Is That Pirated Software?

underpar writes "According to this ZDNet.com article, Microsoft 'has launched a pilot program in which some visitors to the main Windows download page are being asked to let the software maker check to see whether their copy of the operating system is licensed.' The check is not required, but after the desired 20,000 users go through the program they might change their tune."

Comments

Buyer's remorse

[mfh]

I just walked past a copy of WinXP Home Edition in a "Bargain Bin" at Costco, on sale for $299 CAD... so who are the pirates? Linux is free. I could see maybe $99 or something, but it's overpriced and bug ridden. So if you want to know why people are not paying Microsoft, it's a no-brainer. If it's overpriced, loaded with bugs and unstable in any way, paying for it seems like shooting yourself in the foot. Every time XP shows the blue screen of death, I get buyer's remorse.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[NotAnotherReboot]

If you are getting blue screens of death on XP, I'm going to have to say that it is something that you are doing (installed the improper drivers, got some kind of really messed spyware, etc). I NEVER get blue screens of death on any of my machines running Windows XP.

Say what you want, but Microsoft has made such a leap in terms of stability from Windows 98 to the NT/2000/XP code base that it is hard to even compare the two.

I will agree that the price that they charge is somewhat outrageous, but that doesn't mean you need to try to support your argument with points that are hardly valid anymore.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Kenja]

"I could see maybe $99 or something, but it's overpriced and bug ridden."

Its not over priced just because its more then you want to spend. Untill you figure out how basic economics work, there's just no helping you. Or would you be OK with your employer deciding that your services are overpriced so they wont be paying you anymore (but dont stop showing up for work)?

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Kenja]

"EXACTLY I would LOVE to say my copy of XP is legit, but I am not made of money, and Microsoft IS. $299 indeed... I bought SuSe Pro for $79 this year. MS can bite me. Sorry, but they rip people off big time. 50BILLION in the bank proves it."

So you spent more on SuSe Pro then an OEM copy of Windows XP Home would have run you. But you complain that XP is overpriced. Shesh.

But then you seem to have the opinion that any company that shows profit must be a rip off, so color me unsurprised.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Rallion]

A blue screen in XP isn't even the same screen. The only time it ever comes up is for a hardware problem -- the kind of thing that will be unrecoverable in any modern operating system.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Rallion]

Actually, XP works perfectly fine with just a clean install and automatically-installing patches. Just those two steps will even install the latest drivers for almost all of your devices. That's a pretty nice level of service from the software, all other things aside.

What your typical Windows user puts so much effort into is making it stop working.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Lisandro]

My XP installation bluescreens every time i try to use a webcam that has problems with my onboard USB adapter. On linux, the only thing that dies is the process using it.

XP bluescreens whenever a kernel-space driver dies. It happens often enough; through it's nowhere as bad as 98.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[tsotha]

Pirates? Look, if $299 CAD is too much, don't buy it - nobody's shoving it down your throat. Use linux, or use a notepad. You don't have any right too someone else's property just because you think it's too expensive.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Mac Degger]

I fully agree...winxp is the only MS OS that I actually would have bought. Then I looked at the price, and saw the sudden pricehike from something like a hundred bucks to three-four times that. I mean, wtf? That is just not normal. They lost a sale there and then. And the sad thing is, I would have bought it at win98 prices. Oh well...seems MS has no fucking clue what the term 'price elasticity' means.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Requiem Aristos]

He also could have bought a Mandrake or Debian CD for far less. The correct comparison for SuSE Pro is against XP Pro retail; both include features that are not present in the "Home" versions. Both include (theoretically) items that are not included in OEM versions, such as manuals, stickers, etc.

I believe SuSE will sell you just the CDs, if that's all you need. However, I've always been impressed with the quality of the SuSE manuals, compared to the junk that seems to come with most software these days.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[DogDude]

Linux is free.

Linux is unusable. Look, I can give you a pile of cow shit for FREE instead of you having to buy lunch. Is that a deal? Why would you BUY lunch when I'm willing to give you cow shit instead for FREE? There's a difference between price and value. People keep paying for software because it offers them a good value. Linux is useless to me because I can't get the goddamned thing to work. Thus, W2K or XP is very much worth the price to me. The utility that I get from W2K or XP far exceeds the price, so I buy it. When you get to high school, hopefully, you'll have to take Economics. Any basics Economics class will explain the difference ebtween price and value. A good teacher will be able to explain it to you better than I can.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Nyder]

no, you don't do a clean install then go on the net to download the patches. you download the full patches, burn those to disk, or if you are able to follow instructions, you slipstream sp1 & sp2 onto a bootable window xp disk, then you don't have to worry about the firewall or patching it after you do the clean install.

for info on the slipstreaming, check out: http://www.windows-help.net/WindowsXP/winxp-sp2-bo otcd.html I have nothing to do with that web site, I just found it using google http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=slip stream+windows+xp+sp2+how+to&btnG=Google+Searc h it was the first link, there are many others.

Also, the utility Nlite http://nuhi.msfn.org/ will slipstream service packs and updates onto a disk image for you. It will also remove stuff off the windows disk, like drivers you don't need, apps you don't need, even Internet Explorer. Personally, I like that you can take MSN Explorer, Messenger, and other non need programs that are security risks. I haven't used the program yet, but it seems like a very nice one. You can also put the cdkey in the install program so you don't have to enter it when your installing. sweet.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[zulux]

You don't get BSOD's on XP, because XP is set to reboot instead.

[from http://aumha.org/win5/a/shtdwnxp.php]

Right-click on My Computer, click Properties, click the Advanced tab. Under "Startup & Recovery," click Settings. Under "System Failure," uncheck the box in front of "Automatically restart."

Do that, and you'll see all the typical BSOD's that you've been missing.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Dh2000]

tell that to the starving orphan about the rich baker's bread.

things aren't as simple as you'd like to think.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Silvers]

Easy to say except Microsoft has a monopoly on the desktop market.

If you need a Microsoft product to get your work done, you really are in a pickle aren't you.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Anonymous Coward]

That didn't take long ... only a little bit of scrolling to find this tired argument.

Personally, I happen to think there is more than just a little truth to Cringley's latest (paranoid) rant. Windows has been a staple of our economy and culture for so long (and for some time to come) that a $299 entry fee is downright oppressive.

Until recently, they were sitting on a $40 billion surplus. Do you really think the price will go down as their "piracy" enforcement measures become more effective?

Hack the System.

----
Can you Copyright a number? How about a really big number?

Re:Buyer's remorse

[DogDude]

Just because you cannot get linux to work for you does not make it unusable for the rest of the world.

And just because you use it doesn't mean that other people can. I don't know of a single person who uses Linux, even my techie-geek friends. But that's beside the fact. I can use it the day there's a decent business financials package and a point of sale system available for it. Until then, it's just a toy for me (and not a fun one, either).

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Anonymous Coward]

"You don't have any right too someone else's property just because you think it's too expensive."

If using it doesn't deprive anyone of anything, why not? Where in whatever moral code you follow does it say that copying is evil? Or that the statutory monopoly known as "copyright" afforded by the government is a basic human right?

People still haven't figured out what the technological revolution is all about. Data isn't a thing (property) like a gemstone you can lock in a vault or guard with your shotgun.

Reminds me of a statistic I read yesterday: that if the nation of Burundi was required to buy licenses for each copy of Windows in use, they would have to give 67 straight months of the country's entire GDP to Microsoft.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[big tex]

So you spent more on SuSe Pro then an OEM copy of Windows XP Home would have run you.

OEM Copy.

Way to compare apples and lugnuts.
This would be the same MS who gives deep discounts to the OEMS, discounts that you and me cannot buy on our own?

Also, to the grandparent post:
The fact that they still have the 50BN (as opposed to spending it or, say, offering dividends) does not prove that they are good at ripping people off. All it proves is that they have some fiscal responsibility and can hold onto cash.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[zangdesign]

but I am not made of money, and Microsoft IS

So, stealing from the rich is justified? Oh, wait, it's not theft, it's copyright infringement.

50BILLION in the bank proves it.

50 Billion in the bank proves nothing beyond that they have a ton of money.

Look, if you pirate software, you're breaking the law, plain and simple. Stop trying to justify it - that's cheap and stupid because there is no justification for breaking that particular set of laws. Software is not a right and you do not have to be a pirate to make a living.

Pirate because you want to do it, pirate because someone made you do it, hell, pirate because it gives you a woody. But quit whining about how you're being screwed by the rich.

That's the excuse of the oppressed and I seriously doubt you're being oppressed by anyone except your parents.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Bob Davis, Retired]

Bullshit. A stock Media Center PC, running a freshly installed Windows Media Center Edition XP, which only runs on fully 'supported' hardware, goes down more often than most hookers in Times Square. Since MSWMCEXP ONLY runs on FULLY supported hardware, how do you explain this?

XP is better than 95/98/Millennium, but is less reliable than 2000. It still doesn't touch any free / open source Unix (including OS X) for reliability. Once you start serving files or doing anything even remotely heavy-duty (like encoding video) the system begins to break down.

So, while you can insist that XP never BSODs unless it's due to user error, people will know you are a liar and full of shit!

Re:Buyer's remorse

[LiquidCoooled]

I'm sure he would notice his computer rebooting...

It doesn't happen. This install has never blue screened, never rebooted itself, never fucked up.

I routinely count uptime in weeks and months, and dont see problems.

All I can say is, if yours isnt working right, then I would check your drivers and hardware.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[SillyNickName4me]

So tell me.. how are you going to do those things without net access? (don't give me either 'you should have done it beforehand' or 'with another computer', there are many situations in which neither is/was a possibility)

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Keck]

If you are getting blue screens of death on XP, I'm going to have to say that it is something that you are doing (installed the improper drivers, got some kind of really messed spyware, etc).

/me pats young'n on head... That's what M$ would like you to think -- are you going for your MCSE so you can be smart, too? -- The response to your statement is, stuff in userspace should NEVER NEVER NEVER be able to take the whole system down. That's our whole point. Windows is SO poorly designed from the ground up, largely due to:

• Compromising good software principles, OS design, etc for marketing reasons
• Compromising needed design time for the sake of an arbitrarily promised release/ship date

So basically, the object of windows is not to be a good operating system, but a "just good *enough*" operating system.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

Look, if you pirate software, you're breaking the law, plain and simple. Stop trying to justify it,

And when you say things I disapprove of, without paying me $199.95, you're stealing from me. Sure, it's not a law yet, but once I bribe a few congressmen to tack a rider onto a interstate funding bill, it will be. And I expect you to chime in and tell everyone they must obey the law...

Software is not a right

But perpetual copyright is? Industry collusion for DRM to keep linux from booting on 2007 hardware is? Tell me, where in the Constitution is the right enumerated, that corporations have the right to become monopolies, and turn around and use uncompetitive practices to force competitors from the market, and finally raise prices to the most profit maximizing number?

and you do not have to be a pirate to make a living.

Yes, because some small businesses aren't killed outright by the incredibly high price of maintaining software licenses to Microsoft's satisfaction.

