Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Allows Pirates to Install XP SP2
mkraft writes "On the tail of the previously asked question on whether Microsoft should support pirated copies of XP, comes the answer.
According to Computer Times, Microsoft will allow SP2 to be installed on any copy of Windows XP including copies with invalid license keys.
Microsoft decided "that even if someone has pirated copy of Windows, it is more important to keep him safe than it is to be concerned about the revenue issue."
There is no news of whether or not pirated copies will be allowed access to the Windows Update site afterwards or just allowed to install SP2."
Now, this seems like a genuinely nice thing to do by Microsoft. I can't wait to see how the Slashdot hordes of RMS fanboys are going to spin it to make Microsoft seem like the bad guy again...
(this almost made fp, too!)
Quality, performance, value; you get only two, and you don't always get to pick.
This isn't about keeping people safe it's about making sure that people don't switch away from windows to the alternatives http://linux.org http://freebsd.org http://openbsd.org http://netbsd.org and even http://mac.com .
I had to use a pirated version of windows on my vmware because my damn laptop came with a version of XP that could only be installed on a SONY, laptop. Which is crap - I was forced to pay for XP with my laptop - it should be mine to run on:
1. Another computer should I not use it on my laptop.
2. My vmware virtual machine on the laptop it was meant to run on, although not in the manner originally intended.
Well, allowing everyone to install SP2 would make worms and viruses that spreads due to OS voulnerabilities to be slowed down. And i doubt MS would sell more Windows if it wasnt possible to install SP2 on pirated windows-versions.
this is probably the most boring sig in the world
I think what they meant to say is that they realized it's more important to keep OTHER Windows users safe. By allowing users of invalid copies of XP to patch, known vulnerabilities that might be exploited and used as points of attack against other Windows installations are addressed. It simply makes sense for them to do this.
"that even if someone has pirated copy of Windows, it is more important to keep our future revenues safe than to worry about coypright infringment."
You're reading Slashdot. Of course you like Linux and pc hardware
Microsoft decided "that even if someone has pirated copy of Windows, it is more important to keep him safe than it is to be concerned about the revenue issue."
What they mean is "it is more important to keep us safe from the media when the next round of viruses hit any unpatched machines by saying we allowed anyone to install SP2"
Bob
Listen to my latest album here
This is fairly selfless. This stance could be interpreted as Microsoft putting aside its own interests in order to improve the current state of home computer security and the poor security levels on the net. Even though they caused those problems in the first place, this move is one which should be met with approval.
Free iPods - now in the UK!
I don't know what you are smoking but dude, not being able to patch their system will not make them migrate. People don't care about patching their systems as it is. Look at Sasser, a patch was out but people didn't bother downloading it. The only thing that will make people migrate to OSS is if it was ABSOLUTELY impossible to use a pirated version of Windows.
"that even if someone has pirated copy of Windows, it is more important to keep him safe than it is to be concerned about the revenue issue."
Bullshit. What they really mean is:
"Even if someone has a pirated copy of Windows, we will grudgingly forego the revenue and allow it to be updated because the proliferation of morons with compromised machines further erodes the already declining credibility of our OS. For now."
"...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
Bullshit, they'd never ever get (successfully) sued. They have no obligation whatsoever to provide a pirate with updates to the pirated software.
95% of Windows users dont even know what a patch is and in result SP2 will never be installed and nothing will be resolved
i think he meant that the rep MS will get would be bad because people who cant patch their machines will start having machines that are as flaky as winME. One of the biggest turning points for MS was Win2k/XP without the ominous BSOD/crashing every day. Without all the crashes people biggest complaint ( it crashes all the time ) was nullified. But If no one can patch then every other day your system gets infected with this that or the other thing. Almost making it ABSOLUTELY impossible to run without patching. Badda-bing!
I'd say that this is just good business for them.. Making sure that people who probably wouldn't pay for an OS anyways aren't helping to spread worms and infecting people who DO pay for the OS is just going to help MS.
:)) that windows is insecure.
On the other hand, denying people service packs is not likely to induce them to pay for a license (it certainly wouldn't have convinced me, back when I ran windows), and just contributes to the perception (if you want to call it that..
...migrate to OSS
Do you really think Microsoft cares if pirates switch to Linux? They don't pay anyway, so who cares.
