Microsoft Denies the Windows Kill Switch

WindozeSux writes "Microsoft has denied that WGA will kill pirated copies of Windows. According to Waggener Edstrom,"Microsoft anti-piracy technologies cannot and will not turn off your computer." Microsoft also says that WGA is a necessary part of its campaign to catch those illegally using Windows XP which leads one to think what WGA really does then."

Comments

"We can't turn off your computer"

[Anonymous Coward]

"Because we broke power management in the latest update. We will, however, make sure Windows doesn't boot once your computer is on."

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[kabz]

Yes, we have reverted to the Windows 95 technique where we shut all processes down, and display a screen that says:

"Please Turn Off Your Computer (Aaaarrrrgghhh Matey)"

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[rbarreira]

I hadn't thought about this in a long time, but your post made me remember of a trick (and security hole) to get a dos prompt on a win95 (and 98?) computer! Just type "mode co80" and/or "cls" on the "It's now safe to turn off your computer screen", which seems to be running on top of a command.com shell hehe.

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[sumdumass]

In the older win2000 and NT systems, using a win98 boot floppy with the ntfs files copies to it (as described in making an ERD) we used to rename the cmd.exe from the system or system32 directory and insert it as the logon screen saver. The process would give us fully functional command promt at the logon screen were we could change passwords or check other things like server settings.

It should work on win95-98 systems too except you would do it ot the regular screen saver. also you still can do stuff like this with the printer commands so to elevate to admin access all you would have to do is print to a hidden network printer. just like in win95, this is great for acessing recovering passwords and such. Although there are easier ways availible now.

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[Achromatic1978]

the issue of WGA to the forefront of people's minds

Or the issue of asshat virus writers ...

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[mcrbids]

Yes, we have reverted to the Windows 95 technique where we shut all processes down, and display a screen that says:

"Please Turn Off Your Computer (Aaaarrrrgghhh Matey)"

The reason for this was more simple than you may have thought - many computers circa 1995 still had manual ("AT" style) power supplies that couldn't be turned off by the Operating System.

In fact, I *still* have one computer in the house that uses an AT power supply - an ancient AMD K6-2 running Linux that's been upgraded with almost 2 TB of HDD that's used simply to backup other systems with a backup script I wrote when I couldn't find anything else better.

I've now gotten almost a decade of service out of that machine - it's BIOS date is (if I recall correctly) in 1997!

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[tolan-b]

ha!

we implemented that hardlinking / rsync system in php too ;)

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[martinultima]

Personally I wish there were more of those manual power supplies, if only because they do just what you tell them to, and no stupid automatic junk. I don't know about you, but if my computer locks up – or whichever one I'm on if it's not mine – I don't want to have to hold the stupid button down for something like ten minutes just for it to shut down. I want to have a nice, simple switch that knocks it off, and that I can visibly see knocks it off. No standby modes that secretly drain electricity, no operating system calls, just SHUT IT DOWN.

(Yes, I know there's a BIOS option, but not always an option if it's not my machine, plus it requires too much extra work to set up... and the power supplies with manual switches on the back are somewhat rare in most "mainstream" machines from big companies like Dell and HP, and either way they don't turn the machine back on again.)

Who knows, maybe I just spent too much of the 21st century working with DOS on an old 486/66...

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[mcrbids]

I gave mine to the community. Did you?

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[martinultima]

The point isn't just having a switch though, it's having only a switch. As in, no power button whatsoever, working or otherwise. Or at least one of the manual power buttons, the kind that don't go through the motherboard but rather straight through the power supply. I don't know about you, but I'm a total control freak, so as far as computer stuff goes it's either my way or the highway...

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[tolan-b]

oooh look at you with your loaded questions.

no i didn't think it was polished enough, and then i saw there were other more mature tools that do the same thing (dirvish).

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[mcrbids]

oooh look at you with your loaded questions.

no i didn't think it was polished enough, and then i saw there were other more mature tools that do the same thing (dirvish).

I might mention that I discuss the plusses and minuses of dirvish on my related projects page and still get an e-mail every week or so about Backup Buddy.

If it's good enough for you, it's good enough for somebody else. Release your stuff! If only because you might have thought of a feature that I might like! It's this cross-fertilization that makes OSS evolve so quickly and so effectively...

Re:"We can't turn off your computer"

[tolan-b]

Yes I saw your discussion of Dirvish. I didn't feel our tool brought anything new to the table. I don't have the time to manage everything I generate as an open source project unfortunately. I do have a PHP5 web framework and an ORM framework I intend to open source once they're better documented though, that I think are a more useful contribution.

You're welcome to 'roughback' under a license of your choice if you want it though.

Please, this was never going to happen

[adamwright]

This was obvious from day one. In any deployment of software there will be bugs, and I've read plenty of incidents of WGA not recognising valid installations (or people using invalid keys for valid purchases). Even if the failure rate was 0.001%, that's still thousands of machines "killed" incorrectly. If just one of these happened to be a prominent journalist, IT decision maker or similar, the fallout for MS would be far worse than anything they'd gain by the action.

So, another hyped story killed with a modicum of common sense (and I'm certainly not the first to point this out). I thought IT communities were meant to be filled with rational people?

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[westlake]

I thought IT communities were meant to be filled with rational people?

One can but hope.
Slashdot tends to shake your faith a little.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

I think there is a kill switch in there. We bought an HP machine with XP Home on it for the office. When we had to reinstall the machine (dumb user picked up a trojan), we bought a legit copy of XP Home and installed it using the product key that the HP machine came with rather than mess around with installing the HP system restore with all the crap it comes with.

After a few weeks with auto updates on, the machine stopped working, claiming that it did not have a valid license. We did have a valid license (two, in fact), just not the right keys for the right version I guess.

So rather than feed the MS beast again, we've begin switching to Macs and Ubuntu desktops. That was the last straw for us.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Insightful? Your experience is not at all what this article is about. You used the OEM key to activate a commercial version; of course they don't match. XP has only ever worked for 30 days without proper activation. You never actually activated it at all. I'm no M$ fan, but what you describe has been happening for the 6 or so years XP has been out.

This article refers to the recent WGA update and whether it will kill machines that had heretofore been running and updating normally for long periods of time.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[linvir]

There's an important distinction to make between the IT community and IT journalism.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

I had a similar problem, but with a completely different outcome.

I have a laptop and a desktop. I had WIN2K running on both. Dell was sending me an XP upgrade for my laptop. I got tired of waiting, so I went to the store and bought XP and upgraded my laptop. I figured I could use the laptop upgrade when it arrives for my desktop. When the xp laptop upgrade arrive, I tried to install it on my desktop. The license keys would not work on my desktop. I had two valid licenses, but they were installed on the wrong systems.

I called microsoft's 800 number (from the activation screen) and explained the situation. I wanted to switch my license keys. I did not want to reinstall since I had already loaded many applications and did not want to go through that process again. The microsoft rep said they could not switch the keys, but they would just give me another key for my desktop that would work.

I was shocked! I said, "that means I will have 3 valid xp licenses." I said I could wipe my systems clean and install them the right way and then I'd have a valid key leftover that I could give away. The support rep said they hoped I would not do that, but it was possible.

So even though I know it is cool to bash microsoft, this is a case where they went out of their way to help me. I called them for help and 10 minutes later I had my situation fixed. No need to reinstall Windows or switch os's all together.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Ucklak]

The Key you used is an OEM key and you should have used your retail key.
Tier1 vendors get a key/image that doesn't require activation.

Still pointless that you paid extra money for another XP license while you should have used the original OEM license and spend the time removing the OEM crap instead of reinstalling again.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[DannyO152]

Except... "WGA will kill" is speculation which originated from advice given by a low-level tech in the company. The journalist followed up with requests for clarification from Microsoft, and that company and its pr firm would neither confirm nor deny at the time. The most recent chapter in the saga is that an official statement, quoted in the above abstract, perhaps clarifies Microsoft's intentions. Nonetheless, Microsoft's agent has gone on to say that they they will not entertain any requests for interviews on the subject. I quote:

Update 30-June 2:15PM PDT: Microsoft says they have no intention of answering any questions about WGA. According to the same Waggener Edstrom spokesperson who sent me the statement reprinted above, "We are not granting interviews on this, as all of the information we have to share about WGA Notifications is contained in the response I provided below and the PressPass article that I sent you a link for."

Source: Ed Bott's Column

Perhaps these statements are a consequence of the way WGA was rolled out, and the way, allegedly, some people have had WGA nags when they have legitimate licenses. My guess is that the Microsoft lawyers were smelling lawsuits (there's one already) and that's what put the company into clam mode.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[ratboy666]

So, be rational.

What is the purpose of WGA? Windows Genuine Advantage.

It's purpose is to enforce Microsoft's Intellectual Property Rights. And what right is that? There are really only two -- the right to be paid for Windows, and the right to not have to support Windows that has not been paid for. (and, Customer Education).

The only way to enforce being paid for Windows via WGA is to turn off Windows that haven't been paid for.

The only way to enforce the support right, is to not allow support if WGA is not present, or finds that Windows has not been paid for.

WGA won't work on non-Microsoft platforms. (Microsoft will support Windows 98 and ME without validation, &etc. but has stated that NON-MICROSOFT platforms are not supported by WGA).

Not running WGA locks the user out of the Microsoft Download Center.

Which leads to the "Advantage" part: If you are running Microsoft products on a Microsoft platform, you have the advantage of being able to given access to the Microsoft Download Center for support.

That, of course, can't be true, because it is a violation of US monoply laws (it locks the use of MS Office to the use of Windows). Since it is ridiculous to presume that a company would so blatantly ignore laws, this cannot be the case.

So, either WGA is not needed to get download support for Microsoft Office, OR WGA disables Windows. One is illegal; and the other is silly.

Since I run Microsoft Office under Wine, I wonder if I can request any support via sending of the updates by a different channel (and I will not "crack", "reverse", etc. WGA). Has anyone tried this? Because if that is the case, there is another alternative:

WGA is a tool that simply boosts consumer awareness of bootleg Windows. And that I am completely supportive of.

Ratboy.

Re: Please, this was never going to happen

[QuietLagoon]

Note the very careful wording in the Mircosoft's press release. Microsoft's PR firm (not Microsoft) is saying that WGA will not "will not turn off your computer". The release says nothing about preventing Windows from running, which was what a Microsoft person had previously stated.

So Microsoft, through their press agent, has denied something that they were not accused of planning to do. Releasing the denial through th epress agent prevents any further questions on the matter. The agent will just say that they have said all they know.

Bottom line: the matter of whether or not WGA will prevent a copy of Windows from running remains unsettled.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Itchy Rich]

One can but hope. Slashdot tends to shake your faith a little.

Shh... Slashdot users aren't meant to understand irony.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[jZnat]

Yeah, you can call Microsoft, and they'll happily give you another key (not a normal key, but a longer one for that specific situation). The people working the phones for that are very nice. If you can somehow make the damn robot thing understand you, you won't even need to talk to a human.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[shaitand]

It doesn't even make sense. A retail copy of windows would not accept an OEM license key in the first place. When he tried to enter the key it would have said it was invalid and refused to install.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Tri0de]

When you're dealing with my data and my deadlines even a failure rate of 0.001% is too damn high by several orders of magnitude.
I don't care what my gear costs, I don't care what name is one the lable of the box or the disc; I know one thing only- it MUST work.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[jnuzzo]

Which all points to a very convenient (and paranoid) conspiracy theory. Or should I say "another" MS conspiracy theory... try to be rational without rationalizing

It's entirely plausible that WGA does a couple of different things without actually being yet another evil conspiracy, and without any active intervention on installed systems.

Here are a couple of plausible theories that make WGA's existence productive, while not infringing on anybody's rights.

1. WGA just identifies pirated copies.
You buy a new system from a smallish vendor. On your first trip to Windows Update, you see a screen telling you that your OS is pirated. Irate, you complain to the vendor; to MS; and escalate through your state's regulatory agencies. This helps MS isolate pirates but does not affect your ability to get updates beyond a "nag" screen.

2. WGA helps MS collect statistics and nothing else.
When systems connect to get fixes, WGA keeps a counter of pirate-detctions. This allows MS to decide how much to budget for future legal enforcement, and how much to budget for future anti-theft engineering.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[deblau]

When talking about 'intellectual property' rights, let's be more clear.

It's purpose is to enforce Microsoft's Intellectual Property Rights. And what right is that? There are really only two -- the right to be paid for Windows, and the right to not have to support Windows that has not been paid for.

Let's start with the first 'right': the right to be paid. Simply put, there is no such right. You won't find it anywhere in the laws of the United States. No one is required by law to buy Windows from Microsoft (certain public offices notwithstanding). While it is true that external factors (ease-of-use, company policy, etc) strongly compel purchasing decisions, those factors are not legal, and do not create a 'right' of payment.

Now, the second 'right': the right to receive support. Again, there is no such legal right. True, there are implied warranties of merchantability, but these can be expressly disclaimed by an EULA. Let's take a look at the XP Home Edition EULA:

15. LIMITED WARRANTY FOR SOFTWARE ACQUIRED IN THE US AND CANADA. Microsoft warrants that the Software will perform substantially in accordance with the accompanying materials for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of receipt. If an implied warranty or condition is created by your state /jurisdiction and federal or state/provincial law prohibits disclaimer of it, you also have an implied warranty or condition, BUT ONLY AS TO DEFECTS DISCOVERED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS LIMITED WARRANTY (NINETY DAYS). AS TO ANY DEFECTS DISCOVERED AFTER THE NINETY-DAY PERIOD, THERE IS NO WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF ANY KIND.

YOUR EXCLUSIVE REMEDY. Microsoft's and its suppliers' entire liability and your exclusive remedy for any breach of this Limited Warranty or for any other breach of this EULA or for any other liability relating to the Software shall be, at Microsoft's option from time to time exercised subject to applicable law, (a) return of the amount paid (if any) for the Software, or (b) repair or replacement of the Software, that does not meet this Limited Warranty and that is returned to Microsoft with a copy of your receipt. You will receive the remedy elected by Microsoft without charge, except that you are responsible for any expenses you may incur (e.g. cost of shipping the Software to Microsoft).

