Media Center Key Accidentally Gives Pirates Free Windows 8 Pro License 255
MrSeb writes "In an amusing twist that undoubtedly spells the end of some hapless manager's career, Microsoft has accidentally gifted pirates with a free, fully-functioning Windows 8 license key. As you have probably surmised, this isn't intentional — Microsoft hasn't suddenly decided to give pirates an early Christmas present (though the $40 upgrade deal from Windows 8 Release Preview is something of a pirate amnesty). ... The bug involves the Key Management Service, which is part of Microsoft's Volume Licensing system. Pirates have already hacked the KMS to activate Windows 8 for 180 days — but this is just a partial activation. Now it turns out that the free Media Center Pack license keys that Microsoft is giving out until January 31 2013 can be used on a KMS-activated copy of Windows 8 to turn it into a fully licensed copy of Windows 8 Pro. "
the 'activation' component (Score:5, Insightful)
In related news (Score:5, Funny)
Dirty needles accidentally give users free AIDS.
Re:the 'activation' component (Score:5, Funny)
Only works for "large scale" pirating?
That proves this was deliberate - to try to get more people to install Windows 8.
Re: (Score:3)
That proves this was deliberate - to try to get more people to install Windows 8.
And that works very fast. Near here street vendors are already offering fully functional pirated Windows 8 DVDs.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Sounds like a self-punishing crime.
Re:the 'activation' component (Score:5, Funny)
Hell. There goes the argument about piracy being victimless...
Re:the 'activation' component (Score:5, Funny)
Like in China? The "large scale pirating" is generally where they lose most of their money. When a high schooler pirates his windows pro it's not like he was going to pay full retail price if he didn't manage to pirate it, that piracy didn't cost them a sale, despite whatever the BSA will try to convince you of otherwise.
But an entire building full of windows machines in a medium size business somewhere, that's another story entirely. That's where they really, legitimately, DO lose sales. And that's exactly where this little "bug" will be useful. This is a huge problem that kicks them where it hurts.
Re:the 'activation' component (Score:5, Funny)
Not true, there are many 'cracked' KMS servers out there, which are a VM with the most minimal services, running Windows Server in Core mode, and all ports but the KMS ones closed and blocked. Those same servers are patched to keep 25 fake activations renewed at all times, so any and all requests to the "cracked" KMS server result in activations. As far as MS can tell, they are legitimate, since KMS activations are not verified online, except with the original server.
I don't see this getting patched or fixed easily. It will be a lot of work. or it'll require doing things that annoy large volume customers.
Re: (Score:3)
Since when has MS been averse to doing things that annoy large volumes of paying customers in the name of ineffective attempts at anti-piracy?
Speaking as a sysadmin who's been annoyed and inconvenienced in time-sensitive disaster recovery scenarios, by pointless product activation snafus, probably never.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> Since when has MS been averse to doing things
> that annoy large volumes of paying customers
Do you not see a difference between "large volume customers" (which, admittedly, should really be hyphenated) versus "large volumes of
For Microsoft, there's a very big difference. Microsoft certainly doesn't mind annoying large volumes of their customers, as long as they're NOT the large-volume customers. This distinction
Re: (Score:3)
Meanwhile at Canonical (Score:5, Funny)
Hey, we're giving our OS away for free, no license or hack needed!
Anyone?
Hello?
Re:Meanwhile at Canonical (Score:4, Funny)
Q: What do Ubuntu and Windows 8 have in common?
A: You can get both for free using bittorrent.
Q: Which of the two features unusable applications with a convoluted, misprioritized UI designed by a retarded aspie?
A: That's a trick question - both do!
-- Ethanol-fueled
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, we're giving our OS away for free, no license or hack needed!
Anyone?
Hello?
this is not true, they check if your windows 8 is activated they just don't check if a valid serial was used, that's why you need to activate your windows 8 with a fake kms server before doing this
Re: (Score:2)
I've never understood this bizarre belief that "Oh, it's activated, that means I have a legitimate copy".
