Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Windows Operating Systems Software

Microsoft To Begin Checking For Piracy 810

Curious Yellow 82 writes "Microsoft will begin checking for pirated copies of its Windows software when users attempt to update. Security updates are supposed to be exempt from the check. Upon detection of pirated software the user will be given the oppportunity to purchase a legitimate copy of the software for a discounted price, upon providing proof of purchase etc."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft To Begin Checking For Piracy

Comments Filter:
  • Uhh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by daveschroeder ( 516195 ) * on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:39AM (#13165630)
    the user will be given the oppportunity to purchase a legitimate copy of the software for a discounted price, upon providing proof of purchase (!!)

    That will be an interesting feat.

    And, jokes aside, "proof of purchase" of what? If they mean a possible purchase of a machine with, or a standalone copy of, a counterfeit version of Windows, assuming the user purchased it legitimately in good faith, how in the hell is this the user's responsibility or fault? I'm not talking about someone who got Windows from a guy in an overcoat for $10 on a street corner (not to mention you probably wouldn't have a "proof of purchase" for that kind of sale); I'm talking about purchases reasonably believed to be legitimate. No, this doesn't mean that a software company has to honor pirated or illegal copies even if the user believed it to be legal for whatever reason, but it seems like this really sticks it to the user (not to mention the internet community as a whole by not providing OS updates, the fact they claim to be providing security updates aside[1]) as opposed to working to target the entities they believe to be illegally selling Windows...especially if the customer has a "proof of purchase" of an illegitimate copy of Windows in the first place, which presumably contains some element of contact information for the source if it can reasonably considered to constitute any semblance of "proof of purchase". They should be offering amnesty and/or discounts to people who are running straight-up pirated versions of Windows with no "proof of purchase" at all, if this is any attempt to reach out to people running unlicensed copies!

    (Make no mistake: I'm not saying Microsoft is obligated to honor illegally purchased copies of Windows, whether they're pirated, or even ones purchased innocently and in good faith. But they'd be a hell of a lot better citizen of the internet community if they didn't withhold updates in either instance.)

    [1] Windows Service Pack 2 would apparently not be included in this, for example, because it's not a "security update"; but it can be strongly argued that SP2 did more for general Windows XP security than any "security update" ever has. In other words, not updating the multitude of for-whatever-reason non-legal copies of Windows out there does everyone involved a major disservice, not the least of which is the rest of the world surrounding them.
  • Wait a minute... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Sensible Clod ( 771142 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:41AM (#13165659) Homepage
    Security updates are supposed to be exempt from the check.

    Didn't they say otherwise just a few months ago?

    Got to find that link...
  • What? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by JustAnotherReader ( 470464 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:41AM (#13165662)
    Upon detection of pirated software the user will be given the oppportunity to purchase a legitimate copy of the software for a discounted price, upon providing proof of purchase etc."

    So if you're found to have a pirated copy, you need to show proof of purchase? If I have proof of purchase then it's not pirated, and therefore, I wouldn't need to buy it again at a discounted price.

  • Some thoughts. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AnObfuscator ( 812343 ) <onering AT phys DOT ufl DOT edu> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:41AM (#13165671) Homepage
    I wrote about this earlier today on bitsofnews.com [bitsofnews.com]. I'll save you the click and paste my thoughts here.

    I am not sure how MS expects to keep pushing this down people's throats.
    Most people don't want to be treated as thieves, and I can see some general backlash coming to MS from this.

    I really don't see how this will, in the long run, benefit MS. Most people in the 1st world buy a computer from a major distributer, and use the (usually) legit copy of Windows from that. I'm guessing that that one-third number includes nations like India and China, where people can't afford the 1st world pricing scheme of Windows.

    Oh, wait, silly me, why don't these poor people just use XP Starter Edition? Right. That's the ticket.

    Do they seriously think this will decrease piracy in the 3rd world? All they've really done is cripple their product. They now have several issues to deal with.

    This "Genuine Advantage" program is tantamount to legitimizing "pirated" XP. To many, I suspect it sends the message: "Ok, use pirated XP if you want, we'll just give special benefits to those who pay us." It's almost like a "shareware" model of distribution. Seeing how they are trying to push "XP Starter Edition", I seriously doubt this is their intent -- but it looks like they've emasculated that product entirely.

