Microsoft dirty tricks department again

On 2015-08-13, mike wrote:
nothing of any consequence

All that had nothing to do with whether any particular OS is a "toy"
or a "hobby."

I really don't care whether Windows users migrate to Linux, BSD, OS-X,
or maybe some can dig up an old DEC mainframe to run TOPS-20. (Although
Linux fills my curent needs I may migrate to BSD since I don't care
much for the move most Linux distributions are making to systemd.)

Heck, if I needed something only available in Windows I'd use it,
but there is simply nothing there that I need. Your mileage may vary.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)

NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ken Springer wrote:
On 8/11/15 7:15 PM, Mayayana wrote:
And
there's no excuse for lack of thorough, clear docs.

The same can be said for both the MS and Apple worlds too. :-(


Apple had Inside Macintosh for MacOS. And while
they seem to disparage it here, I liked it. If
you were writing your first "hello world" program,
you might refer to it. And it was descriptive,
telling you what the difference between a
pointer and a handle was (a handle being a
doubly dereferenced pointer). They used to sell
copies at my tech book store.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Macintosh

Paul

mike wrote on 8/13/2015 3:13 AM:
On 8/12/2015 7:24 AM, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2015-08-12, Steve Hayes wrote:
Windows is not perfect, but it does the job. This ng is for discussing
how to deal with its imperfections, and subtituting a toy for a tool,
as you advocate, does not do that.

The Fortune 500 companies that have integrated Linux into their
infrastructures might take issue with your characterization of that OS as
a "toy." Believe it or not, the entire computing world does not revolve
around Microsoft Office.

That's linux-speak.
People use the "sound bite" as validation for their choice of OS.
They propagate it until it sounds like truth.

Let's peek under the hood...

Those megacorporations have an ulterior motive. They want to double
employee productivity so they can fire half of them.
To do that, you automate everything as much as possible and severely
limit any employee distractions and deviations from the script.

So wanting higher productivity means not using Windows. Are you claiming
that an OS that lowers productivity is better?

They build APPLIANCES optimized for each task and integrate them.
They can afford to hire the army of gurus to create/install/maintain it.
Linux is a perfect system for creating all those appliances.

So you suggest that Windows is not a perfect system for building
APPLICATIONS but Linux is and, therefore, Windows is superior while
being inferior in this aspect?

The operators, aka users, have no clue what the underlying OS is.
They enter the data and push the "place order" button, day after day
after day. If their station doesn't work, they call a guru to fix it.
They don't ever update their drivers or add an application or add
hardware or install anything.

Most users have no clue about what OS they are using or any of the
details in it's program-building features. Most of the ideas real users
have are wrong no matter what the OS. So why is Linux more or less
deficient than Windows?

How many people in the cold-call bullpen type
./NewOrderNumber | ShipTo -Name Uno -Address '1234 5th Street;Nowhere,
CA 99982' -CardVisa 1234123412341234
????
How many have the slightest idea how to do ANY linux function?

They sit behind a GUI appliance screen entering data and pressing
the "call next number" button.

It seems you have no experience in a call center or with the sorts who
work there. They do not have any idea what is in their computer or, more
likely, their phone app. Their masters have designed things to be that
way. You don't actually want a bunch of employees (actually employed as
contractors) whose ethics you don't trust (after all they are working
for you in this job) poking around and exploiting your procedures. You
can build lock-out software on any OS as long as your users aren't too
sophisticated.

This is not wholesale desktop linux conversion. It's a simple
matter of using the best/cheapest tool that keeps the APPLIANCE
running. I submit that linux is an excellent choice for this
application. Yes, there are more versatile boxes in the home office,
but what percentage of those are installed/configured/maintained
by end users either? The secretary may be editing her boss's schedule
using a linux box, but it's just running an applicaion she's been
trained to use. She's not installing/configuring/maintaining linux either.

So using the best/cheapest tool (not Windows of course) is a good idea.
I agree.

I've found Linux to be the appropriate tool for getting my own work
done, and have been using it for over 15 years. I don't try to push it on
anyone else, but feel compelled to comment when nonsensical remarks that
Linux is a "hobby" or a "toy" are made. (Linux users might well regard
Windows as a "toy" because it doesn't run the Unix/Linux applications
that they need. It would be an equally asinine position to take.)

Can't argue with that. If the tool is best in your opinion you have
the choice to use it. It's not a viable option for joe average home
desktop computer user.

Well a lot of Linux front ends look a lot like Windows and imitation is
the sincerest form of flattery; or so some say.