But quit whining about how you're being screwed by the rich.

No problem. Quit whining because other people point out that the rich are screwing us. Oh, and since I doubt you will quit, just let me point out that in the grandest scheme of things, M$ isn't "the rich" that are screwing us. Even they are pawns.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[RollingThunder]

But it'll be an OEM copy, and by buying it without a PC, you're violating the license, just as surely as if you were pirating it, because it's not authorized.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Lisandro]

As long as you don't fiddle much with Win89, it's fairly stable, still needing reboots every now and then. If you run "heavier" applications (office suits, f.ex, and specially games) expect Win98 to crash and burn regularly - my experience is that it's VERY sensitive to programs that use a lot of memory.

Anyway, the thing is that if the system you need crashes every few months, a Linux, Win2000 or WinXP would stay running for ever. But if Win98 fits you needs, by all means, don't listen to anybody and enjoy it :).

Re:Buyer's remorse

[Pedersen]

Linux is unusable

Funny thing, that... See, I have an ATI All In Wonder Radeon. I wanted to make my computer be my vcr, dvd player, etc (what can I say, I got divorced, got out with my computer, and that was it for entertainment). So, I used the software that came with it, and got something moderately functional. Not great, but functional. Then I decided I wanted a remote control for it all.

Now, before I tell you what happened, let me tell you about me: BS in CS, working on home computers for about 20 years (started on Apple ][ and Vic-20, worked my way up Commodore's line, right on through the Amiga, before it died and I had to replace it with clone stuff). I write code. Play games. Build networks, pcs, and do general repair/maintenance (but no soldering, I don't have a steady enough hand for that). I grok the computer in a way that people around me just don't quite understand. I do things, and they just wonder how I knew to do it.

So, what happened with the remote? I got a lot of functionality working. Able to start file playback, already had working vcr functionality, so was going good. Then ... then I tried to make the power button on the remote into a toggle for putting the monitor into standby mode. Monitor in standby? Wake it up. Monitor awake? Put it in standby.

The damned remote control software stumped me. I spent over two weeks trying to make it do just that. I could set it so the power button would either always wake up the monitor, or always put it to sleep, but could never make it toggle. I decided I'd had enough. Bought an ATI TV Wonder, installed Linux, MythTV, and lirc, an had a working setup. Oh, and the time? About two weeks, including all tweaking. That was almost two years ago, and I haven't rebooted Windows since then.

In fact, I thought I'd deleted it off of all partitions, and recently found a copy hidden on that computer. Forgot it was there. Anyway, Linux is unusable? People can't make it do what they want? Maybe they can't, but I sure as hell can. And do. So please, don't call it unusable.It's only unusable for people who are even worse than my mom at computers (mind you, she still doesn't really understand the idea of folders even).

Since she uses Linux every time she goes online, I have to conclude that, if you believe Linux is unusable, you desparately need to check into computer rehab, and get some better skills.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[killjoe]

It's illegal. I can buy a rolex that fell off the truck for $20.00 too but it's still stolen property.

When you buy an OEM copy of windows you are buying stolen property. It can be taken away from you at any time.

Re:Buyer's remorse

[danila]

Puhleeese! Enough of personal anecdotes already. There's a study that very clearly showed - WinXP requires a reboot more often than Win2k. The study was done on a 1285000 computers that all belong to large businesses and have professional system administrators maintaining them. The fact that WinXP doesn't crash for you doesn't mean jack shit for everyone else. There are more than 100000000 computers running Windows XP and every computer is different. Just be happy that your computer doesn't crash, but stop that "you must be doing something wrong" bullshit. Your stable XP installation is mostly luck, not something you can be proud of.

windows download?

[essence]

..in which some visitors to the main Windows download page are being asked..

Microsoft lets you download windows from their site now? ;-)

Re:windows download?

[chachob]

Actually, you can download Windows from the MSDN site, but you need a subscription. What you are paying for is the license, not the software itself. So downloading it would be useless unless you had a license to run it.

How do they stand to gain?

[__aavhli5779]

Before the inevitable barrage of comments about how nobody with a pirated company would in their right mind agree to this, I'd like to focus on the particular group which Microsoft is actually targetting with this:

... it is a sensitive group of customers Microsoft is targeting with the program--namely, people who bought a computer that they thought had a legitimate copy of Windows, but are somewhat unsure. Microsoft wants those people as customers, so it wants to be sure to treat them kindly, even as the company seeks to encourage legitimate Windows use.

Who are these people? Being a freelance computer tech (and knowing many others in my trade), I know exactly who these folks are. They're the ones who got a particularly good deal when buying a home-made computer from someone's garage... or, more likely, those who had an OEM copy installed with their retail computer, messed it up dreadfully, and whoever worked on it decided to forego using the "restore disks" (which are often missing, since many people have no idea what they're for, and which are generally dreadfully broken in the first place) and install a questionable copy of XP. I've faced this dillema myself, before, but I always opt to try to fix the existing installation, or inform the customer that their decision to visit every gambling and porn site under the sun necessitates that they buy a new copy of Windows.

These are the folks who can often be genuinely uncertain whether their copy of Windows is legitimate. These are the folks who click "OK" on everything anyway. The question is what they have to gain from this knowledge, and, more importantly, what Microsoft has to gain.

What information can Microsoft harvest, exactly? They surely know how widespread these practices are; after all, they practically encourage them with their cutthroat OEM policies. Also, they insist (at least according to the article) that they won't treat those with an unlicensed copy any differently from those with a legitimate one. My guess, among other things, is they'll start harvesting illegitimate license codes (like they have in the past... FCKGW anyone?) and perhaps block them a year in advance.

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[Nurgled]

Common sense says to me that if I've purchased a copy of Windows XP Professional then I've bought a right to use Windows XP Professional, so therefore I should be able to install Windows XP Professional from any install CD, whether it is mine or not, and still be perfectly within my rights as a holder of a licence to use Windows XP Professional.

I'm sure the law doesn't agree with me, but I don't tend to take much notice of laws which don't align with my (quite reasonable) idea of right and wrong. In that situation, on my own machine I wouldn't bad an eyelid and on someone else's machine I'd inform them of the situation (after doing a little more research than I obviously have here) and let them decide, and I'm sure their expectation would align with mine.

Fortunately, I don't use Windows XP Professional, so this will not be a problem I will have to face in the near future.

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's the absolutely most insane thing that Microsoft is currently doing:

Forcing OEMs to include "restore CDs" instead of installation media.

That is absolutely, utterly, completely insane. That, in my book, negates any problem with "pirating" XP after purchasing a computer with XP installed, because they've taken away your ability to install XP by itself without all the bells and whistles the OEM throws in.

This is an important point, because I've worked with Sony laptops that fail to work correctly with mission-critical software unless you blow away the installation and then redo it all by scratch, skipping the installation of the problematic software that Sony does not let you uninstall from the default setup. And Sony's reputation for worse-than-worthless tech support is more than justified in my opinion (crap, at work we even bought a support contract and I swear we're talking to the exact same group of front-line naysayers).

So what do you do in those circumstances? "Pirate" XP so you can use the software you're already licensed to use? Or give in to the Microsoft hegemony and give them even more money by purchasing an additional copy of Windows XP? Which do you think Microsoft expects you to do? That's right, you must give them money.

Sorry, but my vote, in all of those OEM instances, is to "pirate" XP. If Microsoft doesn't like it - then they can change their OEM licensing. That whole "people are selling OEM CDs on eBay" excuse for hobbling every computer owner is not defendable. Punish the people who commit the crime, don't arbitrarily punish everyone who might possibly commit the crime at some future point.

As far as what information Microsoft can harvest? Come on, it's an ActiveX control. They could harvest anything. Office 2003 activation codes, Windows XP activation codes - anything, everything.

What are they going to do with this information? Hasn't history taught you enough about what they do after gathering this information? Seriously. Since this is all implemented through ActiveX controls they could forseeably corrupt your software installation after finding "pirated" codes.

So much for their overhyped "security initiative" - it's obviously back to business as usual in Microserf-land.

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[stcanard]

Who are these people? Being a freelance computer tech (and knowing many others in my trade), I know exactly who these folks are. They're the ones who got a particularly good deal when buying a home-made computer from someone's garage. There's a second group here. The people that bought a computer from a mom-and-pop style computer store, which came with Windows XP "Pre-installed". There's a not insignificant number of these stores that are installing pirated copies. Great cost saving in a tight market.

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[LS]

This brings up a good point. Software companys want (and get) their cake and eat it too. They get to treat software like physical property when it suits them - for instance, fighting fair-use backups. But then they treat it as information when it suits them - for instance, licensing an individual user, as opposed to a single instance of software itself. So which is it? I would lean towards information, and not physical property.

LS

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[eric76]

I asked someone from Microsoft that very question a number of years ago. At least, he represented that he was from Microsoft and he did have a Microsoft e-mail address.

His unofficial answer was that as long as you held a valid certificate of authenticity and used that number in only that machine, then it was not a problem.

What I have been curious about is the situation where you purchase a used machine that includes an original valid certificate of authenticity.

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[Bull999999]

Microsoft doesn't care if you make fair-use backups of your Microsoft install media. In fact, you're often encouraged to do so

I'll have to give MS credit for that one, unlike those copy-protection Nazi gaming companies that geeks love.

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[Waffle Iron]

Software is better than just that. It's a miracle commodity:

It's copyrightable like a book.
It's patentable like a mouse trap.
It can hold trade secrets, like a glass of Coca Cola.
The consumer has to "sign" a contract to use it, like a cellphone account.
Advertising pitches can be included for a captive audience, just like a movie theater.
It's artificially expensive, like a diamond.
It's a recurring source of support revenue, like a lawn service.
It's creator can disavow all liability for anything that may go wrong, and get away with it, like... I can't think of anything else like that!

Nothing else can do more than a couple of those things. Software is just too good to be true.

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[ananke]

I agree with the sony crap. We will never support any new purchase of a sony laptop, thanks to our last experience with their tech support and their policy on drivers: we had to pay money to get new set of drivers, because the old media broke. Instead of allowing for the drivers to be downloaded, like any decent vendor on the market, they want to gain extra few bucks by forcing you to purchase driver cds. Well sony, here's a nice fat 'screw you'. You got the fee for drivers, and you won't see again another purchase from us. How's that for kicks? [by the way, the drivers, as I recall, were essential to have the laptop working with windows. Pretty much the laptop was useless without those]

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[Ratso Baggins]

It's creator can disavow all liability for anything that may go wrong, and get away with it, like...

Politicians and their Election Promises

Re:How do they stand to gain?

[omicronish]

Forcing OEMs to include "restore CDs" instead of installation media.

My HP Pavilion zt3000 laptop came with an XP installation CD. After installing it I was left with a raw XP installation that was even missing drivers, so no, I somehow doubt Microsoft is currently forcing OEMs to include restore CDs over installation CDs.

Likely use...