    Simply, Pirated XP Home/Pro is still less crippled than XP SE. So for the 3rd world market, it's a choice between paying for a highly crippled OS, or getting a slightly crippled OS for free. I don't see many people paying for the privilege of less features.

    This is also a potential gold mine for alternative OS's, such as the newer GNU/Linux systems pushing ease-of-install; Ubuntu [ubuntulinux.org], Mepis [mepis.org], Mandravia [mandriva.com], Fedora [redhat.com] spring to mind immediately, and there are many others.

    Given the choice of a super-crippled SE, a somewhat-crippled XP Home/Pro, or a fully-functional GNU/Linux, GNU/Linux becomes an increasingly "no-brainer" solution.
  • by ChrisF79 ( 829953 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:42AM (#13165682) Homepage
    Its kind of funny when you think about it--users steal the software and then go back to get the software maintenance. It's kind of like someone stealing a car from the lot of a dealership, then taking it back a few months later for it's customary 3,000 mile oil change.
  • Re:one question (Score:4, Insightful)

    by NineNine ( 235196 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:42AM (#13165686)
    How exactly do they check for it being a pirated copy? I mean other then checking their database of registered windows users and comparing it to the computer, how do they know the difference?

    300 people using the same single user registration key/serial number is a pretty damn good indication.
  • by Helmholtz ( 2715 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:44AM (#13165718) Homepage
    Perhaps I'm just being cynical, but doesn't this place the incentive on insecure code. Maximizing the number of "security patch releases" will also help (potentially) maximize revenue by quickly identifying "pirated" versions of Windows, causing said "offenders" to purchase legit versions.

    If Windows were to become secure and relatively bug free, this would cause their "pirate detection" system to become very inefficient, as there wouldn't be a great need for using Windows Update.

    I may be completely off base, but it does seem plausible. Perhaps we need Mythbusters ;)
  • by pickyouupatnine ( 901260 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:45AM (#13165739) Homepage
    .. for Open Source :D.
  • I don't see this as anything wrong.

    I mean, we have MS losing money on a pirated copy of windows. Fine. We can argue the merits of software piracy all night. But... when MS releases a patch, they are spending millions of dollars on R&D, advertising, lawyer fees, etc - this is supposed to be for legitimate users only. When you buy any software, you are understanding that this $50/$200/$whatever cost also includes free patches in the purchase price.

    It'd be like someone stealing a car from GM - fine, they stole it. But imagine if they later came to GM with their stolen car and asked for the $1000 engine recall upgrade. Nope - that's for legitimate carowners only. The $25,000 GM prices the car takes into account the small chance that they may have to set a recall.

    Plus, it's not like the RIAA. Nowhere does it say that MS will be prosecuting every illegal copy it finds. It simply says "hey, if you stole a copy, then that's one thing. But don't try and get free support from us too."

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:48AM (#13165770)
    Except that a car uses consummables, but an operating system should come complete and not need fixes!
  • Re:Hmmm (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Crimsane ( 815761 ) <clarke@nullfs.com> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:49AM (#13165774) Homepage
    Yea sounds great to me too!
    All you have to do is give microsoft your shipping address after admitting you've pirated their software.
  • Re:Some thoughts. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NineNine ( 235196 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:49AM (#13165787)
    Given the choice of a super-crippled SE, a somewhat-crippled XP Home/Pro, or a fully-functional GNU/Linux, GNU/Linux becomes an increasingly "no-brainer" solution.

    Considering that they'll give people the option of buying XP Pro for $150? Are you kidding? $150 isn't nearly enough to make people even consider switching platforms, and going through all the related headaches. If anything, they'll sell a hell of a lot more copies of XP. But, I think you're right. People who consider switching platforms over $150 are pretty brainless.
  • The Hassle Factor (Score:2, Insightful)

    by RagingChipmunk ( 646664 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:50AM (#13165789) Homepage
    The Hassle Factor of using MS products has gone up tremendously in the last 3 years. I legitimately own XP etc, and yet, I'm hassled with crap like "Let MS check to see if you're legit before we fix our mistakes".

