Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Changes Tune Again On SP2 Installs
KidHash writes "Following on from last months Slashdot story, it appears Microsoft has changed its tune with the BBC reporting that SP2 will not install on XP installations using the '20 most pirated product IDs.'"
What I see happening is that the 21-40 most-pirated codes rapidly displace the top-20 most-pirated codes, and everyone who cares about being up-to-date is happy with no benefit to MS. Instead, the chances they missed were:
All in all, I am somewhat surprised - an uncharacteristic faux pas.
Simon
Physicists get Hadrons!
it's about time they realized that it wont make a diffrence
Just go here: http://omnitechdesign.com/cdkey.html
Most of us run something other than Windows(TM) right? This IS slashdot after all.
Last month, I got hammered for taking a skeptical position about MS' attitude and motivations. What bothered me at the time was the disingenuous wording of their original announcement (not the act itself) wherein they professed concern only for the pirate users' safety.
The problem MS faces is that the reputation of their OS is gradually eroding with virus after virus and a lot of this comes from those rouge boxes that lack the securtiy patches. This puts MS in an interesting quandry: help theives or save the OS. Heh.
"...all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness..." yada yada
I was under the impression that it wasn't done yet. So you're saying that an incomplete update doesn't run perfectly yet?
Thanks, Captain Obvious.
You have a pirate copy? You don't get support, patches, fixes of any kind. The people who actually paid for their version get patches and fixes, thereby gaining a benefit from having paid.
The pirates get hacked and infested with worms, viruses and the people who paid, don't. It's about time too.
Deleted
duh?
NEOCA - Custom LED Flashlights
Wow, someone giving SP2 a bad rep and they're getting moderated informative. Perhaps you'd like to point out some of the weaknesses?
For one, even if you hate Windows and you think Bill Gates is evil, I think it is a Good Thing(tm) that a number of new features will ensure that the uninformed masses will be strongly encouraged to not only enable automatic updates, but get anti-virus protection. The wireless networking updates are overdue as well.
By Larry Seltzer
May 11, 2004
Despite reports indicating that Microsoft Corp. was planning to allow users with pirated copies of Windows XP to install Service Pack 2, the company has confirmed to eWEEK.com that this will not be the case...
Perhaps there is another solution...
Perhaps the pirates will just get a new code.
Of course...if people really cared about security, there wouldn't be an operating system to make the Service Pack for.
ok, in a PR strategy not be made publicly known that Microsoft actually wants pirated software - which perfectly sits with their recent plans about 'free hardware on software subscriptions' - because that effectively would make it a 'piracy fed' company, tries to satisfy the masses with this latest report.
Why not just have SP2 install and patch the system then report in ANY WAY POSSIBLE that this is a pirated copy of Window XP. Try and send information to MS identifying the end user if possible through the IP Address, login name, Dial-Up Networking IP account, address, and provider. Gather information from Microsoft Office as well, any Word or Excel Documents that have addresses in them send those to MS as well.
Place something in the Word/Office documents stating this user is using illegal copies of Windows XP or such when opened by a non-pirated user. Then let folks turn other folks in for a reward. Have other systems on the same MS Networking Browser elections realizes which other machines are pirated when the Browser Election process happens, then have those other machines tattle tale to MS about the pirated machines.
Heck, some folks may not even realize they have a pirate copy. When SP2 installs, they could have it prompt the user and tell them, "you're currently using an illegal copy of MS Windows XP, would you like to pay for a legal version at this time?" and still patch them, but inform them and give them a chance to buy a cheap copy of XP.
How is this going to help when there are programs that search for keys?
I'm not sure how they work but I am *ahem* aware of one that finds keys for home, professional, corporate etc
Takes a while but they keys seem to be random.
Fairly unrelated, but has anyone else noticed that it usually takes about 10 times longer for an XP service pack or update to install versus win2k?
This is based on observations doing windows updates on similar spec machines, 20+ win2k boxen and a few XP boxen.
Please help metamoderate.
know what these 20 most common serial numbers are? What about those 20 poor saps who had their serial number copied?
While I don't necessarily disagree with you entirely, surely it took more effort to put in a tamper-resistant key lockout in the service pack installer than it would have done to just let it install everywhere?
It could be argued that Windows Update is costing them in data transfer etc, but then I'd say the solution is to bar the pirate IDs from Windows Update and force the unlicenced users to obtain the patch elsewhere. Of course, they'd have to allow others to distribute the patch, but that would probably save them money as it would spread the downloads over several sources.
While it will generate bad press, and allow many unprotected PC's to propagate worms/viruses, it's their right to withhold updates.
Unless that is, a class action law suit forces them to be responsible for their mistakes, much as car dealers are now. True it's not actually a 'safety' issue, and you don't 'own' the software like you do a car, but now that the government believes the internet is 'needed and a national issue', who knows.
Personally I think they should offer it to everyone, they aren't going to loose any revenue over it. And it makes it look to the common man ( and the government ) that they care.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Installing via service pack and integrated install has worked fine for me, and I haven't had to report any bugs since the couple betas.
My experience with it lately has been great. The popup and activex blockers in IE are a godsend. The firewall is painless, aside from the initial "do you want to allow this?" messages when opening a 3d game for the first time (blank screen for ~10sec in some of them).
I'd love to have an AMD64 cpu to test the NX support, it sounds like a great addition.
SP2 is not a car wreck, and it installs fine on the wdr2y keyset....
what sp2 ___IS___ is effectively a set of patches and updates to cover existing vulns and perhaps more importantly the installation of a new system service that monitors 3 items
windows updates
windows firewall
anti-virus (3rd party)
left to defaults it will enable auto update and do all critical updates, enable the windows firewall, and check you have installed a current working AV application.
left to defaults SP2 is something that will increase security and workability for the vast majority of winows users.
left to defaults SP2 will be a complete pain in the ass for all clueful windows users who religiously replace IE and Outlook with better options, run behind a hardware firewall, do not just download and run software blindly, etc, and scan all new files with a decentish free AV package such as http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_dwnl_free.php
Bear in mind that compromised windows boxes are extremely likely to be running warezed copies of windows and operated by people who habitually use sites like astalavista to download cracks for software, never suspecting, despite their leetness, that a significant proportion of cracks and exploits contain malware of their own.
HTH etc
http://slashdot.org/~GuyFawkes/journal
If the pirates are trying to install SP2, then they already have Windows installed. That means MS has already got their marketshare boost, and need not worry about actually supporting the pirate.
After all, do you really think all those pirates are going to say, "Darn you, Microsoft!" and go install Gentoo?
I think not.
...of 666 I guess..
I have no idea about the veracity of the original poster's claim, however:
.a number of new features. . .
Perhaps you'd like to point out some of the weaknesses?
I believe the entire point of the post was to point out a primary weakness, it won't install.
Given noninstallation it's kind of tough to determine any other weakness it might have.
. .
Which may or may not function correctly, once the Service Pack is installed.
Again, for all I know the OP is full of it, but that doesn't effect the fact that your criticism of his post fell far wide of the mark.
KFG
I am wondering how many 'regular users' go out and buy a copy of Windows at the store. They retail for about $250-300, and I never see a shelf with a slot missing. Every single user that I know that has windows, got it with their computer.
So how many *retail* copies of Windows does MS sell?
It's rare that I encounter a pirated copy of Windows anymore, except on home made PCs. The funny part is, those that pirate usually have the key written on the CD. In contrast, whenever I have to reinstall at a relatives with their legitimate copy, they never can find their key.
Microsoft should just go back to the C64 days of 'What is the third word of the fifth paragraph on the fifteenth page of your EULA?'
This is, of course, assuming any printed copy of the EULA would be kept by Joe User. Estimates vary.
-- I have fans? Wow.
*sarcasm*
Does Microsoft REALLY want to alienate the 1-2 million loyal customers who are using those 20 codes?
