Is That Pirated Software? 758
underpar writes "According to this ZDNet.com article, Microsoft 'has launched a pilot program in which some visitors to the main Windows download page are being asked to let the software maker check to see whether their copy of the operating system is licensed.' The check is not required, but after the desired 20,000 users go through the program they might change their tune."
How do they stand to gain? (Score:5, Interesting)
Who are these people? Being a freelance computer tech (and knowing many others in my trade), I know exactly who these folks are. They're the ones who got a particularly good deal when buying a home-made computer from someone's garage... or, more likely, those who had an OEM copy installed with their retail computer, messed it up dreadfully, and whoever worked on it decided to forego using the "restore disks" (which are often missing, since many people have no idea what they're for, and which are generally dreadfully broken in the first place) and install a questionable copy of XP. I've faced this dillema myself, before, but I always opt to try to fix the existing installation, or inform the customer that their decision to visit every gambling and porn site under the sun necessitates that they buy a new copy of Windows.
These are the folks who can often be genuinely uncertain whether their copy of Windows is legitimate. These are the folks who click "OK" on everything anyway. The question is what they have to gain from this knowledge, and, more importantly, what Microsoft has to gain.
What information can Microsoft harvest, exactly? They surely know how widespread these practices are; after all, they practically encourage them with their cutthroat OEM policies. Also, they insist (at least according to the article) that they won't treat those with an unlicensed copy any differently from those with a legitimate one. My guess, among other things, is they'll start harvesting illegitimate license codes (like they have in the past... FCKGW anyone?) and perhaps block them a year in advance.
Likely use... (Score:5, Interesting)
If the whole thing is optional - (Score:5, Interesting)
1.) Increase of unpatched, demon, zombie PCs
or
2.) Linux Migration!
You could probably piss a hell off a lot of people, who as TFA states "namely, people who bought a computer that they thought had a legitimate copy of Windows." You're gonna force them into buying a new copy?
And that still doesn't get around ordering a patch cd in the mail.
-thewldisntenuff
How do they know? (Score:5, Interesting)
OK, so activation cracked copies will be fairly easy to ID, but if you've got a corporate copy (which most pirated releases are anyway) and a valid key there's no way to tell, surely.
Firefox? (Score:5, Interesting)
Gaming? (Score:1, Interesting)
Bug-ridden, yeah, but (non-rhetorical question approaching) are there any viable alternatives?
I don't even know where to start (Score:5, Interesting)
There was a time when Microsoft began blocking SP1 downloads for WinXP for users using one of a list of very common keys. I suppose it may have prevented a few people from downloading the service pack, but the vast majority of users who were using these keys either found a hack to change their key to something randomly generated, or simply downloaded the service pack elsewhere.
Go back a little further and try to remember the furore over the required online or phone registration of new WinXP installs. For the poeple who do not desire to pay for their operating system, this was a similar inconvenience. Easily circumvented, but an annoyance to legitimate users.
The music industry implements protection so weak that it can be circumvented by pressing the 'shift' key, but breaks CDs for legitimate users. Nobody who wants an illegal track or two is deterred by this. If they can't get the music off the CD they'll just go to a P2P network and download it from there.
Time and time again we see media providers and software companies implement these rediculous attempts to spite casual pirates. The only people they ever end up bothering are there own customers, and in the rare case there is a backlash and their sales are hurt by their own arrogance, who do they blame? Pirates, of course.
If MS doesn't like pirated Windows... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's apparently worked quite well to protect Citrix and MS Terminal Server from being used.
I believe MS likes having everyone use Windows, whether it's paid for or not.
What are people going to do, if they can't get Windows pirated? Buy it? Nope.
Effective? I think not. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Effective? I think not. (Score:2, Interesting)
Don't you think MS keeps track of which keys can be duplicated and which ones can't? It's not like they just randomly generate them and ship them out the door without any record.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How do they know? (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem is that when they start blocking these IDs, they also block the legitimate owners (just because one (ex-)employee copied the company CDs, doesn't void the license.) and they no longer can get their updates.
Actually if it did void the license it's even worse. Imagine you have just spent a few hundred thousand on MS-software and it's void just because some employee put it on a P2P-network.
It's funny that these things never turn up in TCO-studies...
Re:How do they know? (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft should just give up on this stuff (Score:4, Interesting)
If Microsoft were smart, they'd keep working the OEM channels, cut the cost of a new copy of Windows XP Home to $100 with none of the product activation junk and charge $50 per retail upgrade. If Microsoft is so worried about people pirating its products, they should extend steep discounts to their customers who buy off the shelf copies. Microsoft could make good money charging only $50 for Home and $100 for Pro upgrades for Windows.