Turns out that I have more desktop linux machines than windows machines.
Desktop linux could easily do 90+ percent of what I want.
But, if I need to run windows to get the other 10%, why punish myself
learning the ins an outs of desktop linux when there's no light
at the end of the tunnel.
I wish for the day when I won't have to switch
back to windows. I'm not optimistic, but I keep trying.
The good news, or bad, depending on your point of view,
is that windows is becoming more maddening and invasive at every
release. Desktop Linux may win because the incumbent shot himself
in the head.

That 90+ percent goes both ways now a days. I even hear there are
virtual machines in both camps that will run the others' apps.

The sad thing is that the linux community doesn't seem to want to
fill in that 10% and replace desktop windows. And there's nobody
else who could do it.
That's their choice. It eliminates desktop linux as a choice for many.

The fundamental difference between Linux and Windows is not at the user
interface level; it's the OS construction. Windows shot itself in the
foot by not cleanly separating a kernel from the rest of the OS and the
applications level. The security implications have been a nightmare.

Another Windows-induced problem is a culture of really bad
documentation. There is no documentation for most OS features or
applications that closely define the details of what constitutes correct
behavior. Therefore, no one really knows what to expect. Windows created
this buggy universe with blatant security issues but Linux is slowly
moving in this direction too. An example of this trash is Adobe
PhotoShop which comes with no printed documentation and the online help
is often years behind on features that have changed.

I'm not a big Windows fan and in fact had one of the earliest (early
1970's) PDP 11's in my lab. That was the first appearance of Unix
outside of Bell labs. It was a mess: there was no print command, rather
you said "cat file" (for concatenate) to type a file on your terminal;
other commands had idiotic names and inconsistent syntax to match; the C
language in which everything was built was lovable crap - given values
for referenced variables, there was no spec which told you what the
correct value of an expression should be; and many more problems.

Things got some better but there is still a whole host of problems. For
example, though C has an ANSI spec, it still allows compiler tricks,
optimizations, and interpretations that do not guarantee values of
expressions. Unix and Linux have created a legion of semi-knowledgeable
(but really semi-stupid) users who spend their lives compiling
everything that goes on their machine but who HAVE NOT READ EVEN ONE
PERCENT OF WHAT THEY ARE COMPILING AND USING. Reading wouldn't help most
of them because they are not competent developers.

A fair approach to all of this is to use a Linux-like kernel and wrap it
with a Windows-like shell. The emphasis should be on kernel hardening
and that means that some Windows features would need to be sacrificed.
It would also mean that ninety-nine percent of users would have no
access what so ever to the kernel and no more of this ego-satisfying,
macho compiling. It would mostly look like a Windows machine but
security would be greatly improved.

Anyone who thinks the world would buy the above is nuts.
--
Jeff Barnett

On 8/13/15 7:27 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| And
| there's no excuse for lack of thorough, clear docs.
|
| The same can be said for both the MS and Apple worlds too. :-(
|

I don't know about Apple. I suppose MS docs
could certainly be better in many cases. I once
tried to look up IE security settings, as an
experiment, and found that "ActiveX" wasn't even
mentioned in the help. Yet I had to decide
whether to allow signed ActiveX controls. And
unsigned controls? Launch programs in an iframe?
Those basic things aren't in there. But at least
MS does have help files.

"thorough, clear docs" was my basic point. Apple has online help files
like MS, and like MS they are always missing the info I want, or I can't
find the info.

I consider the online format to be defective in concept. If you don't
know the word or words to use in a search, you find nothing. I've
sometimes discovered the word or words I used somewhere in the online
help, yet they weren't found when I searched.

With a paper manual that has a truly competent index, you have something
to browse. Both the index and table of contents may lead you to right
portion of the book, where you can flip through the pages and stumble on
to the subject you're trying to find.

Online help could be improved if they simply did a better job of
creating them, viewing the assembly of the files as if it was a book.
What's wrong with having a TOC and a thorough index arranged in some
logical and organized format? Some are better than others. I thought
Irfanview was good the last time I used their files, and I'm finding the
help files for Serif's core programs seem to be good.

And in many cases the
programming docs are pretty good.

These are docs the average person doesn't care about. :-)

Often with
OSS there isn't even a relevant readme file. Or
if there's help it's often online in a completely
unusable arrangement where every topic requires
a dozen or so webpage trips. GIMP and Libre
Office both currently have separate installers for
help, as though it's a fringe interest.