I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
aaah but there is a greater responsibility there, not to the pirated user, but to the Interne community. IANAL but this is how I'd state my case vs. Microsoft:
1) Microsoft would know that there was a security issue on Windows
2) Microsoft would know that this security issue does not necessarily affect the individual holder of the computer, but the network space surrouning the holder of the computer.
3) Microsoft willfully denied at least some users the ability to patch their system properly, thus harming the Internet community. Therefore we'll have "A Bunch of people sick of these worms trying to infect our computers vs. Microsoft" hittting the Federal circuit courts in no time.
...in bed
Microsoft is only doing this because if they didn't all the pirates would probably switch either:
1. Find a way around it
2. switch to Linux
Pirates have the correct personality to be switching to Linux and Microsoft realizes that even though they are not buying their operating system they are still stuck with Microsoft while using it and they may buy other Microsoft products
And if this is the case (which I highly doubt), where is the problem? I don't feel bad for people who pirate software and then complain when they get caught. If I steal a car and then there is a recall on it, should I be able to take my car in and get it fixed without anyone saying anything about it being stolen? The problem is that people are stealing MS software (and yes, taking something you have no rights to is stealing, whether it's software or hardware). MS isn't to blame for not supporting these people, they are to blame for stealing the software.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
Safe mode.
Well thanks to Microsoft's Product Activation, there is no such thing as a pirated copy of Windows XP, right? Oh, there is? And its easy to get around? Well thanks for wasting all the legit users fscking time, Microsoft!
...and yet I can be sued when a burglar hurts himself on my property.
My server
Then again, I rarely ever do anything on the windows box (here for the family) so maybe constant heavy usage may affect things a bit.
Bloatware? The entire WMP dir is what, 17 MB. Out of that, the WMP binary and the required DLLs comprise a whole 1.8 MB, with the WMP binary alone 72 KB. It never uses more than 7 MB RAM, even playing a playlist that contains more then 3 GB of MP3s.
I say again - bloatware?
Anyone who pirates Windows probably isn't going to buy a copy anyway. However, by denying them patches, Microsoft would simply make it that much easier for virus writers to inconvenience Microsoft's PAYING customers. Having millions of unpatched windows machines floating around harboring all the latest virus/malware payloads just waiting for some unsuspecting paying customer to plug into the Internet is just bad business for M$.
Seriously.. The issues of internet protection are much larger then the revenue lost from a few 'pirates'... ( though it is debatable if there really is a loss, since most 'pirates' wouldnt have purchased the product anyway )
This was a good and responsible move on their part.
Assuming there wasnt some underlying motive we dont know about.... I hate to be too trusting of a company that has a history with hidden agendas..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
This has happened to me three times. I do a lot of reinstalls on test systems at work. Each time I just called the phone number they provide and explained the situation and was provided an authentication key. Took 5 min tops.
As long as you are legit it isn't a problem. If you aren't legit, go cry me a river.
The first is simple. MS can't ban them. SP1 was easily installed when you had a keygen. So basically they are allowing something they can't stop anyway.
The second is more sinister. Has MS ever lost from piracy? Or has piracy helped them become the owner of the desktop. If everyone really had to pay for every bit of MS software they ran would they still be so widely used?
If they ever manage to create a windows you can't install without a license people might just choose not to use windows. It is a radical idea I know but MS can't risk it. They can afford piracy, they can't afford losing dominance on the desktop. Hell Gates himself has boasted that MS fortune is big enough to last them years without a single source of income.
Unix was once very popular because it was practially free to everyone working at a university. There were other OS'es to work with but unix was free for students, teachers, researchers and other people with no money. Same with the C programming language.
Dominance is worth a lot more then getting every user to pay. Just ask apple. Apple made sure you had to pay for their OS because you have to buy their hardware. How big is their share again?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
what about people with more than one machine? i don't just mean a family with a few computers, but i know some people that still keep their older machine around for whatever reason. they may test software on it or put it in another part of the house or whatever. technically they have to buy windows for each machine to keep it current. i'm not talking about keeping a 486 running for kicks, i mean a gamer that upgrades every 2 years or so and their "older" machine is still faster than some bargin box and is capable of running the current M$ OS. i wonder how many of those people really bought 2 or 3 boxes of XP.