[over_exposed]

So they'll probably use this to keep pirated windows boxes from downloading windows updates... so what? You can have microsoft send you a CD with the latest patches on it for free. Granted, it takes a little longer than a 1-20 minute download, but it's still a viable solution for those of you with the urge to use pirated software.

Re:Likely use...

[XaviorPenguin]

Or wait a month or so to get the full updates from AutoPatcher.com.

uh oh!

[Coneasfast]

Those whose copies are found not to be genuine will be encouraged to go back to the company from whom they bought the PC or software upgrade. They'll also be given other information on obtaining genuine software before being allowed to download whatever software they were seeking. In its current form, the program offers no particular benefit for those who are running licensed software.

oooooh, i'm shaking in my pirate boots!

Re:uh oh!

[Sponge Bath]

i'm shaking in my pirate boots!

Mighty fine ye be looking too.
Here's a dubloon, shake it some more.

Arrrr... it gets lonely out at sea.

Re:uh oh!

[ThousandStars]

So this guy does exist.

If the whole thing is optional -

[thewldisntenuff]

then what's the point....What's scary is that someday they'll lock the pirates out of patches...Leads to two scenarios -

1.) Increase of unpatched, demon, zombie PCs

or

2.) Linux Migration! :)

You could probably piss a hell off a lot of people, who as TFA states "namely, people who bought a computer that they thought had a legitimate copy of Windows." You're gonna force them into buying a new copy?

And that still doesn't get around ordering a patch cd in the mail.

-thewldisntenuff

If you run it on Linux...

[Black Parrot]

...will it find all your stolen SCO code?

And as the first Linux user clicks on the test...

[TheDarkener]

"You are not running a Windows operating system. Therefore, you are a pirate. Please click [Ok] to send us money anyway."

P2P Updates

[DougJohnson]

It really won't matter much, most users who are savvy enough to pirate their OS are going to be able to find updates in their favourite P2P program. I can already get SP2 and any other updates off of bitorrent.

So once again the ones that Microsoft leaves in the cold are the unwitting consumers who had their grandson install it for them.

Re:P2P Updates

[Anonymous Coward]

I know that if I wanted to update my OS I'd use some P2P app....

Re:P2P Updates

[Mattintosh]

If I were installing an OS for a grandmother, I'd sure as hell not be installing XP. Maybe 2000. Maybe. With any luck, I'd be guiding them through "installing" a power cord on a new iMac and telling them where to find the power button.

Re:P2P Updates

[slashrogue]

I can see the Mac thing entirely, but if you're talking PC, why wouldn't you install XP? (Assuming that *nix or *BSD systems are out of the question here.) Win2k was an OS for the more technically competent. I've been running WinXP Professional pretty much since it was released and the *only* time I've had a BSOD is when it was a hardware issue. My only other issues with it have been memory related when I was running on a pretty crappy machine, and it just slowed things down which was more of an annoyance than anything.

Microsoft is evil... blah blah... yes they've got security holes... I'd really like to hear your reason to "sure as hell not be installing XP. Maybe 2000."

Re:P2P Updates

[OneOver137]

With any luck, I'd be guiding them through "installing" a power cord on a new iMac and telling them where to find the power button.

You should call Steve with that one for the next commercial!

I'm really hoping to do this with my mom and in-laws. Both are due for a new computer and I'll be recommending a Mac. Windows is great for enterprise, but not for for those who have trouble understanding how the microwave works.

Re:P2P Updates

[Anonymous Coward]

Number one reason why everyone in my family runs 2k or below?

XP's magical disappearing configuration system. After all, if you've never needed it yet, it won't show it to you so you don't know you've got it. Its bad enough having to troubleshoot something over the phone, without knowing the 50 different paths to get there depending whether the person has chosen to disable the hiding functionality, disable the "new" control panel (note that in the new control panel, there are icons that you cannot reach from the groups it displays, most notably 3rd party extensions, but a few microsoft things too), etc.

Its a pain in the ass in Office too. I have to deal with people asking me how to do things that are right on the format menu..... if they've used them once. Of course, until they use them once, they have no idea Word can even do it.

Re:P2P Updates

[RLiegh]

I know that if I wanted to update my OS I'd use some P2P app....

Hey, if it's good enough for you to get your OS there in the first place...why not?

Re:P2P Updates

[slutsker]

Savvy enough to pirate their own OS? In America, this is probably so. But you obviously have never been in countries like Russia. In Russia, everyone owns a pirated version of Windows. Getting a legal version is impossible. The huge stores all sell illegal copies. So all the "non-savvy" users still have pirated stuff.

I'm not sure what affect this will have on the people in other countries, (like Russia) but I doubt the effect will be noticable. The pirates will just introduce some russian site to give the updates or something, no big deal.

Re:P2P Updates

[flacco]

Microsoft is evil... blah blah... yes they've got security holes... I'd really like to hear your reason to "sure as hell not be installing XP. Maybe 2000."

because microsoft is evil and they've got security holes?

Re:P2P Updates

[Anonymous Coward]

You know what makes me laugh? A bunch of Linux-loving Slashdotters who complain that they can't get Windows to work. If you can't figure out how to run Windows without it crashing on you, or fucking up your configuration you've got problems my friends.

Re:P2P Updates

[adamruck]

If you read the grandparents comment he is talking about the interface(crappy bubble style control panel etc, that may or may not be present) and the funky dissapearing icons in the start menu. All of which makes it harder to help people with windows problems.

None of this has to do with "fucking up your configuration" or "figuring out how to run windows without it crashing on you". It has to do with useability and quality of software. Further more how do you figure the grandparent is a "Linux-loving Slashdotter", he/she seems to be quite familiar with windows and its operation, also his/her whole family uses it.

Bottom line whoever modded this up is on crack.

Re:P2P Updates

[gnuman99]

I can already get SP2 and any other updates off of bitorrent.

I get all my updates from personal e-mail from the good people at Microsoft. On the downside, I can verify a significant reduction in speed after installing every single one of them... :( :P

Re:P2P Updates

[Kent Recal]

Dude it's windows. It really doesn't matter.
Just a few days ago I updated this officially licensed and paid for XP box at work via official windows update. You know, service pack 2 and stuff.
Since then the virus scanner (antivir) is broken - the guard-service will pop up, complain about a missing dll and die.
Uninstall/Reinstall of antivir didn't help (the dll-error seems gone but the symptom is the same).
Also the poor soul who has to work at that box reports that apps randomly choke for up to one minute and everything seems horribly slow now.
After a couple runs of the virusscanner, ad-aware and some other spyware-cleaning tools the box seems virus- and spyware-free. But the problems remain.

So, what exactly is funny about people pulling their broken patches from P2P?
I think paying for this crap in first place really is the funny part.

Re:P2P Updates

[glesga_kiss]

Its bad enough having to troubleshoot something over the phone, without knowing the 50 different paths to get there depending whether the person has chosen to disable the hiding functionality

What are talking about? XP has exactly the same paths as 2000.

disable the "new" control panel (note that in the new control panel, there are icons that you cannot reach from the groups it displays, most notably 3rd party extensions, but a few microsoft things too), etc.

Again, eh? Open control panel, click "switch to classic view". How could you miss it?

XP is just as easy to use, if not more. And with the stuff provided by SP2 (firewall, virus check, update checks), it's the obvious choice for a non-techy user.

It checked mine!

[deathcow]

A few weeks ago I was trying a link to the next version of Windows Update, which was not publically released but someone had published it somewhere on the net. It checked my machine and told me my XP key was invalid. (My machine has a VLK 6n1 XP installed on it.) So there are indeed some windowsupdate URLs which do check and do reject!

p.s. I own three legal copies of XP of course, but the slipstreamed SP2 disc is just handy and the only one I keep laying around.

*puts tinfoil hat on*

[Anonymous Cowpat]

You mean they haven't been doing this since the birth of ActiveX anyway?
Well well well, you learn something new everyday, my respect-o-meter for Microsoft has just gone up a tiny fraction.
Oh, wait, they're doing it now, back down it goes...

How do they know?

[Spad]

If the user is running a VLK edition of Windows with a CD-Key other than the FCKGW one - or with the 640 PID, depending one how stringent they're being - how do Microsoft know that it's a priated copy?

OK, so activation cracked copies will be fairly easy to ID, but if you've got a corporate copy (which most pirated releases are anyway) and a valid key there's no way to tell, surely.

Re:How do they know?

[rseuhs]

They can't tell today, but in a few months, they may well have enough data to say "these ones *must* have been leaked".

The problem is that when they start blocking these IDs, they also block the legitimate owners (just because one (ex-)employee copied the company CDs, doesn't void the license.) and they no longer can get their updates.

Actually if it did void the license it's even worse. Imagine you have just spent a few hundred thousand on MS-software and it's void just because some employee put it on a P2P-network.

It's funny that these things never turn up in TCO-studies...

Re:How do they know?

[Snover]

Except for companies which have people running all over the country and/or world (large corporations, companies such as Insurance that have adjusters running all over the place), in which case they'll all be valid but still will "look" bogus, in your scenario.

Yes, I tried it...

[Linegod]

---
Thank you for your interest in Windows Update

Windows Update is the online extension of Windows that helps you get the most out of your computer.

You must be running a Microsoft Windows operating system in order to use Windows Update.
--- ...online extension to Windows... that just freaks me out...

.

Firefox?

[digidave]

I wonder what happens if you visit with Firefox. They are obviously using an ActiveX control for this, so will FF users pass right by or be denied access to downloads? Windows Update won't work anyway, but will this affect manually downloads?

Re:Firefox?

[kagelump]

something like this:
Thank you for your interest in Windows Update

Windows Update is the online extension of Windows that helps you get the most out of your computer.

You need to be running a version of Internet Explorer 5 or higher in order to use Windows Update.

Download the latest version of Internet Explorer

Once Internet Explorer is installed, you can go to the Windows Update site by typing http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com into the address bar of Internet Explorer.

If you prefer to use a different Web browser, updates to Windows may be downloaded from the Microsoft Download Center.

Re:Firefox?

[MTO_B.]

Well, you could change Firefox's user agent to IE, but though you get a little further and dont get that message, you dont get much further: It simply says it is looking for updates, and that goes on forever.

Re:Firefox?

[mrpuffypants]

Clearly you haven't been to WindowsUpdate in a while.

Unless you're using IE5.5 or 6.0 you can't do jack shit on the site. Basically, unless you use their browser you can't update your OS (outside of automatic/downloaded updated from their website.

Right...

[rewt66]

But Microsoft said the program is a first step in trying to provide a better experience for customers using legitimate copies of Windows.

I fail to see how asking me if Microsoft can snoop around in my PC is going to give me a "better experience". It will be a worse experience, if for no other reason than having the experience interrupted to ask the privacy-invading question.

I don't even know where to start

[Daikiki]

This is one of those glorious ideas that look great on paper and have absolutely no effect on piracy.

There was a time when Microsoft began blocking SP1 downloads for WinXP for users using one of a list of very common keys. I suppose it may have prevented a few people from downloading the service pack, but the vast majority of users who were using these keys either found a hack to change their key to something randomly generated, or simply downloaded the service pack elsewhere.