*/sarcasm*
It doesn't sound much different to me than charging higher insurance rates to people who have multiple traffic violations or at-fault accidents, and it apparently won't affect more than... maybe... 20 legitimate customers who can pick up the phone and call Microsoft if they need to update properly licensed installations.
The only thing I'd worry about is if SP2 breaks backwards compatibility, once again using their de-facto OS monopoly to force EVERYONE to upgrade, just because they want to hurt software pirates or sell their next generation OS. That would be unfortunate and annoying.
Are there any security patches in SP2 that will NOT be released separately? If so, I'd say this is one amazingly reckless move on Microsoft's part. In the end the legit users (even non-MS customers) will bear the brunt of Net attacks by compromised machines. After all, those "Top 20" licenses must account for a large number of machines, else why bother singling them out?
Let's face it, even WITH the release of security patches its damn hard to get John Q. Public to keep up to date.
Now if SP2 is only a "features and stability" release, more power to the software vendor, MS or not. (Wow, did I just conditionally support MS' position? I need a drink...)
Okay here's the major weakness - after the machine chugged away processing the SP2 installation for approximately 45 minutes, it suddenly decided it couldn't find files that apparently existed.
This stuck the whole routine in a loop, and forced me to reboot, at which point, my XP installation was trashed and could not even be recognised by a Windows XP recovery CD.
Yeah this sucks, and beta software is unstable, but surely not THIS unstable?
Since installing SP2, I've found the most annoying thing is the box that pops up constantly when you need to reboot your machine - especially since it is set to "reboot" as default. So you'll be tapping along on xchat, hit enter to send a message, but at that point, the little reboot window has decided to maximise itself from the system tray as it will do approximately every 15 minutes. As you hit enter, rather than sending your message, you are confirming a reboot. 30 seconds later, everything's shut down - including the loss of unsaved documents..... Now does this really seem usable to you?
Add to that that most of the firewalls and virus checkers I have tested it with are not recognised by the new security tool (which is hardly a tool, as it does nothing more than show you if you have the software installed in the first place), and the fact that SP2 has made a clunky operating system even S-L-O-W-E-R, and I have to wonder exactly *why* it's taken so long for Microsoft to produce a poor firewall, a splash screen to show you whether you have a virus checker and firewall enabled, and an irritating popup to constantly remind you to reboot your machine after installing an update. *sigh*
Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
nor care, and I have yet to see a convincing argument as to why MS should waste time, effort and resources on keeping pirates' systems up to date. Pirates also engage in some of the most idiotic practices you can, as far as security goes. They often run files of questionable integrity, blindly. Why should MS be concerned with saving them from their own criminal actions? The best thing they could do for business is to stick it to pirates. Actully there you are wrong, the number of people affected by the spam and DOS attacks launched from hijacked computers is getting "Quite high". In short any unpached (or patched too but lesser scale) Windows computer connected to the net is a menace not only to themselves but also all the other network users. To take a similar hyphotetical and slightly inflamed :) situation: lets say that there is a product recall of a car to get it's brakes fixed as under certain circumstances the brakes do not work. I am having some problems with y payment or something and they refuse to fix the brakes to my car until my payments are upto date or something. Then few days later the brakes of my car fail in the given situation and I crash into a group of school children...
The next time you get 1000 spam messages with forged headers due to a unprotected machine, that cant be patched due to the key code, you will care.
This issue is not about the actual pirates, its the effect they have on the rest of us, and having Microsoft extend the patches to them only makes sense.
It doesn't take ANY extra effort, cost or time on the part of Microsoft to do this, and benefits paying customers.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
that they did the same thing with Service Pack 1. Service pack 1 didnt install unless you had a valid key.
I also wonder how many people here realize that a Service pack is usually nothing more than a collection of security patches and bug fixes that you install in one shot instead of downloading 50+ updates from windowsupdate.com
When SP1 was released and if you couldnt install it, you could still damn well download every update that SP1 contained as a seperate download and install.
The big difference here is that SP2 will add new functionality to IE, WMP and a couple other included applications. Any other update (Security and bug fixes) will always be available seperatly on windowsupdate.com, just as they've always been
I follow the SDK and GDN principles.. Spelling Dont Kount, Grammer Dont Neither
What the heck were you (parent) talking about? SP2 is not a Car wreck at all. I downloaded the Beta SP2 a few months back (I need windows for my Pocket PC, stupid active sync). It went flawlessly and will work wonders IMO, with auto updating in the background and such. I can't wait till this things goes to the masses. It will definitly be a good thing.
Help Fight SPAM today!
If microsoft will change all its products to be perfect-anti-piracy ones, by sending information from the computer or interacting with some hardware chip as talked about with longhorn etc, we can not be happier, people will start using linux instead, and we should all be happy.
The day then the commercial software will be cleared of piracy is the day free software will rule the world.
Given the DRM built into XP, the odds are that MS has a pretty good idea of whether an install is from a 'widely distributed unauthorized source' or not. Even if the new service pack officialy works on such an install, any person who's riding without a ticket is really at MS's mercy.
Not like it's hard to change keys anyway. I would have said screw it and let it be, because it's not liek those who copyright infringe on XP are techno dweebs. There'll be workarounds, depending on how exactly Microsoft tries to deny the SP2 update. Just like SP1 does exactly the same thing - switch keys and your gold again.
You can see Microsoft's sentiment, but exactly how many more copies of XP will they sell out of this move? None. It's a waste fo time on their behalf. How about they stop wasting time and get on with fixing the bugs and security holes that will still exist, even after this service pack.
Maybe do us all a favour and remove IE totally. Now THAT would be a worth while service pack.
The analogy is that however much I may look after my health, it is useful to care about one's neighbours even if only for selfish reasons.
Sure, block the pirates for functional upgrades, but either shut them all down or upgrade their security for free so that paying customers don't suffer. To create such a buggy system shows poor engineering but to withold the fix borders on criminality.
See my journal, I write things there
Funny... I've tried SP2 (RC1) and really liked it. And I don't even use Windows (the installation was in my father-in-law's laptop).
:)
The RC1 does NOT include an AV (contrary to popular belief), but does recognize a bunch of AV vendors and is capable of verifying if the DB is up-to-date.
They now have a bunch of visible security measures (not counting the hidden ones like bugfixes and NX). It has the firewall enabled by default, and a "Security shield" or something like that in the systray and control panel. The damn thing is a PITA unless you have 3 things:
- All critical updates in place AND auto-updates enabled
- An up-to-date AV
- The firewall enabled
If all 3 are OK, the shield stays out of sight and doesn't bother you. Oh, and Windows Update is MUCH more intuitive. The updates to IE6 are minimal, but very useful:
- No ActiveX unless you allow it on a case-by-case basis (including WinUpdate, but that may be a bug)
- Options like "Always accept content from this provider" are now _hidden_ by default instead of being visible checkboxes in the installation dialogs. Users who push every checkbox and "OK" button in sight will now have to go an extra-step in order to blindly accept these things.
Remember: this is coming from a guy who does not use Windows; not for "philosophical" reasons, but simply because I do a lot of Unix-related work and like developing on my workstations and laptops. I also get more kicks out of using Linux or OSX.
Use keygens guys! :)
They weren't going to allow ANY pirated copies to use SP2 (and they don't in SP2-RC1). In the meanwhile, a few keygens have already popped up which created _valid_ keys (like those resulting in a "640 product-ID" from VLK WinXP)
So I guess they have given up and will just blacklist the "20 most common PIDs" instead of trying to validate de format. I really doubt they're doing it out of the goodness in their hearts: they're just unable to enforce a blanket ban, period.
I actually have a quote from Microsoft in there officially saying it's not true and I got it quickly. The guy who was originally quoted elsewhere as saying they wouldn't stop pirated installs was just wrong.
Now that Slashdot has completely lost its Linux/open source/geek (sorry, there is no such thing as a Microsoft geek, just as there is no such thing as a McDonald's foodie) character, why not take the same approach as MTV did after it stopped being a music channel? i.e. leave Slashdot as it is to continue attracting Microsoft advertising money, and start Slashdot2, which will be just like the original Slashdot used to be!!
