AT&T Tech Support 360- Related Stories
-
Week in review: Deal or no deal in YouTube?
October 13, 2006 -
Week in review: On land and Ceatec
October 6, 2006 -
Week in review: HP goes to Washington
September 29, 2006
(continued from previous page)
Interestingly, Yahoo beat Microsoft the punch by releasing a Yahoo-optimized version of the Web browser. The browser is essentially the IE 7 browser with a number of tweaks, such as Yahoo home pages, Yahoo as the default search engine and a Yahoo toolbar.
A Microsoft representative declined to comment on the fact that IE 7 was available from Yahoo before it was available from the software giant. Microsoft has touted Yahoo's work as an example of the way other companies can customize the new browser.
Fixing a hole
Microsoft also wormed its way into iPod's fifth-birthday celebration with the revelation that some of the latest versions of the digital music player have shipped with a Windows virus. Apple Computer said that a small number of video iPods made after Sept. 12 included the RavMonE virus.
The company said it has seen fewer than 25 reports of the problem, which it said does not affect other models of the media player, nor does it affect Macs. Apple apologized on its Web site for the problem, but also used the opportunity to jab at Microsoft, its operating-system rival.
In a twist on phishing, cybercrooks are hijacking instant-messaging accounts to lure people to their information-thieving Web sites. These sites try to trick people into giving up sensitive information, such as credit card details, Social Security numbers or login credentials for online services.
In a tactic that includes an arsenal of online weapons, scammers are now also commandeering IM accounts to spread their bait. The barrage of attacks used includes account hijacking, phishing and SPIM, or spam via instant messaging.
Netflix has fixed weaknesses in its Web site that could have let outsiders change a user's address, add movies to their rental queue, and potentially hijack their account. The problems were repaired before they became publicly known.
An attacker could have taken advantage of the weaknesses by crafting a Web site that includes some simple HTML code, one security expert said. A Netflix user would have to be tricked into visiting the nefarious Web site for the attack to succeed.
Earnings season
Earnings season is heating up again, and some of Silicon Valley's biggest names reported healthy growth.
Google's third-quarter profit nearly doubled from a year ago as sales of keyword-related advertising continued to grow for the world's top Web search engine. The news sent Google's stock up shares rising nearly 8 percent to $459.51 in after-hours trading, after closing at $426.06, and the stock continued its climb in early trading on Friday, when it approached an all-time high.
Buoyed by greater than 30 percent growth in both Mac and iPod sales, Apple reported preliminary fiscal fourth-quarter earnings that easily topped analysts' expectations, but warned that its results could change once the company completes a probe into past stock option granting practices.
Intel finally provided some decent news for investors in 2006, beating lowered expectations for its third quarter despite coming in way short of last year's figures. During the third quarter, the world's largest chipmaker recorded revenue of $8.7 billion and net income of $1.3 billion, slightly exceeding analyst expectations and Intel's own guidance for the third quarter.
Also of note
FBI Director Robert Mueller called on Internet service providers to record their customers' online activities, a move likely to prompt fierce debate over privacy and law enforcement in Washington next year...A co-founder of Wikipedia and the site's former editor-in-chief is launching a rival site called Citizendium...Hewlett-Packard leapfrogged over Dell to recapture the lead as the No. 1 PC maker worldwide for the first time in almost three years.
See more CNET content tagged:
Microsoft Internet Explorer 7,
Week in review,
Microsoft Internet Explorer,
Microsoft Windows Vista,
Web browser
I believe that Microsoft is pushing everyone towards the Linux environments unwittingly. Consumers have far more options today in the Linux OS than they ever had before... Ubuntu Linux or a Mac is the way to go...
Now if they can just fix the whole gaming issues with Linux?
There is absolutely no excuse for this. It's not legal. I have rights as a buyer. The law is on our side on this one. Microsoft has no right to limit our use past one copy per device AT A TIME (at a time).
I'm even legally allowed to make backup copies of my windows install disk. Now I have two copies! Am I going to jail now? According to Microsoft, I should.
Fair use. I demand it. Or I will not use your product.
And I don't care if I'm not compatible with windows. That's your problem.
http://www.teckmagazine.com/reviews/software-reviews/roxio-easy-media-creator-9-review.html
off by this OS even before they've boxed it.
announcement about the dramatic increase in MAC sales. How may
'doze users go to the mall? How many walk into the Apple store
intending to look at the iPods? How many come out with the
knowledge that there are MUCH better alternatives to 'doze? And
finally, how many come out of the store with a new Mac?
