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."
The consulting firm issued a report on Wednesday stating that about 40 percent of Linux PCs will be modified to run an illegal copy of Windows, a bait-and-switch maneuver that lowers the cost of obtaining a Windows PC.
I wasn't aware that PCs were made by Microsoft. I realize that B. Crew wants every PC to be sold with Windows and makes in very difficult for vendors to do anything but sell them that way, but I am pretty certain it isn't a requirement for Windows to be on every single PC out there.
As a result, the number of desktop Linux PCs that ship will exceed the actual percentage of Linux machines that get installed in the real world. Desktop Linux will account for about 5 percent of desktops shipped in 2004, according to Gartner, with 10.5 percent of the desktops in Asia shipping with Linux this year. However, the installed base of Linux will come to only 1.3 percent.
In 2008, Linux will account for 7.5 percent of PCs shipped, but only 2.6 percent of the installed base, about the same that Apple's installed base will be then.
Star News reports that by 2009 15.29% of the The National Enquirer's stories will be completely false and that their own stories will overtake FoxNews as the most truthful news source on the planet.
My last machine came with XP installed. I didn't even get to have a CD of XP other than the restore CD. The key on the back of the computer was invalid anyway and MSFT had no suggestions for me other than using a valid key... So, we have to buy a computer with Windows on it because MSFT won't be friendly with vendors that don't offer 100% Windows only. We get that computer with Windows but we really can't use the copy on any other machine and we don't get the install CD and it may not even have a working key. Yet we are supposed to believe that this is acceptable and poor MSFT will lose money to piracy.
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. I would assume the same rings true elsewhere. Who the hell wants to pay 20%+ of their PC cost for Windows if they can't even use it?
Welcome to hell.
So what's new? Microsoft pays its lapdog, Gartner Group, for another anti-Linux FUD piece. Next story, please.
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
That'll just about offset the number of machines that were bought with windows on them that are now running linux. Or do they not care about those?
"Piter, too, is dead."
It is said that a child learns wisdom from the parent,
but the truly wise parent learns joy from the child
... by the same token, how many machines sold with Windows end up having Linux installed?
Both of mine, for a start.
Therefore, there's no way to tell whether the number of Linux pre-installs that are replaced with pirate Windows are balanced with the number of Windows pre-installs replaced with Linux. Gartner's prediction is that more people replace Linux with Windows than vice-versa, but how do you get to that information without guessing?
I appear to have a blog. Odd.
Don't tell anyone, but I'm using my Windows PC to run a pirate copy of Linux! I downloaded a copy from the internet and didn't pay a cent for it! Suckers...
Read reviews of shopping cart software
That would be like buying a Maserati and replacing its engine with that of a Ford Escort.
"We're sorry, but the website you're trying to reach has been disconnected."
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....
In other news, the Gartner Group is reporting an increase in hallucinogenic substance use among its employees.
Sure, if you want to install a pirate copy of Windows on a new PC, your only real choice is to order a PC with either no OS or one with a free OS (i.e. Linux). Since none of the big PC makers will even let you order a PC without an OS, guess which one you'll choose.
This doesn't have anything to do with Linux.
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
"...Gartner's making a bold prediction that the number of machines sold as
Linux desktops may eclipse the number of machines actually running Linux."
Funny that. Its a bit like Windows if you take into account crashes - The
number of machines sold as Windows desktops is far greater than the number
of machines actually RUNNING Windows.
Windows in 6 Bytes (IA-32) : 90 90 90 90 CD 19
I somewhat regularly upgrade computers or rebuild systems for family and friends. When that happens, I end up with a lot of unused copies of Windows. These are bought and payed for - 100% legitimate. So when my friends want a new Windows computer, I'm not going to re-buy a copy of windows when they already own the rights to a copy!
But I bet they would count this as a hit for their study.
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
Because you're not some guy looking to find a sweet deal on a PC at Wal-Mart. These are people buying cheap ass computers and putting the OS of their choice onto it. How is that any different from what the average Slashdotter does?
Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
If we were to use the logic that the RIAA and MPAA use, then we should ban all Linux Distributions because they are used to pirate software. Then Microsoft will truly rule the world!
100% of PC's sold with Windows ME, run Pirated copie s of Windows 2000
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?
