[ale] OT: The reasons why we went medialess

[Michael Curtis]

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: The reasons why we went medialess
> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:39:21 -0400
> From: "Shahan, Casper" <CShahan at mwmicro.com>
> 
> 
>  
> 
> THE GRIPE LINE: Users find Microsoft's 'medialess' anti-piracy play hard
> to
> swallow 
> By Ed Foster 
> THINK MICROSOFT HAS been scared by the antitrust case? Apparently not
> scared
> enough to refrain from ramming a new "medialess" OS policy down the
> throats
> of computer manufacturers and their customers.
> 
> As an anti-piracy measure, Microsoft has quietly implemented a policy
> through which OEM hardware manufacturers who license Windows directly
> from
> Microsoft no longer ship a full backup CD of the OS with their systems.
> Instead, users receive one of two options for disaster recovery: a
> "recovery
> CD" that is locked into the type of system it's going to run on or a
> hard-drive-based approach where a "recovery image" of the OS can be
> loaded
> on a separate partition. Both approaches appear to have some serious
> shortcomings, not the least of which is that PC buyers might not realize
> what they're getting until it's too late.
> 
> Microsoft has made no formal announcement about this, and not
> surprisingly,
> the PC vendors aren't saying anything more than they have to about it.
> Readers who have been complaining to the Gripe Line as they encounter
> this
> policy in discussions with their PC vendors are being told different
> things,
> and that's also not surprising. Disaster-recovery solutions can vary
> greatly
> from vendor to vendor, and getting clear answers about how they work
> isn't
> easy.
> 
> "I asked my OEM about what's going to happen if for some reason the
> pre-installed system files are removed or deleted," wrote one reader.
> "How
> is having a 'recovery CD' going to help me when I'm asked to insert my
> Windows 2000 CD to copy those files? After conferring with Microsoft
> again,
> my OEM could only tell me that my concerns were very real ones, but
> Microsoft just says they know we're not going to like this but this is
> how
> it's going to be."
> 
> "We have been told that this new policy is designed to reduce piracy,"
> wrote
> another reader, a reseller who was told by his OEM that resellers could
> not
> be entrusted with a Windows CD so they could help customers in case of
> disaster. "But it seems to me to be better designed to increase
> Microsoft's
> profit; they still collect all of the fees but no longer have to bother
> with
> duplicating, packing, and shipping the software. This sounds like a bad
> deal
> for the consumer. Isn't this the kind of thing that got Microsoft in
> trouble
> with the law in the first place?"
> 
> So there's a lot of confusion out there. After several weeks of talking
> to
> Microsoft's designated representatives about this, I wish I could say
> I'm
> going to make it all clear. I'll do my best, but the only thing that is
> certain here is that Microsoft is leaving it up to its OEMs to tell
> their
> customers about this. And because different OEMs are going to have
> recovery
> mechanisms, your results may vary: Kids, don't do this at home, etc.
> 
> According to Microsoft representatives, as of April 1 the company
> changed
> its OEM media policies for all versions of Windows except for the Server
> Edition of Windows 2000, for which one still gets a regular backup CD.
> For
> all other versions of Windows, PC manufacturers have their choice of the
> recovery CD or hard-drive-based recovery-image solutions, and some may
> offer
> customers different options (presumably at different prices). How
> recovery
> CDs are implemented is up to the OEM as long as it meets Microsoft's
> guidelines for assuring the media can only be used on the type of system
> with which it originally shipped. These policies are limited to those PC
> manufacturers that have direct license agreements with Microsoft, so
> generic
> OS backup CDs will still be in the distribution channel.
> 
> "Essentially, Microsoft is providing the flexibility for OEMs to offer
> the
> recovery solution that will be best for their business and best for
> their
> customers," said a Microsoft representative. "This change is based on
> feedback from end-user customers and PC manufacturers, as well as to
> address
> piracy concerns."
> 
> Microsoft also says that some OEMs have been using recovery CDs without
> major complaints for several years as a way to deliver Windows. But it
> remains to be seen how well the different OEM recovery implementations
> will
> work and what types of problems they might cause users. How many users
> will
> have to choose between sending their system in for OS repair or losing
> their
> data? How easy will it be for companies with a variety of PCs to track
> which
> systems require which CDs? And will whatever dent this makes in Windows
> piracy be worth the trouble?
> 
> One problem I am certain we'll see is that many PC buyers will be caught
> by
> surprise. With Microsoft leaving explanations up to the OEMs, many
> customers
> aren't going to know what they're getting until they open the box
> containing
> their PC. And inevitably, some won't realize they don't have a backup CD
> of
> their OS until disaster strikes.
> 


--
To unsubscribe: mail majordomo at ale.org with "unsubscribe ale" in message body.