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."
sixty percent of software priates STILL won't install it, because they're white-knuckling their tinfoil hats screaming IT'S A TRAP! so loud that Admiral Ackbar thinks he hears an echo.
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
I can't wait to see how people here try to twist this into something malevolent on MS' part. This is gonna be some mighty cool logical contortionism...
the new DRM stuff being added has nothing to do with them letting everyone have it.
*tinfoil hat*
"You worthless post!"
-Shakespeare, 2 Gentlemen of Verona, 1. 1. 147
Of course, were they to deny access to SP2 to those with copyright infringing copies, those using them might migrate to OSS. Or Microsoft might even be sued for having allowed infected machines to exist, when they had the means to patch them.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
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
If they really wanted to keep u ssafe, they wouldn't let us install windows AT ALL. ;)
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
Microsoft service packs don't require the previous service packs (eg XP SP1) to be installed, they contain all the updates thus far.
Many corporate cdkeys were locked out of the last sp2 build to try to fight piracy. The build would allow you to install the service pack but immediatly after login it would force the activation screen to you which you can not get around. Only solution was to format and install with a different key. More info here.
"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
It's quite obvious when you think about it. As long as Microsoft makes it possible to pirate windows it keeps linux down. Remember, piracy makes things more popular, like music. As long as people can get windows for free the freeness of linux is not so attractive. Microsoft knows that people who are pirating XP probably will never pay for windows ever. So by doing this they can keep their market share from going to linux or some other os. Someone using windows, even if not paying, is still using windows. And there's a chance they just might pay for some other windows software. Maybe the pirated windows and bought an EA Sports game. Doesn't help Microsoft directly, but every windows program sold makes a small difference.
Microsoft probably has the power to completely disable every internet-connected PC with pirated MS software on it. But imagine if today all pirate copies of windows stopped working. You would have a large large number of people with useless computers. They would all follow one of two courses of action. Either go to the store and buy windows for $100+ or download a linux or some such for free. More people would do the latter than Microsoft would like.
The GeekNights podcast is going strong. Listen!
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.
Of course Microsoft don't care about being kind to their pirates, but to save their asses and get a better rumor about providing secure operating systems.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Better get me one of those scurvin' patches for me eye.
But what about me land-lubbin' mateys? Guess the scallywagin' Microsoft haven't thought about them.
Arrrr, who cares about them anyway? Pass the grog, ye son of a biscuit eater!
Yes, all you need to do is get a valid CD key, then change it. Follow the instructions here.
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..
As far as I know there are a couple different pirated copies of XP out there. There is the original DevilsOwn patched version, then there are the VLK/Corporate versions and so on. I am going to guess that the majority of people pirating XP are using the corporate version which AFAIK currently has no problem connecting to WindowsUpdate.
Now - even if Microsoft does block everyone with any kind of pirated version of XP out - what is stopping someone from setting up their own WindowsUpdate server (I have done so at my office) and allowing people to update themselves from there (unless of course the WindowsUpdate allows for the person to download and once it attempts to install finds the illegitimate key and then stops there).
With the piracy scene these days it shouldnt take but a couple days for someone to figure out a way around all this activation stuff and sometimes even MS makes it easier to get around. Take Office XP - it requires activation which can be gotten around and if you attempt to install updates (esp. Service packs) it will ask you for the original CD. However, if you just download the entire SP3 for Office XP you can install the service pack without ever needing the original disks for XP.
If you can program some sort of protection - someone else will figure out a way around it. MS Activation, PGP, etc, etc, etc. Almost everyone wants something for nothing and will spend a lot of time to figure out how to do it.
-
aphex
I Steal Music!
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"
Actually, SP1 doesn't check the validity of the license. It simply denies those who have a CD key starting with "FCKGW".
The SP1 fix for pirated copies of Windows XP is a simple re-registering of a newly generated CD key. No need to activate.
So basically if you installed a pirated copy of WinXP (that has activation removed) and used any other key besides "FCKGW...", you're good to go.
Not much of a "piracy prevention" system going on there.
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
It has nothing to do with being selfless. If they COULD block access, then they would.
The problems with restricting access to this SP2 are totally different to restricting SP1.
At the SP1 stage, everyone with pirated version was using the devilsown serial key - one single key for every pirate.
This key was in use by 1 corporation, and it was fairly simple for microsoft to contact that one corporation, and talk them through changing their key.
Now that everyone knows the key is locked, they all use the newer keygenerators and produce random keys.
Microsoft can no longer determine the legit customers from the pirates.
It would cost them serious money if legit customers were blocked from updating.
liqbase
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!
Microsoft doesn't actually have anything to loose by giving this patch to pirates of its operating system. For one thing, if they had less pirates they would loose valuable market share (their greatest asset). The number of pirates who would actually buy a copy of Windows to get SP2 is negligable, so it's not like they're giving up some big potential revenue stream. Factor in the reduction in bad press that MS gets every time there's a worm and Microsoft's continued policy of supporting pirated copies of Windows makes all the sense in the world. They'd have to be stupid to do otherwise.
Of course the curtailing of various worms is nice for the Internet at large. Just because an action serves Microsoft's interest doesn't mean that it can't serve everyone else's interests too. (Except for the fact that it perpetuates Microsoft's choke-hold on the IT industry, but since when did we worry about the long-term good when a short-term good is in front of us?)
I'm sure that the extra bandwidth will cost Microsoft thousands of dollars, but it's cheap PR for them.
Maybe I'm not the target of this particular troll, since I don't believe that there's any "conspiracy". Microsoft is just doing what is best for Microsoft. That's what it always does (and should do - it is a business after all).
