Slashdot Mirror


Gartner Says Linux PCs Just Used To Pirate Windows

LostCluster writes "CNET is reporting results from a Gartner Group report that claims 40% of desktop machines sold with Linux on them are being used to run pirate copies of Windows! The report goes on to say that this stat reaches as high in 80% in 'emerging markets', the same places that the stripped down lite version of Windows is being aimed at. Gartner's making a bold prediction that the number of machines sold as Linux desktops may eclipse the number of machines actually running Linux."

19 of 815 comments (clear)

  1. Bollocks by TuataraShoes · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bollocks. All my work machines come with XP on them. The first thing I have to do is purge the damn thing and install Linux.

    --
    Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird -- Proverbs 1:17
    1. Re:Bollocks by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's a link to one of many stories on the net about this: http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=5628

      The case was Softman v. Adobe. It is several years old, and it's been a while since I've looked into it. Basically, the court said, the customer bought the product, he owns it, he may redistribute it like any other product. You do NOT have the right to tell him what he can and cannot do with it via an EULA once he buys it.

      You'll want to double check all this stuff to make sure I got it right, and that nothing has changed since. But there is legal precident on our side.

      --

      Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
    2. Re:Bollocks by theLOUDroom · · Score: 4, Informative

      A few of my own auctions have been terminated for this reason (I was very candid about the OEM status), so if there's a legal defense for this, I'd like to know.

      It's call the doctrine of first sale.
      It's a legal concept that says when I buy a copy of something that is copyrighted, I get a certain set of rights by default. One of those is the right to resell it.

      MS would have to believe that their EULAs constitute a valid legal agreement, and remove that right, but that's about as legaly enfocable as someone selling a house and leaving a sticker on the door that says, "by breaking this seal, you agree to these additional terms...".

      You can't force someone to argee to a contract, by putting a sticker on something that's legally THEIRS.
      If MS wants their EULAs to be legally valid, they need to be "signed" when the money is exchanged.

      Imagine if you bought a new car and there was a sticker on the lock that said "By removing this sticker, you agree never to resell this car".
      It's total nonsense.

      In the case of ebay, you want to point them to THIS news item:
      The judge, in the case Adobe vs Softman heard in the Central District of California, has ruled that consumers can resell bundled software, no matter what the EULA, or End User License Agreement, stipulates.
      Then tell ebay that they are attemping to enforce liscense restrictions that the supreme court has ruled illegal.
      You could point out that by having such a policy they are therefore opening themselves up to lawsuits frow people who just want to execise their own legal rights.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
  2. Big news! by Donny+Smith · · Score: 5, Informative

    Big deal - that's been known since 2000.

    I have heard it first hand from resellers and h/w makers in Asia Pacific - "we bundle Linux just so that MS leaves us alone and it's up to the end users to get their copy of Windows".

    In some places shipping systems (assembled computers) without OS is either disallowed or frowned upon by MS and/or anti-piracy watchdogs, so bundling Linux is a nice excuse to avoid pre-installing Windows....

  3. Re:Barebone machines by Shillo · · Score: 3, Informative

    > Why go through all the trouble of buying a machine with an OS when you can just get a barebones machine and then load what ever OS you want.

    Because of the strong Microsoft campaign against selling those machines as 'encouraging piracy', many vendors don't offer them at all. Others only offer this if you buy components and assemble them yourself - this is beyond many users who do want to run Linux.

    Which is what the fuss is all about - a nice MS marketing ploy is falling apart and they're taking notice.

    --

    --
    I refuse to use .sig
  4. Re:wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I paid for my copy of Windows XP and I expect to get my use out of it whether it follows MSFT's rules or not.

    You paid for a non-transferable, limited use license to run XP on the specific machine that you purchased. If you want a transferable license you can get one at Best Buy.

  5. Re:wow! by Kartik3 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Hey bud, I certainly feel for you....

    If you have a legal copy of windows XP you can find out what the key on your machine is by using the "keyfinder" utility found at:
    http://www.magicaljellybean.com/

  6. Re:wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    You actually didn't pay for the software but a very limited license on the software at a hugely discounted rate. If you want a copy without the restrictions then pay the full price for the software.

  7. Re:wow! by Guspaz · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just try getting a laptop without windows? I did. It was easy... I simply selected "None" as the OS.

    It's all about knowing what to buy and where to buy it. I bought a Compal CL56 notebook, which is a whitebook chassis used to manufacture many other notebooks (Such as one of Voodoo PC's 15" Centrino model). Because it's a whitebook, I buy the chassis and parts seperately (Though I chose to pay $29 Canadian to have the store assemble it for me).

    Because it was not purchased from a big computer maker, but simply a computer store, there is no obligation to buy or run Windows on the notebook.

  8. Gartner said, he said, she said by elpapacito · · Score: 3, Informative

    The fact that there's Gartner written on it doesn't mean it is a realiable statement or word from a Holy Book of Markets.