    The lockdown mentality of MS has already made me choose that Longhorn/Vista will not be on my PCs. "Asta la vista baby!". Sure they have every right to 'enforce' their anti-piracy efforts, but, they've made it difficult to deal with them.

  • by popo ( 107611 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:51AM (#13165811) Homepage

    Let me get this straight... if you're caught with a pirated version you're offered a discount? (or a free version altogether) Seems like a great way to shop!

    Only suckers will pick up a boxed copy from the store from now on...



    "they can still fill out a counterfeit report and receive a copy of Windows XP Home Edition for $99 or a copy of Windows XP Professional Edition for $149, Lazar said.

    Windows XP Home normally sells for $199 and Windows XP Professional Edition usually costs $299."


  • Re:Uhh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ingolfke ( 515826 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:52AM (#13165826) Journal
    If I bought a new DeWalt drill for really cheap of the Internet, it broke, and I went to get it repaired only to find out that I had purchased a knock-off product I wouldn't expect DeWalt to fix it. I'd go to the vendor who sold me it and take whatever action I could against them. Why is Microsoft any different?
  • by Xesdeeni ( 308293 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:52AM (#13165829)
    So now, I can't download the update at work, where we have broadband, and transport it home (via CD or thumb drive) because I can't validate my home installation!? I have two machines at home. One is connected via dialup, and the other (an HTPC) is not connected to the internet at all.

    Do you know how long 266 MB takes to download over dialup!? OVER 11 1/2 HOURS!!

    Xesdeeni
  • Re:Uhh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ryosen ( 234440 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:54AM (#13165851)
    >>Recieving stolen goods is also a crime

    You have to be proven to have known that the goods were stolen, otherwise there is no crime.

    What the GP is talking about isn't someone buying the PC out of the back of a truck. It is someone who buys the computer from a retailer, in **good faith**, and the retailer, unknown to the purchaser, is using pirated copies of Windows. This is a common occurance with white box PCs and isn't limited to EBay sales.

    The people affected by this aren't the ones buying and installing XP themselves. They are the ones that bought "no-name" PCs with XP pre-installed where the retailer is not a valid OEM licensee.
  • Re:Great news! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by dlefavor ( 725930 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @11:56AM (#13165868)
    ...genuinely free alternatives.

    Sorry to demonstrate a solid command of the obvious, but nothing is "genuinely free".

  • by Peter La Casse ( 3992 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:01PM (#13165937)
    I mean, we have MS losing money on a pirated copy of windows.

    We do?

    Cite?

    (I don't disagree with the rest of your post.)

  • by scrow ( 620374 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:02PM (#13165952)
    Indeed, but what systems are they downloading these torrents on. I bet the number of "pirates" who have built thier own systems and have not payeds the windows tax EVER are is small compared to the hordes of users who torrent (shiney new verb) on machines they bought that kicked back licensing fees to M$. To shift to a more general sense.. Microsoft, Intel, (insert your broadband provider here) are all making money *in part* by illegal downloading. It is akin to the porn industry motivating video technology or the drug war. We here a lot of clamour about "illegal and immoral" but these markets bolster the economy. What happens when this money dries up becasue of enforcement of the moral and legal standards? Answer: It will never happen.
  • by IceSabre ( 602857 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:02PM (#13165956)
    One of the justifications that software companies like Microsoft uses for the original cost of the software is that they have to charge that much to compensate for software piracy.

    If they now actively check for pirated copies and can catch X% of them, will they lower the cost of new software Y% since they are now theoretically reducing their losses, which was justification of the cost to begin with?

    Maybe if a new copy of Windows XP Pro didn't cost $140 there would not be as many pirated copies?

    Things that make you go... hrmmmmm.....

  • Re:Yawn (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kenja ( 541830 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:04PM (#13165989)
    "Bambino's don't do this"

    Sorry, but if I buy a computer that comes with a pirated copy of the OS (from a white box OEM) I will go after them tooth and nail should I find out.

    I write software for a living. So long as I expect to get paid for my work it would be very hypocritical of me to support the illegal software trade.

  • by rabel ( 531545 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:04PM (#13165992)
    Most people couldn't produce a "proof-of-purchase" after a few days. I know I couldn't prove my copy of Win2000 is legitimate, even though I legitimately purchased my copy with my PeeCee from my local computer store.

