Slashdot Mirror
Aero To Be Unavailable To Pirates
An anonymous reader writes "Users thinking of pirating the next version of Windows may have a surprise in store: no Aero for you. The upcoming Microsoft OS will run a check to ensure the copy was legally purchased. If it comes up short, the shiniest part of the OS will not be available." From the article: "At first an optional program, the piracy check eventually became mandatory for many types of Windows XP downloads, but was not required to run any aspect of the operating system itself. Microsoft has identified reducing piracy as a key way for the company to grow its sales of Windows, which is already used on more than 90 percent of personal computers. But it's not just pirates who will be blocked from Windows' fanciest graphics. The Aero display also won't be available to those who buy Windows Vista Basic, the low-end consumer version of the operating system."
I guess this will merely separate the real pirates from the need pirates.
I'm not going to hide anything, I pirated Matlab and Mathematica in college. But I wasn't selling them or making a profit off them, I was simply installing old versions of them so that I could get my homework done without having to go to campus and be restricted by lab hours. I have since uninstalled them and don't feel wrong for using them to accomplish assignments.
I think there are a lot of pirates here in America and overseas that just want a functioning OS on which they can install their games and quicken and other such Win32 software. Even I would prefer a Windows "Lite" over Windows with Aero. The last thing I want is some fancy pants CPU hog with Rosie O'Donnel sized memory footprints running around in the background!
I would really like to see a free Windows OS "Core" kernal system that doesn't have any features but can be downloaded and installed easily. You could purchase more and more expansions or just buy the loaded omgwtfbbq$999 version of Windows right off the bat with everything from Office Suite Complex SP8 to Windows Media Player with more skins than an 18th century fur trader.
The real pirates are going to try everything to be able to crack and sell these advanced copies. They'll do it regardless of what features Windows has. There's already speculation on how to do it.
If you're making one version more secure than another, you're simply admitting that you're not too concerned about the minimal package being pirated but you cannot afford to have Aero pirated. I think that says a lot about how you really view the core operating system and how it's becoming recognized more and more as a necessary tool and not some software bonus. Many software models have developed into being very successful by offering a "Lite" version of the software product for free and encouraging an upgrade to more features by buying a full fledged license from the homepage. The very piece of software I'm using right now to author and spellcheck this post (Textpad) is marketed in this manner.
So I welcome this new news that only the rich, powerful & non-collegiate will have Aero. Let them have their bells and whistles!
My work here is dung.
Every majoy piece of software is going "phone home" from here on out.
Insert witty sig here.
FTA: With the new operating system, Microsoft is offering plenty of new graphics tricks, including translucent windows, animated flips between open programs and "live icons" that show a graphical representation of the file in question.
Many 'pirate' copies currently run on less-than-optimal hardware, yes? Microsoft's plans will make this 'pirate edition' less of a resource hog so for many it actually sounds like a pretty good upgrade over the legit version.
Trolling is a art,
Somebody please correct me if I have been mistaken.
I understand and respect Microsoft wanting to be able to ensure that as many copies of their software is legit as possible, but from what I understand, Vista is going to *require* signed drivers for it to work, which I would also assume plays some part in the Windows Genuine Advantage program. I would assume that it costs money and requires licensing and such to get a driver signed. Doesn't this qualify as a form of extortion and abuse of Microsoft's monopoly? By requiring signed drivers, they're effectively forcing everybody to pay them an "extortion fee" in order for other companies to be able to make hardware for users to run their systems. Doesn't this present problems for Microsoft? How can they be allowed to do this, considering their monopoly status?
I really don't like the idea of Microsoft forcing me into using signed drivers and such in order to take advantage of the software I legally purchased. There's countless reasons for this, but I would think that Microsoft's monopoly status alone would be enough to stop them from abusing these sorts of practices.
A community-oriented lyrics site
Really, thank you. You have now given me the final reason NOT to upgrade.
As a poster in a previous article said, I'll keep my copy of W2K running as long as I can and when, for whatever reason, it is no longer useful I will devote my time and resources to learning how to use Linux though Apple might come first.
Thank you Microsoft. Your ineptness will be your undoing.
I can't wait to see what happens when businesses realize the cost to upgrade to your latest abomination and all the attendant problems that will occur.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
1) Is Aero relevant to Vista's inner workings, i.e. is it a real limitation to its functionality if missing? If yes, how severe a limitation?
2) How does Aero differ from numerous attempts at 3D desktops that are already out there? Why will users really miss it?
3) What are the chances that Aero will stay off-limits to "pirates" for any extended period of time?
The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
I only know enough about law to tell you this:
No one gives a shit about enforcing anti-trust laws in the current administration.
Sadly, that is not the biggest of our concerns. If we make it to 2009 without nuking someone, I will be happy. We can worry about corporations raping the public after that.
Have you seen screenshots of Aero Glass? It looks like the short films of a first year computer animation student http://www.activewin.com/screenshots/longhorn3/Aer o%20Glass%20-%20Contacts.jpg. It is for this same reason Luna in XP gets very old very fast, and anyone wanting to get some serious work done turns it off.
