• Welcome to OS-tan Collections. Please login.
January 26, 2022, 05:19:25 AM

OS Complaint Box

Started by C-Chan, July 22, 2007, 01:13:31 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Though the idea has been bounced around whenever an off-topic tangent involves some level of Vista or Mac criticism, either by myself or my peers, no one has as yet opened a thread exclusively designed to address such grievances.

I think that can't go on much longer, so I've opened up this thread to provide a forum for this kind of discussion, thus liberating the standard threads from any unsanctioned "flame bait".  

Now while this does risk introducing unnecessarily heated discussions here too, the purpose of this thread is education primarily.  Hence while the occasional bashing or fanatical support may be inevitable, facts and intelligent and/or witty discussion will be far better appreciated.  And of course, any level of discourse that starts infringing on forum guidelines would not be tolerated anywhere.

This is also a reason why I made this thread open ended rather than simply calling it the "Vista Complaint Box" -- after all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and if someone can demonstrate hypocrisy in a competing product's business model, or a critical shortcoming in their product, it's everyone's write to be made aware of this, to set the records straight, to provide additional facts, etc.  

The end goals of this thread is to:

A) Make you a more informed consumer


B) Perhaps harvest some ideas for OS-tan designs.

So without further ado, let's begin.....


Added after 52 seconds:

This is a continuation of post http://ostan-collections.net/post-34197.html#34197
This deals exclusively with Windows Vista and its DRM:

QuoteDigital rights management (DRM) is an umbrella term that refers to access control technologies used by publishers and other copyright holders to limit usage of digital media or devices. DRM can also refer to restrictions associated with specific instances of digital works or devices. The term is often confused with copy protection and technical protection measures, which refer to specific technologies that control or restrict the use and access of digital content on electronic devices. Such technologies act as components of a full-blown DRM design.

While a company may feel compelled to protect a product anyway-shape possible, DRM shifts the design on focus on achieving the best copyright protection possible, often in lieu of product stability, performance, and even security.  Problems with Sony DVD players using DRM protection schemes have been relatively high-profile:


Thing of purchasing a car as an analogy, you expect your money to pay for a vehicle that's safe, stable, and performs under the most rugged conditions.  The DRM equivalent to a car would be if the manufacturer designed failsafes in the vehicle so that the engine would intentionally fail or the tires give out in case you used, say, the wrong brand of petrol (Citgo or a local gas station, instead of Exxon or Pemex).  Naturally, both are apple and orange scenarios since you can DIE in a sabotaged car, but no one really dies or takes seriously a sabotaged electronic device or medium.  Unfortuantely, this mentality has helped make these companies feel "invincible" in the way they treat and price gauge their customers.  [And talk about price gauging: DRM doesn't come cheap, so don't think that the cost of all that protection doesn't filter back to you in some form.)

Bear in mind that Vista is designed for and potentially crippled by DRM, and in fact has been a grievance issued since the days of the Longhorn beta.  Software and hardware companies presumably have unfettered access to your system to update whatever software or firmware they see fit without your consent.  This also would include the additional installation of any programs they feel will enhance their DRM capacity.  This could easily be spyware, data mining software, or perhaps a little something to impede the performance of a rival software company or disc manufacturer.

Why is it that my friends' equipment won't work on Vista, but will on XP and OSX?  
I can't say for certain... because Vista is a proprietary OS after all, and determining how it implements DRM, or how it enables remote Admin access to software and hardware manufacturers (and even itself thru WGA) is completely unknown to us.  

All we're left is to theorize that the problem is likely an obsolete driver or some DRM scheme that's creating incompatibility issues with non-DRM hardware, or just an intentional system flaw designed to cut off support for hardware made before 200X.  But I will say this,... judging from what I'm seeing here and elsewhere, Vista is essentially XP 64-bit edition with a new shell and prepackaged 3D eye-candy, so reason stands that everything that works in XP SHOULD -- technically and morally -- work in Vista.

Clearly we can get more in depth into this issue and you're free to debate this further, but bottom line is this....