So there you have it. They don't have to support their software, ever. If Windows breaks, they have to (a) refund your money, or (b) give you a replacement. They do not have to (c) fix the broken software. Just to make sure you understand that this is their only obligation, they include

16. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES. The Limited Warranty that appears above is the only express warranty made to you and is provided in lieu of any other express warranties or similar obligations (if any) created by any advertising, documentation, packaging, or other communications. Except for the Limited Warranty and to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, Microsoft and its suppliers provide the Software and support services (if any) AS IS AND WITH ALL FAULTS, and hereby disclaim all other warranties and conditions, whether express, implied or statutory, including, but not limited to, any (if any) implied warranties, duties or conditions of merchantability, of fitness for a particular purpose, of reliability or availability, of accuracy or completeness of responses, of results, of workmanlike effort, of lack of viruses, and of lack of negligence, all with regard to the Software, and the provision of or failure to provide support or other services, information, software, and related content through the Software or otherwise arising out of the use of the Software.

Microsoft has no duty to support Windows. You have no right to receive support for Windows. The main reason Microsoft supports their software is because it's buggy and they don't want people to use something else.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[HardCase]

...we bought a legit copy of XP Home and installed it using the product key that the HP machine came with...

Oh no you didn't. The retail XP would not accept the OEM key. You made the story up! I guess we know why you posted AC.

-h-

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Kadin2048]

I don't care what my gear costs, I don't care what name is one the lable of the box or the disc; I know one thing only- it MUST work.

If this is the case, you're making a mistake running Windows in the first place. You'd be better off running an RTOS.

Anyone trying to get High Availability out of Windows is, IMO, foolish. (I'd say the same thing if they were using an unstable/desktop Linux distro, too.)

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[paganizer]

You do mean the WinXP downgrade, right? unless you have a intel hyperthread CPU or a 64-bit processor, XP pretty much sucks in comparison to Win2k.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[dotgain]

Me concur.

I don't normally "me too", but just in case anyone wants to hear it from a non-AC, that's been my experience too. Each particular version of XP I've dealt with, (Home, HomeOEM, Pro, ProOEM, ProVolumeLicence) immediately refuses a key from a different type. If there are exceptions to this I haven't encountered them.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Silver Gryphon]

I think you're confusing 'right' and 'responsibility' here.

Microsoft spends billions creating software.
Microsoft wants to get a return on their investment.
Therefore, Microsoft has a right to get paid for someone taking/consuming/using what they produce.

What you describe is the consumer's lack of rights; MS is not obligated to support software nor obligated to sell or give it to any one person. However, if the consumer is using a copy of Windows, MS has the right to get paid according to the licensing agreement.

If I create software which is to be licensed at $50 per copy or $500 per developer per year, I fully intend to enforce that so I can pay my bills. The method of enforcement depends partially on how much flak I am able and willing to handle from my customers. If MS wants a kill switch, fine, but they damn well better tell me they have one. If my MS system dies in production because WGA couldn't call momma, I'll be porting everything to Linux within an hour. That is MY right.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Ucklak]

All the more reason to use:

Mac- open box, take out and turn on, use
Linux- install, reboot once, use.

As I type this I just realized that even Tier1 OEM vendors require at least 1 reboot for XP. I just setup a HP/Compaq a few weeks ago and it required a reboot.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Lonewolf666]

I agree that it would be a big risk for Microsoft. But never underestimate corporate stupidity. An example from a different business:

At the company I work for, development of a promising new device was canceled two years ago. Because management believed that it would disrupt sales of its predecessor. Since then, the device in question has been mostly sitting in storage while the competition has caught up. Now we will have to catch up because the competition has brought their stuff to market while ours still needs development.

Back to topic:
If Microsoft proceeds with a Windows kill switch and nails a few thousand legitimate installations, they would merely match the stupidity of our management ;-)

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[penix1]

"Perhaps these statements are a consequence of the way WGA was rolled out, and the way, allegedly, some people have had WGA nags when they have legitimate licenses. My guess is that the Microsoft lawyers were smelling lawsuits (there's one already) and that's what put the company into clam mode."

That's exactly what happened. It would be a brilliant strategy to test the switch off waters with a "leak" that can be dumped if too much noise is made over it. Of course we will never see what Microsoft's true WGA intentions were / are because the case will never make it to discovery and even if it did it will be sealed. The ones who should be most interested in Microsoft's WGA ambitions should be the antitrust board. Of course, there is no word from them (or nobody thought to ask them).

B.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[penix1]

"... you should have used the original OEM license and spend the time removing the OEM crap instead of reinstalling again."

The problem with this strategy is the registry. All the crap installed by the OEM (usually "trialware") is heavily embedded in the registry in about a thousand places on purpose to prevent a user from getting around the time limit. Add to that the silly modifications OEMs do to those idiot installs and removal of ALL the OEM crap results in an unstable computer.

Depending on the OEM, it is sometimes quicker to simply reinstall from retail sources.

B.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft has a right to get paid for someone taking/consuming/using what they produce
Now who is confusing rights?

MSFT _may_ have a MORAL right to get paid for someone using what they produce. But MORAL rights don't mean shit. Your moral right an $0.50 will get you a newspaper.

But MSFT does NOT have a LEGAL right to be paid for someone using what they produce. Oh, under copyright they have the legal right to STOP someone from using what they produce, and that person may have a contractual right to use the software if they paid and MSFT agreed to the payment. But fundamentally MSFT is not under some compulsory license to to allow anyone who pays to use their product, which is what your "right" to be paid would result in.

IP (in general) is a negative right. You have the right to STOP someone from using what you have. Not a right to use it yourself (especially with patents) and no right to be paid (unless there is compulsory licensing).

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[cyber-vandal]

I thought IT communities were meant to be filled with rational people?

Huh? You must be very new to IT to think that.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[TechForensics]

From TFA: "In Windows Vista, we are making it notably harder and less appealing to use counterfeit software, and we will work to make that a consistent experience with older versions of Windows as well."

This is an unmistakeable threat to hobble existing versions of XP.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[cyber-vandal]

The word work does not solely apply to high availability servers you know. If you're an accountant who needs to send an Excel version of the month-end figures to the board by 5pm that day WGA not letting you use your computer would be a real problem.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[dougmc]

When you're dealing with my data and my deadlines even a failure rate of 0.001% is too damn high by several orders of magnitude

Considering that a failure rate of 0.001% corresponds to only 1 in 100,000, or if you see it as downtime, five minutes per year, and you feel that you need several orders of magnitude better than that, you might want to consider just how important your data and deadlines are, because you won't find many things that are anywhere near that reliable. Certainly not any single units of the computer hardware or software available today. Not even your body itself -- statistically, the odds of you dying in the next 24 hours are likely to be signifigantly more than 1:100,000.

And considering that you brought this up in the context of Windows is doubly amazing -- I've found that Windows (or one of it's drivers, or an application tha runs on it, or the hardware it runs on, etc.) fails in one way or another rather often. If you want the sort of reliablity you're talking about, you're going to need something better than PCs, a better OS than Windows, and you'll probably need quite a few backups just in case something does fail.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Planesdragon]

The ones who should be most interested in Microsoft's WGA ambitions should be the antitrust board.

Unless MS stops allowing downloads of non-Windows updates due to the lack of WGA (such as someone running Office on WINE who wants the new service pack), the antitrust board shouldn't care about it. In fact, if WGA makes getting the various Windows-add-ons harder, it might actually be done to help antitrust.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[The MAZZTer]

Solution: Uhh... run WGA under Wine? :)

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Tony-A]

0.001% is one out of 10,000

Journalists, IT managers, and 'similar' comprise what percentage of the population?
Direct, rather small, but add a couple orders of magnitude for direct friends and at least another for friends of friends. The influential people are influentential because they know a lot of people (and a lot of people know them).

Finally, what are the odds that of all the possible failure modes software can have, one absolutely not designed to deactivate a product does so.
No, the odds are that a failure of something (hardware, malware, foreign software) fails in a way that can (will?) be attributed to deactivation.

A carefully worded press release from Microsoft's PR firm does not really do that much to allay suspicion. It has to do with how much "weasle room" there is between what the statement appears to say and what it actually does say. Also, since this is a PR firm, rather than someone from inside Microsoft who would be an a position to know, it is probably safe to conclude that they can only say what they have been told.

Dunno what all is behind it, but looks like the beginning of a good urban myth.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[witte]

> I thought IT communities were meant to be filled with rational people?

The real question is whether Microsoft is filled with enough rational people to understand how incredibly stupid this would be.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[slimjim8094]

Correct. You could fsck up the legit users, and trouble the pirates for about ~10 minutes, until there's a fix. This is much the same trouble with DRM - $labelstore only screws over legit users, pirates (not the *true* pirates, that duplicate and sell) crack the AAC/WMA file and decrypt it. It only inhibits the legit user from doing stuff with his music.

However, MS gets a lot of support from pirates. Usually, their only issue is the high cost for not much, but they (often) buy less expensive software (games), thereby supporting lock in. More people using Windows is less than *nix/OSX. If they had some theoretical means of cutting off all piracy, they would lose a signifigant amount of money. A copy of XP costs about $5, including the development cost. The point is, it really is not to their benefit for a number of reasons, on many levels

And shame on you, /. for believing it in the first place

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[maxume]

There are rational people!??

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Reaperducer]

If this is the case, you're making a mistake running Windows in the first place. You'd be better off running an RTOS.

You assume that everyone uses their computers for the same task you do. At my last job, I was like the above poster -- my computers HAD to work all the time. It was the sort of industry where five seconds is the difference between keeping your job, and being sent packing. As much as I wanted to, switching off Windows wasn't an option because the indusrty-specific program that ran on 500 of our computers only comes for Windows, and it's the only program that interfaces to the 100 or so machines that need to communicate with each other, and with the computer operators, all day.

As much as I hate Windows, and wish everyone could switch to Apple, it's not always possible, and pretending it is just shows your ignorance.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[ozbird]

That, of course, can't be true, because it is a violation of US monoply laws (it locks the use of MS Office to the use of Windows). Since it is ridiculous to presume that a company would so blatantly ignore laws, this cannot be the case.

You must be new here.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Vacuous]

I used to do XP tech support, and all I have to say is this:

Yes they can generate XP OEM keys.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[sumdumass]

I have a friend whos computer has been deacivated several times because microsoft saw the keycode being used elsewhere. Well the issue is always unknown on why it was deactivated but i have seen his keycode listed in databases that store codes for piracy. When reactivation is required, until SP2, it required basicly rebloading the computer and a call to microsoft. Now he has to call microsoft and give them the code, some numbers from the actual CD and enter a different product code into the screen before they will give an activation code that works.

It isn't like this isn't already hapening. 5 times that I know of since SP2 and at least twice before. I doubt it will turn off the computer or damage the instalation but I wouldn't be surprised if alot of people need to call redmond to reactivate in a simular way as described above. I havn't installed the WGA software so I am expecting a hit. I'm waiting for it to happen so i can report it to the better buisiness bureau amung other things.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[SilentChris]

That, of course, can't be true, because it is a violation of US monoply laws (it locks the use of MS Office to the use of Windows). Since it is ridiculous to presume that a company would so blatantly ignore laws, this cannot be the case.

Um, it isn't true because there's a whole separate program ("Office Genuine Advantage", or something like that). Knock it off with the FUD. Doesn't help our case.

So, either WGA is not needed to get download support for Microsoft Office, OR WGA disables Windows. One is illegal; and the other is silly.

Actually, if you've been following the "Genuine Advantage" crap for a few months, you realize it's not an all or nothing deal at the Download Center. MS can select (rather randomly) what requires verification and what doesn't. To date, I've never run into an Office download that required WINDOWS advantage.

WGA is a tool that simply boosts consumer awareness of bootleg Windows. And that I am completely supportive of.

Why? Because you can't pony up a couple hundred bucks for a software license? I love people who do this, then turn around and buy $1000-2000 worth of hardware.

Look, there ARE other choices out there. You don't need to buy a computer with Windows. You can buy a Mac, buy a Sun (*shudder*), buy from any number of Linux vendors, build your own.

The only thing you do by encouraging bootleg copies of Windows is putting more evidence in the "we need Microsoft" argument -- which is garbage. Really want to put a dent in their regime? Don't use their software at all.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Anonymous Coward]

"that means I will have 3 valid xp licenses."

No. You will have two valid licenses and three valid keys. Using all three keys would be just as much a copyright violation as using a warez version of XP.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[avasol]

The below part always cracks me up. It's where Microsoft openly admits their software a) doesn't work and b) doesn't pretend to.

16. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES. [..AS IS AND WITH ALL FAULTS, and hereby disclaim all other warranties and conditions, whether express, implied or statutory, including, but not limited to, any (if any) implied warranties, duties or conditions of merchantability, of fitness for a particular purpose, of reliability or availability, of accuracy or completeness of responses, of results, of workmanlike effort, of lack of viruses, and of lack of negligence, all with regard to the Software, and the provision of or failure to provide support or other services, information, software, and related content through the Software or otherwise arising out of the use of the Software.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[HazE_nMe]

Here is a link to a Legit copy of XP Home Edition that would have no problems with an OEM key.
http://newegg.com/Product/ProductList.asp?N=206035 0368+1179212227&Submit=ENE&SubCategory=368
legit |= Retail

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[deblau]

Let's go step by step.

Microsoft spends billions creating software.

True, but entirely irrelevant as to whether they can or should get paid. Rights aren't created based on how much money someone spends.

Microsoft wants to get a return on their investment.

Also true, and also irrelevant. Rights aren't created based on how badly someone wants them.

Therefore, Microsoft has a right to get paid for someone taking/consuming/using what they produce.

There's something here, and that something is sales contract law. If someone buys Microsoft products, Microsoft has a right to payment. The operative word is if. Ordinary citizens are under no duty to buy Microsoft. There is, therefore, no corresponding right that Microsoft has to be paid simply for doing work. See Hohfeld analysis for more information.

My point to the OPP was that right is a pretty strong word, and he shouldn't go throwing around the phrase 'intellectual property rights' so sloppily. IP rights come from copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, and trade dress law, and a little from privacy and publicity law. They don't come from sales contract law, which is what he (and you) seem to be saying.

Re: Please, this was never going to happen

[Keeper]

People like you are the reason why toaster manuals now state 20 different ways you shouldn't put a toaster into water.

Re: Please, this was never going to happen

[QuietLagoon]

People like you are the reason why toaster manuals now state 20 different ways you shouldn't put a toaster into water.