So it activates it, you still have an unlicensed copy. If you were a corporation and exploited this, let's see how the civil court views your "free license".
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it's not true that Windows is being given away with no hack or license.. that's not what the parent posted.
Re: (Score:2)
who wants ubuntu anymore anyhow?
fuck an adware OS and use Debian, Ubuntu is just a ripoff copy of Debian anyhow,
either be a real linux user and run Slackware and learn to compile your own binaries for your system, or use Debian if you are too scared to compile
the rest of the debian ripoffs are pure shit
Re: (Score:2)
I think the common thing here on Slashdot is to say Whooosh and point out GP is talking about canonical, the guys who make Ubuntu...
Re:Meanwhile at Canonical (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, we're giving our OS away for free, no license or hack needed!
That which is given has no value?
You're right. We should shut down all charities immediately. After all humanitarian charities didn't charge the recipients for all that food and medical aid they give to the poor and needy around the world. So obviously the food provided no nutrition and the medical aid didn't help treat any diseases. All because the recipients weren't charged money for them. </sarcasm>
Really though I'd rather use Free Software than pirate an OS that's not worth paying for. That is valuable to me. Long-time Linux user here. I appreciate that some people want or need Windows. Good for them, they found something that fits their needs. But the fact I can legally download Linux for free absolutely does not mean it didn't meet my needs just as well as Windows meets the needs of others. In fact I have a non-tangible benefit that comes with it: the gratitude that people around the world would actually donate their time and hard-won expertise to provide people like me with such a good experience.
Money is simply a tool to facilitate trade. That's all it is. Don't let it completely dominate your entire view of everything. As anyone who has ever truly loved someone knows, some of the very finest things in life are monetarily free.
Re:Meanwhile at Canonical (Score:5, Insightful)
Emphasis mine:
some of the very finest things in life are monetarily free.
Mod parent way up
Re: (Score:2)
If only. Dating is expensive, unless you can find someone who is happy with MacDonalds (and too old to order a Happy Meal). When you finally do get to have sex you end up shelling out for contraception, extra show/bath time and cleaning your sheets...
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Don't equate Linux vendors to charities that provide nutrition or treat disease, seriously, what a douche statement. People can happily live without any OS, but living without medicine, clean water, or without disease is where real humanitarian efforts are required. Nobody is going to be sainted for provided a free copy of Linux. And I think Microsoft and Bill Gates have done more to provide real humanitarian efforts donating billions to the world from the revenue generated selling their OS then Linus or
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can argue whether or not it's a righteous opinion for someone to have, but it's still just a philosophical opinion. Some fascist parallel universe storytelling is just a carrier with which to discuss it.
In moving with charitable giving, I'd propose that donating money is providing use of force (purchasing power) to an organization they agree with, and trust to use that money, along with pooled money from others, to do things that forward their cause. After all, that's what money does, right? Makes peopl
Re: (Score:2)
After all, that's what money does, right? Makes people do things?
If I understand your argument correctly and I offered someone $1 they'd do something for it without question, because it makes them do it? I'd argue that money is a motivating factor, but so is hunger, ultimately it boils down to what that person wants.
Too expensive. (Score:2, Interesting)
Windows 8 really needs to be less expensive. The cost is ridiculous. Even Apple, King of Expensive Shit, sells their OS upgrades for $20.
Come on, Microsoft. Stop being asstards.
Re:Too expensive. (Score:5, Insightful)
Telling MS to sell Windows cheaper is like saying that Apple should be giving away iPhones.
Re: (Score:2)
Changing business models (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple is a hardware company (that also makes software to support the hardware) that has been slowly pivoting to sell online services and serve as the middle man in content delivery.
Microsoft is a software company (that sometimes also makes hardware to move the software) that has been slowly pivoting to sell online services as serve as the middleman in content delivery.