When in doubt, cut your profit margin down and try to sell more copies of your product. Since digital goods are so cheap to fabricate physical copies of, there is no reason why Microsoft couldn't experiment with much cheaper retail prices for a version of Windows. Hell, they might find that if they stop heckling their legitimate users and cut prices that the desktop Linux threat all but goes away.
Let's face it, what incentive right now would there be for people to choose desktop linux for small business and home use if Windows had a no hassle licensing system and was sold that cheap?
An experience with activating WinXP (Score:5, Interesting)
Like many nerds with a job, I upgrade components in my PC frequently. I have a legitimate retail copy of WinXP Pro. I have a home-built PC, which sits happily next to my Powerbook G4. A couple months ago, I upgraded the motherboard and RAM, and took the opportunity to reinstall WinXP (as I typically need to about once a year). When I called the Windows activation department in Bangalore, I learned something new...
Lady: I can help you with activation. First I need to ask you a couple questions.
Me: Ok.
Lady: How many computers is this copy of Windows XP installed on.
Me: One.
Lady: Why are you reinstalling Windows?
Me: I bought a new computer case. (I just said this off the top of my head, not thinking anything of it.)
Lady: Well, I'm sorry. You can only activate Windows XP on one machine.
Me: It is one machine. I've transferred all the same parts to a new case.
Lady: You can't do that.
In the end, I had to call back and make up another reason. This was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard. The woman insisted that I could not change the case it's in, but I could change EVERYTHING ELSE. She kept telling me to read the license agreement.
The bottom line is that MS will slowly but surely reign in the piracy. This is just a first step. The Windows activation is pretty lame, because if you have a legit number you can just keep calling and (re)installing all over.
Re:P2P Updates (Score:4, Interesting)
XP's magical disappearing configuration system. After all, if you've never needed it yet, it won't show it to you so you don't know you've got it. Its bad enough having to troubleshoot something over the phone, without knowing the 50 different paths to get there depending whether the person has chosen to disable the hiding functionality, disable the "new" control panel (note that in the new control panel, there are icons that you cannot reach from the groups it displays, most notably 3rd party extensions, but a few microsoft things too), etc.
Its a pain in the ass in Office too. I have to deal with people asking me how to do things that are right on the format menu..... if they've used them once. Of course, until they use them once, they have no idea Word can even do it.
Re:Effective? I think not. (Score:2, Interesting)
"Warez" keys are detected by enormous numbers of completely distinct IP addresses accessing Windows Update and other "phone home" services.
Re:I don't even know where to start (Score:3, Interesting)
Furthermore, I seriously belive that Microsoft doesn't give a shit about power users pirating windows. I work in a computer repair store, I fix people's dumb ass windows problems all day, everyday. The fact that I have access to windows makes me better at my job. By being better at my job, more people can buy a microsoft PC, and not care if the screw it up, because they know that the guys down at the repair shop can fix it. Plus, these users don't call microsoft wondering what's going on with their software.
In this way, it is better for Microsoft to not care if I have a legit copy for a couple of reasons - by knowing how to fix it, I have now become free tech support for everyone I know, taking the burden off of microsoft. Also, I am affording them additional marketshare in that I perpetuate the windows-is-ok idea.
Re:Buyer's remorse (Score:2, Interesting)
If using it doesn't deprive anyone of anything, why not? Where in whatever moral code you follow does it say that copying is evil? Or that the statutory monopoly known as "copyright" afforded by the government is a basic human right?
People still haven't figured out what the technological revolution is all about. Data isn't a thing (property) like a gemstone you can lock in a vault or guard with your shotgun.
Reminds me of a statistic I read yesterday: that if the nation of Burundi was required to buy licenses for each copy of Windows in use, they would have to give 67 straight months of the country's entire GDP to Microsoft.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
MS needs to get their pricing in line (Score:5, Interesting)
People do not enjoy using pirated copies. Especially when it's a pain in the ass or a worry, like getting service packs, etc. They do so because for them to buy legit copies of Windows would simply be too damn expensive. The cheapest I can do WinXP Home OEM edition for is around $150 Canadian, which is simply too much. Even $100 Canadian would be a stretch, frankly. Your average Joe would be satisfied buying an OS if it didn't exceed ~$75 Canadian. I'm not basing this off any direct studies, just my personal observations, but if WinXP was priced around there, I think I would sell FAR more copies.