Um... I don't register with MS when I download stuff from them, and I'd bet most legit users don't either.
They don't require it, so why would I go out of my way to give them personal info that I'd rather they didn't have.
Used some old Linux distribution maybe? Here everything works perfectly.
Dual Athlon 2000+: Works
Tyan Tiger MPX board: Works, random generator and network support included
Terratec DMX X-Fire 1024 sound card: works
GeForce FX 5600: Works
Logitech Cordless desktop mouse and keyboard: works
USB 2.0 card: works
USB hard disk: works
USB hub: works
CompactFlash card reader: works
MP3 player (Flash): works
HP LaserJet 1010: works
Aiptec tablet: works
My ancient laptop (Toshiba 470CDT) also works, power management and network included.
Linux was a pain to get to work in 1997. Now it works pretty well. I had more problems with Windows 2000 on the Athlon than with Linux.
Sued, yes, but not successfully. You can be sued for any insanity a person can invent, but it'll most probably get thrown out with a bill attached.
Next time you get one of those emails talking about all the crazy lawsuits our corrupt legal system permits, maybe you should google for the RESULTS of those lawsuits. You might be surprised.
Hey freaks: now you're ju
I doubt FOSS has anything to do with this move. It's designed to please the folks at the NSA who realize that millions of Winzombies could be used to launch a major attack on critical infrastructure.
It's not malevolent but it is in their best interest.
When the next killer worm sweeps the world I doubt Microsoft will just be able to wave their hand and say, "it's all those illegal copies that are causing the problem" and have people believe it.
Bad PR is a big danger to Microsoft.
If I steal a car
There is a big difference between stealing real tangible property and illegally using intellectual property (copyrights, patented, and trademarked items). You can not directly compare the two, they are completely 100% different in every way. One is a physical thing, the other only exists because of a series of laws. Although it can be misused (as defined by existing laws), it is impossible to steal intellectual property.
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
Skeptics are taking over the WORLD! People who fear scam-producing companies are GOING TO KILL US ALL!! The Matrix has you! Don't trust anyone who doesn't bend over and take it from scandalous corporations! If they screwed you a million times, they NEVER do it again! You must trust them and believe everything you hear! Skeptics and people capable of learning ARE GOING TO DESTROY THE WORLD!
Oh wait I'm not a dumbass. Nevermind.
I am NOT a number! I am a - oh wait, I'm number 761710. Look! 761710!
Microsoft decided "that even if someone has pirated copy of Windows, it is more important to keep him safe than it is to be concerned about the revenue issue."
Roughly translates to:
Microsoft decided "that even if someone has pirated copy of Windows, it is more important to keep him locked into the platform than it is to be concerned with the legality of the license."
..There's a-dooin's a-transpirin'
My company decided that windows 2000 was the last Microsoft operating system we would use unless Microsoft removed activation from its products. Sure, we use open-license corporate edition software, but the risk of being locked out of updates is too great to consider windows XP. Our machines will easily last us 3-4 years. If Microsoft still persists on using product activation at that time, we will probably move to Mac OS X (we'll need new hardware anyway) or Linux.
We are actively evaluating both products. In 3-4 years, those products will be even better than they are today. Microsoft needs to start realizing that they aren't the only game in town anylonger.
-ted
I think you'll find it's important from a security aspect only actually, as for a company that sells software with security holes in it, it's kinda important (and in their interests) to close them.
I've been beta testing it since inception and there isn't anything in there that remotely qualifies you to wield your FUD. If anything you should be taking your tin foil hat off and applauding them because, by releasing SP2 to people who didn't buy Windows, they've drastically reduced the potential number of zombie machines we'd all have to deal with. Goodness knows how you got a +5 interesting for 29 words with no basis...
Perhaps it's the users who should accept liability for not installing these patches?
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
People in thier comments seem to just be regurgitating the same old piracy drivel about the company not losing revenue streams: "Well, its not like the pirates would actually buy the software anyway." This might be true for some apps like 3d studio max and photoshop to an extent, which are high-priced, luxury software.
But if Windows had been impossible to pirate, these people would have bought windows. Sure, some of them might have gone the *nix route, but most likely a very small minority. These pirates dont balk at spending money: they spent 1000-1500 dollars on the hardware for their computers. Spending an extra 100 bucks on some software that makes that hardware work and function wouldnt even be a second thougt if it were impossible to pirate windows.
