Vista, the latest version of Microsoft's Windows operating
system, makes its long awaited consumer debut tomorrow. The first
major upgrade in five years, Vista incorporates a new, sleek look
and features a wide array of new functionality, such as better
search tools and stronger security.
The early reviews have tended to damn the upgrade with faint
praise, however, characterizing it as the best, most secure version
of Windows, yet one that contains few, if any, revolutionary
features.
While those reviews have focused chiefly on Vista's new
functionality, for the past few months the legal and technical
communities have dug into Vista's "fine print." Those communities
have raised red flags about Vista's legal terms and conditions as
well as the technical limitations that have been incorporated into
the software at the insistence of the motion picture
industry.
The net effect of these concerns may constitute the real Vista
revolution as they point to an unprecedented loss of consumer
control over their own personal computers. In the name of shielding
consumers from computer viruses and protecting copyright owners
from potential infringement, Vista seemingly wrestles control of
the "user experience" from the user.
Vista's legal fine print includes extensive provisions granting
Microsoft the right to regularly check the legitimacy of the
software and holds the prospect of deleting certain programs
without the user's knowledge. During the installation process,
users "activate" Vista by associating it with a particular computer
or device and transmitting certain hardware information directly to
Microsoft.
Even after installation, the legal agreement grants Microsoft the
right to revalidate the software or to require users to reactivate
it should they make changes to their computer components. In
addition, it sets significant limits on the ability to copy or
transfer the software, prohibiting anything more than a single
backup copy and setting strict limits on transferring the software
to different devices or users.
Vista also incorporates Windows Defender, an anti-virus program
that actively scans computers for "spyware, adware, and other
potentially unwanted software." The agreement does not define any
of these terms, leaving it to Microsoft to determine what
constitutes unwanted software.
Once operational, the agreement warns that Windows Defender will,
by default, automatically remove software rated "high" or "severe,"
even though that may result in other software ceasing to work or
mistakenly result in the removal of software that is not
unwanted.
For greater certainty, the terms and conditions remove any doubt
about who is in control by providing that "this agreement only
gives you some rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all
other rights." For those users frustrated by the software's
limitations, Microsoft cautions that "you may not work around any
technical limitations in the software."
Those technical limitations have proven to be even more
controversial than the legal ones.
Last December, Peter Guttman, a computer scientist at the
University of Auckland in New Zealand released a paper called "A
Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection." The paper
pieced together the technical fine print behind Vista, unraveling
numerous limitations in the new software seemingly installed at the
direct request of Hollywood interests.
Guttman focused primarily on the restrictions associated with the
ability to play back high-definition content from the
next-generation DVDs such as Blu-Ray and HD-DVD (referred to as
"premium content").
He noted that Vista intentionally degrades the picture quality of
premium content when played on most computer monitors.
Guttman's research suggests that consumers will pay more for less
with poorer picture quality yet higher costs since Microsoft needed
to obtain licences from third parties in order to access the
technology that protects premium content (those licence fees were
presumably incorporated into Vista's price).
Moreover, he calculated that the technological controls would
require considerable consumption of computing power with the system
conducting 30 checks each second to ensure that there are no
attacks on the security of the premium content.
Microsoft responded to Guttman's paper earlier this month,
maintaining that content owners demanded the premium content
restrictions. According to Microsoft, "if the policies [associated
with the premium content] required protections that Windows Vista
couldn't support, then the content would not be able to play at all
on Windows Vista PCs." While that may be true, left unsaid is
Microsoft's ability to demand a better deal on behalf of its
enormous user base or the prospect that users could opt-out of the
technical controls.
When Microsoft introduced Windows 95 more than a decade ago, it
adopted the Rolling Stones "Start Me Up" as its theme song. As
millions of consumers contemplate the company's latest upgrade, the
legal and technological restrictions may leave them singing "You
Can't Always Get What You Want."
___________________________
Damn Microsoft. 
Pay more for less, what the hell is this? Becoming more and more
like Singapore Government.
And anyhow delete files it deems as high risk, which may render
programs useless. **** 
When Microsoft introduced Windows 95 more than a decade ago, it
adopted the Rolling Stones "Start Me Up" as its theme song. As
millions of consumers contemplate the company's latest upgrade, the
legal and technological restrictions may leave them singing "You
Can't Always Get What You Want."
I agree! 
* Finished ranting * 