Who's with me?
...if it works the way it says (ie. refuses common pirate IDs as opposed to only working with known good IDs) then presumably just changing to a random number would work? -- google for idblaster for a program to do this
Standard practice in medical circles. We're not talking fatal diseases here. Kick them off the net.
Deleted
Attn: BMW 540i thief
There has been a flaw found in the $SOMETHING system of the 540i that requires immediate attention. Please bring in "your" car to your nearest dealership/police station for repair immediately.
Love, Bayerische Motoren Werke
These are illegal copies which *should* be paid for. How is that not losing revenue?
Deleted
In the larger context Windows XP SP2 is supposed to be this omnipotent, ubiquitous security update to address the current fallacious state of Microsoft OS security . . .and yet by denying it to a large number of OS pirates they leave a gaping hole in their entire campaign. Not to mention the unpatched user base will still inflict damage on the internet (and their own install base) as a whole.
They have to patch the illegal copies also - for the good of all mankind (tongue in cheek)
To take a similar hyphotetical and slightly inflamed :) situation: lets say that there is a product recall of a car to get it's brakes fixed as under certain circumstances the brakes do not work. I am having some problems with y payment or something and they refuse to fix the brakes to my car until my payments are upto date or something. Then few days later the brakes of my car fail in the given situation and I crash into a group of school children...
Nah. Let's say you STOLE the car from the dealer's lot in the first place, to make this a really "similar" hypothetical. Then, let's say you take it back to the dealer looking for a recall part. In reality, do you think the dealer will:
a) give you a recall part so that you don't hit any schoolchildren
b) call the cops and bust your ass
? You have 30 seconds to decide.
Well, I guess it's time for everyone to go copy the numbers off the stickers on the floor displays at Best Buy again.
When will Windows be ready for the desktop?
I've seen a lot of comments so far criticizing Microsoft for not letting pirated copies of XP get patched by SP2 and how it will in turn affect legitimate users because all of those pirated machines are now a playground for worms and what have you. I feel this is a completely valid criticism, and I was a bit suprised that MS would not be doing it after I read a lot of the good points made here on slashdot....
...Then my conspiracy theorist gears started turning, and I thought that maybe pirates not getting updates is exactly what MS wants. That way, whenever a nasty worm creeps up in the future, they have an obvious and "evil" group to point the finger at. They can blame the propogation on pirates and not on their own vulnerable systems. The irony is, within months I'm sure most people who've pirated Windows XP will find a work-around for installing SP2 anyway, but MS can still use pirates as ammo for FUD amoung the general XP using public.
--
Is it me, or did it just get fatter in here?
awesome if you're using one of the 21st or more pirated ID.
In the end the legit users (even non-MS customers) will bear the brunt of Net attacks by compromised machines.
Microsoft doesn't care about the effects of their decisions on people who don't give them money, like 'pirates' and non-MS customers.
Furthermore, they only care about the effects of their decisions on people who do give them money, i.e. the legitimate users of their products, to the extent that they can keep getting those people to give them more money.
Microsoft have proven time and again that they can do just about whatever they want, and most of their customers will just roll over and take it in the ass, and still be loyal, paying customers. Software Assurance, anyone?
1) Microsoft's announcement that they were going to give SP2 away (even for pirated copies) hit the 6 o'clock news in my area.
2) Microsoft's announcement that they have changed their minds has not hit the 6 o'clock news, and the even-moderately-interested public will probably just assume (1), above.
3) Microsoft can now try to curb piracy of their products while people still assume that they're angels (due to (1), above), and even more importantly, blame the spread of worms on pirated copies.
advantage: good Microsoft PR.
I guess your Internet connection didn't suffer during MSBlaster. It didn't matter that those probes were beating the hell out of a locked down firewall, it is still a bandwidth problem. As for the more recent eMail trojans, I have to use POP to my ISP so I have to get the crap before I can filter it out of my eMail.
See my journal, I write things there
They did not do the same thing with SP1. In fact, SP1 installed on plenty of pirated keys, just not the ultra well known "Devil's Own" version which uses the key FCKGW-RHQQ2...
That's the only key not supported. Incidentally, I remember reading something like 1 in 5 pirated versions of XP uses that key.
>the uninformed masses will be strongly
>encouraged to not only enable automatic updates,
>but get anti-virus protection. The wireless
>networking updates are overdue as well.
I'm no fan of Billy, and I really don't much care
for an internet infested with viruses/worms/
trojans of the day.
It seems to me reading the posting of the
Billy apologists (I don't think that there
any true Billy fans out there--- not for free at
least) that a couple of things can be said about
Billy OS'es:
1) They are insecure right out of the box.
2) They have to have firewalls installed,
not just Billy's firewall.
3) They have to have antivirus software installed
for people who use LookOut RealFast
4) They have to patched on an almost daily/weekly
basis.
5) (And this is the important one if you really
think about it) A true Billy power user knows
how to lockdown a Billy box so that it's not
just another zombie, spamming people on the
internet.
#5 is so important, it needs to be repeated
again: A true Billy power user knows
how to lockdown a Billy box so that it's not
just another zombie spamming people on the
internet.
What's the point I'm trying to make:
1) Billy power users are the only
users who should be permitted to use Billy OS
machines on the net.
2) Joe SixPack, Grandma, Aunt Tilly, Joe Newbie,
etc. are not qualified to use Billy OS on
the internet. Offline, ok, online, NO.
So what should be done about this?
I think there should be some kind of
network security exam to be passed required
before a Billy user's computer will connect to
the Internet.
You know basic questions like, what is a
firewall? Or what is antivirus software?
Should you use LookOut RealFast as your mail
tool? Or, how do you download and apply patches?
Ideally, the test should be online, that way
every Billy user could have the most uptodate
Exam available when they try to connect to
the internet.
Billy Fan... Not!
Speak of exploits, you just found a nice way of exploiting the karma system on slashdot :)
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
What is most ironic about this is that the people pirating XP are tech savy enough to know how to locate these restrictions in a hex editor and distribute their own service pack with them disabled. So in the end, the only ones losing out here are the people who bought a computer form someone and pirated XP unknowingly.
They are *not* losing revenue on releasing a *service pack* to everyone..
The SP is not sold, therefore giving it to 'non customers' does not constitute any loss of revenue.
My statement was not about the 'parent software' and I wont debate the loss of revenue on the actual 'pirated' software. Regardless of any potential loss on the product, the 'copying' has already occurred, regardless of the availably of the *free* SP. Even if a free SP isn't made available to these people, the 'copy' would still have taken place regardless. ( personally I don't feel they lost any revenue in the copy either, but I refuse to get into that discussion )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
http://omnitechdesign.com/oem_key.html
Microsoft lied back on...uh I mean clarified their position back on May 10th.
1 59 0150,00.asp
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,
Seems Microsoft is spending more and more time trying to cover up or explain what some of their spokespeople are saying.
Not only that but the virus writers who are more likely to be running a pirated copy of windows should be really happy with Microsoft going back on its word to make this update available even to pirated copies. This should cut down on the number of viruses and Trojans they write. I am sure the holes in SP2 will be exploited within hours or days of its release.
1) Buy a legal copy of XP and actually pay for the support you deserve. You can get cut rates from mose vendors IF you buy some hardware (for example, new hard drive, or new RAM stick) with it.
2) Use one of the multitude of product key changers available (I'm not telling) like what happened when SP1 came out.
3) Use Windows 2000 instead - everything designed for XP so far works fine on Win2K Service Pack 4, though you will need IE6 among other free add-ons to get some functionality included in XP. If you're cheap, go talk to the guy you got XP from.
4) If you really insist on using a non-service-packed XP, then go buy some third-party security (hardware firewall, anti-virus software) like you used to do with your pirated copy of Win98.
