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."
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
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....
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.
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.
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.
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.
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."
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.
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.