4 ms·

>Having as my primary workstation a computer that Microsoft could remotely disable at any time for any reason wasn't a very appealing prospect. Unless you're n

by tychuz 11y ago

>Having as my primary workstation a computer that Microsoft could remotely disable at any time for any reason wasn't a very appealing prospect. Unless you're normal, ie not wearing tinfoil hat.

sbarre 11y ago
Not sure why you're being downvoted for this. The "MS can remotely shut me down!" anti-Windows argument has always felt like FUD to me. Can anyone here who owned a legit copy of Windows actually say that this happened to them, or to someone they knew?
- zapu 11y ago
  I don't think they shut you down, worst that can happen is setting your background to color black and "THIS WINDOWS IS ILLEGAL" message. And that can be usually sorted out with one phone call.
- aphexairlines 11y ago
  > Not sure why you're being downvoted for this. Because there's a way to communicate the point without casting aspersions on the commenter.
- zxcvcxz 11y ago
  They're being downvoted because they used the phrase "tin foil hat" which should be a bannable offense on all discussion forums. It's only used to delegitimize other people without having to put forth effort into forming a counter argument.
- delish 11y ago
  > Can anyone here who owned a legit copy of Windows actually say that this happened to them, or to someone they knew? I can almost say. I had a genuine Windows 7 license in 2011 that I used for gaming. When I'd turn on the machine, it'd give the scary "this copy may not be legitimate" message at boot. When I'd enter the product key, it wouldn't work. I could push through that message, but every 10 or so minutes I'd get a pop-up screen I couldn't ignore that said "this copy may not be legitimate" and I'd have to enter my key that should work that doesn't, or hit "ignore for 10 minutes." So, Microsoft didn't remotely deactivate it, but they, through their error, inconvenienced me such that I got rid of something that was a $300 value (it was Win7 ultimate, 32 and 64 bit licenses. I got it for free by hosting a Windows 7 launch party. So it's the most genuine Windows you can get.) I'm a case study of "DRM provides no advantage for legitimate users, and occasionally inconveniences them." Of course I'm just an anecdote, but you asked!
- SyneRyder 11y ago
  Yep, it happened to me: twice. First time, I had an HP laptop with Windows XP Pro OEM in 2006. All worked fine, but one day out of the blue it told me that my copy of Windows wasn't genuine. I don't know what caused it & reinstalling Windows over the top from DVD didn't fix it. I seem to recall Windows then kept shutting down after 2 hours, so backing up my data before a reformat was extremely difficult. Once I reformatted & did a clean reinstall, it worked again. The second time, I had a MS BizSpark membership via the Association Of Software Professionals, and was testing my software in Windows 7 VMs. 8 months later, my Windows 7 claimed it was non-genuine. I enquired with Microsoft, and they said my business shouldn't have been eligible for BizSpark because it was more than 3 years old, so they'd cancelled the BizSpark membership & blacklisted my Windows keys without notifying me. I would've preferred if MS verified my eligibility upfront. I switched to Apple as a result. I know, it's another proprietary OS and tied to one hardware vendor, but at least in 9 years it has never locked me out of my data or my machine.
- Skunkleton 11y ago
  > Can anyone here who owned a legit copy of Windows actually say that this happened to them Yep. Just recently my windows 8.1 installation deactivated itself and I had to call in an talk to a person to get it reactivated.
  - tychuz 11y ago
    Well, activation hickup is not even close to "remote disable". It's an annoyance, sure, you have to call some support person, but it's not a 'self destruct' option.
- cryptophreak 11y ago
  I just don’t like it on principle. Why would I voluntarily offer potential control of my machine to somebody else? My software is mine.
- pdkl95 11y ago
  MS (or anybody else) doesn't get to violate first sale doctrine[1] simply because they don't trust their customers. Once consideration has changed hands for a copy of Windows, MS loses all control. The customer can do anything they want with their copy, except for a few areas covered by other laws (i.e. distributing another copy would make the customer liable for copyright infringement). If Microsoft is disabling a legitimately purchased copy of windows - or accessing it without the authorization of the owner - that could be a violation of the CFAA (or other laws; ask a lawyer). Trying to say the customer somehow authorized all of this by throwing a contract of adhesion at the customer after the purchase has been made is almost certainly not binding, and is explicitly illegal in some jurisdictions. It's patently not a contract as it lacks all of the required elements. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

by tychuz 11y ago

>Having as my primary workstation a computer that Microsoft could remotely disable at any time for any reason wasn't a very appealing prospect. Unless you're normal, ie not wearing tinfoil hat.