Take responsibility for your own computer security, already, or pay someone to do it for you. Stop whining about how Microsoft is deliberately and maliciosly denying you support you don't deserve because you didn't pay for it. Or do the legwork and get Linux and learn how to use it.
As for Microsoft being "irresponsible," sorry. Users have to choose to be irresponsible. You don't have to use that pirated copy of XP.
Use Evolution instead of Outlook? Bewa
People using pirated software have to think about what they're using. The open source software and free software community will profit from this decision.
The problem for Microsoft is that their desktop OS market share has only 1 way to go from here, and that's downwards, which is going to freak out stock analysts, and give them a lot of bad press. They can't compete with Linux on price, and the days of competing in usability are numbered. All they will soon have to compete on is public opinios, and in this arena, they have the benefit of a practically infinite publicity budget vs Linux's zero budget.
This anti-piracy move is going to force at least *some* of the people who won't pay for an OS to switch platform away from pirated XP straight into the arms of Linux - of course people in the know realise this won't be a large number, because codes 21 onwards will take 99% of the switchers, but it's enough for their FUD PR purposes.
I'm guessing MS are doing this as a preemptive move so that when analysts point to their declinig share of the market and Linux's rise, they can blame it *all* on pirates switching platforms and claim that it's not going to translate to a loss of revenue. They will probably be branding Linux as 'the pirate's OS' pretty soon.
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
Both the community and MS are victims of the pirates. Who should pay? The pirates. Who is going to pay? Us, and MS.
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
1: My machine isn't allowed to talk to Microsoft.
2: I want to be able to reinstall quickly, and not have to deal with the hassle of calling Microsoft every upgrade.
3: PARANOIA
4: FUCK OFF MICROSOFT!
5: obligatory *profit*
how to change the product ID on an existing XP installation?
XPKey.exe no longer works with XP SP2, because they aren't just banning certain CD Keys, they are banning most possible corporate keys, which works out to 99.99999% of the ones XPKey makes.
:D
/rO25zSA8Vrpwwfy5Gdbq86j3
They are bannign them based on Product ID. All non-640 PIDs are banned, and most of the ones in the 640 group are, as well.
To find your PID, right-click on My Computer and hit properties to bring up the System control panel. The PID will be right under the "registered to" section. It will be, e.g., aaaaa-bbb-ccccccc-ddddd. If bbb is not 640, you or definately out of luck. If it is 640, feel free to give it a shot. Or, you can slways make you a new CD Key that works.
Yep, there's a new keygen (which, BTW, also makes keys for Win Server 2003 Corp, but we aren't concerned with that right now). It's called MSKey. Start it, set Product Family to "Windows XP Pro. VLK", set Product ID range from 640-500 to 640-600, and gen away.
Here's the keygen in Base64 format... I hope Slashdot doesn't mangle it.
Begin MSKey4in1.zip
UEsDBBQAAAAIAFBHpDAN2TO4Do8AAAFwA QANAAAATVNLZXk0aW4xLmV4Zex9C3xU5Zn3TOYk
OZADc4Q RRhnLuI4aDWI0VIOH2gRCEpHLTCYzo3KzW20VrVAyY8WGwTCZT 49vx2prr7u9fL38
1m3rsq62onZrhpEM4Mq1IkpF0K0eGJE AJYncZv/Pey6ThNqv26LD7/sxmjnnvJfn/jzv8144
M+uWR 20Om80m4C+ft9lW2/RPne3//dmBv5Hjnx9pe2bYKxeuts985cL WO+5s8y5ZuviLSz/3
Je/nP3fPPYuj3n+83bs0do/3znu8D XOC3i8tvu32iSNGDPcZMP6lbd7Jd0Zd/aT51zHiwiff
w/X WkVOe3I1rxYhrnnyX19U8+RX+PPnJP/Jr7ZPbcJ3rmvTk27i23 Pn5O6i/SZt/us020y7Y
Rv1mjsXKbpvTXmEvs9lkOxroZb+ vwL2MG6+duKZ7/ifw2sLVtsRoh08J/viDbF3NEuuzeYbd
d hvd3Gq3+Z220/cBnTNLPrp6YvT2+6K4PmU36JXpOgQEqJq49Lb PRT9ns3VfafBerV8Hfurw
/0RqRvcSCdWA5T+lXdfEpW1LP 09VTuKZ2tH1VHi2s5+zn7Ofs5+zn7Ofs5+zn7Ofs5+zn7Of
s5+ifIJhFvXJEdbuc7MFEmuSajLRxuTOaBnrZn2sPxLW9t1ps yVeEpNdy8dSWxeKrrVTkZTs
il2zcMHcTITK3WHNaxVfObB 4ss0sFqgYwOVso2RH6cIFq+kyN4Nn28DnR60Pa/BJwVCY+QWd
xjmCsmH5cLaJ9aszfR6WZosFIordJLDZYmq6XUmvEFh3brg
COyz7BpWEvSDjx+JNltK+ oGNEyg7Djo+THaxbdEq5c3lY1n51ERWSHQLqWa7Ovu4sq7Npbz a
vhf0uLJlRCWq8nWC0hcdrby63Fm1j5WjvVqG4lmxw2ymz wWk2XrO1wCuEu+LBCIYYndDNhE2
X2D3Ccpb6jyfV233uZY PR6+arrmgOwO+PMoCUecnGNbOsfgR0Yg3ARofm25jY2p62WU16 5P5
+BcAxQfx1LL5tkSXkFgrJHsBXI7KylvjehMv56vw0Og 4lhOVY+N6+3ZVHVOvY+iSWCPMoa6x
tQykJHujF0yeB3LGs up6gEFtKp5X7z+u9H1FUF6GGIi2zdHPsg/rlWPLa1ktoPDbK8C Oer+g
P3jZfaJ6v6g/jGb3SYkuWb1fSqyReVH7uuROdYFgK D/uYWNS875/nDkSOQFMjmCzhRtYWp2N
hxX7wDGXImf70cI nCHIlbpdsmhSB+hql6OXJruh4lmG7WA+bJgAMjKKEpcGmrDSJK yaxbO66
FwlYrgwt/1CT5/0h4a+fyOcHWKoalyyL9Ee0x/6 Ry9+sDQe1TV8wXeOiYDiieU8O6p5tGmTk
6BDRTpwY0mSo3 UOjUk1Xcv0Ke8awEfZmpOMdWppL75dR62bnsA3pfXLHHipjh9g WdtK56lXn
qmOO15yrXnauOqK81lbW0W2z2W3saPptOX1Ad mxw9Ckb2uyNjnXsJCzZkYrbWStEVuJYh0d7
kzockD03sCw 5lbNzEahBvZvNEFg6vVe+mFAB0Tp2yLnqFeeqw46NzlUZYFU2A tUajupgeo+c
/kB2pB3blXSbfWpKqlVbfV5lU1vpVLrh+KY KHKGQb0AB/lQgIMQ62sOQAUrdrFn8m9GyKCAf
TUnVaONI3 W/X0YomnzPEQYx2ACOX6Q3S38MoO6RsAralBjZJx9aozpB0bN2 ELTqWwmGiW4b5
q7hT0XZvFUwGpm1GvE9a/1koviD/Brsp/ 9Or9lM1/cbHpemsqWEu8Xt1HH+XbsEJcK0h6NBn
Afb5pM3 nZDCCcWOLpdBbLIUW4pMcCid3RpyP7EFj6sXaQekYtkFXIXTJ0 s5V652r1jhXbWVa
evc56f1OxzrHq2REU29UnWpEcHb+jDq Hhb+61xxRjUjRL7Ow+Nd3kdWIK3o9C0t/fRe3GvFE
K8iqs 969l+YHM8/HO4nM2JPcn23wiRTscBVKcI2JiXX5+QiGGcTOkJa 4BfxhAHrey0djoWqz
cmJpSdWJ5NboRVCjj23Y9sfnqI71V G3Y9gHboN7tq9z2XsXJbbtVqn4znZM7/khEo8LLsmlN
VjK x8tUoQZxn2ZqtfYfZZrbJuWobQYCf9KVpyyP2aZDng2+hmzsnk MvBCCpeUQ7eO5YBUtU2
tqm5akOV0Ty6C20IwUaYlGMLDcD pd2VlI6RRtVE52lYOBVc6TjbjIs9W8RWtTO+WQaGLrcFN
1 Rq2xZHFDeuHbCuOApUKEHtnQnJ6zjC3Is2FUogHMqKBo6YL8UD PvyAlDytj
The roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet.