If this were true, it would only be because you can buy Linux-installed PC's cheaper than Windows-installed PC's. So there should then be a much bigger market for easy-to-buy OS-less PC's. Right? an OS-less PC should cost even less (if only by a little) than Linux PC. That OS-less market doesn't exist; ergo Gartner is wrong.
(I know you can buy OS-less PC's, but we tend to make it a little bit hard. You know, you have to buy them in part from newegg or whatever. There is not a huge market for buying them all pre-packaged).
Guys, they're talking about people buying machines from OEMs (like Dell) for less money that are sold "with Linux" and then installing Windows on them to get around paying the Windows Tax on all the new machines. It's not about Linux users wanting to pirate Windows.
Gartner finds Linux is not only a dangerous tool actively being used by terrorists to avoid detection, but a psychotrophic drug that causes terrorism, delinquency, malaria and AIDS.
Linux is also subverting good, honest children to criminal behaviour, communism and encouraging them to move to harder drugs such as Heavy Metal music. Not to mention occultism and role playing games.
Linux on an IBM mainframe is also less cost effective than Windows on a dual Xeon! Quick, in the Holy name of Redmond, call a priest and bring out the holy water!
I'm sorry if I haven't offended anyone
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
The zealot faithful are already foaming at the mouth at this report. But what's so surprising about it? All it really says is that of the PCs purchased with Linux pre-installed on them, 40% of them will be modified to run some variant of Windows (possibly in a dual boot configuration) without being within the terms of the EULA. This probably includes transferring OEM licenses to other computers (which, if memory serves, is against the terms of the EULA).
I can't find the report on Gartner's site and therefore can't say anything about its methodology. (And if the report isn't free, I ain't shelling out the bucks for it.) But it strikes me as telling that of the people rending their clothes and screaming here, very few of them are actually arguing with their numbers beyond saying that it's "justified," or "MSFT gets what's coming to them," or "this is offset by," etc.
Oh, and by the way: the headline is stupid and wrong.
I'm a bit sceptical about that 40% figure - I'd say it was closer to 2 in 5.
In emerging markets, where desktop Linux enjoys wider popularity, the trend is even starker. Around 80 percent of the time, Linux will be removed for a pirated copy of Windows
Making wild accusations without backing it up with a solid proof because of remote possibilities... When did slashdotters start working for Gartner?
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
I agree with a reply to the article on CNet, which basically said that the piracy of Windows is Microsoft's problem, not Linux's problem. It's not Linux's problem that it's free, it's not Linux's problem that Windows is being pirated world-wide, and it's not Linux's problem that people are choosing Linux PCs instead of Win machines. This just amounts to FUD, trying to make Linux look like it has some involvement with piracy. It's the people who pirate, not the software.
You won't hate yourself in the morning if you don't get up before noon.
"Gartner's making a bold prediction that the number of machines sold as Linux desktops may eclipse the number of machines actually running Linux."
While I'm would expect that somewhere there are plenty PC's being sold with Linux pre-installed that get wiped and have a pirated copy of Windows installed, my personal experience is the opposite -- I have run hundreds of Linux machines (server farms, at home,at work, etc.), and aside from rack-mounted servers the only practical option is to purchase a PC with Windows, then wipe it and install Linux. In theory you can buy a PC in the US with Linux installed, but in practice, nobody stocks them, and it's easier to get a Windows PC now than to special order a Linux PC to arrive eventually, and do the install yourself.
So, while some percentage of the small number of PC's sold with Linux on them may be converted to run Windows, certainly a percentage of the very large number of PC's sold with Windows on them are converted to run Linux, and in my experience the numbers lean strongly towards the latter case.
On top of this, I would argue that the number of copies of Windows sold (irrespective of Linux) is artificially inflated by the pre-installed copies in other ways:
With consumer PC's you almost always need to buy a "real" copy of Windows, because the pre-installed copies don't come with install CD's, or even the right to make your install CD's. So if you buy a cheap PC and _anything_ happens to it that would cause you to need to reinstall (like, say, owning the PC for six months), the only (legal) option is to run a "restore" that wipes your hard drive and restores it to factory state.
On corporate desktops, if you by PC's with Windows installed, and then wipe the drive and install a standard disk image (which most companies do, to simplify management) MS insists that you need to buy a new Windows license, because the copy in the disk image is a new copy.