Because I read what is actually said?

Re: Please, this was never going to happen

[nsmike]

Bottom line: the matter of whether or not WGA will prevent a copy of Windows from running remains unsettled.

This may be the case, and I caught that interesting choice of words myself...
 
...But there is more to consider here. Do you honestly expect Microsoft to go ahead with a Windows killswitch after making this announcement? To the common user afflicted by defective WGA authentications, a Windows killswitch is no different than essentially turning off their computer. Implementing such a killswitch would cause this statement to resurface, and make them look like fools. Techies and otherwise intelligent people will notice the language difference, but honestly these minor differences in semantics mean nothing to Joe Blow running an OEM copy of Windows legally that arbitrarily fails WGA. If he turns on his computer one day, and sees - "Windows Genuine Advantage has determined your copy of Windows may not be authentic. Windows will now shut down. Contact Microsoft support at 1-800-123-4567 to acquire a Genuine Windows license," and he heard this statement from Microsoft, he's not a happy camper.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[maccam94]

So there you have it. They don't have to support their software, ever. If Windows breaks, they have to (a) refund your money, or (b) give you a replacement. They do not have to (c) fix the broken software.

Finally a way to put Miicrosoft out of business!

1) Buy Windows
2) Install Windows
3) Connect computer to internet
4) Wait for computer to crash due to virus infestation
5) Get refund from M$ for defective software
6) Repeat and sell licenses for profit!

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[ratboy666]

SilentChris

I don't want people to use bootleg Windows. I certainly don't. I want AWARENESS increased.

As to my supposed "FUD" -- honestly, I just read the Microsoft WGA FAQ -- it mentioned Office in the same place. This disturbed me, because I run Microsoft Office with Wine.

I was taken aback, because I am a "corner case"; a user of Microsoft Office and some other Microsoft Software, that is not a user of Windows.

Ratboy

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[sumdumass]

No, he means he had to go thru hoops to get his ilegaly aquired product to become legal with the least amount of hassle possible and he is thanking them for that.

Remeber, he said he installed the version for his other computer while waiting for the new CD to come in the mail. I little point but neccesary because if he had waited, he wouldn't have been in that pickle.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[sumdumass]

The always told me to contact the OEM. Of course this is after they played 20 questions to see who the OEM was and where they were from.

But as far as WGA and OEMs are concerned, the major OEMs hardcode the activation in the bios. Generaly you don't need to activate them. They might not have a record of the original OEM version being installed since the activation hash only uses part of the license key (from what i'm told). But i'm not sure if that can deactivate an install activated by the bios.

Re: Please, this was never going to happen

[sumdumass]

Well, thier PR firm can go shove off somewere.

The issue i have is that I sell computers with OEM versions of XP installed. I have recieved at least two calls and expect more from irate customers who think i have pirated thier copy of XP because some program they ran (WGA) from microsoft said so. They have demanded legit copies and refunds amopunting to the full version price. I have them bring the computer in and call microsoft with them on the phone to get workarounds and ensure the customers they have legit copies. I'm only willing to take so much more of this robotic slander before a suite is called for. Thier program making incorect representations about my work and attempting to discredit my good name is just the same as someone physicly doing it. I guess maybe i should contact a lawer about liable too, since it is in writing.

Oh well, Really though, if this WGA says the copy of XP you installed on a customers computer is invalid and suggest it is pirated, a slander suite should be looked at. It is hard to tell what your customers are saying before you straighten out the mistake. I actualy over heard someone making a claim about this because thier windows update said so. Of course the end user didn't understand what was going on, all they knew was something said have an illegal copy and they recomended no one ever buying something from this guy again.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[mikeswi]

If just one of these happened to be a prominent journalist, IT decision maker or similar, the fallout for MS would be far worse than anything they'd gain by the action.

Whoaaaaaaaaaa there buddy. Slow down. You're looking at it as a rational person and projecting a rational conclusion on it. You can't do that .... this is a major corporation we're talking about here. You can't go throwing around logic or common sense like that!

Remember Sony's rootkit? If Sony were able to make themselves believe that what they did was justified and that it was worth doing, why give Microsoft extra points for brains? These are, after all, the people who inflicted Windows ME and Clippy upon the world.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Vacuous]

May be a policy change (It's been a couple years since I worked there), or you just got the wrong people.

That's an interesting theroy, if MS was to shut people's computers down through WGA I imagine it would be through activation. I'm not sure any form of activation is active on OEM versions because IIRC wpa.dbl and wpa.bak (files used to verify activation) are absent on OEM versions. I could be wrong, however.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[sumdumass]

They told us durring the OEM conferences, that large OEMs are able to set code inside the bios that windows will check for when creating the product hash. If this exist, it doesn't need to be activated. Corperate versions, i think are the ones without the wpa.dbl and wpa.bak files. If you swap mainboards out or upgrade the bios, sometimes it won't have this cod in it and you then have to activate. Dell and sony usualy use Asus boards, sometimes the Asus bios can give a performance enhancment or increase stability. sometimes you need to replace the mainboard though andn this is sure to trip it.

I've been wanting to compare the diferences in the bios from a dell computer with an ASUS board to the ASUS bios for the same board. It would be nice to see exactly were and what the code looks like.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Vacuous]

I did not know that, thanks for the info.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[vdboor]

So even though I know it is cool to bash microsoft, this is a case where they went out of their way to help me. I called them for help and 10 minutes later I had my situation fixed. No need to reinstall Windows or switch os's all together.

Each time you re-install Windows you need to explain your motives at Microsoft. And be sure they'll log your call. It's not that bad, but I don't like the idea to answer for my actions at Microsoft.. ...and typing over a 56-digit key twice :-|.

FYI: In my case, a bad driver from windows update caused display problems and it could not be fixed with Dell support. To get a new activation key you'll have to explain this first at the phone.

Re: Please, this was never going to happen

[sumdumass]

hmmm. It does,.

Wasn't intended to. Just to make a thought come alive.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[uvajed_ekil]

Remeber, he said he installed the version for his other computer while waiting for the new CD to come in the mail. I little point but neccesary because if he had waited, he wouldn't have been in that pickle.

But I think his point was that he paid for both and couldn't install them as he wanted to, even after calling for support. Even MS support couldn't simply get his two legally paid-for licenses installed on two machines, which should be a no-brainer. If you buy an XP upgrade, it should upgrade whatever previous install you wish to upgrade, no? Maybe the Dell (?) version specified that it could only upgrade particular OEM-branded installs, but I don't know what's up with all that jazz. MS must not have thought it should be limited, since they provided another license key upon request.

I understand the desire they have for limiting installs to licensed users, but the process is often cumbersome, has lots of problems, and asks a lot of legitimate users, who predominate in the US and Western Europe.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[uvajed_ekil]

Finally a way to put Miicrosoft out of business! 1) Buy Windows 2) Install Windows 3) Connect computer to internet 4) Wait for computer to crash due to virus infestation 5) Get refund from M$ for defective software 6) Repeat and sell licenses for profit!

Nice try, but that is not the best solution; that allows MS to use your $100 or so for a few months without paying interest, and you'll be selling illegal licenses if you keep using WIndows. Better to skip Step 1 altogether, perhaps proceeding on to Step 2 anyway, or maybe installing another OS entirely and avoiding steps 1-6.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[sjf]

Thank you for that Hohfeld link. Most interesting and thought provoking thing I have read recently. Admittedly, I've been concentrating on embedded processor data sheets recently, but still, props.

Re: Please, this was never going to happen

[jrumney]

Forget about sueing for slander. Such cases are drawn out and expensive, and Microsoft can certainly afford better lawyers than you can.

A safer approach would be to bill them for your time sorting out the problems they have created for your clients, then when they don't pay, file a claim against them (does the US have something like the small claims process here in the UK? - it is cheap, no lawyer required, and often large companies don't bother turning up for the hearing and lose by default).

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Fred_A]

Slashdot users aren't meant to understand irony.

Of course we do, I have a degree in metallurgy you insensitive clod !

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Fred_A]

XP has only ever worked for 30 days without proper activation.

Which does, theoretically, mean that if you install it as a standalone system somewhere that has no phone (and no network), you can only use it for 30 days ? Does it actually say do on the box ?

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[utopianfiat]

ubuntu - install,restart,use
gentoo - boot into shell, type fdisk /dev/hda or /dev/sda (you have to figure out whether you're using SCSI emulation or not, or if you're using a SATA hard drive. be sure to check your hardware beforehand), manage to download and unpack your stage tarball, etc...

I'm personally a fan of ubuntu and gentoo myself, I just don't enjoy installing gentoo anymore. Using gentoo, otoh, is quite nice (except their recent breaking of the xorg package. eww!)

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[strikethree]

Let's start with the first 'right': the right to be paid. Simply put, there is no such right.

Give me a break. It seems that you are being purposefully obtuse here. He said:

the right to be paid for Windows,

and you oh so conveiently left out the "for windows" part of it. Yes, it states quite clearly that the copyright holder has a RIGHT to negotiate compensation (get paid) for you using/receiving a copy of their work.

Your complaint about the second "right" is valid though.

strike

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[iminplaya]

It's purpose is to enforce Microsoft's Intellectual Property Rights.

Wrong. Intellectual property is a privilege granted by government. It is NOT a right by any means!

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[Reziac]

XP itself wasn't your "reboot at least once" problem with the HP/Compaq.... that's not an XP issue. But it could well be an issue with all the partners' crap on an average HP desktop system, some of which does a run-once on bootup to ensure that the hapless user will be forced to see their product.

In fact I recently removed SIX GIGS worth of partners' trialware shit from a 6 month old HP machine. Funny how the machine ran so much better afterward!!

Re: Please, this was never going to happen

[QuietLagoon]

So Microsoft, through their press agent, has denied something that they were not accused of planning to do. Releasing the denial through th epress agent prevents any further questions on the matter. The agent will just say that they have said all they know.

From a more recent blog entry: Update 30-June 2:15PM PDT: Microsoft says they have no intention of answering any questions about WGA. According to the same Waggener Edstrom spokesperson who sent me the statement reprinted above, "We are not granting interviews on this, as all of the information we have to share about WGA Notifications is contained in the response I provided below and the PressPass article that I sent you a link for."

Notice how, as I predicted, that the PR agency would hide behind the excuse of "that's all the info we have to share with you"?

Re:Please, this was never going to happen

[sumdumass]

cumbersime and irritating to say the least.

But an upgrade should only be able to upgrade from previous versions. I don't know why it would be neccesary to upgrade the same version unless this specific situation pops up. I guess the question might be, would you expect a software company to anticipate upgrading from the same version of product?

If you think it should, then maybe this install key might have been fixed to stop piracy ir maybe make it easier for less experienced users to do an upgrade to fix the computer when something goes wrong. I remember one of the most common things windows 98 users would do before taking it to the shop is reinstal 98 on top of itself then format the disk and install.

I know what WGA does!

[Nevtje(hr]

...it automatically sends a raid order of your premises to Tomas Bodström and the swedish police!

Re:I know what WGA does!

[ScrewMaster]

Given what's happening in Spain right now copyrightwise, I'd say another order is sent to the Spanish Inquisition (because nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!)

The usual spin

[Pig Hogger]

Oh, that's the usual spin from the intentionally misinformed P.R. flacks (they can't tell what they don't know, eh?). Who can trust a convicted monopolist anyways???

The real question is..!

[Anonymous Coward]

The question is why not kill pirated copies of Windows?

Re:The real question is..!

[mrjb]

The question is why not kill pirated copies of Windows?

Because a pirated copy of windows does MS more good than a legal alternative OS?

Re:The real question is..!

[jimicus]

You're either a troll or you've been living under a rock for the last week.

Because Windows Genuine Advantage is not 100% accurate.

It has declared PCs to be running an illegal copy of Windows when that is not the case.

Now, if Microsoft could guarantee that they were only turning off pirate's PCs, fine. But the first PC they turn off that isn't running a pirated copy of Windows has some pretty nasty repercussions. Especially if that PC happens to be in a large company or owned by a journalist, lawyer or even a prominent person with a blog.

Myself, I think this is the trial run. Let's face it, the first incarnation of anything from Microsoft always sucks. Doubtless Vista will ship with an improved version of WGA, which is slightly harder to crack. Then, a year or two down the line (perhaps with the first service pack), there will be another improved version which actually works quite well. Then... well, then remote killing of pirated Windows installations may just happen.

Re:The real question is..!

[Bios_Hakr]

Here's a little hint: If pirated copies stopped working, people would buy a legal copy. Computers and components cost a lot. Anyone with the extra scap around to build a custom PC would be more than willing to shell out $99 for WinXP Home. And if you bought your PC, then just throw in the restore disc.

I know linux mentality suggests that 99% of the pirates would suddenly up and switch to an alternative. It won't happen.

Grandma will not spend thousands on a new Mac; she'll get the Geek Squad to install Windows.

Mom won't install Ubuntu; she'll drop a Benjamin on WinXP.

Starving college kids will head over the the school bookstore and grab a student copy for next to nothing.

And MS will make it easy. They'll drop prices and offer discounts if you rat out who gave you the copy. They might even release a tool to map out the distribution of license keys to see if they could track the original licensee.

A WinXP killswitch will not boost the download stats for Debian or RedHat. It'll just boost MS 3rd quarter earnings.

Re:The real question is..!

[Professor_UNIX]

Because a pirated copy of windows does MS more good than a legal alternative OS?

Exactly! If I didn't have a pirated copy of Windows XP Pro how would I run my pirated copies of Microsoft Office 2003 or Visual Studio 2003? Don't even get me started on how sad I would be to not be able to play my pirated games!

Re:The real question is..!

[el_jake]

I guess it will be considered af cracking attempt and therefore illegal.

Re:The real question is..!

[davmoo]

Because if you have WGA do the killing, then what does Microsoft do when it fucks up and kills *legitimate* copies of Windows by mistake. And don't tell me that won't happen. So far since Microsoft started doing their WGA rollout, I've had 4 different systems with totally legitimate and legally purchased (by me) copies of Windows XP where WGA has come up and informed me they were pirated.

Re:The real question is..!

[Bios_Hakr]

Visual Studio is now free.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/

They also have TONS of video and print tutorials.

