The truth always hurts
The truth is, that windows does not and will never allow the user to have full control over his system.Take it from me. I am not inexperienced with MS operating systems. I have been using them since MSDOS 3.3
Most people think their computers should obey them, not obey someone else. Yet, with a plan they call "
trusted computing" and software they call
Windows Genuine Advantage, Microsoft and others are planning to make your next computer obey them instead of you, and this has serious consequences for your privacy.
WGA has caused a number privacy related problems, including deletion of software. WGA gets automatically updated as part of Microsoft's critical update procedures, giving users little choice but to accept changes to the systems Microsoft can monitor. Many have claimed that WGA is spyware, and although Microsoft have denied such intent, they retain the power to decide what counts as an invasion of your privacy.
For Windows 7 they are changing the name of the product to Windows 7 Activation Technologies (WAT), but the functionality remains the same.
Windows has a long history of security vulnerabilities, enabling the spread of viruses and allowing remote users to take over people's computers for use in spam-sending botnets. Because the software is secret, all users are dependent on Microsoft to fix these problems -- but Microsoft has its own security interests at heart, not those of its users.
Standards are important. With standards, users of various computing platforms can share information. It also removes users from the barrier of vendor lock-in. This is most prevalent in the area of Office documents, where entire governments, at both a state and national level, have made decisions based on the future proofing of their information.
Microsoft is attempting to block an established, free and open format by heavily pushing one they have much more control over, and they're using all their lobbying power to try and fast track it through the standards process, destroying the reputations of the very standards bodies they seek approval from. Microsoft challenges the existing OpenDocument standards for Office documents with its own Office OpenXML format, which specifically implements Microsoft Office, rather than a more general standard.
Unlike OpenDocument, which is
well-supported and cross-platform, Microsoft's format is only supported by
proprietary software from one vendor, and because it has been designed to implement every bug, glitch and historical feature from Microsoft's Office software, the specification to implement OOXML is over 6000 pages long, making it much harder for other software to implement the format.
Office documents are not the only area where Microsoft has railed against standards. Microsoft has abused its monopoly position on the internet, by making its Internet Explorer browser support only a subset of the published web standards, whilst submitting users to an inferior experience when an alternative browser was used. In Europe, Microsoft has been forced to offer a 'ballot screen' of alternative web browsers to the user upon installation of Windows 7 to force Microsoft's browser monopoly to end.
Microsoft
regularly attempts to force upgrades on its customers, by removing support for older versions of Windows and Office, whilst changing the file formats used by its desktop applications, leaving many businesses in a position where they are forced to upgrade to continue to use the software and document formats they've invested time in.
Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) are technology measures that restrict what people can do with their computers.
DRM is built into the heart of Windows 7, and
many Microsoft services push DRM on users. In some cases, Microsoft has added these restrictions at the behest of
TV companies, Hollywood and the music industry. In other cases, Microsoft DRM
goes way beyond these companies' demands, suggesting that Microsoft is using DRM simply to create lock-in. Whether Microsoft is merely a co-conspirator with big media companies or an advocate for DRM in their own right, the result for software users is the same...
The
monomaniacal fear of
big media companies is that people will share digital media with their friends, building a free public library of cultural works. Public libraries are wonderful institutions, and in a digital age they become almost miraculous: we can now provide universal access to human knowledge and cultureâ€â€or at least anything that's been publishedâ€â€at little or no cost. The amazing thing is that it's almost automatic: once people can share freely with their friends over a global network, you get a digital public library. P2P networks are one example of a digital library, and the web is another. The value of these libraries to the public is historic and immeasurable. But media companies serve shareholders, not the public, and are therefore very ready to destroy in its infancy any public resource that might interfere with their profits. The personal computer is built from the ground up to make sharing information fast and easy, so for media companies to restrict sharing they need the full cooperation of software makers at the deepest level. Enter Microsoft.
Microsoft has been found guilty of monopolistic behavior all over the world. With Windows Vista, Microsoft worked with PC manufacturers to significantly increase the hardware specifications for the standard user-experience, causing people to require new computers to run the updated OS.
Early versions of Windows 3.1, relying on an underlying version of the DOS operating system
would throw an error if non-Microsoft DOS, such as Digital Research's DR-DOS, were detected. At one point, Microsoft CEO Bill Gates, in an internal memo said "You never sent me a response on the question of what things an app would do that would make it run with MS-DOS and not run with DR-DOS. Is there [sic] feature they have that might get in our way?" with Microsoft Senior Vice President Brad Silverberg later sent another memo, stating: "What the [user] is supposed to do is feel uncomfortable, and when he has bugs, suspect that the problem is DR-DOS and then go out to buy MS-DOS."
Microsoft recently tried to sell a bunch of patents which would threaten GNU/Linux to patent-trolls, but the patents were
eventually purchased by the Open Innovation Network, a group with patents to protect free software.
In recent months, we've seen Amazon.co.uk is starting to make
Windows refunds quick and easy for GNU/Linux users buying netbook computers. Whether this will become a growing trend, who knows?
Worse, most PC manufacturers still do not offer you the opportunity to buy a machine without Windows.
Traditionally, building your own machine was a way to get around the Windows tax. Microsoft has managed to hurt this, too. Sites such as NewEgg have many of their best deals tied to a purchase of an OEM copy of Windows, penalizing those who actively seek to avoid Microsoft and other proprietary software companies in the name of freedom.
The monopoly of Windows isn't just limited to the direct influence of Microsoft's products: many computer manufacturers only ship machines with Windows, because of bundling deals with other software companies, loading up the machine with a variety of proprietary software, including trial offers for Internet providers and other junkware.