If you donate a used Windows PC to a school or church, MS tells them that it's illegal to use the copy of Windows on the PC unless it's accompanies by the original certificate of authenticity, and that otherwise they must by a new copy of Windows (which would often cost more than the PC itself is worth, and wouldn't run on older PC's in any case), and that without that, they must trash the PC's.
So if Gartner is trying to correct for artificial distortions on the sales numbers to determine true numbers of users, I think that they have some more work to do.
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
Going by the argument that Microsoft uses to justify the requirement that all PC's to be sold with Windows XX pre-installed, the movie industry could argue that all DVD players/video recorders be sold with a pre-supplied library of movie classics, as owners are more than likely than not to pirate them.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Making wild accusations without backing it up with a solid proof because of remote possibilities
Standard operating procedure for Gartner. The supporting data is an asset, they're not going to give it away.
So, would this mean that Microsoft is left with the dilemna:
a) try to stamp out this piracy by discouraging "after-market" installs (hey! don't install windows! You had better leave that Linux on there, buster!)
b) tacitly allow the after-market piracy, thus maintaining their marketshare but sacrificing revenue
It would seem that the obvious choice for them would be b), because so much of the MS revenue stream depends on a Windows OS on the machine.
To some degree, I have set up a false dichotomy, but I do know that these cheap Linux machines will only grow in number here in Asia. MS is stuck in a very tricky position, and will be forced to retreat from the OS to their apps and "higher functionality" for value-add. Good luck with that in China...
davejenkins.com |
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.
Gartner used to be a respectible organization
When was this?
The report makes bold claims so as to stand out from common_wisdom. This gives it an edge in its consulting business.
If the claims turn out wrong, they'll say that the companies/countries involved have made very good progress to stamp out piracy. They then go make a report of "How to combat piracy and reduce piracy figures by [claimed figure - actual figure]" and then teach these techniques to others.
If the claims are right, it's going to be "Told you so."
Well, it's a win-win situation.
I wonder how many desks out there are being used to hold up computers that have pirated versions of windows on them. how dare they. We better require that Windows XP gets bundled with desks!
One Nation:
Under God
Under Allah
Under Zeus
Under Satan
OR
One Nation Indivisible
They're just trying to hide the fact that they are shit scared that machines sold with Linux preinstalled WON'T end up with a pirate copy of Windows. The only thing worse than MS not getting paid for a copy of Windows is for a user to stick with the copy of Linux that comes with their machine. That is a sale MS will never get back.
"I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
"How is that any different from what the average Slashdotter does?"
We complain about it more. Next question.
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:
What the correction actually said, seemed to be a rather more reserved opinion:
El Reg themselves then add:
47% of statistics are made up on the fly. I would have to agree with some others that and OEM copy of windows adds like $30 to the cost of a computer, if you can even get it without Windows.
At my comapny we have 2 mail servers that came with Windows 2000 Server and they ran bad, the same mail server vendor make a Linux Appliance. Pop in the CD, it formats the drive and installed a stripped down RedHat install. It runs 4 times faster. We simply ate it on the Windows licenses. More free money to Microsoft.
Since all software is essentially free in China, Linux will have serious trouble in gaining market share in China and other emerging markets. Microsoft Windows is "free", and Linux is free.
That 80% of Linux desktops sold in China is running Windows merely confirms the above analysis.
The problem will not be resolved any time soon. The Chinese have almost no respect for human rights (e.g. brutal occupation of Tibet) or property rights (e.g. theft of software, blueprints for microprocessors, "Star Wars" before its American debut, ...).
Companies that sell reports (Gartner) stand to make more money when they write whatever the people paying the $700 for the reports want to read.
Is this PHBs just wanting to stick their fingers in their ears, point at this report, and say, La la la, no, you can't run Linux, it's bad.?
Get your own free personal location tracker
That's circular logic there. If you define the average computer user as someone who uses Windows, then of course, you will find that 100% of average users use Windows.
On the other hand, I've seen Open Office handle Word documents more reliably than Office. The only reasons I have Windows at home are I'm lazy and don't want to install a new operating system, and the games.
However your parent post has a point, I don't want to run Windows, I'd rather not actually. My next computer will not have Windows on it, and I have no intention of ever installing Windows on it.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Of coarse, Gartner know that it is just a spin, which they try to paint as truth. Someone is SERIOUSLY worried that ISV, hardware manifacturers, etc. will start to take Linux into account and will start to build around it! Ohh, what a horror, Windows-only world is impossible, sky is falling!