Office can be had for $150.

http://www.microsoft.com/office/editions/prodinfo/ students/default.mspx

And WinXP is around for between $50 and $150.

So, bare bones, you are looking at $200 to be legal. Or, you can spend a few weeks dealing with waiting for a WGA hack to come out.

Re:The real question is..!

[Cal Paterson]

Because the users of the pirate copies won't like it.

You ask that question like Microsoft have some inheirant moral right to stop people using pirate copies. They have no such moral right. They happen to have the legal right in some places, but in all honestly that doesn't mean much in philosophy.

How about we begin to consider that taking Microsoft software without paying for it is morally acceptable? Imagine if I decided to jail everyone who copied and pasted the text of this post - Microsoft killswitching/jailing users of WinXP is the same principle.

It's not like I use a pirate copy either; I've been on Unix for a long time. I don't use Windows in the course of my day, but I strongly believe that others have a right to. It's time to give up on the idea that you can force someone to pay you a commission ($200 or whatever XP is now) on what is a private transfer between two people.

Re:The real question is..!

[Bing Tsher E]

Computers and components cost a lot. Anyone with the extra scap around to build a custom PC would be more than willing to shell out $99 for WinXP Home.

Hmm, well let's see. I'm typing this on a machine running NetBSD. It's a Dell Optiplex P3 system that I bought at a university auction for $3, complete with RAM (I had to add a hard drive). Added to this, the most recent hardware upgrade I made was a new ATX motherboard for my 'Windows/gameplaying' system (low end of the spectrum). It cost $79 including the Sempron 2600 processor. I also upgraded my video card at that time with a generic Nvidea card that was $59. My last 'Microsoft' investment was an OEM copy of Windows 2000 back in 2001. I think it may be the last dollars Redmond ever sees from me.

You're telling me $99 for Windows is reasonable? I have broadband and can download NetBSD for free, ya know.

Re:The real question is..!

[hey!]

Because you can't rely on any method of detecting piracy not to create false positives. And the rate of false positives doesn't have to be very high before it costs you more than the piracy itself.

This happened to me once. We had software which is deployed on a PDA and communicates to a central server. A product manager wanted to have the server count seats to make sure the users didn't cheat on their licenses. I didn't think it was a great idea, but so be it. Subsequently, our number one support issue was this cheating detection scheme: cases where broken PDAs where replaced, or PDA batteries ran out and they hard reset and people had lost their license files. Yet, I doubt given our customer base that there has ever been an intentional case of software piracy. After the manager left, I changed the system so that if it detected what looks like a license violation, it still functions, but gives a warning with instructions for correcting false positive license problems. This turned an urgent support problem that required phone support to a low priority one that can be handled by email most times.

Re:The real question is..!

[kripkenstein]

100% true. Microsoft WANTS people to have a 'free' version of Windows. WGA is only meant at differentiating the paying customers (who get non-critical updates, etc.) from the non-paying customers. This way, they get most (well, in the US anyhow) people to pay, while others will still be using Windows. This is the only way for them to maintain their monopoly: lock down unlicensed copies of Windows, and some people - even a few - will consider alternatives. Those few people switching from Windows scare the sh*t out of Microsoft.

In essence, it's like Adobe giving you a free version of Acrobat alongside the more feature-rich version that costs money - it's a great way to get market share. Except Microsoft do it in a dishonest way. I would hope that this is even legally problematic - if you know a person's copy is illegal (WGA tells him so), can you sue him for copyright infringement later on? After all, you could have stopped him yourself. But my hopes are probably unfounded, IANAL.

Re:The real question is..!

[Moocow660]

For those who have never seen the genuine advantage notification 'tool' at work, if it detects you have an invalid license, it will help you through the process of purchasing a new license online (they mail you a physical cd, and activate your copy of windows with the key from that cd immediatly.) They are even generous enough to offer the OEM price without any hardware purchase at all...

In all honesty though, I really don't see why people who have stolen something feel they have the right to complain it might be taken away...

Re:The real question is..!

[txuk]

I think your looking for adamwrights answer up there ^. The risk of bad publicity for killing machines that have been wrongly labled as pirated would be bad for them. Besides, wrongly displaying 'You are using pirated software' in an info bubble every 10 mins was bad enough! especially when you see it on a genuine winxp pc... which is running a public ppt presentation... ahh well.

Re:The real question is..!

[laffer1]

Have you seen what MS charges college students? You only get a discount on XP Pro last I checked, and its still 99 dollars. With the special Microsoft licensing deal at my last uni, I could get it for 89.. wow the savings.

Apparently you make enough that 99 dollars isn't much money. To some people, thats a fifth of their rent or half their weekly paycheck before taxes! If Microsoft shut them out, they would be forced to use an alternative OS. Microsoft doesn't want to lose poor people. I got into computing in my teens while I lived in a trailer park. I can tell you that everyone with a computer ran windows 3.1 or 95 in there. (well except me and a friend who pirated NT4) I was a freak when i tried redhat 5. Aside from the obvious hatred of trailer parks I now have, I don't see these people affording anything or wanting to switch off windows.

Now eventually they'd probably get a license to Windows one way or another. As for the restore disc, my mother's HP didn't come with one. I had no way to reinstall Windows ME on her system when she got a virus. (arguably windows me is a virus too) She makes 30,000 a year and has major credit card debt. No windows license for her. My plan to get her legal is to wait till her system dies and then help her get a new lowend dell. I can't build a pc with a windows license for 300 dollars very easily including a monitor.

On a side note, Macs don't cost thousands of dollars. My iBook was $950 and Mac Minis are under 1000. Its not like you have to buy an apple display. They have great refurb deals too.

btw doesn't geek squad charge a lot for windows installs? That would probably make it closer to $200. At that point wait for dell to have a sale...

(yes dell sucks, but they are cheap and you get a free fireplace with each new laptop)

Re:The real question is..!

[crossmr]

[quote]They might even release a tool to map out the distribution of license keys to see if they could track the original licensee[/quote] Pretty useless since you can get a program that generates unique keys over time and verifies whether or not they can be used to trick windows into thinking it is legit. It can take a couple minutes to generate a key, but you can leave it on over night and generate a hundred keys or so. I don't think you'd be able to track that down at all.

Re:The real question is..!

[rolfwind]

No, not 99%. 5% would be nice. 10% even nicer but maybe that's reaching.

Personally, I consider something like Ubuntu (once Easy Ubuntu upgrades it:) a superior platform to Windows but that's because of all the free software I can download.

That would be the number one reason I think Linux will eventually win - central repositories will be a huge strength to people tired of hunting down freeware/shareware to get the most basic apps.

I had a number of people switch on this reason alone. They are casual computer users without the demands of app X or Y. So even though they weren't "power" users, they were the easiest to convert.

Plus, I'd imagine there'd be a fair of people pissed off at MS for switching off their Windows in the first place.

Of course, you may be correct and no significant amount will convert. That's okay, just gotta keep doing what we are doing. I don't think all of Ubuntu's success though is just from old time Linux hands - lots and lots of linux newbs on the forums since it came out.

And then there are a lot of other good distros out there, I just think Ubuntu is the best for the beginner.

Re:The real question is..!

[jZnat]

And since Ubuntu is based on Debian, it is also very good for the experienced Linux sysadmins. I use Kubuntu, however, as experienced sysadmins also tend to use KDE. ;)

Re:The real question is..!

[bladesjester]

At my alma mater, Microsoft *hated* our origional license agreement. We got it all for free. Everything from Windows to Office to the pro versions of Visual Studio. All you had to do was go to the library and ask.

They changed it a few years ago. Now pretty much anything they want is $20. That's a heck of a far cry from the $99 that you claim.

Re:The real question is..!

[AcidLacedPenguiN]

. . . anyone who builds a custom PC would NOT be willing to shell out $99 for WinXP Home. Anyone in their right mind would either wait the 2 days before the "killswitch" was broken, and then pirate it again OR they'd buy winXP Pro. Anyone who knows anything about computers would probably sooner buy Win ME over the shitty, useless Home edition.

On top of that you're saying the majority of pirates are "Grandma", "Mom", and "starving college kids". Sure College kids, but Mom and Grandma??? they bought the packaged dell computer in the first place with the legal copy of windows.

I hate to say it, but I'd say you're more out of touch on computer issues than Dvorak is!

Re:The real question is..!

[3vi1]

Insightful... not.

The killswitch would, likely, boost Microsoft's sales. But it would also boost the download stats for Ubuntu and Mandriva by some amount.

There are plenty of people that are getting to a tipping point, but just haven't had any incentive to try the alternatives: People that used keys/cracks because their OEM restore disk won't work now that they've upgraded their hard-drive. People that are getting tired of having to completely re-format their system with the restore disk every time their kids get the latest IE-trojan. People that were in the previously mentioned situation and got a taste of Linux while using Knoppix to back up their data first.

One of the reason's Linux is gaining desktop steam is that Microsoft has already bled off more than a few enthusiasts with their authorization scheme: These are people who want to replace their motherboard every other year without being presented with a blue-screen and Microsoft's solution of completely re-installing the OS (which won't work from the OEM disk, since it's customized for the wrong chipset). These are people that have the legal right to use the OS, and are pissed off that they are being shut out by Microsoft (who knows that most will just fork over more money to buy another copy).

Some might say Linux won't work for "grandma"s. It will. It's perfect for them. You set it up once and they can eBay/eMail with no fear of viruses/trojans. Newer distributions are just as easy as Windows to install. Projects like Wine are making it easier and easier to convert - The one Windows app my parents *had* to have runs flawlessly under Wine.

I hope Microsoft does a great job marketing the 360. Because, every person that buys one loses a good bit of the only major advantage Windows still has as an OS - gaming support.

Re:The real question is..!

[Tibor the Hun]

Because then a vast majority of East European, Asian and African Computers would go blank.
I was just reading on one of the forums from there yesterday, a guy is requesting keygens for his windows server 2003 enterprise CD, he bought on the street.

If microsoft was to shut down all pirated copies of Windows, Apple would have a 15% share of the desktops, Firefox 40% of the browser market, and a lot of people in developing nations would get a really nice long coffee break.

Re:The real question is..!

[shaitand]

They haven't stolen anything. They have infringed on copyrights by making a copy without permission. There is a very big difference. Stealing is taking something from another, nobody took anything by making a copy of software.

Many 'pirated' copies of windows are only 'pirated' because of a questionable EULA. Unreasonable expectations like purchasing seperate copies of $100-$300 Microsoft sofware for each PC you own (more and more commonly that is 3 or more machines).

People also pirate when it comes time to update. After all, incremental updates like win2k-winxp or winxp-win vista should be free.

The only ones who really pay for windows are buying it preinstalled on a pc. Most find the prices to buy retail copies of windows (the only ones they are really supposed to buy) ridiculous and unaffordable.

For the price of 3 retail MS Office licenses for your computers you could build two gaming systems.

For a reasonable windows software setup you would pay a fortune. Something reasonable for most would be windows ($140),office ($300), a/v, firewall ($60), 3 anti-spyware apps ($90), adobe photoshop ($600), nero 6 ultra ($90), quickbooks ($199), cd ripper/converter/tagger ($79), and alarm software ($20).

That is $1578 per pc for software. The average person gets a low end pc/monitor/keyboard/mouse/printer for under $300 nowdays. That means the realistic foundation of software mentioned above will cost them over 5x as much as the computer! This average user struggles to pay the price of this computer nowdays because manufacturers use rebates that make the initial price of products difficult or impossible to afford. They certainly can't afford to lay out a budget european vacation for the software that lets them use their pc.

Re:The real question is..!

[IHateChoosingAName]

On top of that you're saying the majority of pirates are "Grandma", "Mom", and "starving college kids". Sure College kids, but Mom and Grandma??? they bought the packaged dell computer in the first place with the legal copy of windows.

One computer store actually sold people pre-built computers with illegal copies of Windows on those computers some time ago. I can't remember which, though. If the place you bought your computer from put an illegal copy of windows on your computer, it entirely is possible for the "mom" and "grandma" to end up with illegal copies of windows.

Re:The real question is..!

[EvilSporkMan]

At the University of Michigan, everybody can have WinXP for $14, and engineering students get it free through MSDNAA (MSDN Academic Alliance). Makes it kind of a pain to do LUG evangelism there...

Re:The real question is..!

[mpe]

Because if you have WGA do the killing, then what does Microsoft do when it fucks up and kills *legitimate* copies of Windows by mistake. And don't tell me that won't happen. So far since Microsoft started doing their WGA rollout, I've had 4 different systems with totally legitimate and legally purchased (by me) copies of Windows XP where WGA has come up and informed me they were pirated.

It would also be fairly trivial for a piece of malware to break Windows in such a way as to generate a false positive for any "pirate test".

Re:The real question is..!

[Moofie]

"cd ripper/converter/tagger ($79), and alarm software ($20)"

What color is the sky on your world? Every user needs Photoshop? Well, I say every user needs a copy of AutoCAD, which starts at, what? $3000? See, I can make up numbers too!

Re:The real question is..!

[swillden]

If pirated copies stopped working, people would buy a legal copy. Computers and components cost a lot. Anyone with the extra scap around to build a custom PC would be more than willing to shell out $99 for WinXP Home.

Anecdotes are not data, but neither are they useless, so here's one: My sister e-mailed me last week asking if I could help her explore the possibility of switching to Linux because her copy of XP is pirated and WGA is annoying her. She gave me a list of the apps that she uses, and other than a few of her kids' games (which she doesn't consider important), there's nothing on the list that doesn't have a F/LOSS equivalent. I found that in a couple of major categories she's actually already using cross-platform F/LOSS software (Firefox, which didn't surprise me, and AbiWord, which did).

So I'm going over to her house later today with a Knoppix CD to see if there's any hardware in her PC that might be problematic. Assuming there isn't, I'll back up her stuff and install Ubuntu.

Go WGA!

Re:The real question is..!

[Anonymous Coward]

>> Myself, I think this is the trial run.

I agree. I really had this (naive) great trust for Microsoft until WGA. Now they've intruded into our office and installed unwanted spyware on our PCs, under the guise of a "Critical Update". This nagware impacts Windows performance making it take longer to log on daily - pops up alarming messages to our users during logon, runtime, logoff, doesn't uninstall, reinstalls itself if disabled manually - sends information to Micosoft - I don't care what Microsoft claims it is - this is SPYWARE.

