While I personally think that the activation requirements are an onerous burden on people who "purchase" Microsoft software, the basic fact is that product activation in Vista is really no different than product activation in Windows XP. XP already "phones home" when it detects significant hardware changes (new video card, new hard drive, etc) based on criteria that are only known to Microsoft, and requires reactivation (this has already happened to me several times). Failure to reactivate results in an immediate disablement of all system functions except the ability to reactivate. Failure to reactivate results in an immediate logout. So in some ways, published reports of Vista's behavior are actually LESS restrictive than XP.

That said, I still believe it is wrong for Microsoft to require people to activate software legally "purchased", and to impose, IMHO, unconscienceable and burdensome terms in non-negotiable contracts. Unfortunately, no one wants to take the step of contesting either the actual contract provisions, or the legality of "shrinkwrap" software license agreements themselves.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/423/34093#34093