But seriously, do they really believe their own lies? They clearly know that GNU/Linux has maybe far more than 6% of installed base - because most people which uses Linux is downloaded it from internet for free. It is nearly impossible to know the correct percentage of that.
And also - I think that most pepole who buys OEM computer with Linux do that with purpose - to use it! Because OEM will pay Microsoft tax anyway - look at the price, it is not so much difference. So what is the reason not to buy Windows computer directly? Nice spin, but...a little bit wrong logic.
And in the end, I just migrate and convert some ten computers each month (small/medium business stuff) to my Debian based distro. And I don't know why everyone claims 'Linux is not ready for the desktop!', 'Linux sux', 'GPL is viral', etc.
It works. It really works guys. That's all I know.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
d) Require a liscensed "Microsoft Install Technician" to do all "after-market" installs, and don't give anyone else the disks.
e) Custom-make each Windows CD to only work with one CPU serial/ID number, pass extra costs on to the customer and blame the pirates.
Anyone want to work on options f, g, h?
Little Brother, watching the watchers
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.
See this article for a more interesting take.
A. It's not hard to build PCs and pirate Windows onto them (most companies won't 'cos the risk of audit is high, whereas consumers have less money so are less important market).
B. Even if true, so what? 80% of cars are used to break speed limits. There is no cogent argument here.
Posters recognized by their sig,
Your argument presupposes that 'free' in Linux refers to price. It doesn't. There are other, more important reasons to run the OS than low cost of entry.
I buy Linux machines to reformat and install a warez version of Microsoft's Windows XP Starter Edition. Merely having product activation telling me how much I can upgrade my hardware was not draconian enough. I want an OS that also tells me how many programs I can open and what resolution I can use. Damn-it, freedom is overrated!
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
If my contract is only thing keeping them out of bankruptcy, maybe they're not the best shop to go with... Hmm?
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?"
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.
As a result, the number of desktop Linux PCs that ship will exceed the actual percentage of Linux machines that get installed in the real world. Desktop Linux will account for about 5 percent of desktops shipped in 2004, according to Gartner, with 10.5 percent of the desktops in Asia shipping with Linux this year. However, the installed base of Linux will come to only 1.3 percent
I guess if you assume that the shipped units will replace 100% of existing machines, I guess this would be a startling claim.
As it is, if say there are 100 machines already in use, and only 1 of them runs Linux, then you ship out 100 more machines, and 10 of them are Linux Desktop machines. None of these 100 machines are used to replace existing machines. Now, your shipped units are 10% Linux boxes, but (horrors) only 5.5% of the installed base is running Linux.
PIRACY! PIRACY! Men with eye patches and parrots are looting software boutiques looking for copies of XP!
Thing is, most people don't bother to think critically about information presentation. Even if the facts are all correct, the wording leads to false conclusions.
I really don't see what all the fuss is about.
"Desktop Linux will account for about 5 percent of desktops shipped in 2004, according to Gartner, with 10.5 percent of the desktops in Asia shipping with Linux this year. However, the installed base of Linux will come to only 1.3 percent."
then:
"In 2008, Linux will account for 7.5 percent of PCs shipped, but only 2.6 percent of the installed base..."
Does anyone else notice that they are comparing shipments with installed base? Unless we were to assume that the entire installed base of PCs is thrown away and replaced each year, this is a bogus comparison.
It's similar in kind to comparisons of raw numbers with percentages. I start a new club. I'm the only member. Next year, I get someone else to join my club. I can report that I've grown my club's membership that year by 100%.
"This signature quote intentionally left blank"
but they can't make music like brian wilson did.
you need a written order from God to get a branded computer without the windows virus on it. you can also buy a box full of random parts anyplace, and build a kickass computer with no OS any time you want.
where gartner is pulling this "data" from, I don't know, and I am not about to spend hundreds of dollars to find out. it is so bogus on its face that I can't see how gartner is staying in business.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
I've read the article, and Gartners 'Report'. No facts, no data, no tests run discussed. The report does not even demonstate any sampling methods. FUD material.
At the end of the report, it does say, (off report topic), that novice users use only a few tools; and windows.