Different demographics are all obviously different too. As a computer engineering student, I'd be surprised if any significant number of my colleagues were using legit copies of WinXP. Those who are, are usually doing so because it came with their laptops. MS will give us absurd discounts on Visual Studio, etc., but we're left to spend the big bucks on an OS?
Sure, analyzing the pricing on an OS may be a bit naive of me. But different demographics are willing to spend drastically different amounts of money on an operating system. When someone wants to buy a ~$400 system, it's hard to tell them that the OS will cost $150. Then I might turn around and build a system for someone else that costs 10x as much and they don't think twice to get me to toss it on there.
Here's an idea that's a real long shot. Suppose a motherboard manufacturer were to design a motherboard which is targeted for low end, budget users. It is somehow crippled so that it can't be used with the more expensive hardware, but it also comes with a rebate form or some sort of discount on WinXP Home. It would be a modified OS to run only on the motherboard it was shipped with or intended for use with, and the motherboard is set up so that it would be adequate for budget users but not for high end enthusiasts. It would encourage the low end users to purchase Windows instead of pirating it, and allow Microsoft to keep higher prices for the rest of the market. I see the potential flaws in my little scheme, but it's something to think about.
Doesnt work. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Buyer's remorse (Score:3, Interesting)
So basically, the object of windows is not to be a good operating system, but a "just good *enough*" operating system.
Re:Buyer's remorse (Score:3, Interesting)
Linux is unusable
Funny thing, that... See, I have an ATI All In Wonder Radeon. I wanted to make my computer be my vcr, dvd player, etc (what can I say, I got divorced, got out with my computer, and that was it for entertainment). So, I used the software that came with it, and got something moderately functional. Not great, but functional. Then I decided I wanted a remote control for it all.
Now, before I tell you what happened, let me tell you about me: BS in CS, working on home computers for about 20 years (started on Apple ][ and Vic-20, worked my way up Commodore's line, right on through the Amiga, before it died and I had to replace it with clone stuff). I write code. Play games. Build networks, pcs, and do general repair/maintenance (but no soldering, I don't have a steady enough hand for that). I grok the computer in a way that people around me just don't quite understand. I do things, and they just wonder how I knew to do it.
So, what happened with the remote? I got a lot of functionality working. Able to start file playback, already had working vcr functionality, so was going good. Then ... then I tried to make the power button on the remote into a toggle for putting the monitor into standby mode. Monitor in standby? Wake it up. Monitor awake? Put it in standby.
The damned remote control software stumped me. I spent over two weeks trying to make it do just that. I could set it so the power button would either always wake up the monitor, or always put it to sleep, but could never make it toggle. I decided I'd had enough. Bought an ATI TV Wonder, installed Linux, MythTV [mythtv.org], and lirc, an had a working setup. Oh, and the time? About two weeks, including all tweaking. That was almost two years ago, and I haven't rebooted Windows since then.
In fact, I thought I'd deleted it off of all partitions, and recently found a copy hidden on that computer. Forgot it was there. Anyway, Linux is unusable? People can't make it do what they want? Maybe they can't, but I sure as hell can. And do. So please, don't call it unusable.It's only unusable for people who are even worse than my mom at computers (mind you, she still doesn't really understand the idea of folders even).
Since she uses Linux every time she goes online, I have to conclude that, if you believe Linux is unusable, you desparately need to check into computer rehab, and get some better skills.
Re:MS needs to get their pricing in line (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh yea. I got a copy of nero with my drive. It complains that it might be pirated. I had to pirate a copy... so it no longer says it might be pirated.
Re:Here's what I think about the whole thing (Score:1, Interesting)
2. If you have a legitimate copy you have nothing to worry about.
3. If you have a pirated copy and have nothing against Microsoft go buy a legal one NOW.
4. If you have a pirated copy and are against Microsoft, then STOP USING WINDOWS
1. But they also deny service to folks with legit copies.
2. If you have a legit copy, you may be stuck with something that won't install and you can't return to the store.
3. If you have a pirated XP Full Pro Corp, you have nothing to worry about, it will install and the service packs will update.
4. If you don't have a pirated copy of windows, you might be SOL until you get a pirated copy.
Re:An experience with activating WinXP (Score:2, Interesting)
The REASON is that the particular software you wanted to install (Windows XP) is not free software. You could have installed a free operating system like linux for your brother, which would have been a perfectly acceptable course of action. If you say "well, my brother won't be able to figure linux out", well then, that's why you need to pay the premium for Windows. Sorry dude, you "not seeing any reason" for liscencing does not exempt you from the EULA.
Activation creates a nation of liars.