I use and recommend a lot of OSS software as the people I'm now coming
in contact with often can't afford commercial programs. From that
software, I've found the help files to be no worse and no better than
anything else. GIMP's web based manual looks to be competent, and I
thought it was available as a PDF file at one time. I can't find it
now, could have missed it.

You can't really complain about GIMP's manual being online, so are the
majority of MS's help files.

For a number of reasons, I'm giving Libre Office another try. Version
5.0.0 has just been released. For Windows users, F1 brings up a web
based help system unless you download the help pack you mentioned. For
Mac users, the help files are in the .app, no online help. LO used to
have paper docs to download, but I didn't look for them this time. When
I did use them, they were always one version behind the program.

And they've not gone to the web page design from Hell, aka for tablets
and smartphones. Not quite sure it's ready for prime time.

I've used Inkscape a bit, I remember the help files being good, but it's
been at least a year. Same for Dia.




--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 36.0.4
Thunderbird 31.5
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

On 8/13/2015 9:15 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| If enough did resist the pirating of our personal data it would stop.
|

One very small help might be to stop using the
word "pirate" and call it what it is: Stealing. Theft.
Software companies started using "pirate", which
can apply specifically to copyrighted material. But it
also serves to buffer the questionable statement that
people were stealing software.

In the case of personal information it's not "pirating".
It's just plain old stealing. They're breaking in and
rifling through your desk. In some cases it's also
surveillance, if they're recording your actions in using
software. There are no two ways about it, mickey
mouse licensing claims and ease of digital transactions
notwithstanding.


I used the word "pirate" as an illustration of how things have changed
and for some reason there seems to no outcry. There are still those
around this NG that defend MS and the rest of the looters. It's OK for
MS and Google and the rest to use what belongs to us while trying to
outlaw our use of what they claim is theirs unless we pay. Remember when
the 12-Year-Old was Sued for Music Downloading?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/09...wnloading.html

Times have changed because the music industry claimed they didn't have
personal information about her and didn't know she was only 12. Now they
and every other industry has access to all our information and that's OK.

I read new articles on MSN.com and enjoy the posts of so many fools
and can only laugh. If you care to comment you have to log in and now
see an agreement allowing Google to access your personal files after you
have logged off and who knows for how long and how it's shared.

Mayayana wrote on 08/13/2015 9:15 AM:
| If enough did resist the pirating of our personal data it would stop.
|

One very small help might be to stop using the
word "pirate" and call it what it is: Stealing. Theft.
Software companies started using "pirate", which
can apply specifically to copyrighted material. But it
also serves to buffer the questionable statement that
people were stealing software.

In the case of personal information it's not "pirating".
It's just plain old stealing. They're breaking in and
rifling through your desk. In some cases it's also
surveillance, if they're recording your actions in using
software. There are no two ways about it, mickey
mouse licensing claims and ease of digital transactions
notwithstanding.


Pretty tough to have something stolen when use of the product is
agreement to allow (it)
- easily preventable, don't use it.

--
...winston
msft mvp windows experience

Al Drake wrote on 08/13/2015 12:12 PM:
On 8/13/2015 9:15 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| If enough did resist the pirating of our personal data it would stop.
|

One very small help might be to stop using the
word "pirate" and call it what it is: Stealing. Theft.
Software companies started using "pirate", which
can apply specifically to copyrighted material. But it
also serves to buffer the questionable statement that
people were stealing software.

In the case of personal information it's not "pirating".
It's just plain old stealing. They're breaking in and
rifling through your desk. In some cases it's also
surveillance, if they're recording your actions in using
software. There are no two ways about it, mickey
mouse licensing claims and ease of digital transactions
notwithstanding.


I used the word "pirate" as an illustration of how things have changed
and for some reason there seems to no outcry. There are still those
around this NG that defend MS and the rest of the looters. It's OK for
MS and Google and the rest to use what belongs to us while trying to
outlaw our use of what they claim is theirs unless we pay. Remember when
the 12-Year-Old was Sued for Music Downloading?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/09...wnloading.html


Times have changed because the music industry claimed they didn't have
personal information about her and didn't know she was only 12. Now they
and every other industry has access to all our information and that's OK.

I read new articles on MSN.com and enjoy the posts of so many fools
and can only laugh. If you care to comment you have to log in and now
see an agreement allowing Google to access your personal files after you
have logged off and who knows for how long and how it's shared.



Just another agreement (logon requirement)
- Same rationale...don't agree, don't use. Complaints hold little
value to the provider beyhond the circular file if not using the service.