Since SP1 didn't stop anyone from using pirated copies neither will SP2 even if they tried, so spin it like they care.
SP1 did stop people from using pirated copies; it wouldn't install if the registration key was one of two red-flagged ones (for example, that one that starts with "F...").
Of course, the day after that, out come all those programs which automatically change your Windows key to a new, un-flagged one.
If I were running Microsoft, I'd give up on copy-protection altogether. It's a waste of resources, because it simply does not work and never will. Except maybe with NGSCB, since Microsoft will be administering your computer and not you.
My god, with 250mb i could create an entire operating environment...
Something is wrong with that, being as the SP is mostly bug fixes.. ( not all, but mostly )
Will not be practical for dialup users, and they will have to pay for the ( by then late ) updates..
And give Microsoft their home address for future 'license verification sweeps'... how convenient...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
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.
Actually, SP1 doesn't check the validity of the license. It simply denies those who have a CD key starting with "FCKGW".
I cant be the only one who got a major kick out of that every time i saw it, can I?
What's to keep Microsoft, if they choose, from grabbing the IP addresses of pirates attempting the Windows Update, and going after them RIAA-style? It seems like that would be real tempting to their legal department...
They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
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.
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
Someone I know *ahem* downloaded an XP Pro ISO from KaZaA (took nearly 2 weeks on modem) then used WinISO to slipstream it with the Service Pack 1 full installer
This individual was going to try and google a key but then went into his local bank (Barclays) to arrange a loan for a car, and noticed that the Dell PC sitting on the adviser's desk had the usual Dell label on it, with serial numbers for Windows XP and 2000 on it....
And there was a pile of complimentary notepads and a pen on the desk. And the adviser was off getting some forms.
Priceless...
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
Actually, most of that 95% of users have a client support group that takes care of this sort of thing for them.
Plus, when this starts shipping with new computers, the FW should save a lot of headaches coming from home users on broadband connections.
So yeah, it won't be perfect. It's also okay to hate the company, or the products, but being a negative nancy isn't going to make the world a better place.
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...
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.
There's an English version and a German version, but the english is 13 megs heavier. Anyone know why? Perhaps some nasty little bit of snoopware they know they couldn't get away with in Germany?
If I had any modpoints I'd mod you up, but I don't so I'll reward you for your insight with a reply. I hate it when people say they hate Microsoft. As you say, it's ok to hate the company but whining about it won't help. A few days ago, when the sasser worm news was on /. people were complaining that warezed versions of Windows XP are to blame, because they're the most likely to not have any security patches installed, and thus help spread the worm. Now Microsoft fixes this (4 days after it's been brought up on slashdot as an 'idea'!!), and people start cracking jokes and saying that it's useless etc etc. I just can't bend my head around this...(yeah I must be new here :p )
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...
Has MS ever lost from piracy?
I hear constantly how Microsoft is supposedly pro-piracy for dominance purposes, yet never an explanation why they added activation to Windows XP, Windows 2003, Office XP, and Office 2003.
And why did SP1 not install on invalid keys?
Clearly, this is simply a turnaround based on the fact that the keygens out there make it impossible to detect an invalid key, and the need to plug certain holes that have been spreading things is more important than making sure the user has paid for what's running. Their own dominance through piracy is becoming a security clutch, and this is their answer.
As a satisfied Mandrake user, I'd love to completely agree with you, but my experience has been daunting so far as finding worthy candidates for OSS. Here in Ohio there are a lot of people who have a limited concept as to what a computer is, how it can be used, and what it takes to maintain one. Many of them get ahold of an old Pentium or *gasp* 486, and then come to me to see if I can get them hooked up to the internet.
"[So-and-so] told me you might be able to get me online with that free e-mail... Jeeno... Jano..."
"Juno."
"Yeah, that's it! So can you help me out?"
With those old machines, I could install a non-licensed copy of 95/98/Me, but they don't want to put any money into it at all. (I don't even think anyone offers free access anymore.) Hense, I've adopted a "Sorry, I'm using Linux" line that gets me off the spot.
As for those people who go out and buy new machines, it automatically comes with the MS tax preinstalled, so their system is legit and qualified for the updates no matter what. Occasioanlly they still come to me crying about some problem, and once again I tell them, SIUL. To be honest, I don't really know the XP environment enough to be of significant help like I was for the 95/98/Me versions.
Now could I "convert" them over to Linux? DOUBTFUL. They get so branded, that they act lost and on the verge of tears if they can't find those familiar icons to their spyware infested programs and proprietary internet connections.
Again, they are cheap to the point that even with OSS you can't make the machine useful. (I'm sorry, but without internet access, I fail to see a computer as anything but an orphaned box in the middle of a wasteland.)
It's not about the rabble wanting to break the law. They just want the internet for nothing, and that's just not the way it works... Even with OSS like Linux.
If anyone ever shows genuine interest, I'd be more than happy to share Lycoris, Mandrake, Knoppix, or any other free OSS with them, set them up, and help them along when they got stuck... But this is Ohio. I might as well teach Shakespear to chimps.
Respect the post, not the account number!
3cx.org - A truly bad website.
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...
I'd bet that many of the 12-20 year old male audience wants a computer for gaming. Yes, there are games for Linux, but really... most of today's PC games run on windows and their engine's work with MS's DX9 and it wouldn't be cost effective for the game company to get their engine running in OpenGL and port it to Linux.
True, Many of these 12-20 year olds are able to get their parents to fork over the cash for a computer and legit software. Others can't. Some parents can't believe that their kids want more money even after they handed their kid $1,000 (or what have you) for the computer hardware.
I used to be one of these kids... then I got a job.
-Derick