Dishonest people create a nation of liars, your excuses are indicitive of an irresponsible "the devil made me do it" attitude.
I'm not saying what you did is immoral or horrible, just realize, it is still illegal.
Site Licensing (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Damned if I'm going to use a copy protected OS. (Score:3, Interesting)
Exactly!!!
I do lots of custom programming and consulting. I have a few machines that I often use to replicate a client's environment. I have legal copies of Windows XP and Server 2003 for this, but I scrub them after each project. Of course, I can activate each one only twice, then I have to call Microsoft and tell them what I'm doing and get hassled like I'm putting off the mob for 20 minutes. That is really starting to piss me off, because as I activate them more and more I get hasseled more and more. I've had to do it over ten times now, and it is really irritating.
On a side note, for the few clients I have running Linux I don't even need seperate test machines, because I know that no matter what else I have running on my development server, the few things that I work on for my client will behave the same once its on their machine!
/rant
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I don't want to be in their database. (Score:4, Interesting)
I run SUSE 9.0 Personal edition for Work and internet.
Somehow the old saying; Windows is for fun, UNIX is for getting things done....seems more relevant today than ever.
Re:How do they stand to gain? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:How do they stand to gain? (Score:3, Interesting)
Politicians and their Election Promises
Re:I don't want to be in their database. (Score:3, Interesting)
I read in the latest issue of Variety that Microsoft had a $1.1 billion loss last year. It was in an article on the 50 largest companies in the entertainment industry. I don't know if that was a misprint or not. I thought Microsoft was a perpetual motion money machine.
Re:Why is $ the terminator in int 21h, function 9? (Score:2, Interesting)
to the mods that ever used an amber monitor on a single-floppy PC XT or PC AT, you gotta admit this guy summarized the old days pretty well- give him +1 insightful.
To everyone else: why don't we ever talk about CP/M anymore these days?
Re:How do they stand to gain? (Score:3, Interesting)
Forcing OEMs to include "restore CDs" instead of installation media.
My HP Pavilion zt3000 laptop came with an XP installation CD. After installing it I was left with a raw XP installation that was even missing drivers, so no, I somehow doubt Microsoft is currently forcing OEMs to include restore CDs over installation CDs.
Re:Damned if I'm going to use a copy protected OS. (Score:4, Interesting)
I ended up getting a cracked copy written over the original master floppy. Cracked, so the copy protection wouldn't fire, but not pirated... I only had the one copy and it was on the original media.
not to nitpick, but if it was cracked, then by definition it was pirated, regardless of your legality or license.... at least by today's standards (see DMCA)
not disagreeing with your post, just pointing out what a different world we live in now.
Microsoft can detect pirated windows anyday? (Score:1, Interesting)
Does a user really have to press "Accept" button to allow M4 to check if their key is valid and allow to download?
How do we know M$ cant Autodetect user serial?Whether or not the user wants , dont you think M$ could hav a mechanism to find if the Windows the user is using is pirated or not when the user accesses the Microsoft.com site ( or even when jus logged into the ineternet!).
Couldnt there be a back door deployed my M$ to do this?
Linux is a kernel, GNU is not platform centric (Score:4, Interesting)
"The problem is that most hackers are rabid about Linux because it's phenonmentally powerful if you code a bit."
So are BSD, MacOS, and (bet you saw this one coming) Windows. Most hackers are rabid about Linux because they got more than they were promised. They weren't promised anything. They didn't pay anything, and they got a whole lot.
I have a few friends that graduated with me from college with varying technical degrees, including CS, Math, Engineering, and Physics (what can I say, I'm a geek and hang out with geeks). Some close friends ended up at Microsoft. And even though they run Windows whatever at work, they still chose vi or emacs as their editor, bash and other shells, and awk and sed in their code along with their C#, C++, and Perl. One of them bought a shiny new laptop with his recent bonus and reused his old desktop (stuffing Linux on it) as a web-connected file server/bridge. He recently told me how he saved one of his machines at work by using a Knoppix CD! Just imagine an MS employee booting Linux, at work, to fix their Windows machine!
GNU isn't just about linux advocacy, it's a philosophical movement centered around the idea that by keeping code "free of ownership" we can advance society. From another perspective, the GPL is a way of saying, "I don't own this code. You don't own this code. The public owns this code. You can't build something from this code and distribute it without the code."
This is quite diametrically opposed to the philosophy that: "I work hard to create a software product of intrinsic value. It is my property. I sell you a license to use that property."