Apple dropping prices on iPhones and Microsoft dropping prices on Windows and similar software both make sense in that context -- where they are competing with firms that are already optimized to sell online services and serve as the middle man in content delivery and which are also delivering hardware and software -- at low prices -- to support the online services / content delivery business (e.g., Google, Amazon.)
Re: (Score:3)
Since you decided to play hard to understand, here it is all laid out for you:
Microsoft's business model revolves around selling software.
Apple's business model revolves around selling hardware.
This is not to say Apple doesn't make software, but they make software for the purpose of selling hardware. While Microsoft makes hardware for the purpose of selling software.
Re:Too expensive. (Score:5, Funny)
Apple sells hardware. Microsoft sells software.
[fanboy]Apple sells dreams, Microsoft sells nightmares[/fanboy]
Re:Too expensive. (Score:5, Funny)
Correction, Apple sells dreams only to crush them a year later.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but that's a whole year away. In just ten months the iPhone++ comes out and we can all start dreaming again!
Re:Too expensive...for Buffett (Score:4, Interesting)
Warren Buffett in the late 90s as a traveling buddy of Bill Gates was asked if he invested in Microsoft and Warren replied that he didn't invest in things in which he didn't understand the long term profitability.
Warren in retrospect was entirely 100% right. If you can't come up with good reasons for people to buy your products at what is attractive to them, they will figure another product to buy.
Probably 95% of the users of MS Word could do everything they normally need on Open Office software. That doesn't bode well for MS long term.
Re: (Score:2)
It is a pity that I have no mod points anymore.
This is not only true (Buffet and his statement), it is valid and proven. Since 2000 the share prices of MS have been hoovering around then same level.
Gee, apply some common sense, that's enough. Like Facebook. How many people can be sustained by this planet? And even if every single one has a Facebook account, there is a natural limit of potential users. And then??
MS was similar. A huge advance in the 1990, no competition, effectively. (IBM was just too half-h
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
The flip side is corporate customers are much less elastic. They must buy Windows licenses, so they do, regardless of price. There is also the OEM market, which does get lower pricing, but that's not exposed to the customers and is huge business for MS. Upgrades to software may have been common in the 90s (3.11 -> 95 -
Re: (Score:2)
you can buy a decent laptop for the price of my first CD burner
I read that and what crossed my mind was no way, but then I remembered what I paid for my first CD burner and then I felt really old. That stupid external (6x read 2x write 1x rewrite or something like that) burner probably would still work if I had a machine with a parallel port and the drivers for it that would actually work on a modern machine.
Re: (Score:2)
Windows doesn't have any "elasticity". It's the very definition of an inelastic product. 995 out of 1000 non-Apple desktops and laptops run Windows. And even a chunk of those Apple machines are dual-boot. In the non-developing world, piracy isn't making a significant dent in Windows sales any more. Pretty much every non-custom PC and laptop sold at retail comes with a Windows license built into the price, so the vast majority of current gen machines are all legit right from the get go.
And pirating Wind
Re: (Score:2)
Apples is more like updates.
That you pay 20 bucks yearly for them to remove features.
I really doubt price is the issue for most techies with Win8. and for a lot of folk it's practically free. also if in USA, you could have gotten it for 15 bucks(as an update). but of course this way you can get it free so... but it's not like it's one or two licenses MS has given for free away anyhow.
their strategy is to get as many people as they can on Win8 and the appstore within it.
what's ridiculous is published licensi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Too expensive. (Score:5, Insightful)
£15 - £40 for an upgrade is too expensive for a piece of software you probably use day in day out every single day?
If that's too expensive then what the fuck do you call every other peice of software on the planet that you probably get far less usage out of such as computer games that last for about 6 hrs play time and cost the same price?
Of all the criticisms of Windows 8, price isn't one of them. It's the first Windows OS that actually has sane pricing options.