--
...winston
msft mvp windows experience

.. . .winston wrote:
Mayayana wrote on 08/13/2015 9:15 AM:
| If enough did resist the pirating of our personal data it would stop.
|

One very small help might be to stop using the
word "pirate" and call it what it is: Stealing. Theft.
Software companies started using "pirate", which
can apply specifically to copyrighted material. But it
also serves to buffer the questionable statement that
people were stealing software.

In the case of personal information it's not "pirating".
It's just plain old stealing. They're breaking in and
rifling through your desk. In some cases it's also
surveillance, if they're recording your actions in using
software. There are no two ways about it, mickey
mouse licensing claims and ease of digital transactions
notwithstanding.


Pretty tough to have something stolen when use of the product is
agreement to allow (it)
- easily preventable, don't use it.

I agree.That is what I have done.

Al Drake wrote on 08/13/2015 12:12 PM:


There are still those
around this NG that defend MS and the rest of the looters.

Not sure I see that occurring to any extent. Don't interpret informing
what you agreed to as to defending MSFT. Use of the product was your
decision, not the informer, not MSFT's nor does it mean the informer
disagree's with you.




--
...winston
msft mvp windows experience

Wolf K wrote:
On 2015-08-13 14:29, . . .winston wrote:
Al Drake wrote on 08/13/2015 12:12 PM:
On 8/13/2015 9:15 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| If enough did resist the pirating of our personal data it would
stop.
|

One very small help might be to stop using the
word "pirate" and call it what it is: Stealing. Theft.
Software companies started using "pirate", which
can apply specifically to copyrighted material. But it
also serves to buffer the questionable statement that
people were stealing software.

In the case of personal information it's not "pirating".
It's just plain old stealing. They're breaking in and
rifling through your desk. In some cases it's also
surveillance, if they're recording your actions in using
software. There are no two ways about it, mickey
mouse licensing claims and ease of digital transactions
notwithstanding.


I used the word "pirate" as an illustration of how things have changed
and for some reason there seems to no outcry. There are still those
around this NG that defend MS and the rest of the looters. It's OK for
MS and Google and the rest to use what belongs to us while trying to
outlaw our use of what they claim is theirs unless we pay. Remember when
the 12-Year-Old was Sued for Music Downloading?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/09...wnloading.html




Times have changed because the music industry claimed they didn't have
personal information about her and didn't know she was only 12. Now they
and every other industry has access to all our information and that's
OK.

I read new articles on MSN.com and enjoy the posts of so many fools
and can only laugh. If you care to comment you have to log in and now
see an agreement allowing Google to access your personal files after you
have logged off and who knows for how long and how it's shared.



Just another agreement (logon requirement)
- Same rationale...don't agree, don't use. Complaints hold little
value to the provider beyhond the circular file if not using the service.

OK, so how do you eliminate the W10 that's "ready to install"?


1) use the DisableGWX registry setting ?
2) Empty out C:\$WINDOWS.~BT ?

Note - the C:\$WINDOWS.~WS folder is used by
MediaCreationTool.exe for its download. If
MediaCreationTool is run, for the purpose of
making an ISO9660, it empties out ~BT whether
you wanted that to happen or not.

If you run MediaCreationTool a second time,
there is a real risk that ~WS will get emptied
out by the MediaCreationTool. You can see how
precarious these folders are (computing term
would be "very volatile") :-)

If you need to convert a MediaCreationTool ISO9660
file into a USB key, you can use
Windows7-USB-DVD-Download-Tool.exe
from a MicrosoftStore archive page.
So far it has worked for Win7/Win7 era
ISO9660 files, and I haven't received feedback
from the person I recommended that to for their
Win10 USB installer stick needs.

Paul

Wolf K wrote on 08/13/2015 5:43 PM:
On 2015-08-13 14:29, . . .winston wrote:
Al Drake wrote on 08/13/2015 12:12 PM:
On 8/13/2015 9:15 AM, Mayayana wrote:
| If enough did resist the pirating of our personal data it would
stop.
|

One very small help might be to stop using the
word "pirate" and call it what it is: Stealing. Theft.
Software companies started using "pirate", which
can apply specifically to copyrighted material. But it
also serves to buffer the questionable statement that
people were stealing software.

In the case of personal information it's not "pirating".
It's just plain old stealing. They're breaking in and
rifling through your desk. In some cases it's also
surveillance, if they're recording your actions in using
software. There are no two ways about it, mickey
mouse licensing claims and ease of digital transactions
notwithstanding.