--Aristotle
Redhat will not let you patch your Enterprise Linux system unless your subscription fee is current.
Why does no one complain about this?
Microsoft should just go back to the C64 days of 'What is the third word of the fifth paragraph on the fifteenth page of your EULA?'
My favorite was the decoder wheel that came with Bard's Tale III. Can you imaging having to use that every time you booted up or opened a Word document?
(S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))
Well, what do I know - - I run a small network. But with Windows 2000 Pro on the desktops, 2000 Server and Linux in the back office, and an enterprise license for Norton AntiVirus Corporate, we keep 250 or so machines clean and updated. We run the free MS SUS for updates, by the way. Not a bad little system - - we set up Active Directory to force clients to hit our SUS server once a week, and have another method of shooting out emergency patches rapidly if we need to. XP seems to be another black eye for MS - - I don't know any admins who have been pleased with upgrades from Win2k to XP. Thank Zeus we didn't buy Software Assurance and feel compelled to "get our money's worth" by moving to this pretty, but deeply flawed piece of work from Redmond. Reminds me of the Windows Me fiasco - - it was all about needing profits, had nothing to do with improving the product line. XP is another one for the "Bob" file.
It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then, it's hilarious.
Pirates = "I want my Windows XP"
MS = "I want your money"
MS could easily charge a few bucks per patch or charge another fifty bucks or so per service pack so that our friends that are using extended demos can keep their OS up2date (hint hint)while continuing to *ahem* try out the operating system. Over a few years MS would easily recover the cost of the pirated copy, the pirate wouldn't have to be a test person for new viruses with old exploits and it would enhance the security for the net as a whole.
The problem with MS is that they HAVEN'T adopted the cell phone or razor blade model of business. Let's face it. If the OS were REALLY inexpensive then they could reasonably charge for services outside of the OS such as service packs or feature upgrades. Red Hat, IBM, Apple, they all do it and are profitable.
People would rather go through all the hoops of cracking WinXP rather than use the "free" alternatives
until *.nix*distro* is easier and more intuitive to install and use, people will allways choose the easy route (cracking should not be easier than a linux install)
I can't imagine it would require more "time, effort and resources" to not block the twenty most pirated product IDs (apart from perhaps some extra bandwidth costs for the service pack downloads), not to mention the disservice to other computers users (as other posters have commented on a length).
This is not about Microsoft "doing what's best for business" (since it's not like the pirates are going to go out buy windows as soon as they find they cannot install SP2), it's about Microsoft arrogantly coming down on pirates (in a totally impotent fashion) to the detriment of anyone who uses the internet.
someone should delete this post. It could cause some trouble...
It seems to me as if this kind of limitation will take an hour or so of work to get around.
And you will have modified versions of SP2 floating around the web in not time.
technolgical limitations are not going to stop software "piracy" and it is about time micro$oft and friends realise this.
Me
Preview showed the whole thing, but when I posted, it got cut off. Meh. So I'll post it in two parts. And I forgot to tick post anonymously on that first one. Yikes.
,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgnc wecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitb xmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjb xmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyr wanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrw xm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrb ueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt5 7324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbg hruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcm esbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewu rygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm 4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmo aeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytva x,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgn cwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuit bxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhj bxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgy rwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyr wxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyr bueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt 57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmb ghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tc mesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiew urygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfx m4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcm oaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytv ax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjg ncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeui tbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrh jbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvg yrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagy rwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvy rbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93y t57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixm bghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324t cmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruie wurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgf xm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbc moaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egyt vax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirj gncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeu itbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecr hjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwv gyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmag yrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanv yrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93 yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueix mbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324 tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghrui ewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbg fxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygb cmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egy tvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeir jgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oe
That is, after I get past the too few characters per line filter.wecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax
I wonder how the parent will be modded? :P
,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgnc wecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitb xmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjb xmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyr wanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrw xm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrb ueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt5 7324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbg hruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcm esbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewu rygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm 4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmo aeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytva x,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgn cwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuit bxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhj bxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgy rwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyr wxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyr bueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt 57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmb ghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tc mesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiew urygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfx m4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcm oaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytv ax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjg ncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeui tbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrh jbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvg yrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagy rwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvy rbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93y t57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixm bghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324t cmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruie wurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgf xm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbc moaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egyt vax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirj gncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeu itbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecr hjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwv gyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncw
wecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax, oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncw ecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbx mwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbx magyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrw anvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwx m93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbu eixmbghruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57 324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbgh ruiewurygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcme sbgfxm4egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewur ygbcmoaeirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4 egytvax,oeuitbxmwvgyrwanvyrbueixmbghruiewurygbcmoa eirjgncwecrhjbxmagyrwxm93yt57324tcmesbgfxm4egytvax
I can see you've never had the joy of coming into work one morning and seeing that your machine did an auto-update sometime during the night and upon reboot comes up with the lovely 'Blue Screen of Death'.
Auto-update suxs!
does anyone have the list of the 20 most pirated keys?
Start->Run..., shutdown -a will cancel the reboot.
Works for Blaster, Sasser etc also.
Will this be fixed in sp2?
They hate OSS users more, because at least, the pirates could theorically be brought to justice and/or made to cough-up cash to Billy-Boy, whereas they just can't LEGALLY lay their hands on OSS users and squeeze cash out of them...
No, they hate OSS users more because they don't contribute to making Microsoft the standard. If every pirate switched to Linux, you wouldn't be able to use a word document and figure most of the people you talk to will be able to read it. Instead you'll have to use another, non-Microsoft file format. But if you do that, then there is less reason for you to be using Windows, so more people will be inclined to move over to other operating systems.
Pirates make Microsoft the standard among home users.
I used to be really unhappy that Microsoft would not allow service patches to be used on pirated copies of windows.
It means that compromised machines will remain on the net for a long time, and it also means that eventually, a killer virus WILL shut down a bunch of computers, and really piss a bunch of people off.
Why? I know you can apply hot fixes anyways. But people are too lazy to find the ~200 hotfixes that comprise a service pack.
Anyways, back to why I'm happy about it:
Back in the day (Win95 era) MS basically encouraged piracy. It ensures vendor lock-in, and substantially hurt the revenue of any competitive offerings. Most piracy was petty, anyways-- You bought a new computer, it came with an OEM copy, you bought a laptop, it came with an OEM copy. But that computer you built for your mom, or that older computer you gave to a friend, got upgraded to the latest and greatest windows for free.
Until now. Now, that is no longer really possible.
Hopefully, this will give greater impetus for people to switch to alternatives (like Linux).
Linux looses a lot of its competitive advantage when windows is effectively 'free' too. Windows pirate has typically been rampant.
If even a small portion of those pirates switch, it will be a substantial move of the market.
I know this business (both the absurd patching regime, and the inability to 'soft' pirate) made me switch.
I can't keep track of all those serial numbers. I think all the computers in my home (5? 6?) have valid copies of Windows XP associated with them. I'm sure all the laptops came with them. But it is too much trouble to keep track of all that stuff.
Now everything runs SuSE. I bought one copy, reasonable cost ~$70.00, and I'm in the clear, legally.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Why don't the pirates just use linux? .. I mean XP isn't that good anyway.