Go back a little further and try to remember the furore over the required online or phone registration of new WinXP installs. For the poeple who do not desire to pay for their operating system, this was a similar inconvenience. Easily circumvented, but an annoyance to legitimate users.

The music industry implements protection so weak that it can be circumvented by pressing the 'shift' key, but breaks CDs for legitimate users. Nobody who wants an illegal track or two is deterred by this. If they can't get the music off the CD they'll just go to a P2P network and download it from there.

Time and time again we see media providers and software companies implement these rediculous attempts to spite casual pirates. The only people they ever end up bothering are there own customers, and in the rare case there is a backlash and their sales are hurt by their own arrogance, who do they blame? Pirates, of course.

Re:I don't even know where to start

[zerocool^]

If you're smart enough to get around having a legit copy of windows, then do it. If you're not, buy a copy. It's that smart.

Furthermore, I seriously belive that Microsoft doesn't give a shit about power users pirating windows. I work in a computer repair store, I fix people's dumb ass windows problems all day, everyday. The fact that I have access to windows makes me better at my job. By being better at my job, more people can buy a microsoft PC, and not care if the screw it up, because they know that the guys down at the repair shop can fix it. Plus, these users don't call microsoft wondering what's going on with their software.

In this way, it is better for Microsoft to not care if I have a legit copy for a couple of reasons - by knowing how to fix it, I have now become free tech support for everyone I know, taking the burden off of microsoft. Also, I am affording them additional marketshare in that I perpetuate the windows-is-ok idea.

If MS doesn't like pirated Windows...

[h00manist]

Why did they release the XP "corporate" verstion which allows installation of XP without teh required online registration?

It's apparently worked quite well to protect Citrix and MS Terminal Server from being used.

I believe MS likes having everyone use Windows, whether it's paid for or not.

What are people going to do, if they can't get Windows pirated? Buy it? Nope.

Spyware

[Guidlib]

I can't justify buying Windows XP while Windows 2000 is still quite capable of playing all the latest games, which is the only real use for Windows now. I don't know about everyone else, but I'm often too afraid to download software for Windows, in fear that it will screw my system up, and so I tend to use my Linux box for most everything except gaming nowdays. That said, with activation, and everything else around these days, I don't think it's too big an issue. If you use the software, you should pay for it, or use something that you don't have to pay for, like Linux.

Effective? I think not.

[chrispyman]

I honestly wonder if it's even possible to effectively determine whether or not a user is using a pirated copy of Windows. Unlike an online game or something where no two users can share a CD-Key and be online at the same time, Windows is just on operating system, and can't always have internet access. Also, many OEM and corporate PCs share CD Keys, and there's really no way Microsoft can tell how many PCs the software is licensend on. Besides, the time Microsoft gets their copy protection working 100% is the time many people decide weather to spend $300 on Windows or $0 on Linux.

Re:Effective? I think not.

[ottergoose]

Also, many OEM and corporate PCs share CD Keys, and there's really no way Microsoft can tell how many PCs the software is licensend on.

Don't you think MS keeps track of which keys can be duplicated and which ones can't? It's not like they just randomly generate them and ship them out the door without any record.

Re:Effective? I think not.

[neil.pearce]

They don't have a database of every released key. Each "release" (Home, Professional, Corporate, Spanish Generic, French Generic...) prepares an algorithm that maps from the 25^36 possible keys to 0.001% of the keyspace. They can rapidly check if a key "could be valid", but no more. You just try distributing cd/manual production amongst 150+ countries and keeping track...
"Warez" keys are detected by enormous numbers of completely distinct IP addresses accessing Windows Update and other "phone home" services.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

This is like the florida Drug search roadblocks

[goombah99]

In florida, the sheriff's were putting put signs that said "drug search roadblock ahead". There actually was no real roadblock. instead they watched for anyone who crossed the median and headed back the other direction. they busted those folks.

I bet microsoft is watching IP addresses. If they see you turn around and leave when confronted they make a note. If they see a cluster from some company then the BSA will get a phone call. Obviously no one with pirated software and a brain is going to let them search. But of course it might uncover some cases of "shared" software between several computers.

Re:This is like the florida Drug search roadblocks

[Speare]

If they see a cluster from some company then the BSA will get a phone call.

Most companies forbid employees from signing external contracts, why would a company allow them to submit corporate machines to potentially invasive tests by external auditors? People will click 'no' because it doesn't involve them, it involves their company.

Re:Gaming?

[WombatDeath]

I buy bespoke games lovingly hand-woven (using the finest traditional materials) by master craftsmen in a remote Peruvian mountain village. Rather than a jewel case, each CD is delivered dangling from the nipple of a Burmese virgin.

Really, though: a typical new game will cost me £30. I can get XP Home (OEM) from Scan for £60.

Microsoft should just give up on this stuff

[ShatteredDream]

It's one thing for them to block service packs and require a serial number, but it's quite another thing for them to do the whole product activation and mandatory serial checking approach. People by nature feel that they own their software or should. The biggest problem that copyright holders face is that the more they pull, the more they are going against human nature. Eventually, the result will be either people losing interest or aggressively "stealing software" and/or supporting political action that is antagonistic to corporate software interests.

If Microsoft were smart, they'd keep working the OEM channels, cut the cost of a new copy of Windows XP Home to $100 with none of the product activation junk and charge $50 per retail upgrade. If Microsoft is so worried about people pirating its products, they should extend steep discounts to their customers who buy off the shelf copies. Microsoft could make good money charging only $50 for Home and $100 for Pro upgrades for Windows.

When in doubt, cut your profit margin down and try to sell more copies of your product. Since digital goods are so cheap to fabricate physical copies of, there is no reason why Microsoft couldn't experiment with much cheaper retail prices for a version of Windows. Hell, they might find that if they stop heckling their legitimate users and cut prices that the desktop Linux threat all but goes away.

Let's face it, what incentive right now would there be for people to choose desktop linux for small business and home use if Windows had a no hassle licensing system and was sold that cheap?

But the whole point of the article...

[zogger]

..is windows piracy. If it WAS cheap enough, people would pop for the Cd and install it.

I got some nifty proof, too, a similar large company gives away it's disks, and has for years now-AOL. They afford it on the margin of a certain small (but still over-all large) segement of the population who will install their software and sign up for net service.

Microsoft could sell the OS on a disk for ten dollars or something like that, and charge another ten a year (something cheap) for updates, and still be billionaires.. Most folks would buy the disk and the legit key then. Note I said most, not all, but I think most would buy it, at least in western/industrialised nations with a decent enough median income.

Their price is not only ridiculous, it's outright scandalous. It's an affront to anyone who's thinking. If their products didn't come pre-installed on new computers, there's no way in heckfire they would sell for what they are asking. Keeping it as a "stealth" product via bundling and collusion with the vendors has been the ticket to their success, off the shelf sales are most likely no where's near where they make most of their money, at least with the base OS. 95 and 98 people were standing in line to get, by ME it slowed down, 2000 hit the doldrums, and XP although on maybe 1/2 the active boxes on the net came mostly with new machines when folks upgraded hardware. It's just lost any "new/shiny/gotta haveit" appeal, because we are 20 years into mass computer adoption now, 10 in a large way. People just aren't as gullible any longer. They'll upgrade with a new box, and that's it, as long as MS lives in delusion land where a simple computer OS is somehow "worth" well over a hundred dollars heading to 200$. Not happening when an entire new computer can be had for not much more than that..

IMO anyway-anyones MMV of course

Jumping on the bandwagon

[orzetto]

CIA has created a link from their home page, saying:

We would like to check if you're a member of Al-Quaeda. If you are Osama bin Laden, please share with us your current residence so we can address our issues. We are interested in maintaining a trust relationship with you as a customer.

Internal sources indicate that the program will be made mandatory sometime during the next months.

Is it Real?

[Agilis]

And yet, if I asked a random girl "Is what you're carrying real?" I'd get slapped or worse.

Bluescreen is OFF by default in XP

[the_skywise]

You won't generally get a bluescreen in XP because, by default, XP will reboot immediately when it encounters a blue screen condition. (See Control Panel | System | Startup and Recovery -- Automatic Restart).

(I leave my PC on 24/7 and only discovered this when I would return home and my PC was magically back at a fresh reboot state. For a while I thought I had a hardware problem because if Windows had crashed I would've seen a blue screen halt, right?)

While I get fewer blue screens then I did with 98, I get MORE blue screens than I did with Windows 2k.

Re:Bluescreen is OFF by default in XP

[Sentry21]

I set up my laptop recently and had to turn this ON from being off by default.

That being said, I don't get bluescreens OR reboots in XP in the whole time I've had the laptop, save once, and that was on the stock install. After reinstalling a fresh XP (day one), I have never had a single issue, and I keep my machine running for weeks at a time (not counting downtime for hibernation when going from home to the cafe).

If you get bluescreens in XP, check your drivers, update what you can, and see if there are any incompatibiliities, because on any hardware I've run, I've never had a problem, except from ATI drivers on an old All-in-Wonder Radeon.

I blame lousy hardware for pretty much every bluescreen in XP, because on good hardware, it's rock solid.

--Dan

Re:Bluescreen is OFF by default in XP

[oogoliegoogolie]

You forgot one important piece of info-the BSOD still occurs! Automatic Restart does not prevent the blue screen from appearing, it just reboots the machine after the memory is dumped to disk. During the memory dump the friendly neighborhood blue screen still appears with the KMODE_ or whatever error message.

So you're saying that people sitting in front of their computer are not going to notice a blue screen, even if only appears for 10-30 seconds? Sheesh! Plus most users leave whatever appps they're working on running and just lock their computer overnite. You think that users wouldn't start to notice the long login procedure and that their apps are no longer running if their machines were BSOD'ing overnite? Double sheesh!

FYI, Win2kProf automatically reboots by default after BSOD's also.

An experience with activating WinXP

[mixy1plik]

Like many nerds with a job, I upgrade components in my PC frequently. I have a legitimate retail copy of WinXP Pro. I have a home-built PC, which sits happily next to my Powerbook G4. A couple months ago, I upgraded the motherboard and RAM, and took the opportunity to reinstall WinXP (as I typically need to about once a year). When I called the Windows activation department in Bangalore, I learned something new...

Lady: I can help you with activation. First I need to ask you a couple questions.
Me: Ok.
Lady: How many computers is this copy of Windows XP installed on.
Me: One.
Lady: Why are you reinstalling Windows?
Me: I bought a new computer case. (I just said this off the top of my head, not thinking anything of it.)
Lady: Well, I'm sorry. You can only activate Windows XP on one machine.
Me: It is one machine. I've transferred all the same parts to a new case.
Lady: You can't do that.

In the end, I had to call back and make up another reason. This was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard. The woman insisted that I could not change the case it's in, but I could change EVERYTHING ELSE. She kept telling me to read the license agreement.