I will never feel the same again about Microsoft. We have always been compliant in our software licensing, but some unauthorized VLKs had been used to to reinstall XP on some (fully licensed) workstations where the disk had failed, had become infected, or failed for some other reason and the OS needed to be reinstalled. We are now having to reinstall Windows on all of these stations, and in some cases, repurchase the Windows XP Professional licenses at $249 per pop.

I can not emphasize enough how disenchanted this had made me with Microsoft, and how a certain and strong "trust" has now been completely destroyed. This situation has cost us many man-hours and will continue to do so.

Re:The real question is..!

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

Isn't that Microsoft's decision to make?

Re:The real question is..!

[pimpimpim]

You are forgetting the millions of users outside america and europe who just don't have the money to buy windows legally. Remember the $1 per copy 'amnesty' microsoft had for indonesia? That was only for the government, but think of all the other small businesses and individuals out there. They want these people to use pirated copies more than to use something non-Microsoft. If WGA would kill all pirated copies, it would get clear that whole countries can also have working PCs without Microsoft. That would bad publicity, much worse than the news that WGA is not really working (what did we expect of that, anyway).

Re:The real question is..!

[ethicalhaxormj]

wow thatis truly naive!!! You really think people once the pirated copy is disabled are really going to go buy it? I have one copy of windows....and use it for nothing more than a box to test new exploits on. I at one time was a windows user. Once I started to learn more about operating systems and how flawed windows is I decided to get an OS that I can TRULY configure. I dont think for a second people will up and BUY windows OS....Linux and linux like distros are gaining more popularity....I think people will have moment of solid thinking and download a real OS. One which doesnt rape your machine of resources and private data everytime you boot up.

Re:The real question is..!

[damiam]

People also pirate when it comes time to update. After all, incremental updates like win2k-winxp or winxp-win vista should be free.

Oh really? You expect Microsoft to employ thousands of programmers for six years in order to give away the fruits of their labors for free?

Something reasonable for most would be windows ($140),office ($300), a/v, firewall ($60), 3 anti-spyware apps ($90), adobe photoshop ($600), nero 6 ultra ($90), quickbooks ($199), cd ripper/converter/tagger ($79), and alarm software ($20).

WTF are you smoking? Something reasonable would be:

• Windows
• Openoffice (free) or Works Suite ($69) if you really need Word
• AVG/Antivir antivirus (free)
• Ad-Aware/Spybot (free)
• Paint.NET/Picasa (both free)
• CDBurnerXP Pro (free)
• iTunes (free)

I've never used Quickbooks or alarm software (alarm software? what the fuck?) but I'm sure there are lower-cost alternatives as well for those who need them. Also, stripped-down versions of Nero and Photoshop come free with most burners and cameras/scanners respectively. No need to pirate them.

Re:The real question is..!

[Crayon Kid]

Why "outside" Europe and America? There are countries in Europe where $300 a month is considered a good salary. Give a third of that for Windows? Yeah, right.

And even in the US and the developed countries of Europe there are plenty of people barely making ends meet. If anybody's curios they should check out a recent US Census bureau report, which states that 37 million people in the US lived in poverty in 2004.

It's bloody elitist to consider that everybody buys ready-made PC's from Dell or that $99 is nothing. Let's not lose perspective here. There are lots of people out there who get their computer from second-hand parts and can't afford Windows. And if you were going to say "then they shouldn't use Windows" or "poor people don't use computers", that's elitist and stupid too. Computers and Windows are a de facto standard and they have to use them. You can't afford to tell a prospective employer "fuck MS Office, I use OpenOffice" or "I don't know how to use computers" when you're barely etching a living.

Re:The real question is..!

[Trelane]

At the University of Michigan, everybody can have WinXP for $14

Actually, if you look at it, you get an upgrade copy of Windows XP Pro for $14, plus $30-70 per semester for the campus to maintain their agreement (note that if they don't, your license vanishes and the money is completely wasted, nor may you keep it if you don't graduate), depending on whom you ask. Hardly a great deal IMHO, but also not exactly trumpeted from the rooftops either--in fact, from what I've gleaned, the students are only told about the bookstore price, not the additional moneys each semester that go directly into Microsoft's pockets for software most of them don't actually need and which they can obtain for at least comparable sums. Additionally, it's hard to buy a PC without XP already installed (you really do have to either be knowledgeable or go looking hard for it) so generally your money is wasted as you can (legally) only upgrade and XP Home or 2000 (or maybe even 9x of some sort) has gotten you along just fine thus far and likely would continue to do so.

Luckily, the Office license is a full one, not an upgrade, though if you've gotten a PC from a major vendor, you likely already have software for it. Not to mention that Office Academic is pretty cheap (relatively speaking--OpenOffice or even Star Office or WordPerfect Office is at least on par). Finally, you have to specifically ask to upgrade your license to a permanent one upon graduation, or your license evaporates, along with your $240 (a very conservative estimate of $30/semester for 2 semesters for 4 years).

Of course, this is the agreement my uni (U. Iowa) hashed out; yours may well be different, but it's likely to be very similar.

Personally, I wish I could opt out because what I have works just fine, and if not I can buy a full license via the Academic licensing channels for similar, if not significantly less money.

And engineering students get it free through MSDNAA (MSDN Academic Alliance)

That could be. I'm in physics, not engineering, but I understand that it's not at all the same beast as the campus agreement, so you may well be right--I've no special knowledge about it atm.

Makes it kind of a pain to do LUG evangelism there...

Yes. Yes it does. Nice move on Microsoft's part, especially given the lockin value plus the fact that the downsides are well-hidden from the students. sigh Double the fact that (at least for some unis) it was actually less an agreement than coercion.

Re:The real question is..!

[CastrTroy]

So, is it all software that's overpriced, or just Windows? Because if a CD burning program (Nero) costs $90, then for sure the operating system is worth $140. You use the OS every time you turn on the computer, and even though most users don't know this, it's the most important piece of software they will ever buy. Many people are used to not buying software, and many just pirate it, but that doesn't mean that software isn't worth what they charge for it. Think about how much you can do with a computer. Sure most people don't use it to their full advantage, and won't get $1000 (removing cost of PS, because nobody needs PS) of use out of their computer, but the potential is there. Although the fact that all the software you mentioned is available as open source and for free does kind of throw a wrench into my argument. People are paying way more for software than they should, but only when comparing it to open source software. Comparing all the choices for windows software for a specific applications yeilds many pieces of software in the same price range.

Re:The real question is..!

[terminalhype]

Well, I think many of you are out of touch with "grandma", because many grandmothers (and believe me, I know a lot of them as I am one too) have "pirated" Windows because their grandkids, or neighbor's grandkids, or their sons or whoever, share software with grandma.

I also know of friends (fellow grandparents) who trade software with each other. One friend of mine hated the preloaded system on her HP computer, so she asked her grandson to come "fix" it. He did. He used his own Win2k disk and totally reinstalled her system so she wouldn't have to use the stupid restore disk and put all the bundled junk back on it. I have a relative whose son-in-law always sets up their computer, and he does it with copies of his own sets of CDs.

Are these grandparents clueless users? Yes, in many ways, but they also would not be happy with MS labeling their beloved grandchildren as thieves. The truth is that sharing among families and friends is a common and normal human behavior. Whether it is now oh-so-wrong, or not, is a matter of opinion. What MS gains out of all of these so called "thefts" is the fact that many people eventually purchase upgrades of their own (upgrades are generally more affordable), as well as purchase other software for Windows. It's hard to imagine how a company with so many billions of dollars coming in every month can whine so much about "pirates", if everybody is "stealing" how'd that company get so rich? Hmmm? And then to go after the family users, rather than the real criminals who make counterfeit copies and sell them for profit, is just assinine.

But back to grandma...it has been very surprising to me how many of my friends are beginning to mention that they are saving up for their next computer, and that they would rather have a Mac next, or that their grandson (or whoever does the computer magic in their family) has mentioned Linux and is trying to get them to try it. I always encourage them to allow this. If they have someone to set up their system, it works beautifully for them every time. No matter how many of you want the world to believe that Linux is just not ready for grandma's desktop, it is, indeed, very ready and quite surprisingly so to those old folks who expected it to be really hard to get used to.

I believe that the prevailing attitudes about "grandma" are going to cause some surprises in the next few years, because MS in their arrogance is not going to see the growth from this "inconsequential" sector, until it's too late.

When even grannies can spot the FUD, and express their wish for freedom of choice and learn new computer tools, then the tide had definitely shifted. It may be a very small and quiet tide, but it's rising. Believe it or not, grannies don't like their freedoms restricted any more than anyone else. We tend to get fussy and peeved. Nobody wants to use a product from a company that promotes an adversarial relationship with its customers either. The older population does not like to be treated like wayward children (even if we do act like children sometimes :o)

Just my 2 cents worth...
You boys be good now, and put that porn down, you don't know where it's been. ;)

Re:The real question is..!

[falconwolf]

Here's a little hint: If pirated copies stopped working, people would buy a legal copy. Computers and components cost a lot. Anyone with the extra scap around to build a custom PC would be more than willing to shell out $99 for WinXP Home. And if you bought your PC, then just throw in the restore disc.

Not entirely correct. As can be seen without WGA more people are getting either Macs or Linux. WGA would only drive more people to use an alternative.

Grandma will not spend thousands on a new Mac; she'll get the Geek Squad to install Windows.

Two things here, one Macs pretty much are easier to use. And two grandmoms are switching, both to Macs and to Linux.

Mom won't install Ubuntu; she'll drop a Benjamin on WinXP.

Or her child or a friend's child may install Linux for her.

Starving college kids will head over the the school bookstore and grab a student copy for next to nothing.

The same thing can happen with Apple and Linux.

A WinXP killswitch will not boost the download stats for Debian or RedHat. It'll just boost MS 3rd quarter earnings.

Wrong again. Discounting a WGA or a killswitch, Activation is driving me to make my next computer a Mac, and I've been buying and using PCs with Windows for years. As it stands now the last Windows I'll get is Win2000 because it was the last one that didn't require Activation. I know I'm only one person but I bet there are many others who feel the same way. And when some business faces what MS does to them they'll get their lawyers and/or will switch.

Falcon

Re:The real question is..!

[penix1]

"The question is why not kill pirated copies of Windows?"

Because it won't work on true pirated copies. Look, to force WGA on security updates (notice I didn't say feature updates) makes Microsoft a menace to networking in general. It makes those that are seen by Microsoft as not legit decide to live without updating. The decision by Microsoft to use critical updates as a mechanism to test legitimacy should concern anyone connected. I find it perfectly reasonable to test legitimacy for feature updates. If you want the new Windows Media Player, then you should have a clean bill of health from WGA. But to apply that to critical security updates only does everyone connected wrong INCLUDING Microsoft. Microsoft takes big PR hits every time a bug infests these pirated machines and what do they do? "Oh, let's test legitimacy on this update that will make this bug go away!" Doesn't sound very smart to me but then again it never was about doing the right thing but about making as much money as they can...

B.

Re:The real question is..!

[SeaFox]

Here's a little hint: If pirated copies stopped working, people would buy a legal copy.

Wow, do you go to RIAA University? The same one that says if P2P doesn't exist all those customers would go out and buy those CDs and DVDs they pirated?

Re:The real question is..!

[orasio]

Stolen doesn't describe the picture.
If you want to steal something, you have to go, and take something from someone.

All that copying-is-stealing stuff is just make-believe. Why do _you_ think people who copy stuff are stealing from someone?
Because they built some software, and now they expect to be paid?
General Motors paid for the air TV I'm watching, they expect to get money from me because of that, and I'm not giving them any. I am stealing from them, too?
Reapeat after me: freeloaders are not thieves, thieves are thieves. Copying is not stealing.

Re:The real question is..!

[FLEB]

I'd venture that anyone with the computer abilities to need Photoshop and Nero 6 Ultra are going to be either smart enough to find the firewall, the anti-spyware, and the CD rip/conv/tag program for free/low-cost, or have enough money to just buy what they need. The people buying these low-cost machines will end up with an OEM version of Windows, and probably something along the lines of Microsoft Works, and possibly Word as well. For most folks buying the $300 PCs, that would do them fine.

As for it not being "stealing". Fine. Call it copyright infringement. There's still the question: If you didn't write it, and you didn't have anything to do with writing it, what gives you any right to have any say as to how it's distributed.

The fact that you're whining about prices instead of announcing your new "Office-killer" makes me think that you don't have the time, initiative, or ability to write a suitable office suite. Likewise with an anti-virus program or a professional-grade image editor. If I'm wrong, and you do, I invite you to start coding. Otherwise, continue providing whatever other specialized and valuable service you can, then participate in the system of trade that's been set up to deal with such inabilities. With your own work done and cash in hand, you may now choose to accept what deals they offer, or to walk away if you feel that the product is not worth the price.

Of course, I'm not saying that you can't just copy the software. Yes, you do have the ability to do that, just as you have the ability to sneak out of the restaurant and stiff the staff. Just don't act so righteous about the whole thing, and don't get indignant when the people actually creating those things you want exert their ownership, by either legal or technical means. (Yes, I agree that they can and do go overboard in the means of exerting their ownership, and that's a point to debate on.)

Re:The real question is..!

[gnalre]

Actually the problem seems to me advertising you have that sort of control over a third party machine.

Put it like this MS do not care if you intend to switch to an alternative OS. For example Steve Balmer will not visit your house to get you to change your mind if you intend to switch. However if you are Munich city council it is another story. If more corporate enities swith to mac OS or linux, then it becomes more publically aceptable to do so. They also have the resources to support such a switch. The more that do, the more who will feel capable of doing so(The herd mentalty is strong in IT)

Why would a corporation switch. Well there many reasons, but if your a non american country with perhaps a healthy distrust of foreign interference, well I am not sure you are to happy if you find a foreign company is not only requiring you to phone home every time you turn the computer on, but has the power to disable the afore mentioned computer at will. Would you feel safe with such power in someone elses hands? Of course MS may make a special case for you, but the special cases(corporate licences) are what pirated windows rely on, so you have not gained.

In reality I think it is something we see more and more of at MS. It appears to be a sign of weak top level control. The WGA should never of been released as it was and I wonder whether all the required departments were in the loop.