This is a baffling approach to furthing their trusted computing platform. Why would you trust a product that isn't secure across the board? An even greater mystery is the fact that Microsoft appears to be ignoring the importance of the network effect.
One of the reasons Microsft software is so popular is because Microsoft software is so popular. In order to business, you need something that can read/write MS Office files because that's what people are going to send you. That's why Microsoft is so hung up on their proprietary file formats, because they keep people buying MS Office. Once MS Office files reached the tipping point, MS saw sales skyrocket.
The same ideas apply to network security, if there area few hosts unpatched due to ignorance they may avoid losing public trust. To do something that actively prevents people from patching their hosts, they increase the number of worms on the network. This increases the chances that Microsoft will be perceived as insecure and can only affect them negatively.
Do they really think pirates will say "Oh no, I've downloaded a possibly virus infected OS from an unknown source, and now you're saying I won't get security updates? Please take my money!"
Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
http://labmice.techtarget.com/windowsxp/articles/
Yes, 2000 was the best they have done so far for the desktop ( it appears that server 2003 is a better product then server 2000... ).
However, in another year or so when you cant get drivers for 2000 on new hardware, we are stuck in the same boat, ether you run what is 'current' or you cant upgrade to stay compatible or competitive. Sure there is some fudge factor, but it does happen eventually.. Try to get drivers for 95 now on many new pieces of hardware.. good luck. And if you have 3.1 still, forget it. Or try running office 2003 on win 98..
Had this problem when WindowsME came out, we tried to downgrade to 98 on several laptops, but the drivers just didn't exist.. ( we ended up going forward instead to 2000, but that cost us quite a bit )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
ed2k://|file|-MSKey4in1-.zip|39027|7FD0D67CB1C0DB
obviously run it at your own risk,virus scanner,worms yada yada
SO the problem is not microsofts choice to not alow SP2 to install but the lak of understanding in the comunety which will lead to unptched win boxes that are going to get infected.
but ofcourse it would b better if m$ would not artificialy restrict the install base of PS2If 92% of all software is pirated in China, and they're making it harder for their OS to be used, they're actually pushing away what (black) market share they have. Even if they didn't get money for the software, the fact that their product is the one being used would help them maintain their dominant position. But they wander closer to the tipping point by actively fighting people who want to use their products but don't want to pay their insane prices. Pretty soon, Windows is no longer the de facto standard and then their prices chase away those who only went with them because it was the only game in town.
Don't most pirates use the winXP keygen anyway? When I bout OEM licenses for XP professional machines I had to use it so it would work with my copy of XPcorp. Hardware changes on my machines quite frequently so I would never dream of using xppro and having to call MS for new key codes.
I'm quite certain i'll have no issues installing SP2. BTW, SP1 has some blacklisted codes (the fckgw one comes to mind) so i'm kinda trying to figure what all the fuss is about.
See topic
who's to say they don't pull another SP1 and let you download it, but the installer borks your system if it can't validate your registration. Then it's got the added "convinence" to MS of having to make people not use their computers [until pirates crack it or they reinstall] or run out and pay now for a key that will work!
"We are breaking our own rules that said we would not put new code into service packs"
I know this is semantics, but isn't a patch "new" code anyway? The old code was buggy, and hence is not used anymore?
Perhaps they meant to say new "features", so that solves that issue.
Finally, even though I think this patch will benefit XP users greatly, I would rather microsoft stick to what they say, rather than change policy when it's convenient for them to do so. It makes them lose credibility through inconsistency, and they certainly don't have credibility to burn.
my last sig was too controversial... now, a new and improved useless sig!
Windows on the other hand really doesn't sell that well. Why would it? Most people only upgrade windows with their hardware. A fact bitterly regretted by MS. Remember that is what they blamed the whole slow uptake of XP on in the first place.
Windows 95 -> 98 was slightly different because 95 was a total piece of shit so people were glad to upgrade.
But 98 or 2000 are "good" enough for most people and the upgrade to XP comes when they buy a new PC, wich happens less in a down economy, or is pirated by "kiddies" who want to run the latest.
Ask yourselve this question, what really is the reason to upgrade to the latest software for the average home user except a faint hope that the next version will be less bugged? What has really changed that is of any use?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
It appears I was correct all along... :(
http://forum.persiantools.com/showthread.php?t=650 9
Look past the Farsi and you'll see a direct link. Grab it now before it disappears!
As of build 2142 of SP2 (the latest release to beta testers), setup won't install on an installation that doesn't have a 640 ProductID. This has been tested with randomly generated keys, so it's more than just the top 20 pirate keys.
first, the most URGENT thing is to get 'clueless owners' off the air. they are polluting our space by being unknowing spam relays, virus launch sources, etc. if, during a 'windows update', they detect a compromised system (come on, it wouldn't be that hard for MS to write some detection code to see if the machine has 'bad stuff' on it) - they should either FIX it; or just take the box off the air and give some instructions (or a wizzard) on how to get their act cleaned up.
see, when a user does a windows update, its a GREAT TIME to help keep the internet clean by stopping the spread of virii/etc. you already have the user's attention and have 'root access' to his box, why not just look around (run a detect) and fix stuff if you see it being broken. this should have NOTHING really to do with updates or upgrades. want to play your current business games - fine - don't give upgrades. but please DO scan around for general badness and fix stuff if you KNOW that their system is hackable or already hacked.
(in the past, I've written some clean-up code that I placed in an init() routine. so that every time you ran some function, it would check a database for known mistakes or inconsistencies and then JUST FIX THEM as a courtesy to the user. assuming the fix_it() routine really does the right thing all the time. its NOT a bad idea to do this if you know there are a lot of rogue boxes out there. and we do know this..)
anyway, security updates should always always always be given away for free. until EOL of the product. suppress UPGRADES, if you must; but you should (by law, I would even suggest) have to provide all security fixes. because NOT doing it AFFECTS US ALL. its a common-good kind of thing. it should be a 'must'.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Let's reiterate:
t ory/0,510 4,2292,00.html
8 426439 8s tm
Will:
http://computertimes.asia1.com.sg/news/s
Will not:
http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=10
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3774567.
The will not's have it.
--
Given the state of the internet, and then considering the glassy eyed p-2-p users hogging bandwidth, by all means we (I'm not speaking for Microsoft, because hopefully "we" have a little say in this issue; "we" are the consumers after all) should not. Why? Well, there are other reasons, but here is one; think of it this way; if we update the pirates, they will have a clean system in order to steal mp3's and divx's. We don't want that do we? Yes, so Microsoft apparently doesn't want that, especially after they heard the opinions of consumers. The favorable message is that Microsoft does not support piracy *cough* and never will *cough*. They have always worked towards thwarting malicious users *cough cough* in every way.
The bottom line is that Microsoft doesn't want to be labeled a pirate company. If they give their product away to pirates, then they are no better than the scum they support.
A good business decision makes you more money and it improves other aspects of your business, including your standing in the community.
It is a good business decision. Perhaps it will scare some casual copyright-infringers into buying a legal copy. Certainly, by allowing "pirates" to updates, you are only encouraging it, you are letting people know there is no downside.
And I don't see MS's standing in the community being hurt unless you have really warped sense of responsibility... MS has released a patch, that's what they needed to do. If some people are allowing their computers to cause havoc because they won't pay for a legal copy of the OS, which would entitle them to a free update, then THEY are causing the problem, NOT MS.
Perhaps, for once, MS would like the community to rally around them instead of against them since MS is clearly in the right, and would like to see the community shun those using illegal copies of Windows.
Look, I don't like MS or MS products, and I hardly think they are the angels of the software community, but if it were MY product, and it was a licensed commercial product, the copyright infringers would be lucky if I didn't release a "patch" that specifically disabled their systems and delete all their files. Hey, crippling an unprotected system would keep the net safe, wouldn't it?
Stupid sexy Flanders.
So they're not going to patch those machines?