So sure, microsoft is gaining marketshare, which is arguably more important to them than revenue -- especially at this point -- but recognize that they have lost a significant revenue source because of piracy.
Bravo MS. Good move.
Anthony Papillion
Advanced Data Concepts, Inc.
"Quality Custom Software and IT Services"
A lot of the underlying code that allows WMP to run is stuff that loads when XP is booting. The tradeoff is that XP takes longer to boot so that programs take less time to load later on (because it's already pre-loaded all the underlying system stuff; it's really just the front-end interface that has to load, and that's relatively lightweight compared to the dozens of codecs, media drivers, DRM stuff, etc. that XP loaded when you were booting up. And the 7MB of RAM is what the WMP binary itself uses, not counting all the memory taken up by the aforementioned codecs, drivers, etc. that are lower-level XP software.
Not that this proves anything, but you seem to be under the impression that the entirety of WMP is contained in that 17 MB directory, which (to the best of my knowledge) is not the case.
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
well.... ,microsoft talking about piracy issues in countries with little or no $. Microsoft would rather that people pirate their software than use linux....
Its fairly simple . remember
Note to Mods: When I post mirrors, it's a best guess. I don't know for certain whether or not the site will go down!
I'll say it, even at the risk of burning my karma.
Most (I said most--if it doesn't apply to you, disregard) of the posters here are high schoolers and college students who don't work and have absorbed into the hivemind groupthink that dictates that everything Microsoft does is silly and ridiculous, and everything OSS does is cool and cutting-edge. It's "hip" to your IRC buddies to hate Microsoft and use Mandrake. Then you can say, "Windows sucks because a buggy driver crashed it once...by the way, I'll be back in three hours while I set up my sound card in Linux."
VA Linux-owned Slashdot has a certain interest in posting as many negative Microsoft articles as possible, and seeing as how Taco's excuse for calling his "news" site a hobby is supposed to be an explanation for the outright falsehoods and propaganda that gets posted, it's a convenient way to discredit Microsoft no matter what they do.
Outside of Slashdot, the world is very different, but a lot of people have adopted a worldview that is based entirely on Slashdot headlines. Google Zeitgeist shows Linux at 1%, Windows is still around and Longhorn is definitely coming, but if you come to Slashdot, Linux is somehow taking over Mac usage and Longhorn is "vaporware" with no useful technologies whatsoever. Just one example of many (don't get me started on the pro-piracy bullshit...violating copyright holder rights is "justified," while violating the copyright of the GPL is "evil").
I've seen sigs that stated, "You use Linux if you're anti-Microsoft, you use BSD if you're pro-UNIX." It extends to this website, which is not pro-OSS or pro-Linux, but merely anti-"M$." We're still seeing Clippy and BSOD jokes in 2004. It's like this place is firmly stuck in 1998 and absolutely will not let go. Meanwhile, the late 90s free software golden child that Linux was to the press has subsided, and now people have moved on, expecting actual results and not just cute ideologies that look good in a Wired article. I merely bring all this up because I believe it has an effect on the attitudes of the Slashdot editors and most of Slashdot's devoted readers.
Less and less do I even bother reading the comments of stories anymore...I'm about ready to just skip them entirely. So much uninformed opinion, outright false memes that never stop spreading ("640K is enough for anybody" is just one example) and bullshit that I could start a manure farm...
Activation was to essentially add marginal revenue.
Think of it like this...
You're selling Windows, and you have a lot of money, so you do a lot of surveys about windows, and based on Windows Update, you have a pretty good idea how many unique PC's are out there versus how many licenses you sold.
Lets assume the piracy rate for Windows is 15% (I have no idea, just a guess). Now, Microsoft is already getting money for each PC, because Dell, Gateway, and all the others force you to buy Windows when you buy the PC. That means you can't gain market share simply by expanding your market, because you've got 100% of the market for all intents and purposes.
So you look at that piracy number. If you can decrease piracy 5%, you get 5% more revenue, essentially for free.
Oh sure, 10% will still bypass it, but what do you care? The 5% is easy, causes no inconvenience, and if you're selling Windows, you make it as liberal as possible. You're trying to scare Joe Mostly-Honest into doing the right thing.