This would make an interesting web site. The site would be an index of simple ways to do VERY simple tasks in linux. The index would be impressive itself, but the content need not be to 'overly stated'.
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?
What they fail to realize is that the common factor in pirating Windows is a computer without Windows, not just computers preloaded with Linux. The fact that these computers are being sold with Linux is just a distraction. Many people build their own computers just so they can pirate Windows and not have to pay the higher price to include the OS. Should we then disparage the selling of separate computer components as conducive to Windows piracy?
This is a huge logical fallacy to imply that Linux has anything to do with these people's intentions. They are trying to save money and so they buy very cheap pre-built computers and pirate Windows.
I have always been told that the kind of statistical researches of companies like Gartner have some point or other to make. But having read the summaries of this research, one can only wonder which conclussion they are trying to reach? (I once saw a university medical statistical study proving that people living in the country and owning no cars are likely to have a higher risk of colon cancer!)
;-)
On all the new PCs I have ever bought over the years, some windows flavour had been pre-installed. In more than half of the cases, it was reformatted and promptly replaced by a Linux flavour.
Thus: if pre-installed desktop linux pc's are treatening for MS-sales and encouraging windows piracy, is the opposite not true and can it therefore not be concluded that pre-installed desktop windows pc's are treatening to linux and encouraging linux piracy?
Let's us conclude that this kind of statistical research is not conclussively written in numbers, but should rather be written with astrological starcharts!
Peace & Long Life,
MadMan-2
I must say i dont think I have ever heard anything more infurating than this. Of course it doesnt need to be said who funded this study..
But to say this when it is so difficult to find any high street store or OEM that will sell you a computer without Windows -- because of the penalties imposed by Redmond... Man this fires me up badly.
Is it so difficult to swallow that some people actually prefer an operating system that doesnt have all the flaws that Windows has ? Is it so bad that OEM's and other companies are starting to notice this? what next ? It really amazes me who dreams up these new and wonderful FUD stories to try and blacken Linux, whos very existance is borne from love?
The increasing trend of OEM's selling PC's with linux pre-installed is because there is a certain amout of demand for it - in the server space and increasingly as an alternative desktop for developers and in some cases just ordinary folk.
Once again this simply emphasizes how worried they are in Redmond about the linux trend that they dont seem to be able to do anything about except generate lies and FUD which is usually ill informed - made up - or just twisted statistics. If these people are failing to see the merits of Linux and the community of people behind it creating software- well then there is no hope for Windows getting any better.
Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
Cassette tapes were VERY easy to pirate. And the practice was much more common. Once DVDs become easy and cheap to copy, then you're statement might be correct.
:) Just about every high-street electrical store back in the late 80's was selling dual cassette deck stereos, with features like synchro-copy, turbo-copy; which would play tape #1 at double/triple speed, but not start recording onto tape #2 until audio was heard on tape #1.
I remember
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
A friend of mine, that never, never listens to me until it's way to late and I hate to sit him down and tell him "I told you so, I told you so, it's a POS.." just went and bought a Gateway PC.
Basics, P4-2.6ghz, 512m, 120m, Nvidia, CRT & MF PSCF, and, Winbloz XP home.
He ordered the machine, $1,500 (about $800 more than I could have built one from scratch)
He brings the whole thing, brand new in the box to me and says, "Install Suse 9.1 Pro on it please." and takes off.
Guess what? This Gateway machine will NOT BOOT AT ALL if it detects a Linux formated hard disc (0x83) plugged into it via ANY means. IDE, IDE on a card, even a USB drive formated for Linux stops the boot from happening. It won't boot Linux from CD or DVD, it won't touch Linux at all. It is coded into the bios to NO BOOT if it detects a non windows drive connected to it.
It won't boot with XP as the OS on the primary drive and a Linux formated drive connected as a secondary drive. I spent a week verifying this. I tried dozens of different drives, CD's, DVD's, distros, and combos thereof. I had to re-install XP back on it and tell my friend, "You screwed the pooch, take it back." He won't, he claims he signed a contract to make payments on it. Screw that, I say it's broken and should be at the very least replaced with a usable machine. So my dumb friend is going to keep it, pay for it and give it to his daughter.
So, Gateway and M$ have found a way to prevent anyone from using anything but M$.
