Gartner Says Linux PCs Just Used To Pirate Windows

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Gartner Says Linux PCs Just Used To Pirate Windows

Posted by michael on Thursday September 30, 2004 @02:13AM from the ho-hum dept.

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."

14 of 815 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

This isnt FUD... by imsabbel · 2004-09-30 02:20 · Score: 4, Interesting

Its actually quite true. Here in germany many retailers have "ultra-cheap" PCs, in the 200-300 range, without operating system(well, not without, but with dr-dos or linux,ect). Windows XP is a 50 or 100 addon.
How many people are willing to buy that addon instead of visiting suprnova.org?

--
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
Re:Bollocks by Doesn't_Comment_Code · 2004-09-30 02:22 · Score: 4, Interesting

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.

Perhaps you should resell your copies of Windows to others who might want them for barebones systems - and split the Microsoft tax 50/50.

Microsoft says you can't do this. But the courts have indicated that you can.

--

Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
Re:Wow by antifoidulus · 2004-09-30 02:23 · Score: 4, Interesting

It's really more than that, everything Gartner says is suspect, whether it has to do with Windows or not. This is the same company that over-hypes offshoring, and just by chance happens to have an offshoring consulting unit. No conflict of interest there......

--
Monstar L
Re:Doesn't have anything to do with Linux by Tony+Hoyle · 2004-09-30 02:25 · Score: 5, Interesting

There's also the unwarranted assumption that just because you didn't buy the PC with windows, you're pirating it.

I have MSDN Universal, which give me 10 XP, win2k, win2003, etc. not to mention the multilingual stuff - if I was mad enough I could buy dozens of machines, all with valid licenses (my last workplace worked entirely like that, although we had on MSDNU for every 3 developers).
Duh... by nullvector · 2004-09-30 02:31 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've known this for a long time.

Even here in the US, what do you think happens with the Wal-Mart linux machines that they sell dirt-cheap. They get turned into 'grandma's-email/XP machine' by some kid that installed a pirate copy of XP.

I dont see this message from Gartner as Anti-Linux. So many of you people have blinders on so that whenever you see MS and Linux in the same sentence you think "OMG Micro$oft Sux0r5!1!"

This is the same as buying one of those MP3 players with a huge CF card, and taking the CF card out to use in your camera.

People just buy cheap crappy PC's that come preloaded with Linux, they wipe the drive, and install XP.

Its purely economical from their point of view. Cheap PC + Pirated software = WIN.
El Reg... by XeRXeS-TCN · 2004-09-30 02:38 · Score: 4, Interesting

The Register had a good story about this yesterday, basically stating that they weren't even aware of the story until Gartner sent them out a rather insistent correction to a press release they hadn't actually received. As they say:

We in the press find recalls and corrections a big help. We get a hell of a lot of junk that we assume is dull and therefore throw away without reading, often without even noticing, but the shrill words RECALL!!" or "CORRECTION!!!!" signify to us that there is something somebody has decided they'd rather not have said, or that they'd rather we didn't read. We dive straight into the trash, and although frequently the original remains very dull indeed and is immediately retrashed, sometimes it isn't.

What the correction actually said, seemed to be a rather more reserved opinion:

"More PC vendors are using Linux as an insurance policy against Microsoft license fees in many emerging markets. However, about two-fifths of these PCs will be modified to run a pirated version of the Microsoft's Windows operating system (OS) a few days before they are used. Most of these systems are targeted towards users that aim on save on OS costs, which can account for up to 15 percent of a PC's total cost."

"Until recently, Microsoft preferred users to employ a pirated version of Windows until the company was able to combat piracy in emerging markets effectively."

El Reg themselves then add:

[It] suggests that Microsoft's recent introduction of Starter Editions of XP is a sign that it intends to switch from this, which is effectively using piracy to its own advantage in order to maintain its dominant position, to trying to win the revenue for itself. Given that that as far as we can see there's no earthly reason why Starter Edition should work, the main effort for this sales drive is surely going to go into lobbying governments to crack down hard on piracy.
Re:That's preposterous! by tbannist · 2004-09-30 02:43 · Score: 4, Interesting

That's circular logic there. If you define the average computer user as someone who uses Windows, then of course, you will find that 100% of average users use Windows.

On the other hand, I've seen Open Office handle Word documents more reliably than Office. The only reasons I have Windows at home are I'm lazy and don't want to install a new operating system, and the games.