Re: (Score:2)
That is promotional pricing, Up till now, upgrades have been >100 and full version have been between $250 and $350 depending on what version you get.
I'm waiting to see what the prices look like once the promotion is over. I've read rumors that they're going to price things a little more reasonably, but I'll reserve judgement until I see them in black and white.
(And yes, I bought the the Win8 upgrade. At $40, why not? That's only, like, 4 starbucks coffees.)
Re: (Score:3)
Forty bucks is twice what an Apple customer pays for an upgrade. I paid $0 for kubuntu, which has features W8 lacks while W8 has nothing kubuntu lacks except loss of productivity with that stupid metro interface. I just don't see how anyone would pay forty bucks for that turd.
Re: (Score:2)
To stay current, you need to pay Apple once a year. Windows on the other hand gets upgrades every 3 years, and you can easily skip a version.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice. You got a positive modding so far. Had I mod points, I might have given 'redundant', since this is what anyone could have read on /. since its inception. And as a GNULinuxer myself, I have to state clearly that W8(XP/7) has a few things that give it a distinct advantage. Like running MS office (for those who probably wrongly assume they need it), running a lot of software exclusively (in my case OrCAD).
Re: (Score:3)
If an update made things worse, then you wouldn't buy it at any price point--including free.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I usually run the most current version of windows, but never actually purchased it (aside from when Win98 shipped on a HP machine I bought back in 2000). Typically I go through the cat and mouse game when MS occasionally catches up to the pirates and limits updates or other software (like media center) without extra activation checks. For $40 this time around I fig
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 8 Pro upgrade is $39 (digital) or $69 (physical) [microsoftstore.com]. Windows 7 Pro was $199 for the upgrade (Home Premium was $119) at release. I would call an 80% (or 66%, depending on the version) reduction in price pretty significant.
Re: (Score:2)
Even Apple, King of Expensive Shit, sells their OS upgrades for $20.
Well, they do now that OSX upgrades largely consist of tying it ever tighter to the App Store, iOS and iCloud. Plus a few driver updates to support the new expensive shiny, while end-of-lifing two year old versions of the OS and hardware older than 5 years.
It wasn't that long ago that Apple were charging $129 for Leopard. Plus, you know, the 40% profit margin on hardware helps a bit.
Re:Too expensive. (Score:5, Funny)
To get a legitimate license for Mac OS, you need to pay for an expensive hardware dongle.
Re:Too expensive. (Score:4, Informative)
On the other hand, upgrading a household of OS X computers costs 0*(number of computers) + $20, whereas upgrading a household of Windows computers costs, at a minimum, $40*(number of computers).
Re: (Score:3)
(Or rather, the other other hand. I'm not sure how many hands this creature has.)
Re: (Score:3)
That would be the "gripping" hand.
Re: (Score:2)
That's assuming there are only two sides to a debate. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly, there is no way to purchase multiple copies of Mountain Lion off the App Store using the same account. If Apple wants you to buy it multiple times, maybe they should make it actually feasible to do so.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Nice troll. Here's the real text: (bolded emphasis mine)
A. Preinstalled and Single-Copy Apple Software License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, unless you obtained the Apple Software from the Mac App Store or under a volume license, maintenance or other written agreement from Apple, you are granted a limited, nonexclusive license to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple branded computer at any one time. For example, these single-copy license terms a
Re: (Score:3)
It depends on your timeline. Tiger and Leopard were huge updates. Snow Leopard, while it didn't have much in the way of user-facing updates, did have significant changes under the hood, not least moving to a pure 64-bit OS (on supported hardware) and culling PPC support. Lion and Mountain Lion had less changes than Tiger/Leopard, yes, but there are still some significant differences. Auto-resume, system-wide dictation, versions, and iCloud are all pretty big.
huh? (Score:5, Funny)
What's this license key and activation nonsense?
Sincerely,
Confused Linux User.
