locked
No validation, No Security updates is wrong! RRS feed

  • Question

  • I'm having the same problems as everyone else. Mine started after computer crash & recovery using Symantec Ghost. Let me say that I pay for my software & have paid dearly over the years. If windows XP & all the other versions for that matter did not have security holes there would be no need for security updates. So, it seems to me we all have been sold a defective product. Then to go thru all this validation stuff, that doesn't work btw, it only makes it hard on the people who've paid for the software in the first place. The hackers, crooks, spammers & all the rest still have their way. It reminds me of check writing. Until recently I couldn't hardly write a check without a DNA sample, fingerprint, or urine test. I've never written a bad check on purpose my whole life. I admit I've made some math mistakes but I paid dearly for that. I'm pretty much sick of having to pay for what some underhanded people do. I say it's time the honest computer users let Microsoft know we are sick of their ***. A class action lawsuit ought to do it. Go ahead Microsoft capture my ip address so you can come after me. The product they sell has security problems & instead of allowing a person to get the updates/fixes they have to spend countless hours trying to resolve the problem. My time is worth something to me & Microsoft has wasted countless hours of mine. So send me a email at moondog520 at the gmail.com site. If we pull together we can have more impact on the Microsoft giant than just one person. I really don't expect Microsoft to allow this post on their boards but someone will read it & understand "I'm Fed UP WITH YOU"
    Friday, June 30, 2006 1:36 AM

Answers

  • Mele20,

    On the Planet Earth, no validation is required for Windows 98SE, let alone W95.

    You keep claiming that MS is accusing Dell of installing pirated copies.  However, unlike the Dorothy character in the Wizard Of Oz, in the real world saying something three times does not make it come true.  If you want to make an outlandish statement like that, you have to provide proof.

    It is also evident that you do not understand the difference between product activation, validation, and the Notifications Tool.

    BTW, if you replaced the motherboards in five Dell computers with non-Dell motherboards, and the reason for the replacement was to upgrade performance rather than to replace defectives, you have violated the EULA and those five installations of XP should be invalid.  With an OEM license for XP, the license is tied to the hardware and cannot be moved to another computer.  For purposes of what defines a given computer, because it is an assemblage of parts, the motherboard is used as the base component.

    IMO MS trusts Dell to install genuine installations of XP.  Now, what the users do to the computers once they receive them is a whole other topic and is out of the hands of Dell.  Pirated copies of XP are installed all the time on Dell computers by their owners, not by Dell.

    Saturday, July 1, 2006 7:23 PM

All replies

  • A class action lawsuit has been filed by a man in California. The lead attorney fittingly, seems to me, was the lead attorney in the Sony Rootkit case.

    Micorosoft's response to this lawsuit in part states that "WGA notification tool provides customers with the confidence and assurance that they are running legitimate software".

    That's BS. I KNOW that I have a legitimate copy of XP Pro and I don't need "confidence" or "assurance" that I am running legitimate software as I know my copy is legit, that is unless Microsoft is accusing Dell of placing pirated copies of XP on all their computers.  I think Dell and the other OEMs should sue Microsoft for damage to their reputations.

    Since I am forced to accept WGA Validation if I want to download updates to DirectX, or obtain UPHClean, .NET Framework 3.0, etc. Microsoft is lying when they claim that WGA is not mandatory. And they are calling Dell dishonest and claiming that Dell computers have pirated copies of XP. 

    http://seattlepi.nsource.com/dayart/20060629/msftwgasuit.pdf

    http://seattlepi.nsource.com/business/275780_msftsuit29

     

    Friday, June 30, 2006 7:00 AM
  •  Mele20 wrote:

    Since I am forced to accept WGA Validation if I want to download updates to DirectX, or obtain UPHClean, .NET Framework 3.0, etc. Microsoft is lying when they claim that WGA is not mandatory. And they are calling Dell dishonest and claiming that Dell computers have pirated copies of XP. 

    Your use of the word "forced" is inappropriate and illogical.

    By your logic, you could say that you are also "forced" to work for your employer if you want the employer's money downloaded to your checking account.  Imagine not being "forced" to work yet still being able to download the employer's money into your checking account!