On the other hand WGA does offer something and if MS asked me for advice(my fees are reasonable) I would suggest if they wanted to stop piracy, give away there basic OS for free. Then charge people for the extra's. The new apps, better browser etc. Of course they would no longer have a monopoly, but if they carry on as they are now, they won't have that anyway in a few years.

Re:The real question is..!

[dougmc]

You're telling me $99 for Windows is reasonable?

No, he didn't say that at all. What he said (well, what you quoted) --

Anyone with the extra scap around to build a custom PC would be more than willing to shell out $99 for WinXP Home.

Now, I don't really agree with the anyone part, but most people? Probably. Grandma? Almost certainly. They might not be really willing, but given the choice between that and downloading NetBSD for free (if they even know of it or it's alternatives) and learning something new that will probably not work with all the applications they have, they're likely to decide that paying for Windows is the lesser of two evils.

I have broadband and can download NetBSD for free, ya know.

Yes, and Microsoft probably doesn't care about you, and WGA probably isn't aimed at you.

I think it may be the last dollars Redmond ever sees from me.

I'm not keen on paying for Windows (but I do have a legal copy on the computer I run Windows on for playing games), but I've found some of the games to come out of Redmond to be quite worth the money, and some of the hardware they sell is top notch as well -- for example, I'm very happy with the Microsoft optical mice I've got. And once hacked, the original Xbox makes a very nice media player ...

Re:The real question is..!

[jimicus]

I've seen this kind of thing before - some of IBM's Rational software does it.

I never understood why it couldn't simply tie up a license with data like MAC address, processor ID and serial number at the central server rather than a license file. Granted, all of these can be forged, but anyone who's buying software like that is probably either quite happy to pay for the full version or won't pay for any version, instead looking for either a crack or a free alternative.

Re:The real question is..!

[dufachi]

Actually, the "upgrade" edition is $99. You have to purchase the full version of Windows to be "legal" in MS's eyes. If you have what WGA marks as an illegal installation, they offer to sell you a legal copy for $149, which is $50 off the full retail edition. So, you're looking at a Franklin and a half.

Re:The real question is..!

[k8to]

I'm not sure about the grandparent's post specifically, but many license schemes are purchased by license scheme makers, software houses who specialize in licensing. The node's identity is stored in a local file so that the license scheme can determine that licensing has properly occurred in the past and matches the current host. As a result, a licensed application can be allowed to work in configurable ways when the network connection to the license server is temporarily unavailable. For many software categories, building in downtime-buffers changes licensing from an absolutely unworkable problem to a manageable annoyance.

I unfortunately used to be the front man for a 100 million dollar a quarter software house, meaning I investigated and resolved all high profile issues on the topic, and worked with the developer who implemented the third party scheme to make it more reasonable for our customers. I would say between the two of us it used up a full technical employee salary, around 80k a year or so. Adding in all the people who dealt with FAQs about it, funnelled information to me, lost business, the cost of licensing the software, it easily cost the company over $500k a year. I always wished I could get good numbers on how much revenue it generated. I'm certain it was over $10k a quarter, but not sure how much.

The whole experience was one of the things that pushed me strongly in the direction of free software. Licensing is software functionality that is useful to no one. We hope that its indirect result is useful to us, but directly, it is waste of everyone's time.

Re:The real question is..!

[dcam]

Visual Studio is now free.

Visual Studio Express is free, not Visual Studio. Big difference.

Office can be had for $150.

If you are a student. You are hardly legal if you buy a student copy of office and aren't a student.

Re:The real question is..!

[labratuk]

On a side note, Macs don't cost thousands of dollars. My iBook was $950 and Mac Minis are under 1000. Its not like you have to buy an apple display. They have great refurb deals too.

Right. Pricier hardware. That's the answer. Pricier hardware that doesn't have to compete with anything for your next purchase as they've locked you into their hardware with their proprietary software. And how much do operating system 'upgrades' cost on this side of the fence?

Thanks, Apple sales representative.

Re:The real question is..!

[nytmare]

Windows XP Home for a custom built PC costs $181 from Amazon, for example. That's a major cost.

Re:The real question is..!

[Ash-Fox]

Also it is highly unlikely that "grandmas" are knowingly running pirated copies, if they get shut off and called "pirates" they probably take offense to that pretty strongly. They will probably ask their kids/grandkids what other computer they can get.

Or like some old people I know, refuse to deal with computers all together after the experience.

Re:The real question is..!

[Grismar]

The whole point here is that if WGA works and kills your Windows, you won't be able to pirate it. The RIAA might actually be right if there was some way of achieving the same feat with music.

Or are you saying that if Madonna, Metallica and Eminem had proper protection in place, people would listen to other music? Ofcourse not. In the (purely hypothetical) situation where it would be no longer possible to copy their music (the copy protection shuts down your CD player and eats your pet gerbil) you would start paying for it.

Same goes for Windows, people won't switch to the clearly superior, open and free OS, if piracy would become impossible. The only thing opening would be their wallets.

Ofcourse, what will -really- happen if WGA works, is that people will once again start distributing illegal, cracked copies of windows installer disc images. Some versions with clear security holes, other with the security fixes slipstreamed in before cracking it.

The net result of that: an even worse reputation for Windows, more piracy, more insecurity on the net for privately owned PCs (with pirated OSes) and more ways for spyware and other malware to find its way onto your system (nicely packaged with the cracked copy of Windows).

Which is exactly why MS won't shut down your Windows with WGA, since this is bad for everyone -including- MS.

Re:The real question is..!

[aj50]

if P2P doesn't exist all those customers would go out and buy those CDs and DVDs they pirated?

This isn't the same at all, windows is one product, it would be more like saying, if P2P didn't exist, then most pirates would buy at least one more CD. In addition to this, people who pirate windows will never buy it, a cracked copy of WinXP is as good as a real one, which usually isn't the case with pirated music.

Re:The real question is..!

[christian.elliott]

ow, do you go to RIAA University? The same one that says if P2P doesn't exist all those customers would go out and buy those CDs and DVDs they pirated?

Compare apples to apples if you are going to make that statement. You are basically comparing the purchase of a new tranmission because the one is your car is non-existent to those new "low-glo" lights all the kids are talking about. OS: Neccessity (on a computer system) CDs/DVDs: Entertainment, not so much.

Re:The real question is..!

[MrSenile]

Here's a little hint: If pirated copies stopped working, people would buy a legal copy. Computers and components cost a lot. Anyone with the extra scap around to build a custom PC would be more than willing to shell out $99 for WinXP Home. And if you bought your PC, then just throw in the restore disc.

-------------

Don't tell me. You work for the music industry, don't you. And you probably believe these same people will go out and by the music CD's once downloads are stopped for them too, right?

Hey (whispers)... I have a bridge to sell you.

Re:The real question is..!

[Bing Tsher E]

and learning something new that will probably not work with all the applications they have,

Most of those 'regular people' being discussed don't have applications that they drag along to a new pc. The PC contains a hard drive upon which accumulates the big wad of crap that accumulates as they use it. Then it is all disposed of when the new computer is purchased. As to their familiarity with it, the 'new' version of Windows isn't a lot different than the freenix desktops that they could use instead.

Gaming is somewhat different, but the typical PC gamer would be just as well served by one of the snappy new consoles. A good PeeCee 'gaming' video card costs as much as the whole console setup, and people who are really game devotees (as opposed to PC hardware devotees, which I won't deny having a tendency toward myself) aren't playing games to justify spending money on all the new bling for their PeeCee. I say this as someone who finally made the plunge and bought a color VGA monitor (grayscale was just fine up until then) to play SimEarth (the MS-DOS version, on my '286).

Re:The real question is..!

[SeaFox]

OS: Neccessity (on a computer system) CDs/DVDs: Entertainment, not so much.

Yes, but Windows XP is not the end all-be all of OS's. You can switch to Linux or even just an older version of Windows (how much software requires XP but wont work on 2000?).

Re:The real question is..!

[shaitand]

"What color is the sky on your world? Every user needs Photoshop?"

Almost every user has a need to edit images and photos. You might argue that users should use shit software to perform the task, I would argue that is little reason for the shit software to exist in the first place and that on most pcs you will find photoshop performing this task. The software I listed is what you will find installed on the pc of the average user who DOES NOT pay for their software. After all, since pirates are only paying the cost of distribution it doesn't make sense to pick inferior software for a given task.

Autocad on the other hand performs that almost nobody needs or wants, it is quite a step away from being the best tool for a commonly performed task like photoshop.

Re:The real question is..!

[Moofie]

Um, if you're talking about piracy, why are you listing prices?

You are a very confused person.

Re:The real question is..!

[shaitand]

"So, is it all software that's overpriced, or just Windows? Because if a CD burning program (Nero) costs $90, then for sure the operating system is worth $140."

Most software is overpriced, nero is another good example.

There are two ways to look at what a price should be. The first is the cost of production and distribution. The cost of producing software is a one time expense and most software companies make massive profits. The cost of distribution is virtually zero for software, it costs more to develop photoshop than ms paint, but once it is made you would be turning a profit on individual sales if you sold photoshop cd's for $0.50/each.

The other is that you should look at what you get from the use the software. This is how you sell overpriced solutions to business and make purchases sound important. In the real world this has no meaning. If I do $10,000,000/year in a car business and a piece of software is critical to that business, that doesn't somehow magically make it legitimate to extort $1000 for a piece of software that required no greater development cost than $20 shareware. Especially when the same 'it makes us money' logic is applied to lots and lots of different things that are critical to making the same money.

"{removing cost of PS, because nobody needs PS"

Nobody is a rather extreme statement. Lots of people need photoshop. Many more need to perform functions that are best performed by photoshop but use a $50 application instead due to the price.
I love open source, but I still wouldn't seriously claim they should be using gimp.

"People are paying way more for software than they should, but only when comparing it to open source software."

There are shareware and freeware applications that perform the same or similar functions as well. The fact is, there is no justification for the prices charged.

Re:The real question is..!

[dougmc]

The PC contains a hard drive upon which accumulates the big wad of crap that accumulates as they use it.

I can't argue with the `big wad o' crap' idea, and how it mostly goes away with the purchase of a new computer, but I disagree with what happens when they get a new computer. The new computer has a small wad of crap (mostly the stuff that the vendor includes) and the user starts going through things that they need and installing them (they probably still have cds if they paid for it, after all) -- AOL, Quicken, QuickBooks, Office, Photoshop (or any of the many less functional clones), etc. Sure, there's non-Windows equivilents for many of these, but 1) how would the person find them if they don't know where to look?, and 2) the replacements often aren't as functional as the Windows version, and even if they are, they're usually different to use.

I say this as someone who finally made the plunge and bought a color VGA monitor (grayscale was just fine up until then) to play SimEarth (the MS-DOS version, on my '286).

And I finally bought a PC (an Amstrad 8086) to play Ultima 6, which was the first not available for my Apple II. I'm not sure how this is relevant, however.

Re:The real question is..!

[shaitand]

For a rocket scientist you sure do seem to have trouble connecting dots. If I am the one who is confused then why are YOU asking ME to explain how to connect the dots? Re-read the post again. The dots are there and I am simply not that patient.

Re:The real question is..!

[Moofie]

For somebody who alleges to be able to follow a recipe, you do a rotten job of constructing cogent arguments.

Let me put it bluntly: Your rantings are not worth deciphering. Thanks for sharing them, though.

Re:The real question is..!

[shaitand]

For someone who claims to be scientist you seem to have a great deal of trouble with logic. How do you propose to claim that the meaning of something you fail to comprehend is not worthwhile? Wouldn't understanding be prerequisite to assessing merit?

Re:The real question is..!

[Moofie]

It's not my job to make your point.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[dkarma]

This still will happen in one form or another...from crafting slimy legislation to WGA tricks MS is was and will continue to be a slimeball of a company.

Phoning home

[elgee]

If WGA phones home more than once, it is proabably up to no good. If it discovers that your copy of Windows is legal, why on earth would it need to contact MS more than once?

It may well be checking for pirated movies, songs, etc and MS may be in cahoots with RIAA/MPAA/BOHICA.

Re:Phoning home

[jfengel]

It phones home more than once because hard drives can be cloned. If the thing only poked its head up once, pirates would run a single legal box until WGA verified itself, then make copies of that disk and sell them. So it has to check every time if the brain wakes up in a "new body".

There's far less cause for it to phone home if it wakes up in the same old body. There's some complexity going on if you replace a hardware component; defining "a computer" is tricky.

Re:Phoning home

[elgee]

There's far less cause for it to phone home if it wakes up in the same old body. There's some complexity going on if you replace a hardware component; defining "a computer" is tricky.

Most "shotgun" approcahes inconvenience many and hurt a few. If I decode to replace my motherboard and CPU, but use the same drive, I expect it to work without any hassle. If I replace the engine in my old beater car, I don't expect it to stop working becaue CGV (Chevy Genuine Advantage) kills it.

I suspect the pirates will get around this anyway, so it is all a moot point as far as piracy goes.

Re:Phoning home

[mpe]

Are we talking about the same Windows OS here? With Linux I can easily throw the disk into another system but WinXP, without fail, croaks when you change CPU/mobo suitably.

This can fail with Linux, if you have an optimised kernel. But it's rather easier to change the kernel on a non functional Linux system than it is to change the HAL on a non functional Windows system.

Cloning work only on almost identical hardware and there are some tools to make windows do a complete driver discovery on next boot but they still don't work everywhere and reasons are always fuzzy.

In some cases Windows will insist on doing hardware detection even with virtually identical hardware. Looking for HDD serial numbers and suchlike.

Re:Phoning home

[dotgain]

I hate to play on car analogy, but the Chevy Genuine Advantage would permit you to replace your engine, but your just no longer allowed to put any fuel in the car.

What does WGA do?

[Richard_at_work]

From the article:

Microsoft also says that WGA is a necessary part of its campaign to catch those illegally using Windows XP which leads one to think what WGA really does then.

WGA is not to stop *us* from pirating Windows, thats never going to be successful. However, it will prove successful against those shops selling whitebox builds with illegal copies of Windows, and it already gives a cheap (or is it still free?) option to consumers caught out like that in return for providing evidence against their supplier (receipt etc).

These are the people that need to be stopped.

Re:What does WGA do?

[4e617474]

and it already gives a cheap (or is it still free?) option to consumers
 
I believe that it offers the full retail package at a discount that comes out to really close to the OEM price. Probably slightly more than you could find it for in some places.