Re: (Score:2)
RHN Activation Key (Score:4, Informative)
Here - https://access.redhat.com/knowledge/solutions/2474 [redhat.com]
You can read about license keys and activation nonsense.
I disagree with the premise. (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as I know Microsoft *does* have a strong interested in being pirated in those jurisdictions in which they are not going to sell much anything. It's a question of market share and staying the monopolist.
Re:I disagree with the premise. (Score:5, Insightful)
Right now MS is having a hard time pushing Windows 8 few individuals want to use it and there's no way any major corporate entity is going to switch because they don't want to spend money to buy a product that's probably going to need weeks or months to for people learn to use properly when the existing product works just fine. By having Win8 pirated a wider population of individuals will be willing to use and get use to using it, which will be beneficial and essential to having Win8 adopted by the larger corporate community.
Re: (Score:2)
It's kind of like how Adobe "allows" their photo shop suite to be pirated
Not any more. The site licenced version of CS6 suite is an absolute bastard to bulk install via automated means legitimately due to the heavy-handed DRM and online activation.
If they didn't care about piracy, they wouldn't make it such a pain in the arse for legit buyers.
Ditto goes for Microsoft - the old 'add the volume licence key to the image and done' method was far superior to the KMS method where you have to add an activation pr
Re: (Score:3)
If microsoft don't care about piracy, they've got a funny way of making their legit customers jump through ever increasing online activation hoops for shits and giggles.
Sorry to say, but based on the fact that DRM schemes only affect legit customers, since the first thing pirates do is subvert or strip out the DRM, nothing you said has anything to do deterring piracy and has everything to do with making it look like they're deterring piracy. Basically all it does is make it appear to legit customers and stock holders that there and DRM is a required solution, while only making it mildly difficult for pirates, until one person figures out the newest scheme, then booty ahoy!
Re: (Score:2)
1) We never use the first iteration of something right away and always only after its been out for awhile, so issues will have been found and corrected. We're not paying anyone, including MS, to be their beta testers.
2) People hate change, even the tiniest little things,
Re: (Score:2)
As far as I know Microsoft *does* have a strong interested in being pirated in those jurisdictions in which they are not going to sell much anything. It's a question of market share and staying the monopolist.
Imagine if Microsoft openly acknowledged that and stopped pretending that all piracy is always bad for them. In fact they could even give a certain number of copies away, legitimately, in those jurisdictions and justify it by the many ways they benefit from increased marketshare. I wonder how other software companies (not to mention related copyright interests like the *AAs) would react. It would be interesting to see how they try to spin it.
And still no one wants it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
one way to increase windows 8 adoption (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:one way to increase windows 8 adoption (Score:4, Interesting)
I guess msft read the recent reports of abysmal sales for Windows 8 and decided to use its proven strategy of promoting piracy of Windows to drive up adoption.
I really don't understand what they're doing with Win 8.
I recently bought a netbook that came with Windows 7. I strongly prefer Linux, so it wasn't very long before I repartitioned the drive and installed the OS of my choice. But before I did that, I decided to gave Windows 7 a try, just for the hell of it. I was a bit impressed, actually.
I generally don't like the Windows way of doing things. I prefer the transparency of a *nix system, the storage of important settings in plain text files, the central package manager instead of being nagged about updates for lots of individual programs, the way I don't need malware scanners, the ease with which open source programs can be modified and studied, the fact that drivers are generally maintained with the kernel and not by third parties, the power of the command line, the ease of automation and scripting, the huge variety of choices for graphical desktop, the simple fact that my Linux distro of choice (Gentoo) doesn't assume I'm clueless and thus doesn't get in my way, the ease with which I can find out what caused a problem and fix it and it stays fixed, and the general Open Source philosophy.
Those things about Windows that I don't like are not going to change anytime soon. So it's just not for me. But, having said all that, when I tried Windows 7 I thought that Windows had come a long way. It was stable, solid, and slick. It seemed to me to be what most people wanted: a highly improved and polished XP.
