Slashdot Mirror


OSIA Dismisses Gartner Linux Piracy Claim

Anonymous Coward writes "The Inquirer is reporting that a claim by Gartner that Linux desktops are used for pirated copies of windows has been dismissed by the Open Source Industry Association (OSIA). OSIA told The Sydney Morning Herald that 'if Gartner's conclusion that pre-installing Linux encouraged people to steal copies of Windows were correct.... It would be possible to state that pre-installing Windows encourages people to pirate application software.'"

14 of 248 comments (clear)

  1. There should be an MS tax, no there shouldn't... by kentmartin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    OK, colour me not too bright, but I cannot see why pre-installed Linux is being targeted here by Gartner - their claim doesn't seems to be, pre-installing Linux is the same as shipping the machine with no OS whatsoever.

    To continue with their premise, any machine sold with no OS (or Linux) installed is destined for pirated software which would imply by there logic, if you want to take it all the way down the line, that there should be an international mandate that no machine should be sold without paying the MS tax.

    To be doubly sure, the only way to ensure this MS tax was paid in full would be to make sure that all PC components had a markup on them to allow for a the price of a copy of Windows on a fully assembled machine (otherwise home built machines would be "tax exempt") - it just all gets a bit silly.

    It would be interesting to know where these numbers come from (on both sides of this argument), and, how they can possibly be verified.

    It simply comes down to a case of MS saying: "You public who don't buy from us, and who we by some weird twist of logic, try to link with the opensource community, are probably stealing from us". Their claim is probably in part true, but to link it with the opensource community is mistifying.

    Oh - and then, shock horror, the opensource community comes back with: "We don't steal from you" (probably true on the whole) "and those who buy Linux desktops don't steal from you either" (probably, at least, significantly false).

    Oh - for the purposes of this comment it has been assumed that the independant research company Gartner is independently researching for the independent entity of Microsoft.

  2. Yes, but by ScrewMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    preinstalling Windows does encourage people to pirate software.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:Yes, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mod parent up. Their argument fell apart here for me. I don't know a person in the world who runs Windows who doesn't have some pirated software on their machine. It might even be Winzip whose shareware period has long expired but everyone has something. You can't do any work on a Windows box without apps and most apps are commerical software. Linux is the other way round.

  3. Re:There should be an MS tax, no there shouldn't.. by pe1chl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Also don't forget that MS has been stealing from the OpenSource community. I significant portion of systems running Linux has likely been bought with a MS operating system pre-installed and its license paid. Efforts to refund that money have always been frustrated by MS and its OEMs.

  4. Pirating Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wonder how many people over the past 10 years have purchased computers pre-installed with Windows, only to immediately remove it and install Linux?

    1. Re:Pirating Linux by kentmartin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, you run into a pretty reasonable point here. I find, that as a general rule, my desktop (laptop normally) is dual boot. Commercial reality when consulting, demands you occasionally need to run some proprietry windows only software (timekeeping and expense loggers/help desk ticket things are the most common).

      Every now and again there is a powerpoint or project file that won't open properly under any of my standard Linux suite of apps, so a reboot is in order there as well.

      That being said, my home machines are only ever linux unless they are used for gaming - but, desktop machines for home tend to be a lot easier to buy without windows anyway (and the shop as a general rule assumes you are pirating it anyway!)

      Even the most diehard Linux fan (assuming he or she gives way to the occasional commercial reality of dealing with MS-centric countries) must occasionly hit the second option in the grub menu.

      Lest we also forget, the slashdot audience is hardly going to be the typical case - we are one of the few sections of the community who are less likely to "need" to pirate Windows.

    2. Re:Pirating Linux by Rxke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Laptops are not that easy to cobble together from off-the-shelves parts... And seeing the laptop market getting bigger and bigger, it might be a significant number...

    3. Re:Pirating Linux by clarkie.mg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What kind of Linux user would buy a computer with Windows preinstalled

      All users who discovered linux *after* buying a complete computer. I payed m$ twice (3.11 and 95), because at that time, I was just discovering linux and discovering computers at the same time.

      In fact, it makes some sense that if you buy, your first computer, you are not going to build it yourself and install linux on it, unless you are close to someone who will help you to do it.

      Now, experienced users (older usually) are often busy and even if they can build a computer, they choose to buy a complete system.

      And as another comment pointed out, there is the case for portable computers.

      --
      Men are born ignorant, not stupid; they are made stupid by education. Bertrand Russel
  5. Who are GARTNER anyway...? by bogaboga · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Who are GARTNER anyway? Aren't they the ones who were analysed in some CNN article to the effect that...

    "...Several times, Gartner Group makes the mistake of equating Red Hat with Linux, which marks the company as completely clueless on the topic matter..." They also ranted..."Red Hat will not meet the Linux community's expectations of overturning Microsoft's dominance and becoming a billion-dollar software company..." Who said Linux's goal was to overturn M$' monopoly?

    Info like this especially from GARTNER is not worth a read. I walked into a store just yesterday and wanted to buy a [new] mainboard. I wanted to know from the salesman whether the board I eventually bought (an MSI one) was friendly to Linux. I was supprised that he knew what he was talking about. I slapped on an AMD CPU and 256 MB of RAM, then left with a very good feeling that Linux is surely catching on. I am now downloading SuSE Personal as I type this message. I can tell you, that Linux is surely doing well.

    Have a good weekend.

    Cb..