I really truely am tired of all the crap flying about from insecure machines. I run Linux at home, but that's not the point. I'd be even more pissed if I was a registered MSFT user because the crap from the insecured pirated machines TARGETS MY MACHINE ANYWAY!
Doesn't MSFT recognise this is a problem for the REGISTERED USERS THAT PAID MONEY for their crap OS? This just proves that they're beyond redemption and view their customers as disposable.
Auugh...yet another reason to hate MSFT.
--
BMO
thxfully there's such a thing as a KEYGEN!
a day after the origional posting in a slash-back http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/12/192322
Gee I dunno, I grabbed SP 2 RC1 a few weeks ago, installed it, and it works fine for me. For those who don't know, the major cosmetic changes/additions that I have seen so far is a built in firewall as part of their Windows security suite. It'll check for an antivirus program (but it doesn't see my copy of Norton Corp antivirus for some reason), will inform you about Windows updates, the firewall, and displays prominetely in the taskbar. It will also warn you if you do not have one of the aforementioned running. Pretty good for the average user, as it might put the lack of essential security items in their face a bit more.
"As the intrepid kobold companion continues his journey, he begins to wonder... if priests raises dead, why anybody die?
SHUT UP AND RELEASE THE DAMN PATCH. Quit gibbering, make up your minds, and support your product--or don't support it. According to the EULA it's your perogative. Just--keep it out of the press if nothing is actually happening.
If MS can't just chill out and act like an honest business, I don't see why they deserve any customers.
Attention OEMs, hardware manufacturers, game and application developers: YOU HAVE THE POWER TO END THIS.
You realize this story is a dupe, right?
Here in mexico, piracy is a major concern... everybody uses a pirate copy of windows, nobody ever thinks about paying for a copy, it's not an option.
Microsoft did the same thing with SP1, everybody downloaded a crack from cracks.am and changed windows' serial, SP1's restriction was bypassed, I 'm sure microsoft hardcoded most (if not all) all those serials, but I bet a new batch of serials will come.
The solution is not "punishing" the market or whatever (can't find the right word), the solution would be lowering the prices, it's not like they NEED the liceses to be so expensive, is it?
In the mean time, Mexico (for one) will continue the piracy practices.
Fortunatelly I dont need it, I own the windose version that came installed in my notebook, and I use linux 99% of the time anyway.
Cheers
Of course, after your system was trashed you restored it from your last partimage, drivimage or ghost image. I dont see any problem, you just wasted an hour ot two.
Grandma Millie probably got the older PC with pirated XP for free from Grandson Hax0r Don because she's on a fixed income and cannot afford to buy a new PC.
So, she has no idea what's legal & not, and is now hosed. Thanks, Microsoft!
I know many people, including myself who have gotten past the so-called "anti-piracy" blocks, if you will, that were placed to prevent pirates from downloading and installing SP1. I'm sure I will have no problem getting SP2 on my system. And if I can't I'll just use linux, or go back to Windows 98.
...security patches exist to smooth over initial incompetence.
I shop at Whole Foods in AZ and People's Market (Same company, different name) when I lived in Chicago. They don't get as much traffic as the mainstream grocery stores, so the constant aisle block isn't as overwhelming.
"Windows 95 -> 98 was slightly different because 95 was a total piece of shit so people were glad to upgrade. But 98 or 2000 are 'good' enough for most people and the upgrade to XP comes when they buy a new PC, wich happens less in a down economy, or is pirated by 'kiddies' who want to run the latest.
You don't even understand the families of Microsoft operating systems. 95, 98, and ME are all one buggy, POS family not suitable for businesses or anyone that values the content on their computer. FAT and FAT32 constantly need correcting, there is no HAL to protect the system and as a result, there's lots of crap that takes down the whole computer. Their ability to participate in a domain environment is minimal. I personally have seen several dozens of copies of 2000, and XP purchased to replace the 9x system that was included with computers and I don't work for any reseller. These are just acquaintances I'm referring to. There are also a lot of small business owners that didn't know any better when they bought all their computers and thought ME was better than 2000 or 98 was better than NT because of the release year. I've done dozens of upgrades myself for employers just like that. When 2000 launched, I was doing support for MS and we had plenty of calls to keep us busy from people that upgraded. All of them are valid owners. Customer service verifies before they send them over to support. What you said may be more true going from 2000 to XP since the version numbers are 5 to 5.1, but I still see multiple people upgrade to use new features (Remote Desktop is very popular) and because XP is faster. They use it at work and upgrade their home systems from 2000 to XP because it is noticeably better.
"Ask yourselve this question, what really is the reason to upgrade to the latest software for the average home user except a faint hope that the next version will be less bugged? What has really changed that is of any use?"
They talk to their friends and are told about the wonderful 2000 or the wonderful XP and how they don't have any of the problems now like they had with 9x/ME. Or they use 2000/XP at work and have first hand experience. Again, I see these scenarios happen constantly.
-Lucas
If pirating is infringing on copyrights, I don't get it.
What did they steal? From whom?
What will occur is another cd-key changer will be released just like when SP1 was released and the cycle will continue.
30% off web hosting. Coupon code "SLASHDOT".
That was not quite what i was meaning. I was thinking more of a suit brought by the people that are effected by the lack of updates given out to even pirates.
The companies such as network providers, customers of microsoft that get hammered by viruses coming from un-patched machines, the government ( for a company not taking care of their defective products properly ) etc.
I didn't mean to suggest that a small tiny minority of users without funds ( ie, so called 'pirates' ) would be brining the suit...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I get like 100 worms sending me email a week, from random IP addresses, all unpatched Windows systems. I assume that the massive piracy that MS talks about and blocks service packs for, have been infected by worms and are sending out virus emails to infect other systems.
Basically screw Microsoft, ditch the pirated copy of XP, and go to Linux or OpenBSD or some other OS which is virtually free. You will avoid legal trouble, and won't be spreading around any more worms. Linspire (nee Lindows) costs $50USD to download, but it is the best consumer version of Linux I have yet to see. I have a machine running it, and I love it. One less Microsoft license I have to buy when it is time to upgrade the OS on that machine. Learn to use F/OSS Goodies on Windows and they will be there for you on Linux and OpenBSD as well.
Soon after you made the switch to Linux or OpenBSD, you will forget your old worm and SP problems that XP suffered from.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
That's the way DRM works. It never really hurts criminals who profit from publishing other's work, it simply burns the end user.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
M$ doesn't want to fix the problems their monopoly pushed out into the world, thats fine. Some people don't want to or can't pay the unresonable fees for an offical series of numbers. Others may even feel that the cost of the OS is offset by the time, effort, and software required to keep such a buggy wide open nearly completely non-secure OS running.
Any way you cut it, one of these days a _programmer_ (NOT a braindead moron script kiddy with a virii generator) is going to release a virus that will paperweight these non-secure machines and remove some pollution from the internet. If this happens to cripple critical components to critical infrastructure it's a lesson well learned. MAINTAIN YOUR COMPUTERS OR PUT THEM BACK IN THE FUCKING BOX. They should have learned by now after all the buggy crap the script kiddies have put out that they will never understand. We really do need a system destroying virus released by somebody who knows what a pointer is and can actually read AND understand code. Not only would this clear up the spam zombies, but also clear up the viral hosts and the trash from them. Go ahead and cry about not caring for critical systems being crashed, personally I'd be more pissed it was unsecure enough to be allowed to happen. Imagine if Al-Qaida/Al-Queera or whatever timed things just right and was able to cripple a system that should have been patched and maintained and since it wasn't hundreds or thousands died. Railway companies with computer controlled switch tracks come immediately to mind. (nitpick if you must, just the first thing to come to mind)
M$'s latest decision will only push people towards a stable and reliable OS. Don't release SP2 to everybody, somebody else will fix your poorly written code problem writing 0s to the MBR or wiping the flash memory or wiping the BIOS etc etc.
-1 Overrated (Too many big words for me to comprehend)
>Actually, these systems have spheres of influence based on where they plug in. I could care less about this since it will not affect our corporate network.