    In any event, if there are any hiccups on the validation process and Joe and Jane Doe Computer User get any bit of hassle from Microsoft when they do a Windows Update, I expect there will be a backlash.

    Hopefully, Red Hat and other Linux vendors are positioned properly to catch the fallout. "Windows Validation problems? Switch to Red Hat Linux and never pay for your Windowing Operating System again! Free Games with every download!"
  • Re:Uhh (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Jeff Hornby ( 211519 ) <jthornby@s[ ]atico.ca ['ymp' in gap]> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:05PM (#13166003) Homepage
    How is this like Microsoft coming after you?

    All they've said is: if you don't provide us with a proof of purchase, we're not going to replace your product.

    They haven't said: if you don't provide us with a proof of purchase, you're going to jail.

    I think the original analogy was quite sound.
  • Re:Uhh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Nugget ( 7382 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:06PM (#13166013) Homepage
    How does withholding support and upgrades constitute "coming after you"?
  • Re:Uhh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BVis ( 267028 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:07PM (#13166025)
    Your DeWalt drill doesn't cause problems for other people if it breaks. Windows installations missing security patches (as people will shut off automatic updates for fear of being caught) become zombies very quickly, adding to the spread of viruses, spam, etc.

    Also, the copy of Windows in question isn't likely to be a knock-off, it most likely is the same OS that you can buy off the shelf. A better analogy would be if you bought a genuine DeWalt drill from someone who wasn't an authorized DeWalt dealer, and the (genuine OEM DeWalt) batteries had a habit of exploding and hurting people around the user. More than likely DeWalt would issue a recall on *all* batteries, and more than likely they'd be pretty lenient about making sure the drill was purchased through authorized channels. In essence, the safety of the community would take precedence over the other factors involved. (Also, the effort to check where the drills came from would cause serious headaches, logistically. It would be more expedient to just replace the battery when it's sent in and not worry about the legitimacy.)

    Granted, we're talking about risk of physical injury vs. network security, but IMHO the obligation is the same: if you put out a broken product, you have an obligation (IMHO) to put out a fix. Anything less is corporate irresponsibility that could subsequently expose the company to liability, should a loss occur.

    Of course, MS doesn't care about that, since they have better lawyers than just about anyone else.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:10PM (#13166067)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Savage-Rabbit ( 308260 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:14PM (#13166109)
    How exactly do they check for it being a pirated copy? I mean other then checking their database of registered windows users and comparing it to the computer, how do they know the difference?

    Just off hand I guess they they might check the license keys (obviously) if 10.000 plus people are using the same license key something is obviously wrong. In this case you probably woudl get som sort of nag screen stating: "Your license key has been compromised please contact your local Microsoft representative to get a new one... bla... bla... bla..." Secondly they could simply check for the digital signatures of various cracks and hacks available like a virus or spyware program does before any patch is installed. In that case you would get the "Purchase offer". It's not as if these Cracks are terribly hard to come by and I would be disappointed if Microsoft does not have a whole team of engineers and coders collecting Windows cracks off the internet and analyzing them. Whatever else they do I don't expect it to be terribly bullet proof but it will be scary enough and work well enough to persuade alot of pirate consumers to buy a Windows OS "Academic Edition" CD/DVD. In future versions of Windows one should expect them to use some far more formidable DRM technology.
  • Re:Uhh (Score:4, Insightful)

    by leereyno ( 32197 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:14PM (#13166123) Homepage Journal
    Your analogy breaks down because software can be perfectly duplicated, a drill cannot. The software is not corrupted, lessened, or otherwise affected in any way by the copying. There is, from a technical standpoint, no difference between your copy which was created by a dishonest 3rd party, and a copy created by Microsoft itself. There are no additional technical hurdles or gotchas incurred when Microsoft provides updates to this illegal copy. If anything it helps them because that is one more system that is less likely to become a zombie, and security is one area where the company needs all the good PR it can get.

    I personally think that Microsoft is shooting itself in the foot. They're losing money to piracy to be sure, but not nearly as much as they'll lose from making piracy more difficult. The reason is that there are alternatives to Windows out there. The vast majority of this piracy takes place in the 3rd world. By making things difficult for people in Bombay and Shanghai, Microsoft is simply encouraging the adoption and use of Linux, and the economic effects of this are far more severe for the company than losing some $$$ from a licensing fee.

