Slashdot Mirror
The Future of Windows Software Distribution
Diomidis Spinellis writes "Microsoft's Windows Marketplace Labs offer a
preview of their Digital Locker technology.
The Digital Locker uses Microsoft's Passport Network to allow Windows users to search, buy, and download software from multiple retailers, storing their product keys for future installations.
Both retailers offering the service support digital rights management technologies:
Digital River promotes its SoftwarePasport, and
eSsellerate its Product Activation technology.
Will this technology trigger an across-the-board adoption of DRM for Windows software?
How will it affect the distribution of free and open-source software?"
The first stop on the path to web services.
First they get you used to having no packaging, then they get you with the subscription service.
I say use bit torrent to distribute windows and then poison the bitch to death!!
Sorry, just had to...
Amazon already has a "Digital Locker" into which digital items like DVD extras, Users Manuals, and extra music tracks are instantly stored whenever you make an associated purchase. They actually call it your Digital Locker.
I wonder if anyone in MS marketing has been shopping at Amazon lately?
Error:
Didn't Passport get cancelled? Are they building new systems based on a deprecated
system?
What does Passport authentication have to do with Open Source s/w distribution? Has Amazon or eBay affected s/w distribution? So why should an MS authentication scheme do it?
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Q: Am I buying my software directly from Microsoft?
A: The Digital Locker on Windows Marketplace Labs is not a software retailer. Microsoft, with your permission, communicates your purchase information to the retailers to help complete your transactions.
Seems they are just a store front using their name to sell 3rd party software. Keeping all the licenses of your purchased software in a Digital Locker on your system might actually be convenient for the average Windows user. The program is supposed to also be able to make backup cds of purchased software as well.
I'm sure there's something I'm not seeing but it doesn't seem such a bad move to me.
Sample this!
I don't think it will effect Open Source much at all. However user friendly it gets it can't get much quicker and simpler than a GUIed-over apt-get, such as Synaptic found in Ubuntu. Then again there's a lot of Open Source software availible for Windows aswell... Maybe the submitter was questioning the stand of Open Source vs. closed source on the Windows platform alone?
All rites reversed 2010
Microsoft has participated in illegal practices for quite some time. They are a convicted monopoly, and what's different about how they did business before and after their conviction? Absolutely nothing. That may be because Bush came into power soon after they were convicted, the Republicans all being supportive of big businesses of course didn't want to cause Microsoft any harm, damn the laws that it broke. Paranoid? Possibly. Co-incedence, doubtful. See the facts here.
So when Microsoft was found guilty of breaking the law, and nothing happened. What incentive does Microsoft have to comply with other laws? What's going to happen? They'll be convicted again? I'm sure Microsoft is quivering in their boots.
See? This is what happens when you try too hard to be funny. Let it be a lesson to you all. Just do a simple "In Soviet Russia, software distributes you" or something, and be done with it.
Why should this put a hamper on OSS distribution? Isn't this just Windows trying to be more like Linux, i.e. like apt-get or CNR for Linspire?
I don't think that this really would hurt OSS distribution at all, but would instead provide more of a reason to use OSS.
This could be a good thing for OSS. If home-user license enforcement becomes easy, it will become widespread. If this works well enough, then MS Office, Adobe Photoshop, etc will start requiring these licenses to run. If it becomes difficult or impossible to run these programs, more people will stop using illegal copies, and start using OpenOffice, Gimp, etc. If MS were able to stamp-out copyright infringement (by any means), that would be a huge boost to OSS.
Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
I'm the same way. I have two PC's at home and many Virtual PC's for various reasons. Apart from MS products, anything that I must have that requires any semblance of activation goes into a GuestOS. The problem is that if I apply a patch to VirtualPC or VMWare (beginning to lean towards VMWare these days) then most activations fail and need to be reactivated. That has prevented me from upgrading my VirtualPC 5.2 to MS Virtual PC 2004.
The bottom line is that until 2004 I would spend untold thousands of dollars in software. I'm a developer, and developer tools don't come cheap (on the Windows platforms) and various other software packages I liked to have. But more and more, they are required activation (tying it to a machine). My machines upgrade quickly. I upgrade and replace early, upgrade and replace often. In 2004, I started noticing how much of my software I can't reinstall. Not much had a problem, but the three things I cared about did and I haven't upgraded since.
Now, in late 2005, more and more requires activation. Some even require a subscription for updates. Not so bad, reasonable IMO. But... they don't provide a way to download patches seperate from their update feature and once the support year expires, if I don't renew, I can't go back and download even those updates I previously qualified for, in the case my system needs a rebuild.
Getting on my nerves. But I see a trend. The trend states that this is where it is all going. Now, I do my research. If a product I *want* requires activation, messes with my MBR, makes it difficult to install on my new PCs as I replace the old, or anything, I typically avoid it.
In some cases, I'll purchase a license and apply a crack. In my mind, I paid for it. So what do they care. In reality, its getting harder to do even that and to the point that I gave up on some software and just do without. Of course, I really don't look for open source alternatives. I just don't care. MS is the only company that gets away with activation in my case. But I avoid all others. I stopped upgrading Acrobat Pro because of this. I just don't agree with activation and the means they take to applying it.
There is one way I agree. www.libronix.com does it. You activate once, get a key that can be reapplied as much as you want. All their ebooks are purchased and activated against that key. If it leaks to the internet, you've just lost quit a bit of money as they deactivate you. Otherwise, they don't "presume" innocence or guilt. They just allow you to reapply they key if you must. I like that approach. It also shilds you from them going out of business. Too many software companies and ebooks that I've activated in 2002/2003 aren't in business and I have no way to reactivate... which is another prime reason I avoid any kind of central server authentication in general when using desktop/server software.
Thanks,
Leabre