sbarre 11y ago

Not sure why you're being downvoted for this. The "MS can remotely shut me down!" anti-Windows argument has always felt like FUD to me. Can anyone here who owned a legit copy of Windows actually say that this happened to them, or to someone they knew?

zapu 11y ago
I don't think they shut you down, worst that can happen is setting your background to color black and "THIS WINDOWS IS ILLEGAL" message. And that can be usually sorted out with one phone call.
aphexairlines 11y ago
> Not sure why you're being downvoted for this. Because there's a way to communicate the point without casting aspersions on the commenter.
zxcvcxz 11y ago
They're being downvoted because they used the phrase "tin foil hat" which should be a bannable offense on all discussion forums. It's only used to delegitimize other people without having to put forth effort into forming a counter argument.
delish 11y ago
> Can anyone here who owned a legit copy of Windows actually say that this happened to them, or to someone they knew? I can almost say. I had a genuine Windows 7 license in 2011 that I used for gaming. When I'd turn on the machine, it'd give the scary "this copy may not be legitimate" message at boot. When I'd enter the product key, it wouldn't work. I could push through that message, but every 10 or so minutes I'd get a pop-up screen I couldn't ignore that said "this copy may not be legitimate" and I'd have to enter my key that should work that doesn't, or hit "ignore for 10 minutes." So, Microsoft didn't remotely deactivate it, but they, through their error, inconvenienced me such that I got rid of something that was a $300 value (it was Win7 ultimate, 32 and 64 bit licenses. I got it for free by hosting a Windows 7 launch party. So it's the most genuine Windows you can get.) I'm a case study of "DRM provides no advantage for legitimate users, and occasionally inconveniences them." Of course I'm just an anecdote, but you asked!
SyneRyder 11y ago
Yep, it happened to me: twice. First time, I had an HP laptop with Windows XP Pro OEM in 2006. All worked fine, but one day out of the blue it told me that my copy of Windows wasn't genuine. I don't know what caused it & reinstalling Windows over the top from DVD didn't fix it. I seem to recall Windows then kept shutting down after 2 hours, so backing up my data before a reformat was extremely difficult. Once I reformatted & did a clean reinstall, it worked again. The second time, I had a MS BizSpark membership via the Association Of Software Professionals, and was testing my software in Windows 7 VMs. 8 months later, my Windows 7 claimed it was non-genuine. I enquired with Microsoft, and they said my business shouldn't have been eligible for BizSpark because it was more than 3 years old, so they'd cancelled the BizSpark membership & blacklisted my Windows keys without notifying me. I would've preferred if MS verified my eligibility upfront. I switched to Apple as a result. I know, it's another proprietary OS and tied to one hardware vendor, but at least in 9 years it has never locked me out of my data or my machine.
Skunkleton 11y ago
> Can anyone here who owned a legit copy of Windows actually say that this happened to them Yep. Just recently my windows 8.1 installation deactivated itself and I had to call in an talk to a person to get it reactivated.
- tychuz 11y ago
  Well, activation hickup is not even close to "remote disable". It's an annoyance, sure, you have to call some support person, but it's not a 'self destruct' option.
cryptophreak 11y ago
I just don’t like it on principle. Why would I voluntarily offer potential control of my machine to somebody else? My software is mine.
pdkl95 11y ago
MS (or anybody else) doesn't get to violate first sale doctrine[1] simply because they don't trust their customers. Once consideration has changed hands for a copy of Windows, MS loses all control. The customer can do anything they want with their copy, except for a few areas covered by other laws (i.e. distributing another copy would make the customer liable for copyright infringement). If Microsoft is disabling a legitimately purchased copy of windows - or accessing it without the authorization of the owner - that could be a violation of the CFAA (or other laws; ask a lawyer). Trying to say the customer somehow authorized all of this by throwing a contract of adhesion at the customer after the purchase has been made is almost certainly not binding, and is explicitly illegal in some jurisdictions. It's patently not a contract as it lacks all of the required elements. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]