FSF Launches "BadVista" Campaign 607
FrankNFurter writes to note the launch yesterday of the FSF's BadVista campaign against Microsoft's new operating system. BadVista's aim is to inform users about the alleged harms inflicted by Vista on the user and about free software alternatives. Quoting program administrator John Sullivan: "Vista is an upsell masquerading as an upgrade. It is an overall regression when you look at the most important aspect of owning and using a computer: your control over what it does. Obviously MS Windows is already proprietary and very restrictive, and well worth rejecting. But the new 'features' in Vista are a Trojan Horse to smuggle in even more restrictions. We'll be focusing attention on detailing how they work, how to resist them, and why people should care."
All I have to say is... (Score:3, Interesting)
No really, this might be a new low for the FSF. I mean, really people, does this tactic ever work? Far from becoming an effective bad PR campaign it is going to further elevate consumer and user awareness of Vista.
While were at it, why aren't we bashing the hell out of Apple and it's release of Shaguar? After all, Jaguar runs on fully DRM'd, TCP'd hardware. The same cannot be said for Windows users.
So.... (Score:4, Interesting)
It's all well and good to say that Vista is a "don't upgrade" for the next twelve months -- but there are improvements in it, some of which rise to the level of intuition, and right now there's no Free way to get those improvements.
Re:The wisdom of crowds (Score:1, Interesting)
The site has bad design... (Score:4, Interesting)
But the point I am making is the site is crappy. The site is ugly. It consists of bunch of long TEXTS (like anybody likes to read long texts). It should communicate better with some pictorials and clear picture of what Vista will not allow you to do.
"Treacherous Computing" "Genuine upgrade promlems" (Score:5, Interesting)
Eventually MS and others pushing [Un]Trusted Computing and Digital Restrictions Management will find out that the strangle grip is not the best way to hold and attract costumers.
Re:FUD??!! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The site has bad design... (Score:5, Interesting)
I went in wanting to be convinced, but instead it comes across as a Fanboi site like many others pointed out. The main page should have the juice straight away. You get in and you read the bulletpoints: Windoze is teh sux because a) It will take away your freedom to copy your legally owned music (insert link)
b) It will spy on you, reporting your every move back to the corporations (insert link)
And so on. They really don't have a clue how to present the information, they are overly verbose for the intended audience which it is very clear they don't understand, the design is so ugly that it takes away much credibility, their claims are not backed up by concise facts, they constantly appeal to emotion, and they don't offer clear-cut instrucions for the alternative.
Also their choice of gNewSense as an alternative OS is weak because it lacks in the same departments: null communication skills, poor design, ZERO instructions. They could at least have picked Ubuntu, which looks much more professional and at least would make an unexperienced user that the thing may actually work.
Why the FSF and other antimicrosofites can't get it through their heads that the average windows user is not stupid but they are also utterly unconcerned with the technical side. From the few distros that I've seen, only Red Hat and Ubuntu seem to have picked up on this fact. If it looks ugly it breeds distrust, and if it is complicated it's deemed not worth it. Free as in Gratis is not enough. In fact, it's no different from a cheap knockoff in their minds. Don't take my word for it. Talk about it to people around you that are not tech fans and you will see, they are not idiots, they simply have different interest and this is a very, very bad attempt at interesting them and it will backfire.
Unless they completely revamp the site and make it look as serious and well presented as the marketing sites for Vista are/will be, offer sensible, to-the-point arguments, and a clear and easy guide to upgrade they would appear to the uninformed like a National Enquirer next to a Wall Street Journal.
I'm registering at the site to tell them this now, if many of us do the same maybe they will listen.
Not an upgrade? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is nothing more than a giant pile of FUD. Accountability in drivers is a huge upgrade, not some soul sucking attempt to steal your humanity. Besides... since when did 'freedom' apply to our computers and operating systems. What's next? My office chair needs the freedom to vote? If I double click on it, it does the job I want it to do, I don't care if Stalin programmed it and titled it "3D Studio Max for the advancement of the Social Utopia and down fall of Democracy." It works it works. Vista works very well. Windows XP hasn't let me down yet, and I'm looking forward to some new glitz and sparkle.
My cameras are black boxes, my lights are black boxes, my chroma paint is top secret, I eat proprietary cereal, my car's design is patented, my apartment design is owned by another company, I can't even paint my walls without permission. but wait... my Operating System... THAT's a holy grail of democracy and freedom. I use almost 0 Open Source software day in and day out, because in my field, it's all worthless except for linux. Gimp? Pfff... yeah why don't I just use MS Paint?