Re:What does WGA do?

[Dachannien]

If MS would offer whitebox builders the same price that they offer to the big OEMs like Dell and Gateway, they'd probably see a lot less for-profit piracy. As it stands, the small shops can put together good quality hardware and come out slightly ahead of the big companies, but the moment they add in software (including Windows and Office), they end up being forced to offer the complete system at a very uncompetitive price.

Re:What does WGA do?

[Oligonicella]

"If MS would offer whitebox builders the same price that they offer to the big OEMs like Dell and Gateway, they'd probably see a lot less for-profit piracy."

If whitebox builders would produce the masses of systems like the big OEMs like Dell and Gateway, they'd probably get the same price offer.

Re:What does WGA do?

[westlake]

If MS would offer whitebox builders the same price that they offer to the big OEMs like Dell and Gateway, they'd probably see a lot less for-profit piracy.

The white box builders have been reduced to advertising on the mini-mart bulletin boards.

The PC has been sold as a plug and play home appliance for over twenty-five years. The OEM Windows install is the gold standard in this market and that is not going to change any time soon.

You will never get a quote on generic OEM hardware that will allow you to compete with Dell. You might find a niche in high-end gaming. Labor-intensive case mods, custom cooling...

Re:What does WGA do?

[writermike]

If MS would offer whitebox builders the same price that they offer to the big OEMs like Dell and Gateway, they'd probably see a lot less for-profit piracy.

Quite true, but I doubt you can lay all of the blame at Microsoft's feet. This is the way the entire retail world works.

I've built many systems and what it really comes down to is the type of system you intend to build. There's no way in hell a whitebox builder can meet a $299.99 price. They can, however, compete well on a $1500+ system, even with Windows and Office. I've done it many times. And, no, I'm not pirating anything.

In any case, what MS does is what ATI, ASUS, and every one else does. It's still not an excuse to pirate software.

Re:What does WGA do?

[Dachannien]

Quite true, but I doubt you can lay all of the blame at Microsoft's feet. This is the way the entire retail world works.

For most goods, bulk discounts are offered to encourage the biggest buyers to go with the company offering the discount rather than some other vendor, while the higher per-unit price for small quantities are meant to cover the higher cost that occurs since economies of scale are not being taken advantage of.

But with software - especially Microsoft software - there aren't really any competitors at all. Most people who want a Mac or Linux box already know that going into their purchase, so offering a bulk discount to the biggest vendors doesn't really offer any incentive at all, especially since those companies won't pirate Windows in the first place. The large OEMs are still going to buy Windows hand over fist. But the small vendor - or the individual home user - faces a big decision between pirating Windows and buying it. There is little difference in economies of scale, since the retail price is so much more than the per-unit manufacturing costs (i.e., the box, manual, and CD). Thus, the people who should be incentivized are the small buyers.

No, it's not an excuse to pirate Windows, but MS should know by now that since lots of people do it, changing their pricing structure would solve a lot of problems.

Stop Piracy

[neoform]

"Microsoft also says that WGA is a necessary part of its campaign to catch those illegally using Windows XP"

It sure didn't stop me.. nor did it stop anyone else i know who's got an illegal copy. But it sure did piss off a whole lot of people who did pay for their copy..

Re:Stop Piracy

[westlake]

But it sure did piss off a whole lot of people who did pay for their copy.

I doubt that even the tinest fraction of Windows users (who do not post to Slashdot) have given a second thought to WGA or even heard any one of the paranoid rumors which fill these pages.

Re:Stop Piracy

[NATIK]

I know 4 non tech savy people, that have asked me what this warning about a non legit copy on their computer is, when they bought their Windows XP license legit with their computer. I helped them out by installing a proper cracked version of XP for them, which does not having annoying messages, so they didnt have to buy a new license from MS.

It is not rare that machines are falsely diagnosed as "pirated" in my experience.

Re:Stop Piracy

[Dlugar]

"whole lot of people" very well might be equal to "tiniest fraction of Windows users".

Dlugar

Re:Stop Piracy

[RadioD00d]

Get over yourself. I keep seeing these "windows users don't read slashdot" posts, as if this was some elitist gated community with guards and dobermans at the doors. I read slashdot because it's (work with me here, this is going to be a big word) ENTERTAINMENT. If I lived and breathed by the 'news for nerds' that this site proclaims as gospel, I'd probably be running CP/M on an Apple IIe in my parents' basement.

There are probably good reasons why the 'windows crowd' doesn't POST here, but I'll bet you there are a hell of a lot more windows users who peruse these pages than you think.

Re:Stop Piracy

[Tony-A]

There are probably good reasons why the 'windows crowd' doesn't POST here, but I'll bet you there are a hell of a lot more windows users who peruse these pages than you think.

Hehe. Some of us even POST here.
Basic survival gear. If there's a problem I need to know about it will show up on slashdot much much earlier than on microsoft.com. That's from Melissa onward. Seems like it took Microsoft a week to find out about Code Red.

(Also Google gives a much better search of Microsoft's knowledge base than Microsoft itself;)

(Also /. is probably the only source of unbiased information about Microsoft. (And yes I am aware that there is a lot of bias, both sides))

Re:Stop Piracy

[GaryPatterson]

No it didn't.

We don't even *see* it.

Maybe you're thinking of those cases of WGA reporting a valid copy as pirated. I'm yet to hear how many cases there are, and I suspect it's a tiny handful.

Re:Stop Piracy

[MrCopilot]

Just wait.

Did you know if you set your clock wrong WGA calls you a thief? Go ahead give it a try.

Guess what happens when your battery dies. I've already had 4 calls, thanks for the service calls MS, and keep up the shoddy work.

Actually, I really wish they would stop making me feel like a criminal, having to charge 35 bucks to set someones clock . I don't evwen want to support windows outside of my job, but I still get calls at home. I think I'll draw the line at Vista Launch.

Re:Stop Piracy

[neoform]

Maybe you should read this then..

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=89

Re:Stop Piracy

[GaryPatterson]

All the article said is that someone in Microsoft marketing reported that 20% of the WGA failures were not due to stolen keys.

That could be 1, 1000, 1000000 or some other number. It could be a tiny handful after all.

I haven't heard many *actual* users complaining that they were personally hit by this. I've heard of a few, but it's a tiny fraction so far.

Maybe it's not really a big issue.

DUA

[a_greer2005]

Of cource they deny this; if they let the rumor run, trust in the company is shaken, if they confirm it, their reputation is shattered...and if they go through with it...holy hell, watch out...

Re:DUA

[Moocow660]

Oh no... the people who already don't buy windows will hate Microsoft even more.

I'm sure they are trembling in fear.

Re:DUA

[ScrewMaster]

Trust in the company isn't the problem, people expect Microsoft to pull shady stuff, illegal monopolism and all. What Microsoft wants is for legitimate users to feel smug because they shelled out hard-earned cash for their XP disc, and likewise wants the people that have illegal copies to think twice about not paying for it. I mean, it might get turned off and God knows what would happen to their data then. In effect, this is a form of psychological warfare, with the enemy being people that Microsoft would most like to have buy Windows. Impressive, really, and similar in nature to the RIAA's legal campaign against filesharers: both are trying to induce fear of a remote possibility in order to encourage desirable behavior.

Re:DUA

[The Cisco Kid]

Personally, I beleive people who don't want to buy Windows should have no right to do so. They should be forced to buy (or obtain legally, for free) something else. But MS doesnt want they either. What they want is for *everyone* to be forced to pay for Windows.

But people foolish enough to WANT to run Windows are probably foolish enough to pay for it.

Re:DUA

[Bing Tsher E]

Actually, what Microsoft should be discovering is that people like me, who used to in good faith buy retail box copies of Windows (95, 98, Me, 2000), Office (4.3, 97, 2000, XP), and Visual C (1.0, 2.0, 4.0, 6.0) will no longer purchase their products.

I used to be a 'Microsoft Preferred Customer' according to their records. Game over.

(I ended up reselling the Office XP on eBay, after leaping over the hurdles that Microsoft puts in place to prevent people from selling legitimate licensed copies of their product there. Wasn't able to find all the bullshit paperwork, just CD with CD key and some of the packaging, to get rid of the Office 2000 that way.)

I'm probably not part of their 'demographic' anymore, but I actively support other people in their decisions NOT to purchase anything from Microsort.

20% failure rate (from TFA)?

[geerbox]

Through its spokeswoman, Microsoft said that "80% of all WGA validation failures are due to unauthorized use of leaked or stolen volume license keys."

That can partially explain why WGA will not cause the "killing" of computers with XP. That said, it's a 20% of their no-corporate users (large-volume purchasers of XP are exempt from installing WGA from TFA) that will be having problems trying to get things to update and work.

Re:20% failure rate (from TFA)?

[Peyna]

Perhaps you failed statistics, but the proper conclusion from the statement that "80% of failures are due to unauthorized use of leaked or stolen volume license keys." is that the other 20% of failures are due to something else.

I would guess some percentage would be the unauthorized use of leaked or stolen non-volume license keys. The rest of that 20% could be anything or nothing.

I have no idea what conclusion you were trying to draw from that statement, but you made quite a jump in logic there. That figure gives us no indication as to what total percentage of users have problems with WGA.

Re:20% failure rate (from TFA)?

[PhreakinPenguin]

Just an FYI from someone who has failed validation with a legit copy of Windows. Mine failed because I didn't let it install, so it came back saying that WGA failed when in all reality it technically didn't. So take with a grain of salt that all of the 20% of failures were false positives.

Re:20% failure rate (from TFA)?

[geerbox]

I would guess some percentage would be the unauthorized use of leaked or stolen non-volume license keys. The rest of that 20% could be anything or nothing.

I have no idea what conclusion you were trying to draw from that statement, but you made quite a jump in logic there. That figure gives us no indication as to what total percentage of users have problems with WGA.

I don't think it's a jump in logic; my point was that of the 20% which could be anything or nothing, I am assuming thus that those are failures not resulting from "unauthorized use of leaked or stolen volume license keys". Thus, if WGA fails to rectify you as a geniune Windows XP owner, and you're one of those in the 20% that will be inconvenienced.

Re:20% failure rate (from TFA)?

[Darth_brooks]

I would guess some percentage would be the unauthorized use of leaked or stolen non-volume license keys. The rest of that 20% could be anything or nothing.

I recently ran into an issue with compaq restore disks and WGA. We recieved a batch of Compaq Deskpro's, complete with the shiney happy license sticker and restore disks. Trying to load up windows from scratch proved to be a pain (driver hell, compaq seems to use multiple components that can each use any opne of 15 different signed XP drivers.) so I loaded XP pro from the restore disk.

The install went fine, but once windows update got to the WGA tool, things took a turn. validating via the WGA tool failed unexpectedly. A quick google turned up a direct link to a microsoft validation page, and a couple clicks later, everything is loaded and valid.

Re:20% failure rate (from TFA)?

[maxwells_deamon]

I had a situation where we needed to rent 12 computers. They were all Dells with real MS OEM stickers on them

The computers showed up and we powered them up and attempted to update them and install the latest office versions on them.

Because the rental company had imaged them all from a single copy of windows they failed WGA.

We had some fun.

Re:20% failure rate (from TFA)?

[RealGrouchy]

Through its spokeswoman, Microsoft said that "80% of all WGA validation failures are due to unauthorized use of leaked or stolen volume license keys."

The use of the word "stolen" here makes me think that they'll justify shutting down legitimate users because they allegedly "shared" their licence key. "When you're old enough to take care of your licence key, then we'll let you drive the windows car."

- RG>

Several purposes, perhaps...

[blcamp]

I'm just speculating here, just my best guesses (so mods, keep that in mind):

1. They can't (intentionally) kill working copies now. If they killed too many legit copies from too many "false positives", they'd be slapped with a class action that would make the current EU anti-trust pale by comparison.

2. While they can't kill windows, they can divide it into two classes (legit and cracked), and thus allow the legit ones to have all the eye candy and other accessories... not that too many people really care all that much about Power Calculator.

3. It is a test program for a future version of Windows, where they can very reliably kill cracked versions of the product, once they fine-tune their ability to tell a cracked version from a legit one.

I can only hope, however, they don't bog thier products down with so much "detection code" that the app is 90% slower... like recent versions of Norton Systemworks.

Re:Several purposes, perhaps...

[Peyna]

What they really need is better copy protection out the door, instead of relying on a way of detecting it after the fact, they should be finding ways to prevent it beforehand.

I think probably one of the biggest mistakes Microsoft made regarding copy protection was in its method of handling volume licensing. Entire Universities across the country were given a copy of Windows that requires no activation or anything, along with (in many cases) one CD key for the lot. All anyone had to do was copy that CD, give away that CD key and those people are immune from detection. Of course, Microsoft knows a lot of those CD keys that have spread like wildfire, but they haven't blocked the one I got from my university yet.

Better copy protection and management in volume licensing upfront would have gone a long way to prevent a lot of these problems. I do suppose there is a balancing of factors taking place, in that on one hand you don't want to overburden customers that are feeding you millions for a volume license, but on the other hand, you also don't want them to turn around and give a copy to every family member and friend and acquaintance.

Re:Several purposes, perhaps...

[rjmx]

> 3. It is a test program for a future version of Windows,
> where they can very reliably kill cracked versions of the product,
> once they fine-tune their ability to tell a cracked version from
> a legit one.

Another possibility:

4. It's a test program for a future version of Windows, in which Microsoft move from having you "buy" a copy of Windows to a business model in which you rent it from them.

Think about it. Currently Microsoft receive nothing from users once they've bought their copy of Windows. If they rent it to you, on the other hand, then they've got a permanent cashflow. WGA could be (eventually) intended to shut off Windows once the computer owner doesn't/can't/refuses to pay the monthly fee.

Remember, they've got to find some way of financing all those bugfixes somehow.

Re:Several purposes, perhaps...

[pcgabe]

not that too many people really care all that much about Power Calculator.

Speak for yourself. Power Calculator rocks! It's not regular calculator, it's POWER Calculator! It's the Chuck Norris of software calculators. We're talking abs() of steel. It'll tan() your hide. Power Calculator once gave a computer virus a round(housekick) so hard it got cancer.

What a shock!