Oh, and one last comment, these so called XP pirates that would use Linux to pirate XP? Nope. They are too stupid to figure out how to use Linux just to get free winbloz. To do this they would have to spend way to much time figuring out how to setup their PPPOE, then finding using GTK-Gnutella or BitTorrent & Python and finally K3b to burn it to disc. Right.
I've seen these low end PC's that have Linux pre-installed, ThizLinux. Total, unusable GARBAGE. Trust me, they will never accomplish the task. Just go to any of the alt.os.distro.linux groups and read any of the multitude of "Linux sux!" posts....
These retards will just get a copy from a buddy that's already online. XP is easier to find than crack or meth. Something they need to quit smoking. Oh, and if Linux is such an easy to use pirating tool, why is it that M$ is the number one delivery system for pirated warez?
Someone should sue these morons for slander and liable.
In fact, Linux runs on about 23 additional architectures that Microsoft can't even remotely support with their most-flexible embedded target.
If Microsoft had its way, nobody would be allowed to buy separate PC components.
Well, what if somebody puts them all together and makes a PC? Then it wouldn't have an operating system, and you'd be a pirate.
I wonder what the other software companies will do to ensure that their software isn't pirated? Maybe you'll soon only be allowed to buy a PC if you buy a copy of Photo Shop (incase you pirate that).
Actually, when you buy a house, you may soon find that you are forced to pay for cable, incase you start using a descrambler illegally.
Man, things could really get expensive here!
Linux/Open Source/Anti Microsoft News
...personally I use Windows PCs to download Linux ISOs and burn them.
I find many of Gatners findings run contrary to reality. This ones included. I would wager to guess that there are people buying Linux installed PCs and installing Windows on them. But are they pirated copies of Windows? That is where I disagree with Gartner. I have seen many times where people, already owning a copy of Windows, bought a PC sans Windows for the cheaper price and installed Windows on it. Now, the question becomes: is installing an owned copy of Windows on a new box pirating? Im sure according to Redmond, and Gartner, you have to buy a new copy of Windows to be legit. Its always been my view, and many others for that matter, that the PC and software are two seperate components. To say: 1 computer = 1 install only is idiotic. If I replace a computer with a new computer my version of Windows should be able to be migrated. Period.
Arguably, when they used to say things I agreed with.
Insanity is a gradual process; don't rush it.
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.
It was bound to happen. PCs with Windows preinstalled are so readily available it was only a matter of time before people started buying Windows loaded PCs just so they could install a pirated copy of linux once they get the box home. . . oh wait. Nevermind.
burnin
This is a jab at the credibility of selling Linux installed machines to protect the perpetuation of the Windows tax. The report is pumped into the media channel to implant the idea that selling Linux installed PCs is a bad idea because the users are just going to install pirated Windows anyway. The same thing happened with "Bare" or "Naked" PCs a couple of years back. That's why only way you can get a box without anything on the hard drive is nearly impossible without building your own.
Just because the figures are true doesn't mean there aren't ulterior motives for a report to be funded to bring those numbers to light.
I want MS to:
A)Stop patching pirated copies of Windows.
B)Have Windows Update sabotage pirated copies of Windows.
C)Break compatability with newer versions of MS apps (Office, Outlook Express, Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player) with pirated versions of Windows.
D)Legally crack down on pirates like none-other.
Right now, we exist in a world where it is okay to get Windows for free (pirate), and the cost is subsidized by the rest of the world.
If EVERYONE that used Windows was forced to considered the market(monopoly) value of it, Windows marketshare would fall off considerably.
I used to pirate Windows. One day, I made the decision to keep all my systems 'legal'.
This brought the level of problems I've had with my Linux systems into focus.
Of course, this hasn't been hurt by the general improvements in Linux distros. SuSE 9.1, IMHO, is a very polished, easy to use distro.
Force people to understand the true costs of using MS software, both upfront (end piracy), and TCO (patching, clearing viruses/worms, spyware crap, other generalized Windows issues), and the costs of using Linux don't seem to bad (have to be picky with hardware, much smaller software base (counterweighed by tons of free software), training needed to become familiar with the layout of your particular distro).
In order for the Free Software community to become more succesful than it already has, and continue to claim more and more marketshare, we need to have a VERY strong respect for Intellectual Property rights.