I used the word "pirate" as an illustration of how things have changed
and for some reason there seems to no outcry. There are still those
around this NG that defend MS and the rest of the looters. It's OK for
MS and Google and the rest to use what belongs to us while trying to
outlaw our use of what they claim is theirs unless we pay. Remember when
the 12-Year-Old was Sued for Music Downloading?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/09...wnloading.html




Times have changed because the music industry claimed they didn't have
personal information about her and didn't know she was only 12. Now they
and every other industry has access to all our information and that's
OK.

I read new articles on MSN.com and enjoy the posts of so many fools
and can only laugh. If you care to comment you have to log in and now
see an agreement allowing Google to access your personal files after you
have logged off and who knows for how long and how it's shared.



Just another agreement (logon requirement)
- Same rationale...don't agree, don't use. Complaints hold little
value to the provider beyhond the circular file if not using the service.

OK, so how do you eliminate the W10 that's "ready to install"?

From: ". . .winston"
Newsgroups: alt.windows7.general
Subject: Nag to install W10-turn it off
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 15:09:40 -0400


Uninstall KB 3035583
Set Windows Update to Notify (before download and install)
Run the Windows Update troubleshooter (this will ensure 3035583 in not
in the update queue)
Reboot/Restart
Stop the WU Service and Delete the Software Distribution folder
Start the WU Service
Run WU manually
Hide 3035583
Delete the WS and BT folders in the root of C:\


If you'd desired Win10 at a later point in time
- Download the Media Creation Tool
When ready create the appropriate media (language, architecture, edition).
Upgrade during the free upgrade period using the media by running
setup.exe on the media from within the qualifying o/s (i.e. do not boot
media)
- ensure the hard drive that holds the qualifying o/s has the highest
booting priority when the upgrade restarts the system otherwise it will
boot the media and rerun setup.exe external to the qualifying o/s.


--
...winston
msft mvp windows experience

On 8/13/2015 2:38 PM, . . .winston wrote:
Al Drake wrote on 08/13/2015 12:12 PM:


There are still those
around this NG that defend MS and the rest of the looters.

Not sure I see that occurring to any extent. Don't interpret informing
what you agreed to as to defending MSFT. Use of the product was your
decision, not the informer, not MSFT's nor does it mean the informer
disagree's with you.




I have already distanced myself from W10. You really have to be
dreaming if you think any MS agreement can be fully understood without
actually seeing first hand and learning from others what MS has become.
There is NO defense of any organization pirating/steeling personal data
and using it to everyone's advantage but the end user at the bottom of
the food chain. You can defend MS all you want but that doesn't change a
thing.

Not to mention all the time spent to debug every OS ever released. If
that were to be the case in any other industry or with any other product
justice would be served.

Al Drake wrote on 08/13/2015 10:44 PM:
On 8/13/2015 2:38 PM, . . .winston wrote:
Al Drake wrote on 08/13/2015 12:12 PM:


There are still those
around this NG that defend MS and the rest of the looters.

Not sure I see that occurring to any extent. Don't interpret informing
what you agreed to as to defending MSFT. Use of the product was your
decision, not the informer, not MSFT's nor does it mean the informer
disagree's with you.




I have already distanced myself from W10. You really have to be
dreaming if you think any MS agreement can be fully understood without
actually seeing first hand and learning from others what MS has become.
There is NO defense of any organization pirating/steeling personal data
and using it to everyone's advantage but the end user at the bottom of
the food chain. You can defend MS all you want but that doesn't change a
thing.


Lol...not defending MSFT, just informing you what you agreed to. Pretty
simple.



--
...winston
msft mvp windows experience

| Don't interpret informing
| what you agreed to as to defending MSFT. Use of the product was your
| decision, not the informer, not MSFT's nor does it mean the informer
| disagree's with you.

| You can defend MS all you want but that doesn't change a
| thing.
|
| Lol...not defending MSFT, just informing you what you agreed to. Pretty
| simple.
|

Winston, you're stepping over the line from
garden variety intellectual dishonesty to outright
buffoonery. You *unfailingly* defend Microsoft
in nearly all of your posts. It's your only visible
motive. If you actually can't see that then
you're the Emperor's New Debater, fooling
only yourself with your own untenable arguments.

Here you keep repeating the same ridiculous
claim over and over: That people shouldn't
complain because they've agreed to exploitation
by using the product; that someone buying a
new computer has agreed to let Microsoft spy
on them because Microsoft has posted a 35-page
mumbo-jumbo treatise online.