    This is an example of being penny-wise and pound foolish.

    They should of course take steps to deter piracy, but this is not a valid means of doing so.

    Lee
  • Good! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by WhiteWolf666 ( 145211 ) <sherwinNO@SPAMamiran.us> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:15PM (#13166130) Homepage Journal
    In fact, I think MS should prevent pirates from getting security updates.

    Anything to make piracy of MS products as difficult as possible!

    MS always blathers on and on about TCO, but nobody ever mentions the marketshare that MS has gained through piracy.

    Home users will be more willing to consider alternatives if the actual cost of Windows is figured into their calculation.
  • Re:Yawn (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Pxtl ( 151020 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:32PM (#13166386) Homepage
    yes, but it won't let you get SP2, which, iirc, MS was legally required to provide to all users for anti-trust reasons. I wonder what legal position that puts MS in? I mean, on one hand they're not paying users, on the other hand they're not providing the patches that the court required them to provide.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:32PM (#13166390)
    "Something's wrong with the brakes. You built your own car off copied blue prints and are afraid to take it in to get fixed. Your brakes being out puts EVERYONE ON THE ROAD at risk. "

    Not quite. I realize you will not be able to make the connection between one's own actions and the consequences of that action (cause and effect. works for physics, but not for human causes). But the ones who are putting drivers at risk is the pirate. The honest buyer made the right decision and the consequences of that choice is that their vehicle's brakes will present no danger to anyone. The pirate intentionally chose to "go it alone", and therefore assumes all the responsability of that decision.
  • by Alereon ( 660683 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:32PM (#13166396)

    Microsofts Windows Genuine Advantage system is unable to actually identify pirated copies of Windows. Anyone who installed Windows XP using a unique key created by a key generator [wikipedia.org], which is everyone who didn't just download an ISO and use the CD key in the .NFO, skates neatly through the piracy check. Note also that anyone who ISN'T running a unique key can also change it, via instructions that are conveniently placed on the Microsoft website [microsoft.com].

    Last I checked, there was also a fallback verification system you could use if you refused to let them install their ActiveX controls that asked you questions about what your CD key looked like. This was easily passable by anyone who had ever even SEEN a Windows XP retail CD.

  • by michokest ( 893732 ) <michokest@NOspaM.gmail.com> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:37PM (#13166453)
    In fact they'd be useless, because when you connect to their database the cd-keys you generated wouldn't be there. Get it? They don't check if the key is ok, they check if they made the key.
  • by WhiteWolf666 ( 145211 ) <sherwinNO@SPAMamiran.us> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:43PM (#13166532) Homepage Journal
    Seriously!

    It's *their* software. They can do whatever they want with it.

    They want to run intrusive anti-piracy scans?

    Shift to another vendor.

    Home users can do it. Corporate users can do it. Yes, you'll be an early adopter, thats not always bad.

    If you're a corporation, this shouldn't bother you much, its not *that* intrusive that it'll shut down work for you, and no one has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the office anyways (you signed that away in your EULA).

    If you're at home, tough shit. Pay up, pay often.

    Don't like it? Switch to Mac or Linux. You have no 'right' to a Microsoft Operating System, unless it came with your system, and if thats the case, they'll give you a free licensed copy.

    Sure, I support this initiative for my own ends. But even so, there is absolutely nothing wrong with what MS is doing.

    A) It's legal.
    B) It's not immoral. It's not that intrusive. It's well short of similar measures that gaming companies or expensive app companies have been using for years.
    C) There are alternatives for Windows.

    Pay up, or switch. There is no room for pirates anymore, and I'm *fine* with that.

    Advocate the GPL? Then you *better* support generic notions of copyright, because that's what the GPL is about.

    Read through this topic. Half the posts are "This is terrible! I'll no longer install pirated versions of Windows!" Well, big deal. You aren't a customer now, why should they give two shits what you do.