According to the trend, more and more! I'm enjoying watching the
demise of M$, it's about time!
announcement about the dramatic increase in MAC sales. How
many 'doze users go to the mall? How many walk into the Apple
store intending to look at the iPods? How many come out with the
knowledge that there are MUCH better alternatives to 'doze? And
finally, how many come out of the store with a new Mac?
According to the trend, more and more! I'm enjoying watching the
demise of M$, it's about time!
I buy my operating systems preinstalled, and OEM operating systems aren't transferable anyway.
As for Symantec and McAfee, they are incompetent whiners. They should spend less time whining, and more time improving the low quality of their products.
That's good for you, but not everyone buys pre built system s. For some this makes going with Windows an even more expensive choice.
This doesn't just involve Symantec and McAfee but ALL security vendors. They just happen to the ones big enough to fight this.
It would amount to all anti-viruses - including free ones and ones provided to you by your ISP - being ineffective on the one of the major parts of Vista that every malware author is going to be looking upon as a golden trophy to crack.
Oh, and just in case you didn't notice - not everyone uses OEM copies of Windows. Some of us like our fresh installs of Windows to have less bloat, whether or not we buy OEM machines.
Second, the OEMs do NOT make this clear to the purchaser. They tell you somewhere in the fine print so their butts are covered legally.
Third, and most critically, this is only true for MS OSs. So you can hardly use it to defend the new Vista rules. It just shows that MS is trying to extend its stranglehold over everyone, and force us all to upgrade our OS every few years. (Not to mention our PCs. These people are all in bed with each other.)
These are just things that have happened in the last year for me. If they can come up with a viable repair feature it may be feasable. Until then vista sits on the shelves.
And havnt you ever heard of System Restore? Works fine for me - no reinstall needed.
The article said "In the past, those who bought a retail copy of Windows needed to uninstall it before moving it to another machine, but there was no limit to how many times this could be done."
The license for previous versions of Windows allowed you to install it on one computer at a time. If you removed it from a previous machine you could move it to a new one. Even with Windows XP you could do it as long as you reactivated it. You'd raise a flag if you did it often, but there was no hard limit on the number times. This is a big story especially if build your own computers or do a lot of updating. Vista will let you move it to a new computer one time and that's it, that's a pretty change.
What's sad are the inaccurate critisms.
It should be.
Who has any right to tell me what I can or cannot do with my purchased copy of windows which I now OWN and paid for?
As long as I am not running it on more than one device at a time, I should be allowed to do whatever the heck I want with my property.
And don't tell me it's not my property. it most certainly is under the LAW. Look it up.
Criminals will attack!
Businesses will revolt!
The code will crash!
Vendors will file suit!
Ballmer will blame Microsoft's enemies, of course, and chase cars on 520 and bite their tires.
Dell will introduce a consumer desktop OS using a Linux core that, with Google ads, pays for the computer over time.
Microsoft will point its 150,000 laywers at Linux and find itself shooting at smoke.
Multicore processors allow users to boot 9 simultaneous operating systems, one of which, Windows, is increasingly only booted to read and write to legacy data.
Ballmer will retire to star in monster movies that don't have budgets for make-up or costumes.
I can see him starring in King Kong III. He does a really good monkey boy.
'Everyone' doesnt call it that - just you. Im already using Vista and its great :-)
Who are YOU, Microsoft, to tell ME that I have to pay YOU twice to use my ONE copy on any device as long as I'm not using it on anything else at the same time?
Thanks for clarifying your EULA, Microsoft. Now even I can understand just how hostile and greedy you are towards your "consumers."
purchase than the fact that Microsoft is in the NEWS EVERYDAY
for security issues should get you running to the Mac factory!
Justin
Tech01
www.Tech01.net
Tech01 Mobil
Mobil.Tech01.net
I tried IE7 and there is something intangible that I hate about it. ( Perhaps the forced upgrade? )
I haven't heard anything good about VISTA, but now I don't need to. The new rules did it. It will NOT be purchased and I will be installing LINUX on the WIN2K machines as well.
If LINUX doesn't work out? Hey, I like the looks of the new MAC's.
It was neat to be able to feel like it was my computer again!
shrinkwrap.
Anyone who WANTS to pirate it, WILL, and they'll be able to do it
in far less time than it takes someone who gets a false positive
to resolve it with customer support.
Activation will at most stop legitimate but budget-conscious
buyers of one copy from installing it on a couple of machines,
perhaps even the same machine they have upgraded (which is
now excluded in the license). The result will be that they simply
leave those machines running XP, and Microsoft doesn't get an
extra sale anyway.