    MS makes the nice-to-have downloads available as a perk or reward to those who choose to participate on the WGA program.  They are not "lying" about anything.

    I must have missed the press release from MS claiming (in 72pt type, no doubt) that Dell is dishonest and are selling computers with pirated copies of XP.

    Link, please?

    Saturday, July 1, 2006 2:15 AM
  • Your analogy is absurd. I paid for my copy of XP and for my copy of 98SE. So, I am certainly not asking Microsoft to provide me with non security patch updates when I haven't paid for the OS. I paid for it and I should not have to validate my 98SE OS now ...over seven years since I bought it. 98SE is going unsupported very soon...I guess I will still have to validate then also? That is utterly crazy.  What if that validation were to find that my 98SE is pirated and I thought all along that the three disks I have (have never even unsealed two of them) were valid. Or perhaps,  it is the 98SE Updates disk that will prove to be pirated. Is Microsoft going to provide me with a free copy of a valid 98SE? What is the point of requiring validation for W98 or W95? Or W2000 after it goes unsupported? The only possible point is so Microsoft can spy on the users.

    As for my XP Pro, I paid for that also and I bought OEM so that there would be no activation and when I got XP Pro SP1 there was no such thing as validation which makes absolutely no sense on an OEM computer.  And yes, Dell Small Business supervisors have told me that Dell is seriously considering suing Microsoft.  I hope they do as that would put a stop to this nonsense instantly. Microsoft obviously erred in not exempting all OEM machines from this idiocy.

    Dell is bit tired of the whole mess.  Dell accepts all responsibility for technical support for OEM installs (the one exception being security patches that the user has a problem with) and if Dell says the machine has a valid copy of the OS on it that should be sufficient.  Microsoft is accusing Dell of installing pirated copies ...either that or Microsoft's secondary purpose in this WGA program is to spy on the users. If Dell users do not ever need to activate XP (and they don't because I had a totally rebuilt system with substantial, major hardware differences from the hardware XP Pro was on originally, including 5 new mobos installed and never had to activate so the key is not tied to the mobo on Dells) they also should never need to validate.

    Either Microsoft trusts Dell to install valid copies of XP or it doesn't. It can't have it both ways. Microsoft can't sanely say that it knows a Dell install is valid so there is no activation but later claim that the Dell owner is a thief until otherwise proven. That's totally contradictory and again indicates one thing: Microsoft did not exempt OEM machines from WGA because they want to spy on the users.  That is the only logical explanation since they already know the install is valid...unless...and here we come full circle... Microsoft has reason to believe Dell is installing pirated copies.   

    Saturday, July 1, 2006 10:26 AM
  • Hi Mele20,

    Thanks for your reply! I for one do feel that I'm forced to jump thru Microsoft hoops in order to get the security updates for Win XP. The validation tool is what I would consider spyware. Something I spend alot of time trying to prevent along with virus & hackers. On one hand I can understand Microsoft wanting to protect their interests but on the other hand making it near impossible for the honest (paying) user to get security updates is the wrong way to go about it especially when their process is not working correctly. I would like them to back up & eliminate the validation process until they get it to work correctly but I think that's the whole idea, if nothing ever works correctly then we keep coming back for more. They basically have us on a leash.

     

    I couldn't get to the links you provided about the lawsuits, I would like to get on that bandwagon. Like I said, I'm fed up with them holding me hostage.

    Saturday, July 1, 2006 11:57 AM
  • Mele20,

    On the Planet Earth, no validation is required for Windows 98SE, let alone W95.

    You keep claiming that MS is accusing Dell of installing pirated copies.  However, unlike the Dorothy character in the Wizard Of Oz, in the real world saying something three times does not make it come true.  If you want to make an outlandish statement like that, you have to provide proof.

    It is also evident that you do not understand the difference between product activation, validation, and the Notifications Tool.

    BTW, if you replaced the motherboards in five Dell computers with non-Dell motherboards, and the reason for the replacement was to upgrade performance rather than to replace defectives, you have violated the EULA and those five installations of XP should be invalid.  With an OEM license for XP, the license is tied to the hardware and cannot be moved to another computer.  For purposes of what defines a given computer, because it is an assemblage of parts, the motherboard is used as the base component.