Then I learn about Windows 8 and I'm wondering what the hell the people at Microsoft are thinking. It's as though they want to sabotage themselves. What do they hope to gain here? Is it just that the days of Win 9x made them too arrogant and they don't appreciate that people have more options now? Or what? I haven't seen them pull something like this since either Microsoft Bob or Windows Millenium.
Re: (Score:2)
They want to be Apple. Windows 8 is all about Metro and the marketplace lock-in. They want a cut of all software installed.
Re:one way to increase windows 8 adoption (Score:5, Funny)
What was Microsoft thinking? Thinking had nothing to do with it; they had no choice.
See, Windows 98 SE was followed by Windows Me, which sucked more.
Windows Me was followed by Windows XP, which sucked less.
Windows XP was followed by Windows Vista, which sucked more.
Windows Vista was followed by Windows 7, which sucked less.
Windows 7 accordingly had to be followed by a "sucked more" release.
Re: (Score:2)
What was Microsoft thinking? Thinking had nothing to do with it; they had no choice.
See, Windows 98 SE was followed by Windows Me, which sucked more. Windows Me was followed by Windows XP, which sucked less. Windows XP was followed by Windows Vista, which sucked more. Windows Vista was followed by Windows 7, which sucked less.
Windows 7 accordingly had to be followed by a "sucked more" release.
Heh that's pretty funny (because it's true). I believe you have identified the pattern!
... I don't like Microsoft one bit, but I would compromise my objectivity if I didn't admit that they have some seriously talented employees who really could do better. Is it that they don't want to break this pattern? Maybe they think a combination of vendorlock and "next one will be better really!" increases sales more than consistent improvements could? Or are they simply a one-trick pony in this regard?
Still
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, sure, he has identified the pattern *rolleyes*
It's not like it's been a meme forever or something. Dumbass.
Your comment amused me, because I know just how much you make yourself suffer by being so bitter.
Perhaps one day you'll recognize that this is beneath you.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft sees that they need to get into the "app" market to increase their profits, so they make a platform that puts "apps" first.
Then, logically, their worst fear would be that apps become more portable so that the underlying OS becomes increasingly irrelevant. They don't see that as an eventuality if they continue along this course?
Microsoft traditionally has removed options from users in subsequent OS changes, Windows 8 is the next progression of it.
Yeah. I disagree with it strongly, but there is certainly a school of thought that prefers to remove options because it might confuse us "stupid users", rather than implement those options in a more robust and transparent way.
How can you encourage people to upgrade if the UI looks the same? It would be much harder to do that.
By not treating them like complete idiots and explaining that changes made "un
Freebie (Score:4, Funny)
As I surmised (Score:5, Informative)
In an amusing twist that undoubtedly spells the end of some hapless manager's career, Microsoft has accidentally gifted pirates with a free, fully-functioning Windows 8 license key. As you have probably surmised, this isn't intentional
Yes, in fact, this is exactly what I surmised after seeing the word "accidentally". That usually implies lack of intention.
Interesting hack, and pretty "Oops" on MS' part (Score:5, Informative)
On the upside, you can have a fully activated copy of Win 8 with relatively little effort.
On the downside, it'll still be Windows 8.
I think I'll pass, thanks.
It's a trap? (Score:2)
Can this key be revoked after, say, a year or so, forcing the (by now committed) users to shell out or be locked out of their systems?
win8 selling so poorly the gave pirates keys (Score:3)
Just a key, not a license. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not a valid license. It is just a key that happens to work arround the current version of their anti-piracy control. But if you use this, and get an audit, you will have to shell out the full amount of a retail key ( 4 to six times the the price of a basic oem version). It might stop working at any time if you apply updates supplied by MS. They know what keys are published, and can block them if they want.
This is very disappointing coming from a site that is very rigorous when it comes to the free GPL license. The MS license has at least to be paid.