The hardware you're buying isn't free and I'm sure you're using legal, unpirated software like any upstanding citizen).  So if you value your right as a consumer, you must not take lying down the fact that you're paying to be criminalized, and penalized often times worse than the criminals themselves who can crack DRM like it were a walnut.  Consider this also as a favor to the companies themselves, since this business model is spiraling them into unsustainability -- no doubt if Microsoft truly designed their products with your benefit and protection in mind rather than their own, I'd be sitting here showering praise for their latest product rather than scorn.

Additional Reading:

Windows EULA's
(Ever wondered why Microsoft is never held responsible for all its security breaches?)

A Five Minute Guide to Opposing DRM
(Despite the potential bias of the source, the short article does a good job of summarizing the main issues behind DRM that you should be aware of.  Quoted below are the four basic arguments:)

Consumer Rights: The most basic argument against DRM is highlighted in the name of the Defective by Design campaign -- namely that DRM technologies result in inferior products with deliberately disabled features. Just as importantly, even if DRM were effective in protecting manufacturers against illegal copying -- which seems questionable, considering how quickly DeCSS appeared once the demand for it existed -- it does so at the cost of existing consumer rights. Users can borrow books from each other, but may not be able to borrow ebooks or mp3 files where DRM is implemented. Similarly, they may not be able to play DVDs from some distributors or install free software, because their hardware only allows registered products from a particular manufacturer to be used or installed. They may not be able to make a backup copy, even in jurisdictions where doing so is legal. From this perspective, DRM continues the trend begun by software end-user license agreements and subscription services, both of which promote the idea that users buy only the right to use the software they buy and do not own it outright. In all these cases, the general tendency is to reduce consumers' rights while reducing the obligations of manufacturers.

Violation of Privacy: In the fall of 2005, publicity over Extended Copyright Protection, better known as the Sony root kit, alerted consumers to the possibility that DRM-enabled hardware can be controlled by the manufacturer, and report regularly on its users' activities. This scenario is any system administrators' nightmare; basically, it makes a secure system impossible. Moreover, it violates the privacy provisions in many jurisdictions (but not in much of the United States), most of which gives users the right to know that data is being gathered. Typically, privacy laws also give users the right to know that the data is gathered for a reasonable purpose and used only for the reasons stated and that the data is stored securely. Privacy concerns are the largest non-technical argument against DRM, although conceivably DRM could simply be recognized as an exception to existing laws.

Anti-competitiveness: Depending on the implementation, DRM may allow only compatible digital material to play on a given piece of a technology. In other words, to play a Sony CD, you would need to have a Sony player, and non-Sony CDs would require their own separate players. In this scenario, DRM becomes a back door entrance to monopoly. It would prove a detriment to second tier hardware manufacturers unless they could license a major manufacturer's DRM technologies. Even more importantly, it would literally mean the end of free software.

Industry Standards: So far, no universally agreed-upon standard for DRM exists. Instead, each manufacturer sets its own standards. To see why this situation is undesirable, you only need to imagine the chaos if car manufacturers could set their own crash safety standards. Not only would people waste endless time shopping around for compatibility, but consumer protection would be impossible. There's a reason why, in other industries, standards are set by consultation and overseen by government agencies -- it's the only way to ensure that the standards are not based entirely on self-interest. If DRM standards were regulated, we might hope that, if DRM were not banned, it would at least be restricted to mild forms that did not violate existing copyright and privacy legislation. The way things are, DRM sets an alarming precedence for other industries by placing the interests of a few manufacturers above the public good.


I have a complaint:

XP is so great, I don't think I'll ever be able to use another Windows OS (at least the way they're going).

After K8 and XP die (which could be in 5+ years), I think I'll have to convert to Linux full time or Mac.

That's if Vienna is a bomb....

Other complaints...? I dunno, I guess it would be nice if Linux was more laptop-friendly...