    The other half of posts are, "No Sweat, this is easy to work around!" To this group, all I have to say is, "Grow up." Hopefully, they'll get around to sabotaging your Windows installation soon.
  • ya FOSS (Score:2, Insightful)

    by sickboy85 ( 734870 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @12:51PM (#13166624)
    When a decent chunk of your future developer (developers developers developers, the FUTURE of our company, yadda yadda) force is students, dropping $100 on an OS is like giving up beer for a month! Bye bye win32!
  • Re:Yawn (Score:2, Insightful)

    by courtarro ( 786894 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @01:04PM (#13166813) Homepage
    If you hold an illegal copy of Windows, you don't have a right to such legal benefits.
  • by flithm ( 756019 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @01:09PM (#13166873) Homepage
    Keep in mind this is probably a prelude to a larger anti-piracy scheme to be phased in over the next generation(s) of Windows.

    They'll likely employ the same tactic that online games use.

    Every copy that's printed gets a code, same with OEM. Those codes are all recorded and shoved into a database. When you connect, you MUST have one of those codes, and ONLY ONE of those codes can be active at a time.

    If this is implemented properly, there's really no way around it. The only thing you can do is buy a legit copy.

    Having said that, this method is prone to all sorts of problems. For instance, many companies Ghost all of their machines, and deploy a standard image. They use the same key on all the machines, but have a stockpile of keys (usually larger than the number of actual deployed machines).

    Obviously this would break that system. But, workarounds will be found. It would be easy to add (maybe it's already there?) functionality so that when a newly ghosted machine boots up on the network the server sees it has the "newly ghosted key" and assigns it one from its pool or something.

    Who knows, but the point is, if Microsoft gets smart about this, there's no way you'll be able to pirate Windows anymore.

    The funny thing about all of this is, I think it's actually against their best interests to do this. One of the biggest reasons Windows is so widespread is due to piracy. Many many people are simply not willing to pay for Windows. If they succeed in doing something like this, I think we'll see interest in alternative operating systems rise yet again.
  • Gate's end game (Score:2, Insightful)

    by HornWumpus ( 783565 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @01:09PM (#13166881)
    He knows there little room for MS to grow. But lots of downside possibilities.

    He wants to put earnings on the front page of the WSJ so his stock sales (which I expect to accelerate) don't depress the price untill he has sold out more shares.

    Go back to day one of microcomputers. Gates knew he could become richer then the pope by setting defacto standards then using them to beatup his compitition. This is OVER, Bill knows it. The market has matured.

    Knowing he won't get better growth from MS then the market in general Bill would be moron to not continue diversifying as fast as possible.

  • by Sloppy ( 14984 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @01:19PM (#13167036) Homepage Journal
    I bought a Fujitsu Lifebook P1120 so I know what you're talking about -- there was an extra partition sitting on the drive when I first got it. And I nuked that partition and reused the space for something else, within an hour of receiving the computer. And it just so happens that my drive really is starting to flake out, so I'll be facing a reinstall situation pretty soon.

    But I'm not fucked.

    When the hard disk completely goes and I have to replace it, I'll be able to reinstall Gentoo Linux without paying anyone anything. ;-)

  • by EWIPlayer ( 881908 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @01:32PM (#13167220)

    Microsoft is a multi-billion dollar coroporation. That corporation must increase profits at the cost of everything else (known as externalizing cost). That means that it must increase profits regardless of who gets hurt, what governments topple, or even if it means the end of the world. The documentary, "The Corporation" made a great case for this and "proved" that The Corporation (any Corporation) is a psychopath, as a result of treating it as a person (which the law does).

    Some points:

    • The Corporation here knows that the bulk of piracy occurs in the third world.
    • The third world is the same world being raped by Corporations (Microsoft is not free of guilt here).
    • Due to the last point, the third world can barely afford computers, let alone paying craploads of money for every piece of MS software they "need". (And don't tell me that they don't need those pieces of software. The bombardment of media and the desire to have what they don't have tells them they need it. They, much like you and I, are completely powerless here.)
    • Assuming that this works perfectly (which we know it won't) and there is no other way to get Windows but to purchase it, these people will not purchase it.
    • Since they can't purchase it, MS does not make any extra money from this venture (ignoring non-third world folks, which comprise the minimum of piracy).
    • Quality of life in the third world, in this regard, now goes down. Even if they do purchase it, quality of life still goes down because they have to give up some other necessity to purchase it.