The bottom line is that MS will slowly but surely reign in the piracy. This is just a first step. The Windows activation is pretty lame, because if you have a legit number you can just keep calling and (re)installing all over.

Re:An experience with activating WinXP

[DroopyStonx]

That's why you just install a version that bypasses the activation scheme. I'm glad I've never had to deal w/ that unnecessary BS.

Re:An experience with activating WinXP

[Spacejock]

I used to upgrade bits and pieces frequently, but I learnt my lesson when XP forced me to phone Microsoft(tm)(r) when I transferred my OS from a 20gb to a 40gb hard drive (within the same machine) I felt like a naughty schoolboy explaining to teacher why the dog ate my homework, and any company which is willing to put computing professionals through that kind of shit is really, really stupid.

Recently I purchased an Athlon 64, new motherboard, dual 120 gig SATA drives. I ghosted my WinXP partition onto the new drives, rebooted and got through the 'activation' rubbish by allowing the machine to phone home and report its new config. (The old bits won't be running the same OS, they're destined for a Linux box) I lay awake that night, listening for the sound of the front door splintering as jack-booted thugs came to take me away. Fortunately, nothing. They were probably busy dragging away some old dear who really did install her copy of XP onto two computers.

To be fair to Microsoft(tm)(r), they have every right to protect sales of their software. To be fair to me, I have the right not to use it, not to recommend XP to anyone I know. I can spend my time burning and distributing CDs with OpenOffice, Firefox, Thunderbird to Windows(tm)(r)-owning friends/relatives so that in a year or two their data will be out of Microsoft's(tm)(et-bloody-cetera) clutches.

It is a seriously bad move for a company to treat all customers like common thieves. Imagine if your employer made you turn out your pockets before leaving work each day, to make sure you hadn't stolen company pens or a valuable stapler. That's how this product activation rubbish makes me feel.

Re:An experience with activating WinXP

[shyster]

A couple months ago, I upgraded the motherboard and RAM, and took the opportunity to reinstall WinXP (as I typically need to about once a year).
Lady: Why are you reinstalling Windows?
Me: I bought a new computer case. (I just said this off the top of my head, not thinking anything of it.)

Ummm...you lied. And when they check your HW ID, it shows that your HW has changed from the last install. A case swap wouldn't change any of that.

Re:An experience with activating WinXP

[BenFranske]

...I felt like a naughty schoolboy explaining to teacher why the dog ate my homework, and any company which is willing to put computing professionals through that kind of shit is really, really stupid.

The question is how long can you make your customers feel like "naughty schoolboys" before they stop buying your product? Of course once they do stop buying it for that reasion, you can blame it on piracy and use that excuse to do even nastier things.

To be fair to Microsoft(tm)(r), they have every right to protect sales of their software. To be fair to me, I have the right not to use it, not to recommend XP to anyone I know.

Exactly. Once upon a time, a time before many of those on /. owned computers and/or were born there was a massive amount of software piracy. The companies all knew about this, first it was cool, their programs were getting massive exposure to home users who were going to their bosses at work and getting the company to buy it. All was good in the land of software, then someone at the software companies decided they could make more money if they got all the home users to pay for their copies too. This was their right too. Of course the copy controls those companies imposed didn't do a whole lot (who here remembers baking up copies of floppies using special disk copy utilities that uhmm "bypassed" copy protection?) but it made them feel warm and fuzzy. Then the bomb hit. No one was even using thier software anymore, much less buying it. You see, the cheap home users weren't buying it and if they were pirating it they weren't recommending it. Many software companies with decent products who were making money (but wanted more) went right out of business! This was the end of most copy protection (except for those really really expensive programs ) until recently. Of course, some would say the invention of the CD-ROM prior to the big HDD's and CD-R's were their own form of copy protection, but that's a story for another post.

Re:An experience with activating WinXP

[SunPin]

I had an almost identical experience. On the first call, I got ticked off because I let my actual opinions guide my words. Typically, this is called "the truth" or "being honest." My brother just checks email and goes on the Internet occasionally. I saw NO REASON why I should spend money on an additional license for somebody that never uses their computer.

I called back and made sure my words were coated with honey. I was able to activate the operating system using that route. Basically, their stupid licensing games made me a liar and I HATE lying.

Now that I have a better understanding of my brother's computer habits(typical surfing, email, word processing), Microsoft won't get another lie from me. If I'm administering his system and Microsoft decides that his copy isn't legitimate, Linux will be the next operating system on the machine.

We aren't the only people that have figured out how to con Microsoft out of a serial. It makes me think of stories I've heard about Cuba. They let you get away with this and that like they don't know what's going on. Then one day, you try to get an employment or social position and somebody doesn't like you, they laundry list every offense against the state that you've ever committed.

Activation creates a nation of liars. Even if you are legitimate, you'll have to lie eventually to serve your household. Nice long-term thinking by Microsoft. Kudos to the mofo that came up with the scheme.

Re:An experience with activating WinXP

[sharkey]

The bottom line is that MS will slowly but surely reign in the piracy.

Sounds like the second picture in a drive-in double-feature. Microsoft: King of Piracy!

Re:An experience with activating WinXP

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw NO REASON why I should spend money on an additional license for somebody that never uses their computer.

The REASON is that the particular software you wanted to install (Windows XP) is not free software. You could have installed a free operating system like linux for your brother, which would have been a perfectly acceptable course of action. If you say "well, my brother won't be able to figure linux out", well then, that's why you need to pay the premium for Windows. Sorry dude, you "not seeing any reason" for liscencing does not exempt you from the EULA.

Activation creates a nation of liars.

Dishonest people create a nation of liars, your excuses are indicitive of an irresponsible "the devil made me do it" attitude.

I'm not saying what you did is immoral or horrible, just realize, it is still illegal.

Stop Windows Piracy!

[CustomDesigned]

The moral of this story is that Linux promoters should do all they can to help Microsoft stop Windows Piracy. Just like the best way to get rid of a bad law is to enforce it rigorously, the best way to convince people of how expensive Windows really is, is to make sure they are paying for it.

Go MS

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

As much as everyone here "hates" Windows, it seems *some* here actually use it? Windows and Microsoft have a lot of problems. But that does not give you the right to steal it.

They also confiscate your tinfoil hat

[nobodyman]

I bet microsoft is watching IP addresses. If they see you turn around and leave when confronted they make a note.

Make a note... of the 99.85% of people who click "No"? Doubtful.

Obviously not many people, legal or otherwise, are going to click "yes". My guess is that Microsoft doesn't care. I think what they're trying to do is gradually acquaint users with the notion that these checks will become gradually more commonplace. After awhile, they may become compulsory. After all, if you heat the water up too fast the frog hops out...

I don't want to be in their database.

[HBI]

Simple, I don't want to be part of their license tracking system. Win2k didn't require activation but XP does.

The computer is mine, I bought the components and built it with my own hands. Those bastards can get stuffed. I'll run Win2k until it isn't useful as a dual boot solution for playing games. Hopefully by then Cedega will be good enough to play everything i'm interested in playing.

MS-DOS wouldn't have become as popular as it was, and Windows in its turn, if they weren't allowing rampant piracy via lack of copy protection and winking at the pirates. This hypocritical attempt to maximize profits is a bunch of bullshit and will ultimately result in Microsoft's downfall once they piss off the wrong entity. They may have done so already.

Anyone who thinks Microsoft is justified in the measures they are taking at this point is either a total shill or ignorant of history.

Re:I don't want to be in their database.

[Mitchell Mebane]

Win2k didn't require activation but XP does.

Kind of ironic that only users who legally aquire their copies have to go through the activation scheme.

Re:I don't want to be in their database.

[westlake]

MS-DOS wouldn't have become as popular as it was, and Windows in its turn, if they weren't allowing rampant piracy via lack of copy protection and winking at the pirates.

Baloney. The IBM Compatible PC was a cultural and economic landmark as significant as the Ford Model T. Microsoft rode that wave to dominance and never looked back.

Re:I don't want to be in their database.

[Eric604]

That's what pirating is all about.. making it easier for the users. I think lot's of people outside the US are willing to pay for shareware apps that they use a lot but don't have a creditcard and going to the bank to transfer something like $25 is way too much effort.

Re:I don't want to be in their database.

[freedom_india]

I run Win98 SE for Games.

I run SUSE 9.0 Personal edition for Work and internet.

Somehow the old saying; Windows is for fun, UNIX is for getting things done....seems more relevant today than ever.

Re:I don't want to be in their database.

[protovirus]

Kind of ironic that only users who legally aquire their copies have to go through the activation scheme.

Well that depends on what you think Microsoft is. Viewed as a private club their actions make perfect sense. Only the members have to go through the trouble of joining. You can sneak onto the course and play night golf, but if you get caught there may be consequences.

I don't agree with those consequences or even the registration at all...just pointing out the way I think about Microsoft.

Re:I don't want to be in their database.

[Simonetta]

This hypocritical attempt to maximize profits is a bunch of bullshit and will ultimately result in Microsoft's downfall once they piss off the wrong entity. They may have done so already.

I read in the latest issue of Variety that Microsoft had a $1.1 billion loss last year. It was in an article on the 50 largest companies in the entertainment industry. I don't know if that was a misprint or not. I thought Microsoft was a perpetual motion money machine.

Here's what I think about the whole thing

[melted]

1. They have a right to deny service to the folks who have pirated copies.
2. If you have a legitimate copy you have nothing to worry about.
3. If you have a pirated copy and have nothing against Microsoft go buy a legal one NOW.
4. If you have a pirated copy and are against Microsoft, then STOP USING WINDOWS instead of whining that it's overpriced, bug-ridden and poorly designed. There are at least TWO alternatives right now (MacOS X, and Linux), so there should no longer be any excuses.

Re:Here's what I think about the whole thing

[Jamie Lokier]

How in the hell did you get a computer if you have no money?

Where I live, computers are given away free to people who cannot afford them. No, it's not government; no, it's not commercial. It's a community project: old computers are collected from those who don't need them any more, repaired and refurbished if necessary, and given to those who do.

Is that how you get your internet service too?

We have a community project to provide free wireless internet service too.

You might be surprised to learn how many people cannot afford to use computers or access the Internet. For many people, the only access to computers or the Internet is via a public library, and that's often impractical to use if you have a full time job.

For such people, the cost of a Windows XP license is out of the question. This is only a problem when they are asked to use some Windows-only software, of course, but that does occur. We like them to use Linux and OpenOffice, but there are occasions when a document doesn't display right in MS Word and not being able to say you used Word to create it puts you at an economic disadvantage.

-- Jamie

Microsoft shouldn't care about piracy

[Stevyn]

For windows and office, they have a market dominance and their goals should be to keep that. They may be "losing billions" to piracy, but that's all imaginary numbers because they assume people would pay for it if they couldn't pirate it. If someone is pirating it and they get scared, they have two options. One is to fork over hundreds for a real license, or try linux. If they try out linux and like it, then Microsoft is worse than when they starting this scare campaign.

Microsoft should keep to the goals of keeping everyone addicted to their software so they can't switch to something free.