  6. Breaking News... by gone.fishing · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Guns sold in gun stores are sometimes used in robberies. Cars purchased at dealerships sometimes are used to speed. Alcohol purchased at liquor stores sometimes gets used by people who then drive.

    Almost anything can be misused or used for criminal purposes. In most cases the shopkeeper does not know how the produce he is selling will be used.

    I submit that a computer sold with Linux installed is safer and results in less harm than the average gun, the average car, or the average bottle of booze. Unless (of course) you are Microsoft. In that case, you hire a large, influential consulting group to show how dangerous computers with Linux pre-installed is.

    To me, this report is a little like BP issuing a report saying that hybrid electric cars are bad for the environment. Or like a cigarette company publishing a report that says smoking is good for you becase it calms your nerves.

  7. Re:There should be an MS tax, no there shouldn't.. by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ahh, basic business tactics 101. If Microsoft can continue with their illegal monopolistic practice of forcing vendors to pre-install Windows on every CPU they sell, under the theory that "they're all being used to run Windows anyway", it helps their bottom line and helps them keep it pre-installed on all boxes so people won't bother to throw away the Windows and install Linux. They've already paid for the Windows anyway, and since most vendors won't sell the hardware without some OS and only provide Windows, customers don't see the Windows cost.

    Vendors *do* want to have some base OS installed on the hardware for testing and support reasons: giving the customer something they then have to install on takes away the vendor ability to say "it worked when it left the factory" or "what does this test say? Oh, your CD drive is dead, let's just replace that."

    Your points about the Microsoft tax are well-taken. In addition, keep a very close on Microsoft's "Palladium" initiative which is designed to require Microsoft-designed authentication keys to run key components, such as, say, your CD-R drive and DVD player and have your *CPU* and *BIOS* designed to prevent you from using features such as a read/write drive or even a bootloader unless it is signed by the authentication key signatories.

    Re-read that carefully, and look it up on the web. They want control over your CD-RW/DVD-RW drives and your boot loaders, under the guise of "controlling piracy". This would allow them to block the use of non-Microsoft boot loaders or boot CD's, preventing the use of any operating system but Microsoft.

    We're not paranoid: they *ARE* out to get us.

  8. To me, that means Windows users steal. by khasim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yup, I can see that happening. Maybe even as much as Gartner says. Maybe more, maybe less.

    But that still doesn't justify their spin on their story. It isn't Linux, it is those filthy, thieving Microsoft junkies.

    Why didn't Gartner frame the discussion as .....

    "Gartner says: Linux users 75% LESS likely to pirate software than Windows users"

    In a recent Gartner study, it was found that 100% of Linux users had paid for the OS that was installed on their PC's. Windows users frequently purchased Linux-based PC's and then installed pirated versions of Windows.

  9. What they are essentially saying ... by innerweb · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ...is the biggest competitor to MS is mostly a venue for piracy of MS's product. This is useful for preparation for another attack through legislative and judiciary means to squash competition. This reads like the opening statement in a trial by media. I support MS locking all potential thieves of their software out of their software. What I really see this document paving the way for is Palladium and more DRM like controls on hardware (CD-Rom, bootstrap, DVD, HD, CPU, etc) to force the world to use MS.

    I think this is a case of follow the money. What value is there in a report that says people buy linux systems to install pirated windows? The only value is in making it easier to get more locked down hardware, and a bigger MS tax imposed. I believe, based on other things that have been published and reported in the past 2 years, that with Paladium coming out in a few years that MS is wanting to lock down the hardware to prevent competing OSs from being able to use it (or anything that might have been useable on it).

    Remember, MS is loosing market share to linux. The market is not growing as fast as it used to. MS is a company who's value is based on growth of sales base, not divedends. MS needs more ways of making money (which essentially includes not making less money).

    InnerWeb

    --
    Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
  10. Re:There should be an MS tax, no there shouldn't.. by DavidTC · · Score: 3, Insightful
    That's not the point.

    For once, no one's whining this is unfair...they're just pointing out that it's a bit absurd for MS to start whining about the opposite. Sure, people who didn't get a machine with Windows sometimes illegally use Windows, but plenty of people who legally got a machine with Windows don't use Windows. (This is why MS doesn't want you to resell Windows, and claims you are prohibited by law from transfering an OEM copy to anyone else.)

    In fact, nearly all machines that currently run Linux and are older than a few years almost certainly have some random MS OS license that just basically got thrown away, whether XP or 2000 or 9x or even DOS and Win 3.1. Thanks to 'anti-piracy' measures, they're nearly impossible to sell.

    I know, because I have a copy of Microsoft Office XP Professional that I was given, for free, by MS, at a developer convention, and wish to sell. I have another copy I was randomly mailed out of the blue because I apparently picked up a demo of something and a demo of Office and the demo of Office didn't work with the demo of the other thing, so they mailed me a real copy without asking me, in addition to the other copy I 'purchased' for free. (This second copy has 'not for resale' on it, which they can't actually do...you can't impose terms on goods randomly mailed to people. I didn't in any way order that second CD. And I never installed that copy, so I've never agreed to the EULA, or even seen it.)

    It's a perfectly normal, legal thing for me to do, to sell these two copies, but MS has manipulated eBay into refusing to let me list them. They do the same thing with OS copies.

    (Before anyone complains about me selling things I got for 'free', I have to point out that I spent a day of my time, at one of their stupid launch parties, to get those things.)

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?