    The Corporation here has hurt the user-base, yet again, for no real gain. This is where they could be charitable and recognize that the multi-billion dollar company can eat the "loss" (of which, we know, there is no serious value).

    I swear to god that if we don't start taking Corporations down and make them accountable to human decency (and a Corporation, being a psychopath, doesn't care about its negative impact on the world), then things will keep getting sadder and sadder until we're all in the third world, save the Bill Gates' and Steve Ballmer's.

  • by Proc6 ( 518858 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @01:37PM (#13167288)
    Big deal. If MS starts putting the screws to Windows Update visitors for having a keygenned serial number, all that will happen is your neighborhood 0-day distro will have:

    Windows.XP.Security.Updates.Nov19.2005.X-Force

  • Re:Darnit... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by kelnos ( 564113 ) <bjt23@@@cornell...edu> on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @02:12PM (#13167803) Homepage
    I really don't get why people bash Microsoft so hard and, in the same breath, talk about using an unlicensed copy of their OS. If you really think their product sucks that much, why not use another product? I can at least somewhat understand stealing something when it's good, but why would you want to steal something that sucks?

    Unless you're running some very specialised custom software that's not cross-platform, there's really nothing that you can do with a Windows box that you can't do with an alternative OS.
  • by WebCowboy ( 196209 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @02:27PM (#13167977)
    Here is one for you:

    I am running a copy of Windows 2000 at home--it is a LEGITIMATE copy IMHO but I'm not sure how MS would treat it. The install CD in question is from a former employer which closed up shop and let us all go. My boss was a pretty good guy and made sure we all got our final paycheque but couldn't pay out our remaining vacation time (in my case it was four figures in range) so he compensated us with company assets that weren't due to creditors. So my "vacation pay" consisted of hardware and software including a Celeron PC and an unused, still-shrinkwrapped NFR copy of Windows 2000 (NOT OEM--we bought it separately from any of the computers--and it was NOT a resale legally or technically).

    I installed this on the PC (it is now a Linux server since I got another PC and put it on there), but this was before product activation and I NEVER have registered it with Microsoft. It has never been on more than one PC at a time, but MS can't have much of a record.

    My guess is that they hav amassed a list of product keys or serial numbers that are floating around the P2P networks, and have also been "spying" on us for while to collect keys via Windows Update--if a single key shows up on clients from hundreds of diffferent IPs from around the globe and it isn't a known good corporate key then you are shut out.

    Anyways, I'll be curious when I run Windows Update next and see if they have decided I'm a pirate.
  • by ShoobieRat ( 829304 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @02:44PM (#13168218)
    So your school can either fork out the extra money to buy and support a mass license that you get automatically but they have to keep track of....or they can give you the software for free and only ask that you perform the simple task of activating it.

    Not much of an excuse. Is it really that freaking hard to take five minutes?
  • Deja-vu? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ShoobieRat ( 829304 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @02:47PM (#13168254)
    Hasn't this topic come up several times before? And not just here? This isn't really new news.

    And besides, can't say I'll shed many tears for software pirates getting slammed.
  • by DroopyStonx ( 683090 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @02:59PM (#13168398)
    It's actually pretty obvious and doesn't need explanation - use your brain. Try to think outside of the box.

    Whether you are in favor of piracy or not, it's NOT the same.

    Hint: can you duplicate a car with a simple copy & paste?

    Didn't think so.
  • Hasta la Vista (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @03:40PM (#13168947)
    Considering how un-locked down and easy to use yum (and other package updaters) is, I'd say its a safe bet that Microsoft products have officially reached the end of their usefulness on all of my machines.

    Windows Vista can effing blow me.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @04:37PM (#13169620)
    Proof that pirating Windows is mainstream: pirating tips get modded +4 informative on Slashdot.
  • Re:Yawn (Score:3, Insightful)

    by vsprintf ( 579676 ) on Tuesday July 26, 2005 @06:55PM (#13171241)
    What possible legal interest could Microsoft have in what you send to your printer? If they are really doing this (and I'd like to see some proof) they are way beyond looking for seafaring vagabonds raping and pillaging honest wayfarers and townsfolks. That would be more like big brother.

"A car is just a big purse on wheels." -- Johanna Reynolds

Working...