I'm not condoning piracy, it's immoral and wrong. But Microsoft's strategy should be to keep people hooked, not get every last bit of revenue on their golden goose. Their biggest fear should be the one guy who switches to linux, not the five people that are using a copy they downloaded off the Internet.

MS needs to get their pricing in line

[Thai-Pan]

I run a part time business selling computers (approx. 10 a week) and it's a rare event that I sell a computer to a private user with an operating system.

People do not enjoy using pirated copies. Especially when it's a pain in the ass or a worry, like getting service packs, etc. They do so because for them to buy legit copies of Windows would simply be too damn expensive. The cheapest I can do WinXP Home OEM edition for is around $150 Canadian, which is simply too much. Even $100 Canadian would be a stretch, frankly. Your average Joe would be satisfied buying an OS if it didn't exceed ~$75 Canadian. I'm not basing this off any direct studies, just my personal observations, but if WinXP was priced around there, I think I would sell FAR more copies.

Different demographics are all obviously different too. As a computer engineering student, I'd be surprised if any significant number of my colleagues were using legit copies of WinXP. Those who are, are usually doing so because it came with their laptops. MS will give us absurd discounts on Visual Studio, etc., but we're left to spend the big bucks on an OS?

Sure, analyzing the pricing on an OS may be a bit naive of me. But different demographics are willing to spend drastically different amounts of money on an operating system. When someone wants to buy a ~$400 system, it's hard to tell them that the OS will cost $150. Then I might turn around and build a system for someone else that costs 10x as much and they don't think twice to get me to toss it on there.

Here's an idea that's a real long shot. Suppose a motherboard manufacturer were to design a motherboard which is targeted for low end, budget users. It is somehow crippled so that it can't be used with the more expensive hardware, but it also comes with a rebate form or some sort of discount on WinXP Home. It would be a modified OS to run only on the motherboard it was shipped with or intended for use with, and the motherboard is set up so that it would be adequate for budget users but not for high end enthusiasts. It would encourage the low end users to purchase Windows instead of pirating it, and allow Microsoft to keep higher prices for the rest of the market. I see the potential flaws in my little scheme, but it's something to think about.

Re:MS needs to get their pricing in line

[Anonymous Coward]

That's an excellent idea! Nero already does something like this with their OEM versions shipped with CD/DVD writers.

Oh yea. I got a copy of nero with my drive. It complains that it might be pirated. I had to pirate a copy... so it no longer says it might be pirated.

Re:MS needs to get their pricing in line

[JFMulder]

Yes, but your logic fails with people who pay 2000CAN$ for their computers. 150$ more is not much compared to what they spend. I don't know any Windows users who have bought their own copies of Windows, be they student or retired people, yet they all had 2000CAN$ equipment. People copy software because they can. They can't copy hardware so they pay a lot on good hardware knowing that virtually any piece of software is going to be available for free afterwards.

Damned if I'm going to use a copy protected OS.

[argent]

if you're talking PC, why wouldn't you install XP? Win2k was an OS for the more technically competent.

I don't know about the OP, but I don't trust copy protection software any further than I can spit a rat. Back when I was on the Apple II, I was playing a game called Wizardry when the copy protection software decided that it was only going to let the program boot on one particular floppy drive... and that one was going bad.

I ended up getting a cracked copy written over the original master floppy. Cracked, so the copy protection wouldn't fire, but not pirated... I only had the one copy and it was on the original media.

I think I've used copy-protected software maybe two or three times in the intervening twenty-odd years. And that's only been games... I'm damned if I'm going to boot a copy-protected operating system.

Incidentally, I ran into one of the Wizardry authors many years later, and told him the story. He thought it was pretty funny.

Re:Damned if I'm going to use a copy protected OS.

[mod_critical]

Exactly!!!

I do lots of custom programming and consulting. I have a few machines that I often use to replicate a client's environment. I have legal copies of Windows XP and Server 2003 for this, but I scrub them after each project. Of course, I can activate each one only twice, then I have to call Microsoft and tell them what I'm doing and get hassled like I'm putting off the mob for 20 minutes. That is really starting to piss me off, because as I activate them more and more I get hasseled more and more. I've had to do it over ten times now, and it is really irritating.

On a side note, for the few clients I have running Linux I don't even need seperate test machines, because I know that no matter what else I have running on my development server, the few things that I work on for my client will behave the same once its on their machine!

/rant

Re:Damned if I'm going to use a copy protected OS.

[crazyray]

I ended up getting a cracked copy written over the original master floppy. Cracked, so the copy protection wouldn't fire, but not pirated... I only had the one copy and it was on the original media.


not to nitpick, but if it was cracked, then by definition it was pirated, regardless of your legality or license.... at least by today's standards (see DMCA)

not disagreeing with your post, just pointing out what a different world we live in now.

Re:Damned if I'm going to use a copy protected OS.

[surprise_audit]

Couldn't you make a ghost image right after the activation step?? When you wipe the disk, slap the image back on it and carry on trucking...

Re:Damned if I'm going to use a copy protected OS.

[argent]

if it was cracked, then by definition it was pirated [...] at least by today's standards

Dude, way to miss the point.

1. This was in 1982. The US hadn't even joined the Berne Convention in 1982!

2. The author of the program in question had no problem with it, when I asked him about it.

3. Using copy protected software is risky, even for a game. For an operating system, it's an unacceptable risk.

Doesnt work.

[vspazv]

The site says my fake volume license key is legit. The people they're catching are the ones that got screwed by shady computer stores that slapped a computer together with an unlicensed copy of XP and give the customer a burned CD. If it makes anyone feel better I have 5 NFR copies of XP Pro that have never been used.

The benefits of Linux

[0x0d0a]

The problem is that most hackers are rabid about Linux because it's phenonmentally powerful if you code a bit.

They don't understand why the average Joe doesn't get excited about Linux. The average Joe doesn't get the benefit of all the great CLI tools out there, so Linux is, at best, just a decent XP alternative, not something that quashes it into the ground.

If you just use the GUI tools on Linux and don't give a damn about the politics involved, it isn't *that* amazing of a system. It's just a decent OS without a number of commercial apps that people want to play with.

Naturally, every hacker looks at people that aren't using Linux and thinks to himself "what are they thinking?". For a programmer or a hobbyist or a hacker or a sysadmin, Windows is an infinitely worse OS. But most people aren't any of the above -- and Windows lets them navigate to the application that they want to use and open it.

I like Linux, and use exclusively it as a desktop system. Those of you familiar with me know that I like Linux quite a bit. I think that it might become the defacto desktop system in a couple of years. But it won't be because it's mind-bogglingly better and people are just reluctant to switch. For *hackers* it's mind-bogglingly better. For average folks, it's just another alternative.

Re:The benefits of Linux

[matt_trentini]

OK, I'll bite. Why do you consider Linux to be a 'mind boggling' better platform for hackers?

What can't you do on a Windows platform that you can do on Linux?

I've developed on both platforms and find that they both have advantages and disadvantages...

Re:The benefits of Linux

[TyrranzzX]

Yes, it's true. Those who accomplish have no mercy or sympathy for those who don't think they can accomplish. The problem is that the average user (as in, average american idiot, although it is universal) has been taught throughout their life 2 fundimental things; Trust the vendor, and that there are some things they can't accomplish.

Linux is better, but then again, the idea of what's needed versus what's provided is always there; don't fix something that ain't broke.

Wanna know why I hate WinXP? It's simple, really. First, they ask you to activate your copy of windows by calling in and giving them all kinds of personal info. Then, they shove a bunch of applications down your throught you don't need; Do I want messanger integrated into my OS? Do I want IE integrated into my OS? Do I want a help system integreated into my OS? No, I don't, and nor do most users. Most people use their computers for browsing the net, checking e-mail, playing the occasional game, and chatting. They're perfectly capable of choosing between browsers, e-mail clients, games, and chat clients. But, MS doesn't give you a choice. Furthermore, they're showing that they want to go in the direction of locking down the OS and the machine itself, and changing the law, to further lock down the machine for themselves.

It's MS's policy of digital enslavement I don't agree with. Win2k Is a great OS, I use it all the time. But, if they ever ask me to upgrade to WinXP or any other OS, and begin pulling that crap, Win2K is going to become my gaming OS for as long as it'll run, then we're talking linux. And if I can't game on linux, then I guess I can't game on linux.

Re:The benefits of Linux

[0x0d0a]

I've developed on both platforms and find that they both have advantages and disadvantages...

Same here, and same here, though I think Linux's advantages for a hacker vastly outweigh the drawbacks.

Why do you consider Linux to be a 'mind boggling' better platform for hackers?

* If I have a problem/missing feature and it's irritating me enough, I'm guaranteed the option of just fixing it myself.

* The POSIX toolset, large set of development tools and compilers available on a typical system, and easy hooks into the OS (like /proc) makes Linux a much nicer system. I can slap together apps to accomplish simple tasks in a line or two. Sure, there's cygwin, but despite being an impressive hack, cygwin is slow, often flaky, and almost all software is vastly less well-tested on cygwin than on a Linux environment.

* If I don't like the way my system functions, I change it. For example, Fedora's standard configuration currently stops any attempts to re-obtain a DHCP address if any attempt to get an address fails. I often work on flaky networks, and this drives me bananas -- I want the thing to keep trying to re-obtain an IP address even if an attempt fails. You can just open up /sbin/ifup in your favorite text editor and tell the script to hand "-w" instead of "-1" to dhclient.

* Better (non-POSIX) tools. Windows doesn't have a "file" command any more than it has a "locate" command.

* Better remote access options. Using Windows remotely is a painful chore that *can* be done using VNC or the like. Using Linux remotely (stick with CLI programs, which is quite feasible) is a pleasure.

* Choice in what packages to use. As it happens, I don't like GNOME *or* KDE *or* Explorer very much. They all slap large icons on the screen, eat screen space, expect me to launch applications with my mouse instead of my keyboard, cover up my pretty desktop, and none of them (well, maybe KDE) use "viewports" instead of "virtual desktops" any more, where a window can lap over from one "viewport" to another. Easy fix -- just slap something else in. I use xbindkeys+gkrellm+sawfish, and have exactly the environment I want.

* Sandboxing capabilities. It's a bitch to, say, sandbox an unknown binary (or a server, to keep a server compromise from compromising the whole system) on Windows. It's much more reasonable on Linux.

* No bullshit. If I've identified a problem and I don't want to fix it myself, I file a bug report. With, say, Microsoft, I go to some low level tech support person, and maybe after a series of escallated issues, they admit that there's a bug. Maybe. And they don't call it a "bug", because they don't make products with "bugs". They call it an "issue". Their product doesn't have a bug -- *I* have an "issue". Then maybe somewhere the "issue" wends its way to the cloistered-away developers and perhaps, after some period of time in the mysterious black box, eventually gets released. In the open source world, if I know what I'm doing, I fire off a "there's a problem, here's what's breaking" message straight to the developer (and can do so to the guy that wrote the very line of code that's broken). I dump my bug into a bug tracker (heck, wishlist features go into the "bug tracker"). As the developers work on the thing and fix it, I have full access to every thing they've done, just as much as any developer does, and when the problem gets fixed, I know about it immediately.

