REM said:
I started to reply to this when you wrote it, but I decided against it
since it is just my opinion. I think MS does not want users to have
the ability to boot from a recovery CD. Each version of Windows has
made it more and more difficult to protect a working system. I think
MS should make complete system recovery via images of patched and
setup systems once the setup process is completed (WUBCD), but chooses
to leave paying customers in the cold, simply due to the fact that
someone out there might pirate the software. I was even going to
suggest that MS will fight this project.
Totally agree. I sympathize with Microsoft not wanting their software
pirated. However, their total, complete refusal to provide a usable
maintenance/recovery option, when others in the industry(IBM, for
instance) allow basically any rational use of their OS for emergencies/
recovery is just paranoia run wild. Their obsession about piracy would
be a more supportable position if Microsoft was not currently so profitable.
That's priorities gone wrong, badly wrong! Paying customers denied
data integrity and heaved with hours and hours of reinstalling,
downloading critical updates, setting up all programs used, just to
secure the bottom line.
Yes, I would agree with this. and the licensing problem could be worked
by including the build of BartPE/WUBCD/WinPE within the activation
fence. You would have to build a copy of the Boot CD on the machine
it is to be run on. This would work for home/small office users. The
corporate
users could work out their license with MS(and give their lawyers something
to do). This is what I mean by Microsoft dropping the ball.
However, the more I hang around the Microsoft public news groups,
the more I become convinced that there is a large class of Windows
users that are clueless(some about computers and some totally) and
are proud of it. This comforms to the period once upon a time that
I maintained about 100 pc's in a technical organization(non computer
related). About 10% of the users in this environment were computer
clueless and were hostile about learning anything about computers.
Giving a CD bootable copy of Windows to a
member of this group would be the computer equivalent of giving a
loaded gun to a baby. Although.... It could be the best way to equip
them with indestructible(?) software-if Windows PE could be made
more like, say Knoppix Linux. If you could just build a CD that was
as indestructible as a brick.
I was so delighted to discover this project! But..
Ben was apparently served legal papers from MS concerning the
possibility that he might "profit" from his completely free freeware
project. Check the forums for more details as he digests the packet he
received. It might be as simple as changing the project name, but I
suspect it is a strong arm tactic designed to squash the project. He
clearly doesn't have the means to present any defense at all.
He should first stop using the word "Windows." He(and the rest of
us) should have seen that one coming.
"Monopoly? Don't be silly, that's a game. I want to control the whole
world!"
Clearly! And our choices to stop it are Macintosh and Linux.
Bill Gates is still a neurotic, insecure college kid deep inside,
and is uncomfortable when he is not in control. His organization
is built around that psychology.
Dick Kistler