Many people who wrote utilities and published them under the GPL ported their utilities to Windows, BSD, Linux, etc. They also make pure Windows apps under the GPL, and others port these. Basically, it's not the Linux OS that makes for a great hacking experience, it's the fact that it comes with a bunch of GNU tools. But then there's CygWin and other GNU toolsets for Windows and BSD and MacOS.
The reason that Linux may be a threat to Microsoft is that there are a growing number of developers who got hooked on Linux because the development tools came with the OS, and they didn't want to pay MS (or Borland) for tools which promote Windows. Of course, there are also a great many people who still write free software for Windows (using DJGPP or other MSVC++) simply because Windows is the largest target audience of normal users, and they use it. But if the developers market is changing because of the availability of high quality tools, then Microsoft will react. Maybe too late, but it's in the cards.
Indeed, Microsoft already has done some reacting. 57,000 employees, including some of my best friends know that their job is on the line if Microsoft goes under, and from what my friends tell me, working at Microsoft is better than all of their previous jobs. Their reaction: http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/ [microsoft.com] Is this too little too late, or is it the beginning?
(getting back to original topic of activation, and tying back into the philosophy of property)
When I ask my friends about the activation stuff, they tell me that nobody who has a brain expects it to deter piracy, but they have to do something to attempt to prevent it from happening. DRM is an equal joke, but it is another way to protect information as property. Both of these measures do something very specific: they make it so that in order to copy the "property", you need to intentionally remove its "protection". This follows a fundamental principle that property is only owned by someone to the extent that they can defend it.
One more response to the parent poster:
"For average folks, it's [Linux] just another alternative."
In order for it to be an alternative for me, it needs to do everything that I need it to do. I need it to run the software I use (includes Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop and t
Re:The benefits of Linux (Score:5, Interesting)
Same here, and same here, though I think Linux's advantages for a hacker vastly outweigh the drawbacks.
Why do you consider Linux to be a 'mind boggling' better platform for hackers?
* If I have a problem/missing feature and it's irritating me enough, I'm guaranteed the option of just fixing it myself.
* The POSIX toolset, large set of development tools and compilers available on a typical system, and easy hooks into the OS (like
* If I don't like the way my system functions, I change it. For example, Fedora's standard configuration currently stops any attempts to re-obtain a DHCP address if any attempt to get an address fails. I often work on flaky networks, and this drives me bananas -- I want the thing to keep trying to re-obtain an IP address even if an attempt fails. You can just open up
* Better (non-POSIX) tools. Windows doesn't have a "file" command any more than it has a "locate" command.
* Better remote access options. Using Windows remotely is a painful chore that *can* be done using VNC or the like. Using Linux remotely (stick with CLI programs, which is quite feasible) is a pleasure.
* Choice in what packages to use. As it happens, I don't like GNOME *or* KDE *or* Explorer very much. They all slap large icons on the screen, eat screen space, expect me to launch applications with my mouse instead of my keyboard, cover up my pretty desktop, and none of them (well, maybe KDE) use "viewports" instead of "virtual desktops" any more, where a window can lap over from one "viewport" to another. Easy fix -- just slap something else in. I use xbindkeys+gkrellm+sawfish, and have exactly the environment I want.
* Sandboxing capabilities. It's a bitch to, say, sandbox an unknown binary (or a server, to keep a server compromise from compromising the whole system) on Windows. It's much more reasonable on Linux.
* No bullshit. If I've identified a problem and I don't want to fix it myself, I file a bug report. With, say, Microsoft, I go to some low level tech support person, and maybe after a series of escallated issues, they admit that there's a bug. Maybe. And they don't call it a "bug", because they don't make products with "bugs". They call it an "issue". Their product doesn't have a bug -- *I* have an "issue". Then maybe somewhere the "issue" wends its way to the cloistered-away developers and perhaps, after some period of time in the mysterious black box, eventually gets released. In the open source world, if I know what I'm doing, I fire off a "there's a problem, here's what's breaking" message straight to the developer (and can do so to the guy that wrote the very line of code that's broken). I dump my bug into a bug tracker (heck, wishlist features go into the "bug tracker"). As the developers work on the thing and fix it, I have full access to every thing they've done, just as much as any developer does, and when the problem gets fixed, I know about it immediately.
* If I want to do something, there's probably a ton of actively-maintained and free libraries already out there that do just about everything I want (and if they *become* unmaintained, someone else can easily take up the torch -- I don't have to worry about reliance on some random third party). For example, two days ago I was working on a JPEG artifact removal idea. I wanted to do image processing (encoding, decoding, manipulation) and use a neural network. Two apt-cache searches and an apt-get download later, I