* If I want to do something, there's probably a ton of actively-maintained and free libraries already out there that do just about everything I want (and if they *become* unmaintained, someone else can easily take up the torch -- I don't have to worry about reliance on some random third party). For example, two days ago I was working on a JPEG artifact removal idea. I wanted to do image processing (encoding, decoding, manipulation) and use a neural network. Two apt-cache searches and an apt-get download later, I

Why Windows users don't upgrade so quickly

[Frater 219]

I can see the Mac thing entirely, but if you're talking PC, why wouldn't you install XP?

In my environment, where we have good and competent central IT support, but do not mandate what our clients (researchers) can run on their desktops, we've found that a lot of people simply do not see any compelling reason to upgrade Windows. By and large, people move from one Windows version to the next when they get a new PC. This is in contrast to our Mac OS X population, who upgrade quickly, and our Linux population, who are in between.

Licensing is not an issue, since we have site licenses for Windows, Mac OS X, and other systems. We have a Windows subscription that allows us to upgrade any Windows install to any later version; and the same for Mac OS X. For Linux, it is of course no problem.

Today, about 60% of the computers on our network are running Windows, according to my p0f results. About 15% each are running Linux and Mac OS X, and the remainder are running a "classic" Unix or Mac OS Classic. Of the Windows users, about 60% are running Windows 2000, 35% are running XP, and the remainder are running Windows NT, 98, or older versions.

So why don't Windows users upgrade? My suspicion is that there is not sufficient benefit from upgrading to make up for two persistent problems: retraining oneself, on the one hand; and broken or lagging third-party software, on the other.

First off, major releases of Windows make substantial disruptive user interface changes. Windows users, in my experience, tend to memorize a lot of rote behaviors -- I do this to dial up, that to search for files, the other to set up printers. The upgrade from Windows 98 to 2000, and then from 2000 to XP, each make a lot of relatively gratuitous changes. (Contrast the XP Control Panel with the 2000 one. Even if you like the XP one better, you've got to admit it looks unfamiliar to someone used to the other.)

Second, a lot of third-party apps break when you upgrade Windows. The version of Matlab the user has installed on Windows 2000 quits working on XP, and so they have to rev Matlab as well. Oops, the Matlab script they got from NASA doesn't work on the new Matlab; gotta get the new one of those. And so it goes. Scientific software is frequently not particularly robust over operating system changes. So an upgrade is a lot more pain for our users than it might be for a business user who does nothing but Word, Outlook, and IE.

Some contrasts from the other platforms:

Our Linux installed base is probably around 90% Red Hat, and the remainder Debian or SuSE -- with almost all of the Debian systems being central IT servers, since we prefer it for its stability there. The Red Hat users are impelled to upgrade chiefly by the obsolescence of older releases: when Red Hat dropped support for 6.2, we had a big migration to 7.x; when they dropped 7.3, to 9; and now to Fedora and RHEL. The driving force behind Red Hat upgrades, for our users, is chiefly the assurance of support and security fixes. I expect that this will calm down a lot now for our RHEL users, who have been promised a stabler upgrade cycle.

(For our Debian systems, in contrast, the drive to upgrade (when a new release comes out!) is to have access to the vast new supply of native packages.)

As for our Mac OS X users, they are the quickest to jump on new releases. Why? I think it's because Apple promotes their new releases with lots of new user features: utilities, non-disruptive appearance tweaks, and speed improvements. I can't emphasize the latter too much: each release of Mac OS X has made it faster, and this is a big reason for a scientist (or a ordinary end user, for that matter!) to upgrade.

It's been said that Microsoft's chief competition today is itself, five years ago -- that is, rather than contending for market share against Apple, Red Hat, or SuSE, each new re

Re:Why Windows users don't upgrade so quickly

[Mattintosh]

My god, man... I wish I had modpoints. I also wish I worked where you work.

As far as my "official" reply, I would install Win2k because I don't want MS messing around asking people questions about where they got the license. *wink, wink*

Re:Ever entered the USA as a foreign national?

[NotoriousQ]

There is sense in the madness.

If you answer No, when the answer is Yes, you are guilty of perjury, and may be arrested/deported on that charge.

Simply having some communicable desease or being a drug addict is not enough for a deportation, since by themselves these things are not against the law. Perjury gives government greater leverage in these situations, for good or bad.

My Greatest Wish

[Seraphim_72]

....is that Bill Gates gets his greatest wish. I hopethat both Windows and Office become uncopiable - I really do. I hope for this with all of my soul. MS is king because everyone got it for free - make them pay - and OS will rule the day.

hmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that now with crossover office, wine etc. you can run almost all major apps that are on windows without any problems. My own two specific apps that I still can't run that I need are Microsoft SQL Server (don't think that'll EVER work in crossover office), and Adobe Distiller, which actually isn't such a big deal, but it's just annoying that I can't print to distiller in linux.

MS office, dreamweaver, photoshop, are my major apps I run in crossover office, and they are very usable. I very rarely use my windows partition on my laptop, and then I only do it to install firmware updates to my iPod (I use the cxitunespreview release to use itunes in linux :)

Re:If MS doesn't like pirated Windows...

[SpamKu]

MS released a corporate version of Windows XP (along with Office XP and Office 2003), IMO, for two reasons:

1) Mass VLK rollout for large corporate networks where SysAdmins don't care to be bothered with an activation every time a new machine is installed/re-instralled/modified. This BY FAR the main reason MS did this.

2) corporate keys can be used to get the "file sharing effect" of illegally distributed copies as a mass marketing effect among those who would never have bought WinXP or its bretheren products anyway, but will have their friends/aqaintences become interested by seeing it in use. This idea is allluded to by you in your statement of "I believe MS likes having everyone use Windows, whether it's paid for or not."

And it is probably true.

But let me add that I believe that is a mere fringe benefit of software piracy to Microsoft. Microsoft would, IMO, fully prefer to have all of those who use its software aquire it in a LEGAL FASHION a-la sales or tranfer of ownership of a legally aquired product from a previous owner.

Before we all fully bash MS for its product activation I would remind those who will now mod me as troll that MS products did not used to require it. It was implemented as a response to truly massive and casual software piracy among Joe average users and people in the workplace. MS has stated before that Product Activation was never intended to stop pirates who are determined not to pay for their products in the first place, but rather to discourage casual piracy and educate users of what does constitute software piracy (for those who actually did not know, and they were quite a few). And if it pissed off illegal users in the process, well, I can't imagine how this could have caused MS to lose any sleep (there goes my karma again.)

Yes, the product actiavtion is a real pain. No, it doesnt stop illegal software sharing and distribution (read as: software piracy), but yes, it has, in fact, curbed casual piracy and was a legitimate, if not short sighted response, to illegal distribution and outright software piracy.

I don't mean to wholly defend Microsoft against it's nasty, Draconian, fairyland EULA agreements, Anti-Trust violations, Pac-Man Style if-you-can't-beat 'em-buy 'em aquisitions, breach of contract with its "affiliates" (read as: beholden subordinates), stifling of innovation via it's monopolistic sumo-weight throwing, or its sorry-ass excuse for a browser.

But they do, occasionally, have perfectly valid reasons for what they do.

Why is $ the terminator in int 21h, function 9?

[HBI]

Hmm? Could it be because Microsoft copied their OS from another popular operating system that was under copyright?

Yes, the beige box was a cultural landmark, not the actual IBM. So, what OS came with those beige boxes? A pirated copy of MS-DOS, more likely than not. I still have tens of the hand-labelled 5 1/4" floppy copies of DOS 2.1, 3.2, and 3.3 from those days. The trade in DOS copies was fairly brisk. No one had an excuse for paying for it. The 3.5" copies of 4.01, 5, etc are long gone, 3.5" floppies seem to bite the dust much faster. That was the favored format for Windows 2.03/2.10/3.0/3.1/3.11, so those copies are also gone. Had tons of them though. No serials there, just pirated OS goodness which nearly everyone shared in back in those days.

If people had to buy an operating system, due to not having friends who could execute the DISKCOPY command, the choice wasn't quite so clear then. IBM helpfully assisted by initially pricing PC-DOS at $60 and CP/M at $240, mostly due to the sweet deal on royalties Microsoft gave them initially due to their near-zero development cost.

I believe they ultimately paid $75k for the MS-DOS code and IBM helpfully did the debugging for them. Why work? After all, they'd swiped the technology.

The wave they rode was piracy and deceit.

Corporate A$$hats

[AstroDrabb]

I have worked for 3 fortune 500 companies (still at the current one). I have to say that for most big comanies (not my current one : )), the higher up you go, the less knowlege you need. Look at this statement from the article

But Microsoft said the program is a first step in trying to for customers using legitimate copies of Windows.

Huh? How in the H-e-double-hockey-sticks could some corporate monkey say this? Just exactly how is MS making it "better" for end-users? I am sure every Joe-Average-Home-User wants to play 50-questions with MS. I am sure that every Joe-Average-Home-User wants to be treated like they are a criminal unless they can prove to MS they are not.

Don't get me wrong. I don't think MS should allow updates for "pirates (arrrgh)", but this is just bunk. I would like to know just exactly _how_ this would "provide a better experience" for me as a legit customer?

This is a tough call, I wouldn't expect _any_ commercial company to support "pirates (arrrgh)" stealing their software. However, MS WinXP is not the most secure platform for the Joe-Average-Home-User. If Joe-Average-Home-User gets a "pirated (arrrgh)" copy, that just adds one more exploit for spammers, one more spyware, adware, virus infected PeeCeee out their hurting the net.

So, where is my free upgrade?

[mangu]

I NEVER get blue screens of death on any of my machines running Windows XP.

You know, this astroturfing is getting pretty boring. "You should upgrade to XP...", etc, etc. The problem is, I PAID FOR MY COPY OF WINDOWS 98. That copy appears to be defective, it crashes all the time. I want a replacement. Where can I get a copy of that wonderful XP, which fixes 98's problems, at no extra cost?

OTOH, maybe that "upgrade" may not to be as effective as the astroturfers claim. Since they readily admit that XP crashes when it gets "spyware" or "improper" drivers, I'm not so eager to get XP. Because Linux doesn't allow spyware to get into the system and improper drivers are simply ignored by the system, rather than crashing it, I believe I already have my upgrade that really fixes Window 98's problems at no extra cost, after all...

WINE?

[SKPhoton]

I want to see someone run it in WINE.

"I'm sorry, we have no idea what is going on. Chances are, something is pirated. Please go here to purchase something legally."