If the author drives an open source car, lives in an open source house, uses only open source hardware, only eats food from freely available recipes and sleeps on a mattress with a freely available design I'll give a shit.
Most important aspect? (Score:2, Interesting)
the most important aspect of owning and using a computer: your control over what it does
"""
So, who's opinion is this? B/c I know that my parents and any "normal" person that I've run into couldn't care less about ultimate control over there computer aside from being able to install M$ Word, etc and run a few games on it like MahJong. Since I do believe that Vista will allow this, I really don't think that any other freedom that might be limited will even be noticed.
So, how important is this to the average user?
On the flip side, those that need and/or want to have total control over what there computer does are probably already running a Linux/BSD/etc. That or they know how to bend windows to meet there needs.
All this campaign will do is further confuse an already very confusing issue for the average user.
Re:FUD??!! (Score:3, Interesting)
More detail (Re:"Treacherous Computing" "Genuine (Score:5, Interesting)
This page [minasi.com] says something about the nature of Vista. It shows the six privilege levels:
The owner of the computer, even with root ("Administrator") status, can have at most only the third privilege level.
Are you content to be only a tenant in a system where someone else retains ultimate control? If you prefer to own your own copy of an OS, you will have to choose free software over Vista.
bad article- my list for BadVista. (Score:3, Interesting)
Most home users don't give a shit about SMB2. Most users are going to get Vista with new hardware, so their needing new hardware point is moot and really is it a shortcoming of Vista that it won't run on old hardware or is it a shortcoming of the hardware. The 2 gigs of ram to run Vista is bollocks - these guys havent even booted upto the RCs have they. He complains about a lack of driver support from the hardware manufacturer - how can you spin a hardware manufacturers problem into a shortcoming of vista?
They talk about lack of compatibility with AV products but do fail to mention a lot of things M$ is doing better with security. He actually complains that there is a learning curve with Vista - that its different enough than XP that users and technicians will need retraining - I've tried it - I don't need retraining. And whats the alternative - switch to linux - I run Debian in lab and Zenwalk at home and have run a whole bunch of other distros and I can assure you that any users that switch will need retraining there too.
By the time he gets to 20 he isn't he making grammatical sentences and he actually claims that theres bound to be bugs in 50 million lines of code and a five year beta test period - I'd agree but it isn't because theres 50 million lines of code because dear lod Linux also has a lot of lines of code. THis also sounds little better than SCO claiming well theres millions of lines of code in linux - some of it is bound to be ours.
I'm not going to go on bashing the article - its pretty obvious its biased and badly written in about 15 mins and he isn't even trying. The most valid point for me is going to be the inability of wordpad to open
Heres my list of things that are Bad with Vista
1) DRM - especially the Hollywood mandated HDCP and its Protected Video Path crap. The minute they roll this out you will see studios using HDCP because they can and if you don't have a brand spanking new monitor then there is a nice little ICT to drop your content straight back down to 480p and good riddance - now if I just bought HD content and have hardware perfectly capable of running it without needing an upgrade except to satisfy the Hollywood moguls then I damned well expect it to run and don't like being shafted. Even if movie studios do decide not to enforce ICT until 2012 (bollocks they will do it in a couple of years because they can)
2) UAC - this is a great idea in principle but the last I checked in implementation it was too goddamn annoying and I'm sure most people will just turn it off.
I used to have an issue with the limited license transfers but they've taken care of that one (not if you get your Vista from an OEM in which case you get what you paid for imho) I had no driver issues. If I did I don't think I'd be blaming MS and rather my shitty hardware manufacturer.
Thats it. Thats my list of woes with Vista. Now I'm not going to add my list of things that are bad with MS....
See this is a great example of (Score:3, Interesting)
So yes, Vista's DRM support does give you more choices. You have the choice to get access to the restricted material, if you want. I don't think it's a good idea, but it's available. However you can also use all the content you have in the past, no problem. You do not have that option in an OS that doesn't support the DRM, the restricted media just won't work. Now you probably don't care, but you can't pretend like yo have more freedom because the user of the DRM enabled Vista system has the freedom to use what you do AND the restricted content.
I know that some people would like to believe that the big, bad MS is going to go and lock down everything on your system and encrypt your MP3s in your sleep but really, I've used Vista, nothing changes. Your unprotected media works as it always has. The DRM isn't a useful new feature, but it doesn't hurt, you cna just ignore it.