Or, did anyone consider the fact that these all look like crap because they can be turned off--they are only add-ons to the plain style that was introduced with Win95. They get in the way. Would anyone even consider turning off Aqua, even if you could. No, because it is part of the system, part of your work flow. (Disclaimer: I have Win2000, OS X and Ubuntu machines)
Besides, as people have noted, most individuals who are installing pirated versions have computers that can't handle Areo Glass anyway. Any computer capable enough will come with Visa pre-installed, whenever that happens to be. The rest of us be thankful that we can get the garbage out of the way, even if you believe that Visa will be able to do some real work. Me, I'll keep Windows 2000, because really haven't seen any real innovation since then--it is stable and uncluttered, which is about as good as Windows can get.
XP is nice and snappy and stable when you make it look like 95!
And what's really cool is that it looks better too!
KFG
in the future more and more things wil be tied to the web. Office applications like writely and ajaxWrite. Photo librarys. Maybe even your music and TV. You won't want to unplug to run the OS.
On the otherhand I like this solution to piracy. If it detects a piarate copy it hobbles the OS but does not shut it down. That makes it safe to use in case it glitches on you and mis-detects it's lic status.
I'd take it one step further and change the mouse to an oversized hot pink X with a desktop that says "Liscence key not valid". Anyone seeing that on someone elses computer would know it was stolen and there might be social pressure to pay for what you can steal.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
"While it's great to suspect some extortion/conspiracy theory, the signed driver requirement is in place so that it'll be much harder for Hacker McPhee to install that driver rootkit on your machine."
Yes, I'm sure that's what they told you. Oceania has always been at war and all that shizz, you know?
Hackers will find ways to bypass these restrictions easily enough. Security holes (old AND new) will allow dishonest people to do whatever they want anyway.
That's not even counting on the possibility of hackers getting their spyware signed. Remember when people managed to get keys signed in Microsoft's name? You REALLY trust Verisign with this? I sure don't.
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
While it's great to suspect some extortion/conspiracy theory, the signed driver requirement is in place so that it'll be much harder for Hacker McPhee to install that driver rootkit on your machine.
But it won't do anything to stop Hacker McSony
Think about it. Microsoft can't afford to seriously crack down on piracy... not with the new Mactels, not when distros like Ubuntu are making such giant strides for Linux noobs everywhere. At the same time, they do want to prevent piracy of their OS from becoming (more) mainstream. Hence, they allow us the ability to pirate their core OS, while blocking all of the glitter. We might not care about the glitter (though I must say I don't understand why everyone here prefers to look at gray on gray all day. Yes, XP on default is Fischer Price, but that's a hell of a lot better on the eyes than gray on gray), but your average consumer does. Your average consumer won't give a shit about the techincal advances of Vista; they'll just want the eye candy. Your average consumer is also the least likely to want to jump ship to something that's harder, less flashy, and/or less compatible with their favorite software.
So, Microsoft is putting the squeeze on those customers they know won't jump ship by leaving out the glitter, thus reducing their incentive to pirate, while simultaneously leaving the door open for the tech-savvy (who are generally much less impressed by glitter) to pirate Vista-sans-glitter, thus reducing their incentive to jump ship to OS X or Linux.
Too bad it's all going to fail miserably. I've got $1000 that says Vista-with-glitter will be pirated within the first month. Any takers?
Jack Valenti, one time head of the Motion Picture Association of America, once said:
... but the comment is still valid in this context. Just because you can easily connect a user's copy of your software to your servers doesn't mean you should.
... Jack Valenti. But he did have a point.
Just because technology lets you do something doesn't mean you should.
He was talking about illegal copying of DVDs, of course
I know, I know
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I'd argue that offloading the graphic generation from the CPU/RAM to a video board and video memory might be a good thing. It could mean a more responsive GUI, less bogged down processor, and a better user experience.
Don't make it 1K and you'll be in business. Take Adobe's offerings for example. 1600-2000USD for Production Studio ( http://www.adobe.com/products/productionstudio/ma
Pricing always leads to pirating. Make it a pain in the @$$ and offer it for $50 for home users, or sell groups of licenses (4 computers per street address) and most people will buy. Make it $500 and people won't. Windows XP is $200USD, Word in itself is $180USD! It's a question of value. These days the OS costs as much if not more than a new PC!
Sell high to enterprise, and low to home and small business. Get people hooked on Office, so that if they go to a place of business, they're pre-trained in it. Make it cheap and attainable for home users and few-man office shops.
I don't think this is it. If an organization is pirating Windows, which is extremely common in businesses, then they'll stand out like a sore thumb as I'm sure the 'basic' version won't be a corporate offering. It's like a call-home. The 'Microsoft Police' come in and will very simply see what computers look crappy and which don't. You know where the licenses are right away. You can't assume a license is there, as you'll see it. As a user in a University, you'll see right away which PCs are legit.
-M
when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
Drivers aren't signed until they are tested and certified by Microsoft, right?
No, this isn't the case. You can sign drivers yourself if you have a code signing cert from Verisign and have registered with MS to get a cert signed by them. The manditory signing is only on x64 versions too.
This means "beta" drivers will be signed by their developers and runnable on Vista. The net effect of the code signing is it just raises the bar a little on who can write drivers for the system, and potentially causes headaches for open source drivers like ext2 and winpcap (which is where I see the main problem).
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means