However your parent post has a point, I don't want to run Windows, I'd rather not actually. My next computer will not have Windows on it, and I have no intention of ever installing Windows on it.

--
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Deliberate incompatibility through OpenBIOS by motown · 2004-09-30 02:53 · Score: 4, Interesting

Of course, not only Microsoft is unhappy with this phenomenon. The Linux community is not amused either, since of course we would have preferred to see the customers continuing the use of Linux instead of wiping it from the drive and replacing it with Windows, pirated or not.

But perhaps there is a solution that could kill two bird with one stone: make Linux-systems deliberately incompatible with Windows by supplying them with a legacy-free OpenFirmware-implementation, such as OpenBIOS, which could be optimised specifically for Linux.

Many experienced UNIX and Linux users have been desiring OpenFirmware/OpenBIOS acceptance in the x86-market anyway, and this may be just the chance to make it happen!

It's a perfect solution: On the one hand, Microsoft can no longer complain about Linux-systems being a merely a method to use pirated copies of Windows. On the other hand, selling Linux systems solely with OpenBIOS firmwares (and making some modification to make the motherboards imcompatible with pirated legacy BIOS-versions) guarantees that buyers will be running Linux (or other open-source/free-software OS'es) instead of Windows on it.

And of course, as we all know, an Openfirmware-based BIOS would provide additional technical advantages and features over legacy BIOS implementations.

And finally: true OpenBIOS-enabled Linux-systems would be free from any DRM-crap.

Take the problem, and turn it in to an opportunity Wonderful! :)

--
"Oooh, does that mean we get to kick some puffy white mad zionist butt?"
+1 Insightful by swillden · 2004-09-30 02:53 · Score: 5, Interesting

When piracy is defined as any use that the vendor does not approve of, it's hard to call it a moral issue and to think of the vendor as a victim.
Exactly. This is another variant of the problem that the entertainment content industry has created for itself: By making copyright terms so long that most people don't realize they ever expire, people no longer see copyright as a good trade -- or as any kind of trade at all -- and therefore have no compunction about violating the hell out of it.
It's a slashdot cliche, but it really is true: The more you tighten your grasp, the more copies will slip through your fingers, as the majority simply stops paying attention to your restrictions.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Re:Bollocks by magefile · 2004-09-30 02:58 · Score: 4, Interesting

True. But if you call MS and say you lost the key (1-800-RU-LEGIT, I think), they'll give you a new one, no questions asked. At least, they have for me several times. They also did it when I said I wanted to move the OS to a different mfg'r's PC.

One could, theoretically, use this for pirating. Or one could use this with a legit copy.
As quoted by Bill Gates himself... by farzadb82 · 2004-09-30 02:58 · Score: 4, Interesting

"As long as they are going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade"
I really don't see what all the fuss is about.
validity of EULA by belmolis · 2004-09-30 03:04 · Score: 5, Interesting

I have never entered into a contract with Microsoft. Indeed, the last few machines I have bought had MS Windows pre-installed, so I never even had to click on "I accept" to install it. Under the doctrine of First Sale, in the absence of a contract I can do what I please with the goods that I purchase. Can someone explain to me how Microsoft's wishes could possibly be binding on me?

For me this is a purely hypothetical question since I have no interest in running MS Windows, but I am perplexed by the idea that Microsoft's EULA's can be binding on people who either never saw them until after they purchased the software or on people who have never even looked at the EULA. Haven't the courts ruled that such "shrinkwrap licenses" are invalid?
Re:wow! by BrokenHalo · 2004-09-30 03:31 · Score: 5, Interesting

Here in Australia, it's pretty easy to get a laptop without Winbloze. You just have to be prepared to talk tough. You get the lowest quote from the shop, then tell them that you want them to remove Windows and any related sticky labels, and that you'll pay them that amount less the Microsoft tax.
Turns out that most of them, even if they do claim to be contractually obliged etc, will oblige for the simple reason that it's a sale they wouldn't otherwise get.
Re:wow! by LinuxGuyFriend · 2004-09-30 03:41 · Score: 5, Interesting

Let me tell you a little story. Last year, my appartment was broken into and my computers stolen. Of two Windows copies, the insurance company agreed to reimburse only one. Apparently they have problem with paying for software...

Since I keep all my CD keys seperately, I ended up calling MS to get a new key because the old one refused to install on the new computer.

Guess what, they refused to cancel the old one and give me a new one because the license is tied to the stolen hard drive. Great.