    IMO MS trusts Dell to install genuine installations of XP.  Now, what the users do to the computers once they receive them is a whole other topic and is out of the hands of Dell.  Pirated copies of XP are installed all the time on Dell computers by their owners, not by Dell.

    Saturday, July 1, 2006 7:23 PM
  • If no validation is required for 98SE then why am I required to validate when I try to download from MS Download site using my 98SE computer?

    I was installing 5 mobos on ONE Dell computer that was under warranty not 5 Dell computers. Dell rebuilt the computer and installed 5 mobos because they refused to listen to me. I knew what was causing the BSOD at boot and it wasn't the wrong mobo being installed. It is not necessarily true that the license is tied to one computer if OEM.  I was assured by Dell supervisors that if I want to put XP Pro SP1 using my old disk that came with the 8300 on this new Dell that has SP2 that is perfectly legal.

    Dell users would not install a pirated copy of XP on a Dell computer as that would break the warranty and everyone knows that with Dell these days you must buy a 5 year warranty because Dell computers fall apart very rapidly (including their $3000+ systems) and you will need that warranty repeatedly.  (I am speaking of Dells sold to home and small business consumers. Those sold to corporate users are better built).  I would never put a copy of XP on my 98SE box so I have no motivation to pirate a copy of XP which I don't like partly because I am not a child who likes cartoons. (What was Microsoft thinking with that horrible XP look...forcing everyone except children to use Classic look)?

    I am not saying that Microsoft is accusing just Dell of installing pirated copies of XP but all OEMs. A person who buys OEM these days buys a 5 year warranty unless they are an idiot or have bought one of those pieces of junk Dell sells for $300.  There would be no advantage to a user putting a pirated copy of XP on their Dell if it came with XP and if they still have an old Dell that runs that came with 98SE or W2000 why in the world would anyone upgrade those to pirated or legal XP? W2000 is superior to XP and 98SE is still on millions of computers because the users don't want XP. 

    Sunday, July 2, 2006 12:11 AM
  • Hmm...those links are dead. Sorry. I had not discovered how to paste here when I gave those links and I typed them manually.  Let's see if this link is ok. This link has an article and the link to the PDF copy of the lawsuit.

    http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/104615.asp?source=rss

    Sunday, July 2, 2006 12:37 AM
  • Brian Livingston has the answer. We can all dump Microsoft for updates and go with Brian's recommendation. If you have several computers in your home or small business the cost to purchase 5 licenses for HFNetChkPro from Shavlik Technologies is quite reasonable (one time fee of $25 per machine 5 license minimum purchase and a maintenence fee after the first year of $6 per computer).  If you have only one or two computers, Shavlik will have a Web service that scans machines remotely available in a couple of months for an affordable monthly fee.  That is what I will be using as I only have two computers. Although I might purchase the 5 licenses simply because it is such excellent software. It can scan, gather and deploy patches for all your machines from just one install on one machine. It not only patches MS OSes and Office but also patches Firefox, RealPlayer, etc. and offers all non-security patch updates also.  I'm not sure what the remote scanner will be able to do so it may be advisible even with just a couple of computers to purchas the 5 license pack.

    I agree with the following quote from Brian Livingston's Windows Secrets Newsletter June 29, 2006:

    "Just as third-party software firewalls and antivirus programs are widely considered superior to Microsoft's own offerings, I believe patch management will become a category in which those in the know demand independent solutions."

    http://www.windowssecrets.com/comp/060629/

    Sunday, July 2, 2006 2:03 AM
  • I have seen literally dozens and dozens of complaints from Dell owners on this forum, that their Windows OS didn't validate properly, either initially or after checking on the MS genuine advantage link. Especially with the 8200 series.

    However, I haven't seen a notification from Dell or discussion from them that they are having a major problem with their OEM computers, OEM Windows XP, and the MS WGA.

    If there is written info from Dell or notification that has been sent out, please share the link or article with us, so Dell computer users can see how much of a problem it is and if there are specific models that are affected.

    Sunday, July 2, 2006 4:31 AM