Phone Home

On 2010-02-27, Spanky de Monkey <> wrote:
>
>
> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.com.invalido> wrote in message
> news:hmbfip$ev7$...
>> John Aldred wrote:
>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=1788&tag=wrapper;col1
>>>>
>>> I'm afraid that my simple mind doesn't follow the logic behind this
>>> exercise
>>> by Microsoft.
>>>
>>> If it is possible to decline to take the WAT update, then those running
>>> hacked copies if Win7, (and those with privacy/false positive concerns)
>>> will simply not install it.
>
> Doesn't seem to bother the people who have genuine copies. I know you are
> worried so you should download their software to put you at ease. If you
> have a genuine copy, there will be no issue. I am sure you are scared
> because most likely you are running a pirated copy and that is why you are
> all over this.
>
> Too bad. Better stick to Ubuntu where they don't give a rats ass who gets
> their INFERIOR OS running for a day or so.
>
>
>>>
>>> The vast majority of users will have Win 7 pre-installed on their
>>> machines
>>> by the OEM. A small percentage of users such as myself, may have been
>>> sufficiently impressed by the beta to purchase an upgrade from a
>>> reputable
>>> supplier.
>>>
>>> So who is Microsoft targeting with this exercise? I guess it is those who
>>> have unwittingly purchased a pirate copy and will
>>> find out to their cost in the near future.
>
> BULLSHIT. If you purchase a pirated copy you KNOW it you dumbshit.
>
>
>
How is your foot. For you have shot yourself.

Al Smith wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
>>
>>
>> "DanS" <> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9D2C7A4EF78C2thisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131...
>>> Frank <> wrote in news::
>>>
>>>> On 2/27/2010 6:48 AM, DanS wrote:
>>>>> DanS<> wrote in
>>>>> news:Xns9D2C6227E630Fthisnthatroadrunnern@216.196.97.131:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The comments are interesting, too, especially where Mr. Bott tries
>>>>>>>> to defend himself and repeatedly fails.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No one, not you, nor any the responders to his article, has posted
>>>>>>> any verifiable empirical data to factually refute what he posted.
>>>>>>> If you can, post a factual refute that is verifiable ok?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And there is no factual data that everything he says is true either,
>>>>>> so what's your point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Until the update is released, and the WAT process is picked apart by
>>>>>> others, no one really knows except the team that designed WAT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm fairly certain Bott wasn't on that team, and the information he
>>>>>> is passing along is nothing more than information released by MS and
>>>>>> repeated by him.
>>>>>
>>>>> And actually, after further reading that linked article, that is
>>>>> *EXACTLY* what happened.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bott was called a shill and he responded.....
>>>>>
>>>>> "Actually, I called them. I had questions, so I called them and got
>>>>> answers.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's called reporting."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> And you problem with getting the facts is?
>>>
>>> They are not facts !!!!!!
>>>
>>> Those were statements made by a manufacturer of a product when asked
>>> about
>>> some product.
>>>
>>> Months ago Toyota, on multiple occasions, released statements saying
>>> that
>>> there were no probems with the braking systems on several cars and the
>>> issue was with the floor mats....those were the 'facts'.
>>>
>>> Fast-forward several months, and it comes to light that it's not the
>>> floor-
>>> mats, further testing by third-parties show that there are problems in
>>> the
>>> design of the 'drive-by-wire' throttle system, and there's evidence of a
>>> coverup, and blah, blah, blah......
>>>
>>> But, several months ago, the facts were: It's the floormats.
>>
>> Actually, on several models like the Tacoma, and the 90's Camrys it
>> still *is* floormats according to Toyota.
>>
>>
>
>
> I don't think the floor mats were ever the real problem. Toyota just
> didn't want to admit that its electronic throttle system has a design flaw.
>

Pretty much what Steve Wozniak said of his Prius. He deduced that it
was a software flaw.
And this could be very costly for Toyota, seeing that the computers are
a black box module.



--
"It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument."
William G. McAdoo.
American Government official (1863-1941).

>>>>
>>>> But, several months ago, the facts were: It's the floormats.
>>>
>>> Actually, on several models like the Tacoma, and the 90's Camrys it
>>> still *is* floormats according to Toyota.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> I don't think the floor mats were ever the real problem. Toyota just
>> didn't want to admit that its electronic throttle system has a design
>> flaw.
>>
>
> Pretty much what Steve Wozniak said of his Prius. He deduced that it
> was a software flaw.
> And this could be very costly for Toyota, seeing that the computers
> are a black box module.


I had just read several articles about third-parties testing the system and
being able to purposely create what would be system faults, but tested good
by the ECM.

On the radio I even heard an interview with some group that was able to
create a fault condition that regularly did actually cause the sudden
acceleration problem, usually within minutes of starting to drive the car
under one of these undetected fault conditions.

DanS wrote:
>>>>> But, several months ago, the facts were: It's the floormats.
>>>> Actually, on several models like the Tacoma, and the 90's Camrys it
>>>> still *is* floormats according to Toyota.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think the floor mats were ever the real problem. Toyota just
>>> didn't want to admit that its electronic throttle system has a design
>>> flaw.
>>>
>> Pretty much what Steve Wozniak said of his Prius. He deduced that it
>> was a software flaw.
>> And this could be very costly for Toyota, seeing that the computers
>> are a black box module.
>
>
> I had just read several articles about third-parties testing the system and
> being able to purposely create what would be system faults, but tested good
> by the ECM.
>
> On the radio I even heard an interview with some group that was able to
> create a fault condition that regularly did actually cause the sudden
> acceleration problem, usually within minutes of starting to drive the car
> under one of these undetected fault conditions.
>
>
>

I think it was Stanford U. that also did some testing and found software
faults.