Now, if your goal was to go from 10% piracy down to 1%, my guess is that you would piss off about 50% of your customers, because it would be such a pain the ass, no one would be happy.
So MS just got 5% more revenue simply by forcing the thing to phone home once. Big deal.
"First off, why do you need technical knowledge to use OSS? "
Because (a) as soon as you say "you need to configure X", you've lost 99% of the population (b) as soon as you say "you can't buy software, you have to go online and then install packages from the command line" then you've lost 99.99999% of the world's population
Lets not get into the lack of something as nice as Nero, Quicken, Quickbooks.
This is about SP2 not checking valid product keys.
What do pirated copies of Windows XP have to do with people caring about security and the FOSS movement? What does any of this have to do with the open-source movement?
Typical Slashbot spin...
microsoft isn't just successful because people pay for their OS, they're successful because they have a huge installed base of users who then go and support the millions of developers who write applications or provide services for the windows environment.
if another OS were to take a chunk of microsofts marketshare, then the overall health of the entire industry that provides programs/services for windows declines.
the fact that WindowsXP is on every damn computer nearly is what lets RealNetworks (moreso before WMplayer arrived so seriously)provide their software to people for free, because content providers will pay through the nose to have content that can be accessed, and even payed for by windows users. thousands of companies can expect to make money by leveraging the HUGE installed base of Windows computers. if the number of users shrinks for whatever reason in a large enough amount (hobbyist that switch to linux: doesn't matter. but if people switched to Linux in droves because they had to pay through the nose for something that was always seemingly free, or for whatever reason... [and i know this isn't going to happen any time soon, just as they won't go and buy a mac immediately either]) then companies will not have as much incentive or profit potential to support windows, or windows only.
if for whatever reason it becomes a better business idea to support an alternative OS (exclusively or not) instead of windows, then it will be easier for people to get by without having to use windows to accomplish the same functions. if people aren't forced into using windows because it is the easiest way to accomplish something more often than not, or if developers don't see an easy way to tap into a huge stable market, then the strengths of windows will soon dissipate.
- I'd prefer not to.
However, some people seem to be under the illusion that MS have made a charitable gesture to those users and almost sanctioned the use of pirated copies of XP in the future - this is not the case.
Everything that MS does is purely for financial reasons, nothing more. The fact is that their reputation has taken a beating recently with regard to worms & viruses and, as many people have already said, it makes sense to allow all users to apply updates to limit the spread of those across the Internet in the future.
However, MS's ultimate aims are to sell more copies of XP and deep down MS knows full well that the struggle to keep Windows in and Linux out of the desktop is going to get more and more difficult over the next few years - so from a financial perspective, it makes far more sense to keep all users working with MS products now (and taking a financial hit as a result) rather than risking them seeking an alternative OS. This decision is therefore purely a business one, not a charitable one.
Finally, I also believe that the people here who are proudly proclaiming some kind of victory because they can continue to run updated copies of illegal XP installations, need to grow up and join the world of adults.
Piracy achieves nothing apart from making things bad for everyone. Any piece of commercial software released today has a price that factors in some assumptions based on the amount of illegal copies that will be run of it - the upshot is that the price is higher than it should be and honest users suffer.
A lot of people need to grow up out of this childish "must have" attitude. The only way to force the hand of any business is to hit them where it hurts - in their profits. In other words, if people don't want to pay the full price for a product, they should contact the vendor or manufacturer and tell them exactly why their product is overpriced and and why they will not use it, rather than simply copying it. The same goes for a product that restricts rights to fair usage - don't use it or buy it if you don't like what it does to your freedoms.
Pirates are nothing more than cowardly sheep who are ultimately responsible for driving prices up and allowing all manner of restrictive technologies to get in through the back door. In a few years time, when these same people still need their Windows "fix", they may not be congratulating MS so loudly when they find that all their data is DRMed and the ability to copy & share data, something they took for granted previously, has disappeared.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Personally, I think it just burns your ass that an alternative point of view to yours got modded up +5, so you have to do *something* to try and tear it down. BTW, I thought you were so disgusted with Slashdot that you weren't going to post here anymore? I think these guys were on to something.