The ways this will hurt you:
1. XP machines transformed into spam relays flooding your corporate email servers.
2. Floods, zombies, etc attacking your ISP thus increasing latency for all involved or even DDOS. Remember how that MS SQL exploit slowed down the net for millions of people?
3. XP machines transformed into virus/trojan machines shooting emails at your corporate network. What's that? You got hit before you could update the definitions? Too bad.
4. Home users bringing in USB keychains or floppies with today's newest virus because their home machines are on an untrusted network.
5. Remote access users flooding your network with trojan packets by using a machine from Kinkos or some other untrusted location. Or remote access users letting their kids use the "company laptop" and then penetrating your firewall with all sorts of crap.
Criminal investigation and punishment should be done by the authorities, at least we have a check on them. When corporate america decides to "police the net", we all have problems. MS should give up and give everyone whatever patch they need regardless of legality.
No, it's an immediate shutdown, a shutdown can't be cancelled when it's in progress. The shutdown dialogue you see in the case of sasser is a 1 minute countdown, which gives you time to do shutdown -a, which cancels the shutdown. When the countdown reaches 0, you won't be able to cancel the shutdown in progress either.
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
Ouch...in that case the solution is shutdown -r, open CD drive, insert Mandrake disk 1...
/obvious
Microsoft didn't "change its tune." Slashdot reported on a rumor that SP2 would install on pirate copies. Immediately afterward, Microsoft stated at the WinHEC that the rumors were false. Wininformant reported it the very day after.
Slashdot is reporting this like Microsoft just now changed their decision. For one, they said this already LAST MONTH, and two, they never said SP2 would install on pirate copies anyway.
"Sufferin' succotash."
So long FCKGW.....or so Microsoft hopes. Its been a fun ride.
I figure most tech kids on the block where everybody goes to get a machine built or fixed would end up with pirated copies of Win2k or WinXP. So now those people try to update their machine have problems call the tech kid over who changes the key upgrades to SP2 and charges $20 for his time.
Yeah, and also installs some spyware and pop-up windows requesting you to buy a legal copy. maybe intentionally corrupt the filesystem now and then.
Man, this is a great idea. I can't wait to try out XPDE. Crap, it takes me to a page that cannot be displayed. Linux sucks! Oh well, back to Windows. Dislexya is a bicth XPDE
What's really insane is how people were bashing Microsoft last time for allowing SP2 to install. "They're just doing it because they want piracy in order to spread their monopoly!". Now they're being bashed again when it's revealed they never planned to let SP2 install anyway--last time Slashdot just reported a rumor as fact, as usual. "Microsoft just wants people to buy their product legally instead of pirating it, those bastards!"
I think its great for linux if they don't let pirates patch. At least one pirate will get hit by a virus and switch. And it will boost the "MS is just a viriid up piece of junk, so switch" argument.
Congratulations, you got a software pirate to use Linux. One more warez/mp3 asshole in this community, posting on Slashdot about how evil the RIAA is supposed to be for going after copyright infringers, meanwhile criticizing the next company who violates the copyright of the GPL...
One way or another, people here are going to bash Microsoft for anything they do. They let SP2 install, they suck. They don't let SP2 install on pirate copies--gasp, forcing warez d00ds to actually buy shit--they suck. Show a little level-headed rationalism here, people. Pirates don't deserve a service pack, and if they get hit with a virus, fuck 'em. Not my problem. Not yours. It's theirs for not buying and not patching.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Microsoft "changes tune again?"
They never said they'd allow SP2 to install on pirated copies. It was a rumor that Slashdot reported as fact (surprise, surprise). Microsoft immediately dismissed the rumor at WinHEC. It was reported on several of the Windows websites. For at least a month now, it's been known that SP2 wouldn't install on pirate copies.
Not only is Slashdot finally catching up, they're yet again pointlessly bashing Microsoft. Slashdot invented something they decided on, and now they've invented a "turnaround" on that decision. Neither happened.
Please, if you're going to report on Microsoft, can you at least have as much integrity about it as, say, Activewin? Care to do a little fact-checking first? The very day Slashdot said SP2 would install on pirate copies, I went over to Wininformant, and Paul Thurrott reported that it wasn't true. You simply can't trust this place for valid tech news anymore...
"Sufferin' succotash."
You didn't mention reckless drivers, but I'll introduce them as an example. We hold reckless drivers responsible because it's taken decades of horrible deaths to do that. You're right - no one's died from a computer virus, though careers and business are impacted. But currently, society doesn't hold other members of society responsible for their reckless computing.
When that day comes, we'll see ISPs actually act on complaints, we'll see fines, criminal charges, summary convictions / misdemeanors for reckless computing, and then it will have less of an impact. Until then, it's still the Wild West and it's every user for themselves.
For me, reckless idiots running pirated, unpatched XP boxes don't negatively affect me, my business, my life or my career. I make a few one-time changes and a few one-time purchases to adapt. Now the joker who stole my bike seat yesterday? He impacted me more in one morning than all of the reckless computer users on the Internet combined this year, so far.
Use Evolution instead of Outlook? Bewa
Personally i would see it as incentive to NOT purchase a legal copy. Just another challenge.
That is if i used their crap at home, which i dont.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I guess no one told you, your not supposed to have anything else running while you install the update.
Be seeing you...
Hmmm so I disable my firewall to install SP2 which meanwhile leaves my ports wide open to the kind of viruses that SP2 is designed to prevent?
Grrrrreeeat
Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
Okay, so I am still using Win2Kpro instead of
WinXPpro. I was going to buy a commercial
(OEM) copy of the latest & greatest MS OS
ever (choke), but Monopoly$oft's bad press
regarding XP made me hesitate.
Now it looks like I need to hold out until
M$ releases WinXPpro with SP2 already there
(around the end of the year?).
However, during this time period I will be
looking at (gasp) an alternative OS that
ALREADY provides better security. If the
stars fall into alignment AND WINE becomes
a more stable environment for those apps
I can't do without, Monopoly$oft will NOT
be getting any more of my money.
I am willing to bet that M$ will be losing
many more customers besides me during that
time frame.
What about Microsoft Thailand? Dont they offer Thai users valid licenses of Windows/Office for a very small fraction of the price (I'm talking like 1/10), as some sort of strange way to "solve the problem" of almost 100% piracy in Thailand.
Founder & COO, Hayai India (hayai.in) / USA (hayaibroadband.com)
Windows XP is pretty clunky, huh?
:) It goes "click" every once in a while. I might go and get a Warranty replacement...
I brought my new notebook, and it ran XP Pro beautifully for the first couple of months. Then, the obligitory OS degradation came in, and now the machine pretty much runs like shit.
I turned off all those "visual enhacements" - and is better, but still clunky. It takes AGES to bring up anything from the taskbar... among other things.
Next thing I'm going to try is to replace the hard drive - I think its slightly dodgy
Founder & COO, Hayai India (hayai.in) / USA (hayaibroadband.com)
Lets assume that the 'sentence' of death is passed to every un-patched machine....
What happens when banks shutdown, governments, aircraft controllers, power plants..
Its a lot bigger then just some idiots at home.. this is the point I'm making.. this stuff effects everyone and its not a simple solution of saying ' ya, they deserve it'.
My example was meant to be extreme, to make a statement about you not truly thinking beyond your own nose, and just being selfish.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
"assigning blame isn't going to accomplish a lot."
No shoes, no shirt, no service.
Microsoft doesn't exactly provide an essential service. They're not a telephone company or energy utility. They have the right to refuse service. It doesn't make good PR, but it makes good business sense - you shouldn't have to service anyone for free.
That they bother to service their paying customers five to ten years after the fact is pretty impressive.
Use Evolution instead of Outlook? Bewa
I could be wrong, but I do recall reading that MS is addressing the fact that there is a short period during boot up between the network turning on and the firewall becoming active. It's supposed to be addressed in SP2.
Be seeing you...