Windows 8 looks hilarious now... (Score:2)
...but Windows versions never catch on until people realize how useful their "killer feature" is.
XP's killer feature was comparative stability. Vista's was shiny-pretty value and natively playing well with a lot of things that previously needed third-party software. 7's was polish. 8's is almost entirely the touch interface. If touchscreens on decent machines become more prevalent, people will fucking love Windows 8.
Re: (Score:2)
We do have common sense. That's why we know touchscreens on the desktop are a really, really dumb idea unless you're solving crimes on CSI.
Most people probably wouldn't be complaining if Metro wasn't forced on them when running it on a machine with a keyboard and mouse.
Will they ever get that right? (Score:2)
Back when XP came out, the upgrade disk was about half the price of a "full retail" disk. If you loaded the upgrade disk on a new build, it would ask you for the CD of your previous version. All you had to do was borrow an ME disk and put it in; then you could go right ahead and load XP from the "upgrade" disk.
Re: (Score:2)
I've not tested Windows 8, but 7 was even easier: Install it once on a bare disk with no key, and then "upgrade" that install. No need to scrounge up a disk from a previous edition.
There's really no point in doing that, though, when the OEM license is roughly the same cost as the upgrade.
Horseshit! (Score:2)
In an amusing twist that undoubtedly spells the end of some hapless manager's career, Microsoft has accidentally gifted pirates with a free, fully-functioning Windows 8 license key.
This falsely assumes that Microsoft wouldn't want Win8 to be pirated, when that's the very thing that'll help ensure their continued dominance.
(It'd be safe to assume that the higher-ups at Microsoft are also aware of this...)
Its obviously intentional (Score:2)
Every version of Windows so far has either been directly copyable, had token copy protection that is trivially easy to circumvent or had a 'leaked' registration hack emerge within a few weeks of its release.
For a method involving remote online validation, It really isn't hard at all to think of a scheme where validation hacks wouldn't be even possible.
At some point, you have to conclude this weak security is intentional, as are the leaks too. Its just another way for Microsoft to keep their product on most
Why would anyone pirate it? (Score:2)
Microsoft and piracy (Score:5, Interesting)
It has been known for years, and publicly admitted by Bill Gatess 14 years ago that piracy is Microsoft's key to building and keeping market share. While Ballmer has threatened in the past to turn up the anti-piracy knob to 11, that was all bluster. The goal is not to eliminate piracy, but make it just inconvenient enough for most people.
If you are willing to jump through the hoops to pirate Windows and Office, Microsoft would rather you do that than try any alternative at all. Because they know that those who try alternatives and get by with "good enough" are gone for good.
Bill Gates' original "Open Letter to Hobbyists" can be completely disregarded as the writing of a naive young man soon to figure out that piracy builds market share.
My "diagnosis" of the situation is that this was not by accident. My prediction for the future is that Microsoft will not fix this, or at least make a half-hearted attempt to make it look like it's harder. They will not close this hole.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
Likewise. Really makes one wonder just how accidental this really was.
Re:What about windows 7? (Score:5, Informative)
Google "slmgr -rearm" and "IR5". Note that IR5 doesn't install any sort of actual cracks, it just scripts a few simple tasks you can do manually if you don't trust it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:M$ (Score:4, Insightful)
I used Visual Studio in the early 2000s and I liked it, but I like other IDEs too. Delphi was what I used for developing GUIs for ages. The options for doing so in Visual Studio back then were a lot more complicated, either that or I just didn't know where they were. I find Eclipse a bit annoying, but I tried Netbeans recently and I like it. I also started using Emacs a few years ago for things like C, scripting and web page editing, and I like it a lot.
So yeah, Visual Studio is one of the few decent products that MS produce (or at least it was 10 years ago), but it's pretty silly to suggest that people won't like the alternatives available to them.
Re: (Score:2)