Actually, as I warned Darknight, and in spite of M$ railings about patent infringement and OSS being a "cancer", they've actually begun dipping their toe into a form [however diluted] of open source:


Whether this is a move to ensure their survival or a device to split the FOSS commnunity, it's still at least an acknowledgment that open [or at least a "more open"] source will be the future of computer software.  Not that I expect them to open source all Windows any time soon, but with a change of mindset, culture, and,... more importantly,... market, who's to say one day you'll be staring at the source code for your beloved Saseko.... ^___^

(although if you worked for the Chinese government, you could do that now.... ¯v¯; )

And as for Linux being laptop friendly, Dell, Lenovo and Asus are working to fix that for you.  ^___^
(although admittedly other smaller companies have been doing that for quite some time, albeit not necessarily for the cheapest prices.... ^.^l)

And naturally compiling your own kernel will help improve speed and performance of Linux on your lappy, although even I can't do that quite yet.  ^^;

In the meantime, you might want to try a distro that already has advanced APCI features enabled.  Both PCLOS and SAM disable them by default due to their experimental nature (and believe me,... you can suspend/hibernate with the *Buntu's, but sometimes you really don't want to.... ^^; ), although if you really want them there are instructions to how to enable them.  

One must is to go to the software repository and download one of the Power management services (powersave or powernowd).  I'm sure there's a reason why these aren't enabled by default, but on my Acer it helped stop the fan from running continuously (major noise pollution.... >_<) and they're intended to not let the laptop battery drain so quickly.


*straps on crazy sandwich-board, grabs bell and theatrically yells*



oh, wait, "Applesoft" will be the final sign...

*walks away...*

QuoteAnd naturally compiling your own kernel will help improve speed and performance of Linux on your lappy, although even I can't do that quite yet. ^^;

You had better be joking XD


Quote*straps on crazy sandwich-board, grabs bell and theatrically yells*



oh, wait, "Applesoft" will be the final sign...

*walks away...*

I'd be afraid anyway.  ^___^
Normally I'd be happy, but M$ has been quite bipolar about it.  On the one hand, you have one section of the megacorporation working towards at least some shady collaboration with Linux developers..  On the other hand, you also have the other half of the company (+ suits) foaming at the mouth and wishing the whole FOSS thing would just shrivel and die, and take Red Hat and Google along with them.  ^^;

It makes for some very freakish yet unsually funny reading.... ^____^;
Almost like watching the Crazy Cat Lady from the Simpsons.... -v-;

QuoteYou had better be joking XD

No actually.  ^__^
From what I've heard, once you've attained veteranc status in Linux, modifying and compiling your own kernel becomes as common as defragging is to Windows users.  After all, here's a chance to modify the guts of your operating system, and you'd be darned not to take advantage of that while you know how to do it (and can always fire back the old kernel in case something goes boom...).  ^___^

Think of it this way...

I've often heard that Linux boots very fast, and indeed it does to a certain extent, but certainly not in a jaw-dropping, near-instant-on fashion.  That's because the vanilla kernel that comes prepackaged in your Linux distros doesn't know where it's being installed into, so it tags along a lot of generic driver and hardware detection support so it knows what to do when the time comes.  So a lot of the boot loading time is wasted searching for things like Tape Drives, various models of DVD-ROMs, and so on.  It also loads up services that may be useful only to an extreme power user (like server applications), but not to you.  So when you compile your own kernel, you can mold it to fit your exact hardware and computing needs, thus potentially cutting down on boot time and freeing up more available memory.  ^^


Quote'd be afraid anyway. ^___^
Normally I'd be happy, but M$ has been quite bipolar about it. On the one hand, you have one section of the megacorporation working towards at least some shady collaboration with Linux developers.. On the other hand, you also have the other half of the company (+ suits) foaming at the mouth and wishing the whole FOSS thing would just shrivel and die, and take Red Hat and Google along with them. ^^;

*lightbulb pops on*

I have a good name planned is M$ and the open source side team up and make an OS:


*Oh, wait, that's already been used...*

QuoteAlmost like watching the Crazy Cat Lady from the Simpsons.... -v-;

Whahaha!! I'll take your random The Simpsons reference and raise you a even random-er Simpsons quote (from the episode Das Bus, where Mr. Gates wants to "buy out" Homer's "internet company):

Your Internet ad was brought to my attention, but I can't figure out what, if anything, Compuglobalhypermeganet does, so rather than risk competing with you, I've decided simply to buy you out.


