FlipNET - If I were Microsoft, I'd do the same thing regarding not releasing specifically what hardware #'s are used during the activation process. If they did publicly say what the exact components were, they'd also be handing hackers a blue print for a WPA crack. By not saying specifically what it is that goes into WPA allows MS to keep the hackers guessing. Sure there are cracks out today, but without the specifics, those same cracks may not work tomorrow.

I understand your point hoverboy and I thank you to clear this out. My point was that having to give info on what I own and not knowing what info I give makes me reticent. But I want to make clear that i'm with any anti-piracy initiative since I believe its a real need but only as long as it doesn't infringe my own privacy. So the questions remaining are : What makes an anti-piracy initiative fair and reasonnable? What's the limit after which it makes it an infrigement to someone's privacy? That's a debate that will last for quite some times I believe...

FlipNET: I think MS makes it pretty clear what information they're gathering. http://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWSXP/guide/activation.asp

They couldn't possibly be gathering personal information, because none is available at the time of activation (assuming a new install). Registration comes later and it's clearly stated that registration is optional.

If you don't think it's an anti-piracy thing, just what do you think it's for?

Again, I'm not pro-WPA. I just think the privacy concerns are unfounded.

HB, can you name a single game that runs on Windows XP but not on Windows 2000?

Tarkus, maybe during the installation no critical info is gathered but you still can't be sure what are all the possibilities later. May I remind you the GUID controversy w/Win98, Office 97 & IE4. It wasn't "suppose" to be used that way but at the end, it was. With WPA, another process is, of course, involved but basically, it's the same thing: infos are gathered from your PC to create a unique ID except that now, it's required to activate your product. What are the possibilities then, after such ID is created? Will it serve later to other means? Will there be "unknown" vulnerabilities, as it was the case with the GUID? Who knows...

Anyway, these are just arguments and personal opinion on the subject and only time will clear things out. I sincerely hope that I will be proved wrong if WPA is officialy enforced!!! As I said earlier, i'm a paranoiac when it comes to security. Maybe that's why my employer pays me to be involved in system security

Frog -
Peter Jacobsen's Golden Tee Golf

FlipNET: If you don't trust MS to live by their own contractual agreement, then how do you know your current Windows isn't spying on you (for what purpose, I have no idea)? If that was really their intent, they wouldn't need WPA to do it. They could build it in so that even firewalls wouldn't see it.

If you're that paranoid, why use anything but open source?

Micro$oft, Micro$oft, Micro$oft, Micro$oft, Micro$oft. Eh, well, I was wondering if M____soft will actually continue supporting and developing for win2000 after XP is released - or will their new releases be compatible with win2000. It would really be a drag to have to upgrade our 1000+ workstations to XP...when we haven't even finished our win2000 upgrade yet.

Not here

They just barely dropped support for Windows 3.1, so I don't think they'll stop supporting W2K anytime soon.

Tarkus, let's make things clear once and for all: I looooove W2K and praise W2K whenever I can. So much that i'm pursuing the W2K certification. Since XP is based on W2K's kernel then I should love it too when it comes out (although I haven't tried it yet). But, that WPA bugs me. As I said earlier, it's a personal opinion on the subject and we obviously both have different opinion on it.

And to answer your question about if they do it already I can't tell for sure since i'm not Microsoft. But I would suggest you to check out what IE does when you install it. Watch closely which server it contacts the first time, no matter if you set your homepage to an URL other than MS one in your IE preferences. It will force you to go on their page. But that's not the only thing. Me and others noticed that it also contact a server just before sending you on their default IE page. But, when you go back on that IP, all you see is a blank IE page with the IP address at the top of it and I doubt it's just a redirect page. Why did it direct us there first when there's absolutely nothing to see? I don't know but it makes me and others suspicious.

That being said, I didn't meant to argue when I posted my opinion so let's just close the book here and finish this thread on a good note Have a good day Tarkus!

FlipNET: You just proved my point. You're paranoid about WPA, when MS could easily be spying on you without WPA. I still haven't heard WHY they would be spying on you, though.

You have a good day, too.

Hoverboy, to answer your questions, I've tried RC1 and RC2 of WinXP. I have found both builds to be a lot less stable than Win2k, had many compatibility problems with hardware (which I'm sure will be resolved soon after release) and far too many compatibility problems with software, including a complete inablility to run 3DS Max R4 license server, thus making it impossible to launch the app, infinite tweaking and screwing around with CounterStrike and Max Payne to get them to work, and even when they did work, they crashed frequently to the desktop and had all kinds of display problems, GameSpy Arcade also required fiddling to get it running. Then there's the ever popular inability to share "Program Files", "Windows" or "My Documents" folders over a network, not a bug, but a documented feature with no way to disable it. As for the WPA, I don't have as much of a problem with it as many do, I don't feel it's an invasion of my privacy, but my two objections are that as someone who reformats regularly, it will be a real pain, and secondly, it's undoubtedly MS pushing towards their whole .Net subscription based software idea, which I'm not too fond of at all.

So your main arguments are compatibility, which I completely disagree with, so we'll have to agree to disagree on that one based on our own personal experiences.

New features that XP offers are skinning (windowblinds, desktopX, etc) and remote control (PCAnywhere, RemotelyAnywhere, VNC). My point is that XP doesn't offer anything at all that you can't already do (better in my opinion) with third party products for a hell of a lot less cash.

XP is a horrible monster, and I pray for its death.

Does anybody have a short strong list of reasons why someobdy like me using Win2K should upgrade to XP?

Frank Leon: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/guide/featurecomp.asp

Frank - Contrary to what AJ is saying, the app/hardware compatability in WinXP far exceeds Win2k. I won't argue AJ's claims of the games that he mentioned not running on his system, but on the 27 test systems that I run XP on, not one of those machines needed any 'tweaking' to get Max Payne or CounterStrike to run. Also, many of my friends who are on the beta program have reported better hardware compatability over Win2k. Plus, if you like to play old-school "DOS style" games, something that Win2k doesn't do very smoothly at times, XP is the way to go.

Hoverboy and I are pretty much at opposite ends of the spectrum on this one, insofar as he loves XP and I hate it. If you read both of our opinions, you will probably find a balanced view somewhere in the middle, but bear in mind that we are both going on our own experiences with the new OS. Of course, as I've said before, I can't think of a single reason that anyone running 2k with an OD subscription would want to upgrade unless they want to play old DOS games, and the only ones of those I can think of would be Day of the Tentacle and Sam & Max, both of which run fine on 2k, but without sound (I would add Grim Fandango to the list, but I don't have the original, and it's not abandonware yet, so I haven't tried).

I think that the smart thing for anyone to do would be to try XP before you buy. If you have a friend with XP, install it, and don't activate it unless you intend to stick with it, in which case, buy a copy and get an activation key. If you don't want commit to putting it on your machine without knowing if you'll stick with it, or don't have a friend with a copy, go to your local computer shop and get them to demo it for you. Ask as many people as possible about their experiences with it, though as you can see from the difference of opinion between myself and Hoverboy, you'll have to ask a lot of people to get a true feel for how they are reacting to it.