The very same protections that gave us the GPL highlight the BEST economic advantages of F/OSS.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
They should just put NT kernel in ROM and make it so it can't run anything else. Then you really wouldn't be able to run anything but windows on a PC.
Of course that's what these DRM compliant bioses are all about too. This issue will be going away shortly if the new bioses become the standard.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Funny you should mention YDL. Terrasoft (makers of YDL) are the only Apple authorized reseller allowed to package an Apple product with a different OS.
By default they install a dual-boot setup of YDL and OSX. But from what I've been told you can simply request that you don't want OSX installed. which is good if you want to use the entire drive for YDL.
I'm sorry but Apple fanboys should just stay out of this conversation. Apple keeps far tighter control over hardware and OS than Microsoft.
I'm not sure what your remark about Apple fanboys is all about. Your post has basically asked that a person with an opposing viewpoint need not reply? Why did you bother posting at all if you don't wish to discuss things? (If you didn't notice, I've ignored your request)
Also what does it mean that Apple keeps tighter control over the OS than Microsoft. (obviously not the hardware since MS isn't a hardware company). There are secret APIs in Windows. You need to buy an expensive dev kit if you want to write drivers for Windows. but on OSX you can write a driver for whatever USB dongle you have the specs for, and you can just use the bundled compiler and debugger. And the API docs are posted on apple's website. I MS's site also has freely available docs on devel topics too. From my point of view Apple has kept no more tighter grasp on it's OS than Microsoft has. Perhaps even a looser grasp if you consider that Darwin is completely open source. Am I somehow misinterpreting the point of your original statement?
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Just for completion's sake, there is another set of product keys, for academic / MSDN distributions, which will not work on the distributions mentioned above.
The Mac is the only true desktop replacement contender. When Microsoft Office becomes available for Linux, that's when Linux will become a serious contender.
I would love to sample some of that iCrack you're smoking. 1) not everybody needs or even wants an office suite. even counting "business machines" which are the vast majority of windows licenses, only about 30% have any sort of office suite installed. I can't cite a source, but my company does very large scale samplings of global business machines annually. 2) microsoft is not the only source of excellent office suites.
This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
Not following the rules is part of the game, too.
XML causes global warming.
Basically, they are saying that if you buy a machine preinstalled with linux, there is a 40% chance you are a criminal.
I would think that some enterprising land shark out there might just want to start a class action libel suit about that statement, against gartner and cnet, if such a suit is even possible.
Couldnt the argument go something like, "such an article could indeed make such individuals feel persecuted by the law in the future with out cause, possibly even seeking councle that they wouldnt even need otherwise?"
Again IANAL and Im just speculating.
I recently got an HP zd7000 for work and occasional gaming. Since the only GPU that works(with Linux) really well for newer games is NVIDIA Geforce, the zd7000 was pretty much the only thing I could find that was suitable for me. Of course, getting it without 'doze was not an option.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Appears to me that the Gartner Group got bought out under the table, and now will be used to propagate incorrect facts to the 'masses', influencing everything from marketing to legislation.
What is next, a report from them on 'pirate-2-pirate'.
Truth often gets lost when the other side has control of the media/marketing machine.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
So what happens when the HD dies? I guess this is how MS will be selling a new version of XP to the same customer every few years.
I dont' understand why Microsoft wastes time pushing Windows when it's Office which is what really locks people in.
Office is the MS cash cow and if they wanted to expand their sales they'd just port it to Unix/Linux or at least supply a version with really good emulation under it, a la Wine.
Then they wouldn't need to worry about how much market share Windows had and could concentrate on their real money maker.
"Terminate?"
"Terminate... with extreme prejudice"
Once I was making a joke about Gnome (a french one, Mennen [shaving cream] pour nous les gnomes [original advert says pour nous les hommes {men in french}]) and my wife goes hey Gnome that's the name of my desktop at work.
"You use Linux at work?!?", I was really surprise, my wife was working as a consultant for Indonesia Ministry of Coop and Small Business and for Ministry of Industry and Trade; she was telling me that everyone in government is using Linux.
When I told this story to my expat collegue Marek from Poland, he told me it is the same in Poland.
I wish I wrote an article about this at the time (2001) maybe we would not see major FUD/BS from Gartner and other lame IDC.
I think Linux users should sue Gartner for libel!