Homer: I reluctantly accept your proposal.
Mr. Gates: Well everyone always does. Buy 'em out, boys! [his' lackeys trash the room.]
Homer: Hey, what the hell's going on!
Mr. Gates: I didn't get rich by writing a lot of checks! (crazy laughter)

(note: I found this on a Simpsons site, I did not remember/write all that XD)

Baaack onto topic, or at least a little closer to topic, I had a outlandishly scary/funny/weird though...

My family does digital photography, and we use several rather pricey printers. The odd part about them is, unlike most printers than will reach the "end of their life" with malfunctions and breakdowns, these printers will be and the top of the game, chugging along when, suddenly, sometimes while producing a photo, a message will appear on the screen saying the printer has reached the end of it's "service life".

Which means it's, essentially, dead.

I wonder if "they" could ever build a computer/OS that has a "lifespan..." before it needs to be inevitably replaced...


Oh my GAWD, talk about lock-in.... ^___^;

Leave it to industrialized countries to impair extension of the serviceable life of electronic equipment.... It's no wonder printers are also an achilles heel of Linux, given that nearly all of them are produced by such twisted companies.  ^^;

Computer with an enforced lifespan?  Don't give them any ideas.... ^___^;
Personally I prefer to just rip out the mobo an install a new one at the very least.... -v-;

Raffaele the Amigan

I hate that thingie embedded into Windows that is called the Register...

It is an ugly mess of data and informations, some unwanted, which allows any malware to autostart itself at any boot, or any little damage to register could cause the machine to hang-up.

Also I hate the fact that Microsoft could run unwanted software in Kernel Space, invisible to final user, and this software could spy you, or doing dirty tricks like downloading unwanted updates from Microsoft site

(I hate for example updates that slow down the machine because were bad written).

Added after 27 minutes:

Quote from: "Bella"*straps on crazy sandwich-board, grabs bell and theatrically yells*



oh, wait, "Applesoft" will be the final sign...

*walks away...*


Microsoft announces that it is about to release its software WORKS as free download, free of use, no demo-limits.



It is not open source, but it is close to it...

Repent OSinners! For the end of the world is nigh!  ;015
Pegasos computer: CPU PPC G3 600MHz, RAM DDR 512 MB PC3200, Graphic Card ATI 9250 256 MB videoram. SO MorphOS 1.4.5
;011 -(Caramba! El nuevo Peggy computador es Amiga compatible y muy Mejor!)
"God, what an incredible thing we did!"
(R.J. Mical, engineer of original Amiga developing team at Amiga Inc. 1982-1985).
"When the Amiga came out, everyone [at Apple] was scared as hell."
(Jean-Lous Gassée, former CEO of Apple France and chief of developers of Mac II-fx, interviewed by Amazing Computing, November 1996).


You know, I agree with Raffaele-san, the registry is a place of fear and loathing (to quote a well-known penguin ^.^). I've had to deal with quite a few problems resulting from infected registries. The thing that gets me is that M$ has known how much trouble this creates, and how confusing it is, and yet Vista still uses it! Raffaele-san is also right about M$'s ability to run whatever they want without your consent. The EULA is, in my opinion, a devils contract in which you pretty much sell your computer's soul in order to use their OS

--Ecchi na no wa ikenai toomoimasu!!!


QuoteComputer with an enforced lifespan? Don't give them any ideas.... ^___^;

Hmmm...that reminds me of the SAI of the Halo series...which have a lifespan of 7 years and then die...hmmmm....

...yes, I bought the halo books, call me a geek and be happy.


Hey... I read those mythical things called "books" too (well thats my Microsoft-"Bible"- a thousand pages of Windows2000Server-training, and an original (omg I said original, I'm a nerd!) DOS 6.22 manual) :D
I dont tell you how to tell me what to do, so dont tell me how to do what you tell me to do... Bender the Great) :/
[Img disabled by Fedora-Tan]
Thanks Fedora-sama
Homer no function beer well without (Homer Simpson) ^_^