ReactOS

[LentoMan]

In other news, the opensource native windows compatible ReactOS 0.2.4 was released a few days ago:
http://www.reactos.com/en/content/view/full/6056

Windows is ALL about backwards compatibility

[kylef]

Second, a lot of third-party apps break when you upgrade Windows. The version of Matlab the user has installed on Windows 2000 quits working on XP, and so they have to rev Matlab as well. Oops, the Matlab script they got from NASA doesn't work on the new Matlab; gotta get the new one of those. And so it goes. Scientific software is frequently not particularly robust over operating system changes. So an upgrade is a lot more pain for our users than it might be for a business user who does nothing but Word, Outlook, and IE.

I agree with almost all of your other points, but this statement is simply not correct. Windows backwards compatibility has always been excellent. Hell, it's one of the few systems where people expect to be able to run 20-year old 16-bit DOS binaries and scream and holler when they no longer work.

In fact, Windows backwards compatibility with x86 binaries is what most computer historians acknowledge as the vehicle for IBM-compatible PC dominance for the past decade. The fact that new versions of Windows would continue to run old binaries (without patches, without recompiles, etc) has probably done more than anything else to keep businesses buying Windows so that ancient, proprietary business software will keep running. This saves lots of money and hassle, believe it or not. I know businesses still running on 12-year old DOS software because it still works.

However, I think that today this legacy software is starting to see its demise in favor of web applications which are largely platform-agnostic. So Microsoft, IMHO, spends WAY too much time worrying about breaking old software.

I've heard it explained in many ways, but most people tell me that they're afraid of being sued. Real, for instance, sued Microsoft claiming that changes between Windows 98 and Windows 2000 "intentionally broke" their player. So now MS is paranoid.

XP, for instance, has this insane system loader that can actually PATCH broken apps before they are run. Just take a look under the registry key "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Contr ol\Session Manager\AppPatches". Every key listed there gets special treatment when it is executed on your system. There are even some binary blobs that are overlayed at specific memory addresses on-the-fly.

Microsoft has an entire division in Windows that works on Application Compatibility (AppCompat). If a bug is found in a Win32 API, and the fix ends up breaking ANY vendor's app, then either an app workaround is created or the fix is backed out. I think that's horrible (backing out fixes because it might break some old program), but it amounts to putting backwards compatibility ahead of fixing bugs.

Contrast this with Macintosh, where for years people EXPECTED to have to purchase new versions of Adobe Photoshop whenever a new OS or new hardware came out. This has allowed Apple to introduce dramatic changes over the years that broke tons of apps, but improved their systems' capabilities dramatically. Ditching the 68000 for PowerPC, for one. Switching to OSX was another radical change. In both cases they tried to have a "compatibility layer" for old programs, but lots of apps still broke. The win, however, was to take a gigantic leap forward in platform capability.

Goodbye moderation....

[steeviant]

I was going to mod you into oblivion, but I just HAD to reply.

If the entire Microsoft organisation (which undoubtedly employs some of the world's finest software engineers and quality assurance experts) can't make Windows run stably, what makes you think that a bunch of geeks on Slashdot with no access to the source code, and bound by a license that makes reverse-engineering and patching of Windows illegal are going to be able to?

Re:Goodbye moderation....

[Kent Recal]

the entire Microsoft organisation (which undoubtedly employs some of the world's finest software engineers and quality assurance experts)

What ever happened to judging people by their results...

Re:Goodbye moderation....

[jonadab]

> > the entire Microsoft organisation (which undoubtedly employs some of
> > the world's finest software engineers and quality assurance experts)
> What ever happened to judging people by their results...

He was judging by _quantity_ of results. Microsoft produces *lots* of software.

FYI

[kc_cyrus]

FYI, I successfully extracted the algorithm MS uses (same VLK Public Key Infrastructure), and broke the private key uses to generate product keys.

Decode
The following computations are based on this product key: JCF8T-2MG8G-Q6BBK-MQKGT-X3GBB The character "-" does not contain any information, so, the MS product key is composed of 25-digit-character. Microsoft only uses "BCDFGHJKMPQRTVWXY2346789" to encode product key, in order to avoid ambiguous characters (e.g. "I" and "1", "0" and "O"). The quantity of information that a product key contain is at most . To convert a 25-digit key to binary data, we need to convert "JCF8T2MG8GQ6BBKMQKGTX3GBB" to "6 1 3 22 ......", where 'B'=0, 'C'=1, 'D'=2 ... we call the array "6 1 3 22..." base24[] compute decoded = , the result is: 00 C5 31 77 E8 4D BE 73 2C 55 47 35 BD 8D 01 00 (little-endian) The decoded result can be divided into 12bit + 31bit + 62bit + 9bit, and we call theses 4 parts 12bit: OS Family, 31bit: Hash, 62bit: Signature, and 9bit: Prefix.

Verify
If you want to understand what I am talking about in this section, please refer to some Elliptic Curve Cryptography materials. Before verifying a product key, we need to compute the 4 parts mentioned above: OS Family, Hash, Signature, and Prefix.

Microsoft Product-key Identification program uses a public key stored in PIDGEN.DLL's BINK resource, which is an Elliptic Curve Cryptography public key, which is composed of: p, a, b construct an elliptic curve G(x,y) represents a point on the curve, and this point is so called "generator" K(x,y) represents a point on the curve, and this point is the product of integer k and the generator G.

Without knowing the private key k, we cannot produce a valid key, but we can validate a key using public key:{p, a, b, G, K}

compute H=SHA-1(5D OS Family,Hash, prefix, 00 00) the total length is 11 byte. H is 160-bit long, and we only need the first 2 words. Right lift H's second word by 2 bits. E.g. if SHA-1() returns FE DC BA 98 76 54 32 10, H= FE DC BA 98 1D 95 0C 04. compute R(rx,ry)= Signature * (Signature*G + H*K) (mod p) compute SHA-1(79 OS Family, rx, ry) the total input length = 1+2+64*2=131 bytes. And compare Hash and result, and if identical, the key is valid.

Producing A Valid Key!
We assume the private key k is known (sure, Microsoft won't public this value, so we have to break it by ourselves). The equation in the product key validation system is as below:
Hash=SHA(Signature*(Signature*G+SHA(Hash)*K) (mod p))
What we need is to calculate a Signature which satisfies the above equation. Randomly choose an integer r, and compute R(rx,ry)=r * G Compute Hash= SHA-1(79 OS Family, rx, ry) the total input length = 1+2+64*2=131 bytes, and we get the first 62bit result. compute H=SHA-1(5D OS Family,Hash, prefix, 00 00) the total length is 11 byte, and we need first 2 words, and right lift H's second word by 2 bits. And now, we get an equation as below:

Signature*(Signature*G+H*K) = r * G (mod p)
By replacing K with k * G, we get the next equation:
Signature*(Signature*G+H*k*G) = r * G (mod p) , where n is the order of point G on the curve

Note: not every number has a square root, so maybe we need to go back to step 1 for several times.

Get Private-key From Public Key
I've mentioned that the private key k is not included in the BINK resource, so we need to break it out by ourselves. In the public key:
K(x,y) = k * G, we only know the generator G, and the product K, but it is hard to get k. The effective method of getting k from K(x,y) = k * G is Pollard's Rho (or its variation) method, whose complexity is merely , where n is the order of G. (n is not included in public key resource, so, we need to get n by Schoof's algorithm) Because a user cannot suffer a too long product key, the Signature must be short enough to be convenient. And Microsoft chooses 62 bit as the length of signature, hence, n is merely 62-bit long. Therefore, the complexity

Re:FYI

[neil.pearce]

Microsoft has a database which has a list of all valid keys sold

Oh yeh, and they employ Uri Geller at the backend to detect (using the mind-power) when the credit card sale goes through, before quickly typing it into some Access form...

Linux is a kernel, GNU is not platform centric

[Photo_Nut]

Parent poster wrote:
"The problem is that most hackers are rabid about Linux because it's phenonmentally powerful if you code a bit."

So are BSD, MacOS, and (bet you saw this one coming) Windows. Most hackers are rabid about Linux because they got more than they were promised. They weren't promised anything. They didn't pay anything, and they got a whole lot.

I have a few friends that graduated with me from college with varying technical degrees, including CS, Math, Engineering, and Physics (what can I say, I'm a geek and hang out with geeks). Some close friends ended up at Microsoft. And even though they run Windows whatever at work, they still chose vi or emacs as their editor, bash and other shells, and awk and sed in their code along with their C#, C++, and Perl. One of them bought a shiny new laptop with his recent bonus and reused his old desktop (stuffing Linux on it) as a web-connected file server/bridge. He recently told me how he saved one of his machines at work by using a Knoppix CD! Just imagine an MS employee booting Linux, at work, to fix their Windows machine!

GNU isn't just about linux advocacy, it's a philosophical movement centered around the idea that by keeping code "free of ownership" we can advance society. From another perspective, the GPL is a way of saying, "I don't own this code. You don't own this code. The public owns this code. You can't build something from this code and distribute it without the code."

This is quite diametrically opposed to the philosophy that: "I work hard to create a software product of intrinsic value. It is my property. I sell you a license to use that property."

Many people who wrote utilities and published them under the GPL ported their utilities to Windows, BSD, Linux, etc. They also make pure Windows apps under the GPL, and others port these. Basically, it's not the Linux OS that makes for a great hacking experience, it's the fact that it comes with a bunch of GNU tools. But then there's CygWin and other GNU toolsets for Windows and BSD and MacOS.

The reason that Linux may be a threat to Microsoft is that there are a growing number of developers who got hooked on Linux because the development tools came with the OS, and they didn't want to pay MS (or Borland) for tools which promote Windows. Of course, there are also a great many people who still write free software for Windows (using DJGPP or other MSVC++) simply because Windows is the largest target audience of normal users, and they use it. But if the developers market is changing because of the availability of high quality tools, then Microsoft will react. Maybe too late, but it's in the cards.

Indeed, Microsoft already has done some reacting. 57,000 employees, including some of my best friends know that their job is on the line if Microsoft goes under, and from what my friends tell me, working at Microsoft is better than all of their previous jobs. Their reaction: http://lab.msdn.microsoft.com/express/ Is this too little too late, or is it the beginning?

(getting back to original topic of activation, and tying back into the philosophy of property)
When I ask my friends about the activation stuff, they tell me that nobody who has a brain expects it to deter piracy, but they have to do something to attempt to prevent it from happening. DRM is an equal joke, but it is another way to protect information as property. Both of these measures do something very specific: they make it so that in order to copy the "property", you need to intentionally remove its "protection". This follows a fundamental principle that property is only owned by someone to the extent that they can defend it.

One more response to the parent poster:
"For average folks, it's [Linux] just another alternative."
In order for it to be an alternative for me, it needs to do everything that I need it to do. I need it to run the software I use (includes Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop and t

EXACTLY.

[hndrcks]

I couldn't agree more - and here's my philisophical rant:

This page is 7-8 printed pages of the 'FAQ' for terminal services licensing. It's obtuse, complicated, not clear, but critical to get the damn stuff to function properly. Not one word on that page has anything to do with making my business more efficient, better, easier, anything... it is all about maxmizing Microsoft's revenue stream.

Excuse me, but I obtain tools to perform MY objectives, not someone else's.