Re:Would've been nice if... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Speculations and guesswork (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:More detail (Re:"Treacherous Computing" "Genuin (Score:3, Interesting)
Free software protects free speech (Score:5, Interesting)
Your apple shop is a monopoly, and we know monopolies reduce freedom. If freedom is the ability to satisfy wants, e.g. by choosing what to buy (a very narrow definition of freedom, but it's one you apply here) - then paying more for apples reduces your freedom to satisfy other wants.
You say, "Don't complain unless you can tell me how to fix the thing." We know one way to fix the thing: introduce choice. That's what free software is doing. That's why we need to support it and make it better, not simply say, "it doesn't do X today, so I don't even want to know." For some people, it's a practical choice. That's why Microsoft is afraid of free software.
But there's a wider issue here, and it's the reason I really care. Speech is freedom, but it isn't just a matter of choice: it's generative. It involves creating something original. In a world where computers have become central to communication, free speech depends on software. If that software is not free, there's a real danger to speech.
I'm a brilliant musician, but nobody knows. I want to share my music - but music players delete it after three plays. I have a video of an important political gaffe - but I can't share it all because YouTube has a 10 minute limit unless I'm certified. I have vital information about voting machine flaws - but I can't distribute it because it has the no-copy bit set. I filmed my son's first steps - but not it in high-resolution because I need a special encryption key. I tried to comment on Oedipus Rex on my blog - but the software blocked it as obscene.
This isn't the world we live in. Our freedom to speak is defended by our choice of software. But are the choices offered by proprietary software enough? When DVRs are limiting the ability to share content; when technology companies act as if Hollywood is their customer, not the people who buy their software; when Microsoft and Apple are starting to lock down what their systems can do, I don't think that they are. Because it's not enough to pick from someone else's choices: we have to be able to generate our own. That's what free software is about. I'm thrilled and proud of everyone who puts in the effort to make my freedom that much greater. You may not want that freedom. But don't tell me that's not the "domain of freedom", because I sure as hell do.
Re:Speculations and guesswork (Score:2, Interesting)
Purely speculative
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You're response is speculative too. At the large company I work at, none of the Vista(read 30+) can connect to our samba shares. We still have yet to resolve it.
Re:More detail (Re:"Treacherous Computing" "Genuin (Score:4, Interesting)
As computer users we have slowly been giving up more and more of our computer to Microsoft and other OSes (even Mac is starting to expand). I think it's time we start saying "Fuck you" to people who over charge us so they can take our computer and run rampant on our hardware. I don't think it's time for Linux if you don't already run it. But it's time for us to remain on Windows XP. It's time to demand that DirectX 10 get ported to XP if you need it. It's time to basically stop taking shit from OSes and start demanding a better OS. Dos could give you a disk operating system for 640k, All I want a simple GUI, that all the programs now run on. Why am I sacrificing 2 gigs of memory just to my OS when it's something that should only require a couple megs if done properly. If we want to clog our systems it's our option.
That's my opinion. But i believe it's anyone else who is sick of being forced to upgrade every 3-5 years to an OS that takes at least double the processing power. Moore's law? Didn't know Moore's first name was Peter.
Re:Clarification of SMB support/FUD (Score:3, Interesting)
Opinions from MS's sales dept? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Would've been nice if... (Score:4, Interesting)
- The RAM thing exists already - without the paging. Drivers can allocate AGP- and even Sysram to get some space for the data. Sysmem is obviously a very bad idea with AGP, but its there. With PCI, this is much less of an issue. There the drivers can transfer from/to sysram, which gets paged by the OS already.
- Running multiple games at once will obviously hurt their FPS, unless they are not very demanding (running Gothic 3 and Oblivion at the same time is not a good idea). Running several 3D apps side by side HAS to work in Vista since the entire interface is going to be a 3D application, actually. In fact, D3D10 adopted a server/client model from OpenGL here; in OGL it never was a big deal to run several GL apps at once, because they are clients using one server (the graphics card).
- Accelerated drawing: not going to happen. At least not on a primitive stage. The windows are VERY likely to be rectangular textures, but forget about drawing every line with 3D, this is just too inefficient as it chokes the CPU because of wait states. 3D engines usually avoid as many API calls as possible for this reason. CorelDraw's calls are likely to involve GDI. It is perfectly ok for GDI to draw in the window texture. This is faster than traditional GDI because pre-Vista GDI immediately shows the result and has TONS of waitstates built in. The texture approach just involves some writing in a memory block. (Afaik this is the same way Qt4 handles drawing with GL-acceleration, and it is really MUCH faster than traditional 2D.)