In a small percentage of cases, they may shell out for an extra
copy, and that would seem to be the whole reason Microsoft is
targeting these otherwise honest users, who wouldn't have tried
to do the "dishonest" thing if the OS was more reasonably priced
and/or available in a home pack.
The claim that Microsoft is reigning in the rampant piracy in
developing countries carries little weight. These countries can
barely afford the excessive costs (the ROI for Microsoft has
always been excellent), and if WGA actually did work to stop
piracy, they'd switch away from Windows to something like
Ubuntu.
Having got the world hooked on Windows, Microsoft now
believes it can extort everyone, in the same vein as a drug-
dealer.
This sort of drug dealing should be illegal. Oh wait, it is! It just
so happens that the drug is software and not heroin.
Thef ield is ope for OEM and greymarket venors and pirates will reap a rich harvest and several more Micosoft haters will be added to the politicl lobbies. Certainly in Europe we wil figth this
If somebody purchases software, they should have the right to use it on whatever system they want to use it on, as long as they're only installing and using it on one system.
Charles R. Whealton
Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com
Linux stuff I'e been fooling with. Microsoft can be sure I'll never run Vista with the limitation on being able to reload to another machine when mine dies for whatever reason. If I paid retail for it it should be mine to use as I require, noy as Redmond thinks I should. I didn't know windows when I started, and I'm sure Linux will be as easy as Windows was in the early years.
...the following has been a sacastic rant, it is not necessary to defend your leader. HAL, HAL, are you there HAL. Are you watching me right now? HAL...
Sorry I can't afford one, I will however gladly accept one if you will buy it for me. Even though I absolutely detest the Mac Snob "elitist" attitudes that alot of you have. And the Get a Mac ads are annoying enough to make me want to pitch something heavy through my TV. Like an iBook - yeh that would kill the TV good.
Pfft.
I'm calling my senators.
- Unheardof
-
by Ryo Hazuki
October 22, 2006 3:43 AM PDT
- Unheardof and unfair: a company trying to make sure you don't use its 5 year-hard-working and expensive software in an illegal way.
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
- Right... And its probably just a Random Coincidence...
-
by Had_to_be_said
October 22, 2006 1:49 PM PDT
- ...that this IMPOSITION, would ROB consumers of an ABSOLUTELY-FUNDAMENTAL "consumer-right", ...and, effectively undermine the very concept of "private property ownership".
-
-
- They have gone too far
-
by dmm
October 23, 2006 12:21 PM PDT
- I wouldn't have a problem with MS requiring a new activation code with every re-install. That would allow them to catch the professional pirates who make illegal copies and sell them (thus costing MS big bucks). It would also allow them to catch the amateur pirates who buy one copy and install it on 3 or 5 or 10 PCs (thus collectively costing MS big bucks). In return, MS could lower the price and could offer "family packs" like they have done with the student version of Office. This would make MS's honest (and longsuffering) customers happy, and would make customers out of the mildly dishonest people. That's a win-win-win situation.
-
-
See all 97 Comments >>...Especially, when these LIES come from the richest software- "company", on the face of the Earth, ...Who, just so happens, has a PROVEN decades-long history of VIOLATING THE LAW, ...engaging in numerous UNETHICAL-BEHAVIORS, ...FORCIBLY "...maintaining their illegal-monopoly", ...and even, officially being caught, directly, "...stealing other peoples properties".
And, BY THE WAY... Re-Using a -product- (such as "software") that has been legitimately purchased... is NOT "illegal" (Thats the "LAW"). And, implying that it is "illegal", ...IS (...at best) COMPLETELY-ASININE.
Microsoft is NOT, "...trying to make sure you dont use its 5 year-hard-working and expensive software in an illegal way". Microsoft is trying to PERMANENTLY-REVOKE (through technological-means) YOUR BASIC RIGHTS as a "consumer".
What is TRULY "unfair"... is MILLIONS of "hard-working" consumers, and businesses, ...after spending THEIR HARD-EARNED MONEY, being told by a REPEATEDLY CONVICTED-MONOPOLIST, ...that they [purchasers/consumers] do not, -actually-, own the "products" they buy...
But the announced policy? It won't catch the worst pirates, the pros, the ones who most hurt MS's bottom line. The casual pirates will be unable to afford 3 or 5 or 10 full-price copies, so they will find an alternative OS. Lousy customers as they were, they were still customers. As their financial situation improved, they might have become honest customers. Instead, MS will lose them permanently, not to mention giving them a grudge to settle.
The persons behind the announced policy should be given the heave-ho, and MS should publicly apologize to their user base. Anything else will be cutting their own throats. (Sell your MSFT stock now, while you can!!)