies like "YAWN" to cover it up, the M$ track record is
still out there defeating all the spin and redirections they have
invested so much of their time in trying to get a complacent public
into believing.

You just can't beat a good old track record for finding the truth.