- The composer: well, it is really strange why nobody EVER thought of this before. You don't even need a fully-featured composer, just some simple double-buffering would do. This is the very reason why tearing does not happen with Aero, NOT the blending and composing. Turn off double-buffering, and the tearing is back.
As for the vector thing, this DOES sound like marketing babble. I want this in a more detailed form. It would be very strange to see entire bitmaps transferred to the composer anyway, and I doubt its done this way now; heck, even X11 does not handle it this way.
Scaling old apps will give you a blurred result because of the bilinear filtering. Still better than having huge pixels though. GDI calls could be scaled nicely, yes, by sending the coordinates through a scale before drawing. But bitmaps will get blurry (that is, all icons etc.)
- User mode drivers are back, finally. But how am I going to handle GPU driver crashes in Vista? There is no textmode console, so what if video just doesnt restart?
I agree that Vista is a leap, but it just doesnt make it more attractive, really. Its expensive, has a bazillion features that need to be turned off etc. Direct3D 10 is going to be the likely reason why I'm gonna get it (its new features are VERY cool, and I write 3D graphics stuff), as soon as VistaAntiSpy is available
Then again, once OpenGL 3.0 is available, D3D10 won't be alone...
My own proposal... (Score:2, Interesting)
I heartily recommend evaluating FreeBSD. [freebsd.org] For people seeking something a little less prickly than the vanilla tree, PC-BSD [pcbsd.org] is also available, which adds a graphical user interface by default and a more graphically oriented form of package management, among other things.
Stallman raises some valid points with regards to how Vista users are likely to get the shaft...but what Stallman isn't likely to want you to know is that there is a third option, which means you don't have to climb aboard the FSF/Linux bandwagon either.
FreeBSD is a very solid system. The Linux binary support means you can get such things as Adobe's binary browser plugins working with it, and FreeBSD also has native binary nVidia video card drivers available, meaning that you can play World of Warcraft and all of the usual 3D games with Wine. Ports, the package management system, has makefiles for over 16,000 applications, and it's also pretty much the only package management system I've used that I consider genuinely reliable and decent.
You will possibly see some people aligned with the FSF shouting me down for writing this...Stallman doesn't want anyone using FreeBSD or the BSD license, and the reason why is because if people do, that's less people who end up seeing him as an authority figure, or who he has to use as extra bodies for his activism.
It's got to the point where to a large degree, using an operating system associated with any particular group means you're vulnerable to control by that particular group. With Microsoft, sure, you end up with DRM. With Linux, you end up with *only* the license/s Stallman wants you to use, and no other...as well as possibly getting conscripted for his activism if you become sufficiently close with the FSF.
The only solution I've been able to find is to seek an operating system which isn't affiliated with any particular group...or at least controlling agenda. FreeBSD is one, and is probably the most mature that I've been able to find...but there are a few others [freeos.com], for people who want to investigate those. That however is what we need...an operating system, without economic, political, or technological control. Microsoft want economic and technological control of people...Richard Stallman wants political control of people. The reason why I don't find the offerings of either of those two camps appealing is because I value self-determination...the ability to make my own choices.
Re:Clarification of SMB support/FUD (Score:3, Interesting)
The GGP/Article was talking about Vista requiring you to "check in" every 6 months or lose access to your system. MS should never be allowed, technically or legally, to arbitrarily turn off your system until you jump through some more hoops for that. Yes, this "never" includes any smoke and mirrors set up about it being a "business machine".
Further, if it is possible as you say to get non-expiring keys, of what benefit is the lockout system? The only one I can think of is a power play to help get people adjusted to the idea that their corporate masters have final say on what they can do with what they paid for. The existence of even a single non-expiring key means that's the one "the evil pirates" will use and will evade the system entirely. Only legitimate customers unable or unwilling* to install an non-crippled product will be affected by the lockouts. If you, or anyone else, can name even one legitimate reason for a system like this with a back door in place; please do post it.
~Rebecca
*- I realize sometimes the boundaries between unable and unwilling cross in this area. Frequently the problem is monopoly mindshare; where even though the technical skills may be present a manager is unwilling to give up the MS payola by switching to a better product. The trickle-down from this is that Joe User is unwilling to try something different because he "needs Vista for work", even if it was offered preassembled and installed.