    Indeed, let's look back in 1999 when (according to this CNN article) some among the "prestigeous" Garnter analysis predicted :

    The Gartner Group finding is that Linux will fade from the scene following the release of the first service pack for Windows 2000.

    Service Pack 2 was really so terrific ?! Man, if Service Pack 2 can do that imagine what could an hotfix do..maybe cure plague ? Guess Nostradamus is spinning in his grave as he finally found some serious competition.

  9. Re:wow! by ePhil_One · · Score: 4, Informative
    According to his vendor and the local MS fortress his key was valid .. according to Windows it wasn't. :)

    This was probably due to using the wrong install CD. The Key checking algorithms are keyed to the versions that are shipped with the machine, so you can't use a consumer key with the Volume License Install CD, or vice versa. Its a pain in my behind, because some of my images got built with the Dell CD, and need a Dell key, and some got built with our VL CD, and need a VL key.

    Its possible a smaller vendor is distributing the wrong CD with his legitimate keys (shows horrible QA, BTW)

    Of course, given the number of licensed to run Windows PC's I have that are actually running Linux, this just reinforces my thoughts that Gartner sells its soul to whomever is buying this week. "Yes sir, you want an independant study? What would you like the conclusion to say? 3 = 5? Not a problem sir!"

    --
    You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
  10. Re:wow! by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, no not really. You can't use WinXP unless you agree to their rules. It's in the EULA, and regardless of how you feel about the EULA (it stinks), that's the way it works. Here's a plan: If you can't stand M$ Rules, don't use M$ Products, use the Linux desktop which is perfectly adequate. If you "need" to use M$ Products, it's likely you need it for games or such, well, than you got to pay the M$ Tax...

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  11. Re:wow! by chris_mahan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Exactly.

    I bought a computer at a local store. The guy fished through a boxed and handed me a nice shrinked-wrapped windows licence with Getting started guide and CD. I pushed it back to him across the counter and said: "Keep it for the next guy, this machine won't be running windows."

    He smiled and said, "Cool".

    --

    "Piter, too, is dead."

  12. Re:wow! by Electrum · · Score: 3, Informative

    Apple keeps far tighter control over hardware and OS than Microsoft.

    As is expected, considering Apple makes both. If Microsoft made a PC, would you expect it to come with anything but Windows?

  13. Re:wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    So how much did he discount the PC?

  14. Nit Picking ... by Allen+Zadr · · Score: 5, Informative
    The Keys are different for "OEM License (what ships on that restore disk)", "Volume License" and "Retail". Most licenses sold are part of an OEM license.

    Most likely the original user is trying to use an Install disk to do a dual-boot, but because the only available OEM copy of Windows is an "FDISK, Format and Re-install" recovery disk, he's S.O.L. on using a Retail disk.

    The best thing to do is contact the seller of the PC, and ask for a Windows XP OEM installation CD that doesn't FDISK the system first.

    --
    Kinetic stupidity has a new brand leader: Allen Zadr.
  15. Re:wow! by Dashing+Leech · · Score: 4, Informative
    Physical material cost (for the item itself and the equipment required to build the parts) prevents it [copying].

    You are mixing and matching a bunch of cases that muddle the issue. There are at least 4 cases here in:

    Software: Copying is easy, cheap, but illegal (except for fair use). This is the one that's at the core of the discussion. The main issue is that people license software instead of owning the copy they get, unlike just about any other product.

    Natural material goods, like lettuce: Copying is impossible, but legal. I don't think anybody would complain if we could.

    Manufactured material goods, like an automobile: Copying is hard, expensive, but generally legal (except if violating a patent).

    Copyrighted material goods, like a book: Copying is relatively cheap and easy, especially if scanned in, but illegal.

    From the above list, you'll see that software and books are very similar. Both can be copied cheaply and easily. Books can be scanned it and distributed through P2P. The original question I think asked how come I can buy a book and do with it as I please (except copy it) but not the same with software for which we license it, sometimes with severe and inconvenient restrictions? It is a valid question. The ease and cheapness of copying does not differentiate books from software, both are generally quite easy and cheap. The difference seems to lie in the fact that software naturally comes in a form that can be copied and a book has to be converted from physical to electronic (via scanning, for instance). It's not as clear a difference as some would believe.

  16. Re:validity of EULA by Grant_Watson · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ignorance is not a defense.

    The maxim is, "Ignorance of the law is no defense." Other kinds of ignorance often are.

    IANAL, but IIRC you have to have had an opportunity to read a contract before you can agree to it. If you were never presented with it, like the above poster said... well, how can you be bound by it?

  17. Re:where the f**k? by Canberra+Bob · · Score: 4, Informative
    I've been a Linux user for nearly a decade, and I have never found a decent place to get laptops without 'doze
    Try here ;-)