This situation is about to be ramped up by the
car companies. What happens when car companies
start issuing so-called privacy policies, claiming a
right to track your driving and sell the data to
insurance companies or advertisers? (That's already
in the works.) How would you feel if you said you
don't want to be tracked and they said, "Well, then
don't drive cars!" Or would you just agree with the
car companies that since they manufactured the car
they have authority over your basic civil rights as long
as you use that car? (Before you answer, remember
that you won't be getting any "MVP" goodies from the
car companies.)

There was an interesting case awhile back about
a woman who found her image plastered on buses,
in ads for a sports team. It turns out they photographed
her (presumably with a telephoto lens) at the local
stadium and then used the picture in ads. She sued.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...man-joel-glass

They claimed that the micro-print on the back of the
ticket gave them a right to take her picture and use it
in any way they like. I don't remember how it turned
out. The NBA team may very well have won the
case. But that only highlights a problem with the
regulation of unilateral (usually hidden) legal agreements.
I think there are very few people who wouldn't think
they'd been wronged if they were in that woman's place.
Yet your logic would say to the woman, "LOL. It's very
simple. Don't buy tickets if you don't want your picture
on the side of a bus. LOL."

That response may be technically accurate, in a
very strict reading, but it's intellectually dishonest.

Mayayana wrote on 08/14/2015 9:11 AM:
| Don't interpret informing
| what you agreed to as to defending MSFT. Use of the product was your
| decision, not the informer, not MSFT's nor does it mean the informer
| disagree's with you.

| You can defend MS all you want but that doesn't change a
| thing.
|
| Lol...not defending MSFT, just informing you what you agreed to. Pretty
| simple.
|

Winston, you're stepping over the line from
garden variety intellectual dishonesty to outright
buffoonery. You *unfailingly* defend Microsoft
in nearly all of your posts. It's your only visible
motive. If you actually can't see that then
you're the Emperor's New Debater, fooling
only yourself with your own untenable arguments.

Here you keep repeating the same ridiculous
claim over and over: That people shouldn't
complain because they've agreed to exploitation
by using the product; that someone buying a
new computer has agreed to let Microsoft spy
on them because Microsoft has posted a 35-page
mumbo-jumbo treatise online.

This situation is about to be ramped up by the
car companies. What happens when car companies
start issuing so-called privacy policies, claiming a
right to track your driving and sell the data to
insurance companies or advertisers? (That's already
in the works.) How would you feel if you said you
don't want to be tracked and they said, "Well, then
don't drive cars!" Or would you just agree with the
car companies that since they manufactured the car
they have authority over your basic civil rights as long
as you use that car? (Before you answer, remember
that you won't be getting any "MVP" goodies from the
car companies.)

There was an interesting case awhile back about
a woman who found her image plastered on buses,
in ads for a sports team. It turns out they photographed
her (presumably with a telephoto lens) at the local
stadium and then used the picture in ads. She sued.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...man-joel-glass

They claimed that the micro-print on the back of the
ticket gave them a right to take her picture and use it
in any way they like. I don't remember how it turned
out. The NBA team may very well have won the
case. But that only highlights a problem with the
regulation of unilateral (usually hidden) legal agreements.
I think there are very few people who wouldn't think
they'd been wronged if they were in that woman's place.
Yet your logic would say to the woman, "LOL. It's very
simple. Don't buy tickets if you don't want your picture
on the side of a bus. LOL."

That response may be technically accurate, in a
very strict reading, but it's intellectually dishonest.



The intellectual dishonesty lies with your interpretation.
You/we may not like it, but it is exactly what it is...permission.

Fyi...the NBA analogy and outcome would fail to hold precedent in MSFT's
case.
- that's a common problem with non-legal persons attempting to justify
an opinion with something thought to be analogous.

Likewise, the 'what-if's about car companies at this stage are
non-sequitur. One can't agree to a 'what's in the works' not having
signed or agreed to a contract.
Lol...MVP goodies as you've mentioned don't provide car company benefits
but thanks for reminding me, I'll soon be in the market for a new
vehicle for the spouse and it's time to request a purchase authorization
(and more lucrative than any MVP goodie)

Don't interpret informing what anyone agreed to as to defending MSFT.
Use of the product was anyone's decision, not MSFT's nor does it mean
the informer disagree's with you on MSFT's practice.

The real issue is not liking to hear (in front of an audience) what what
one gives permission (to) and believing if they complain enough to
others it will make everyone feel better.



--
...winston
msft mvp windows experience