[CXI]

Did anyone honestly believe the random blogger who said that some random Microsoft guy said that "if you don't install WGA we'll use WGA (which isn't installed) to kill your copy of Windows"!? However, it made for some great sensational headlines.

if the records exist, RIAA or anyone can subpoena

[Anonymous Coward]

Once a record of what is stored on your computer exists at MS, it can be subpoenaed by RIAA, the government, or virtually any company involved in a law suite about virtually anything.

It doesn't matter what MS says about your privacy. If they have your information, they can't protect it from subpoena.

The only safe windows box is one that has no connection to the internet.

How Do They Detect Pirated XP Corporate?

[TomHandy]

It seems like a lot of people who have pirated Windows XP just go ahead and use Windows XP Corporate (which doesn't require activation or a license key). How does MS detect a legit copy of XP Corporate vs. someone who is using a pirated copy of it?

Re:How Do They Detect Pirated XP Corporate?

[ScrewMaster]

It does too require a product key, it just doesn't require activation. Microsoft has been known to deactivate specific keys from the Corporate Edition on occasion, if it has been found to have been leaked and is commonly used for illegal installations.

Re:How Do They Detect Pirated XP Corporate?

[fyoder]

It seems like a lot of people who have pirated Windows XP just go ahead and use Windows XP Corporate (which doesn't require activation or a license key).

For XP the absence of something, product activation, is a 'feature'. If you require that feature and can't get a legal copy of the Corporate Edition, what are your options?

I wonder if product activation doesn't encourage more infringement than it prevents.

Re:How Do They Detect Pirated XP Corporate?

[imemyself]

Hehe, your post reminds me of something I read from MS's Windows 2k3 documentation. It was listing the "features" (that really was the word they used) of Windows 2k3 that were not available in the Itanium versions. Activation was listed among them.

Kind of funny

[Lumpy]

I know of 2 major corperations that do not allow WGA to be installed on their machines because of sarbanes Oxley rules they have as well as not installing apps that report back information outside the company.

So microsoft will not risk pissing off an entire corperation sized customer by turning anything off.

Personally I wish they did such a boneheaded move. No matter what the naysayers believe it would force a switch to something else and braindead easy installs like Ubuntu and Mandriva will capture a larger amount of pc's.

The bulk of PC owners out there do not care about playing games except at places like pop-cap and other web based time wasters, they dont go shopping for software on a regular basis. They want their pc to do simple web stuff.

I have converted a large number of people over to ubuntu on their pc after scaring theim with the latest MS fud about not having WGA on there to spy on you they will get viruses and trojans ant other things instantly. So they begrudingly try ubuntu and then 2-3 months later ask me to erase their windows partition for more disk space.

Are they pissed they cant play Quake4 or the sims2 latest expansion pack? nope most people dont have a PC capable of playing them nor plan on buying one.

The low end computing power web/wordprocessing only people outnumber game buyers almost 30 to 1. And those that buy software at best buy and the likes only do so after they find out they cant do it at home already. Ubuntu gives them a button to get free software instantly and without effort so they save more money and I dont have to go support their pc on a weekly basis like I did with windowsXP.

Re:Kind of funny

[MaXMC]

Quake 4 does have a linux binary yes?

Re:Kind of funny

[Bert64]

You can play quake4 on ubuntu anyway...

Re:Kind of funny

[rikkus-x]

Which Sarbanes-Oxley rule forbids behaviour like that of WGA? Just interested.

Re:Kind of funny

[Lumpy]

anything in the IT/Is section. Companies are "making crap up" as they go for SOX compliance and places have went overboard requireing that nothing that sends data to another company is allowed.

SOX is one of those laws that bites the ass of the idiots in charge sothey go way overboard making crap up to try in Cover their Asses. so lots of money and time is wasted for doing really stupid things as we as things they should have been doing decades ago.

SOX compliance rules at each company vary wildly. I made a crapload as a consultant for SOX compliance when I was in the biz.

Wonder

[donutello]

That last line should read:

which leads one to wonder what WGA really does then.

Come on. That's what editors are supposed to do.

Re:Wonder

[sparkyz]

Yeah, you would think vi would've caught that :)

It's all in the name...

[ErikZ]

Well duh. It's not a "Kill Switch"

It's a "Happy Sleepy Funtime Switch!"

The way we're going......

[smchris]

Microsoft can just send their report to your local ISP daily. The FBI can pick up the Fourth Estaters. The local police can handle the software thieves.

Careful wording?

[Holistic Missile]

"No, Microsoft antipiracy technologies cannot and will not turn off your computer," said a spokeswoman with Waggener Edstrom, Microsoft's public relations firm. That statement is barely true; Windows shuts off your computer. For example, when you click |Start| -> |Turn Off Computer|. Also, has anyone ever seen what happens when you don't activate your copy of XP? It will only boot to a safe-mode command prompt, at which point you are supposed to call MS to activate over the phone. They will tell you how to run msoobe.exe so you can enter the lllllllloooooonnnnnnnnngggggggg code that they will dictate to you over the phone. If that doesn't work, they tell you to go out and buy Windows XP. What's to stop WGA from doing the same thing? Technically, your computer would be on and running, but you won't be able to use it for anything. I guess MS is telling us the truth, after all!!

Re:Careful wording?

[Holistic Missile]

Actually, I understand it quite well.

My point is is, they are not lying about anything; they are telling a separate truth. It's how PR departments/firms do their job without getting themselves into trouble...

Remember that the rumor originated by a low-level (possibly out-sourced?) tech support phone monkey. They are merely dismissing his/her incorrect statement.

I think that if WGA has any forceful element, it would be to fire up the Product Activation that has been there since day 1, which would require people to contact Microsoft if they don't activate within 30 days. Someone who knows their product is pirated will not call; legitimate customers with false positives will call, and some solution can be reached. (My guess regarding false positives is that legitimate keys have been created by keygen programs, and WGA sees the same key coming in from several different places.)

It would not be good for MS to admit that even this much action will be taken, as they already have at least one lawsuit filed against them regarding WGA.

Have a great weekend, and Happy July 4th if you are in the U.S. (Happy July 1st for those in Canada!)

Re:Re:Careful wording?

[Holistic Missile]

No, I used the example of manually shutting off the computer to prove that Windows can shut off your computer. This makes their statement barely true through the technicality that the antipiracy technologies can't do it; if that was their intent it would send a system call to the OS to shut it off. But I also said I don't think that is what they would do.

I never said that not activating will shut off your computer. I said that it forces you to a safe-mode command prompt mode, which is just enough for their support people to help you get it activated, yet not enough to do much of anything else. This is as far as I think they would go with any forceful action via WGA. This way the people who got shafted by false positives would have an avenue toward getting the problem resolved.

I did not say they were lying, either. I said they are carefully wording their reply. Why did they not say that the antipiracy controls will not have any affect on your ability to use your computer whatsoever? (except for the already-announced limits on downloading updates, etc.) Because that may have been a lie?

Didn't actually refute the claim, did they?

[Teddy Beartuzzi]

The only quote in that story is that "No, Microsoft antipiracy technologies cannot and will not turn off your computer". That's not the same thing as saying "No, Microsoft antipiracy technologies cannot and will not stop Windows from operating."

My computer can still be on, but XP refuses to boot.

Re:Didn't actually refute the claim, did they?

[Slithe]

So it is operating normally?

Who started this rumor anyway?

[Osrin]

Wasn't it some "anonymous developer" who was originally quoted? I can't see how turning off copies of Windows would ever have been in Microsoft's best interests.As others have said, even a pirated copy of Windows is a working entry point into the rest of the ecosystem.

Re:Who started this rumor anyway?

[Reziac]

Official M$ presenters been talking about stuff like this at various official functions since the Win2K roadshow, over 6 years ago.

As It Unfolded

[Quirk]

In the 90's Microsoft would go into major cities, set up a booth and offer to exchange illegal copies of MS software for legitimate copies.

I believe up until at least Me version and possibly Windows 2000 owners were allowed to install the OS on 2 computers in the family home and carry the OS over to a new mobo when owners updated their hardware. Fast forward to today.

Now, if Windows owners update their mobo's they must purchase a new OS and Home versions of Windows can only be installed on one mobo.

While MS pc Windows is still highly profitable it's no longer expanding in leaps and bounds. It may be that any forseeable increase in profits MS can see for Windows is in squeezing owners of pirated editions.

Personally as I've posted before I'm in countdown mode on Win Xp in a switch over to all Linux/BSD machines. By way of my parents buying my first pcs and my own purchases, as an individual, I've invested in MS DOS, Windows/NT and Office pro for 23 years. No more. I can motivate many people in my sphere of influence to switch to FOSS, but I can't do it if I'm still buying Windows for multimedia/games/web purposes.

If MS can access my computer on a daily basis under the guise of looking for it's stolen property than it's not out of the question that they can accesss my computer for the government. If you have Windows installed on an internet connected pc then you should have zero tolerance for having sensitive information on that pc.

New technology is often met by the buying public in a herd mentality. The model T dominated sales up to nearly 50% of all autos until near existing market saturation then, with the technology having proved itself, many variations in style and manufacture began to appear. Windows is the model T of operating systems, but the early market saturation period has passed.

If I'm right the biggest immediate threat to MS is Apple. I see Apple taking 4-8% of Windows share over the next 3-5 years.

On the desktop Open Source can take considerable market share by way of a multitude of inroads but there are many barriers to overcome.

As for me, as I finish building my new boxes Windows will be phased out. MS has so deeply alienated me that I'll willingly put in time to help fill in the gaps in productivity my switch over will incurr.

Re:As It Unfolded

[nuckfuts]

If you paid for a full retail version of Windows the license allows you to move it from computer to computer. If you're running an OEM version the licence does not allow this. Up until the last year or so if you wanted to move an OEM version from one computer to another you could phone up and say that you're using it on the same computer but with a new motherboard. Then the OEM licence was changed to specifically disallow that kind of thing, presumably because there is no practical way to tell the difference between a new motherboard and a new computer. And it's not just motherboards that can cause Windows to require activation again. If you change enough components, such as adding RAM, a larger disk and a new video card all at the same time you might cross the line into what's considered a new computer.

All that being said, I've moved OEM versions between computers quite a number of times and I've yet to be refused activation key. It is necessary to speak to someone over the phone, however.

Re:As It Unfolded

[Nightspirit]

This is bullshit. I've installed the same copy of XP home on 3 different motherboards, using 3 different CPUs (of course, not all at the same time, but as part of an upgrade), and never had a problem. All it took is a 3 minute call to MS to get a new key. BFD.

Re:I thought IT communities were meant to be...

[hackwrench]

Oh sure they may start out rational. But then it's like Guantanamo Bay, where they've been held for four years. They may have been innocent four years ago, but because of the incarceraton, they want to kill you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDrhecqDoO8

This is the same WGA that contradicts itself

[jrothwell97]

On one of the computers at my church, the WGA Notifier came through MS Update. Fair-dos, I thought. But the church logs anonymous users in through the guest profile. You can see where this is going...

When I tried to use the guest profile, the system tray spouted an icon that said "you may not be running genuine Windows." I logged out, logged in as the system administrator, and asked why.

"The product key could not be read."

Well, do you think you'd LET guest users look at the product key so they can steal your copy of Windows, even if the PK isn't attached? But Microsoft contradicted itself, and I went home happy that I'd found a bug in Microsoft software. (I wasn't off the ceiling for several hours.)

Mercifully, an update was issued that allowed the program to check the PK in the Guest profile. But note the wording of the bubble:

"You MAY not be running Genuine Windows."

May? That, translated out of marketing-speak and into English, reads:

"Oh, dear. You might well have a legit copy of Windows but we believed our computer, so we assume you're a fake. So, we're going to display consistent nag screens until you cough up two hundred pounds to buy Windows."

Or throw the (beep) thing away and use Linux or a pen and paper.

Re:This is the same WGA that contradicts itself

[ratboy666]

Don't you know that you are expected to be running as an administrator at ALL times?

Ratboy

You are just a number in the system

[AHuxley]

In capitalist west computer calls comapany and your digital life disappears.
In Soviet Union neighbour calls KGB and your family disappears.

As your life now exists as information - welcome to the digital Gulag.

I'd rather not have WGA be cracked.....

[Khyber]

I'd much rather instead have some nice hackers find out every vulnerability that's possible thanks to WGA being present, and start wreaking absolute hell with everybody's computers, from DDoS attacks to discreetly installing malware/spyware/child pr0n on unsuspecting people's computers, right up to wiping half of the contents of your hard drive. Perhaps then will the masses rise up against Microsoft and say "Why the fuck have you been selling us a flawed product for years and years? Give us our money back!"

Too bad the majority of malicious 'hackers' don't have any clue about the ethical potential of their skills. :(

Re:I'd rather not have WGA be cracked.....

[decadre]

The problem with hoping for this kind of public response is this:

Most people who use windows simply have *no* idea that it is essentially "Microsofts fault" when things go wrong on their PC. People assume that problems like malware/spyware are just part of the whole internet expierence. To them Microsoft finding a and plugging a security hole is a good thing. "Good on you MS, you are forever working on making things safer for me". People simply arn't aware that the onus of security lies on the developer, instead they assume that the product simply should do what it should do, and any problems are "the hackers fault", and not MS's.

Hold on a minute!

[cjsoftuk]

Windows Genuine Advantage has never stopped me installing XP on two PCs with the same licence.

Admittedly, you have to wait 30 days before you can. But install XP, wait 30 days, and you can install XP with the same licence code and it will activate fine.

Re:Hold on a minute!

[popsicle67]

I do it on one box once or twice a day and give the help desk hell for infringing on my right to take all the time and trouble I need to decide which harddrive I would rather use
(I rotate between 4 or 5 different ones). One of these days, if enough people make it a regular habit, Microshaft will abandon this narrow-minded, ill-concieved, parochial quest to villainize everybody.

____________________

  Of all the strange "crimes" that human beings have legislated out of nothing, "blasphemy" is the most amazing -- with "obscenity" and "indecent exposure" fighting it out for second and third place.

Ob Grammar Nazi

[Dun Malg]

"which leads one to think what WGA really does then."

No, it would lead one to wonder what WGA really does.

One would think of a conclusion, and "what WGA really does then" is a meaningless sentence fragment all by itself.
Illiterates!

Re:Not the first time

[Reality Master 101]

This is not the first time Microsquash was working on a kill switch to force more sales, and had to back down due to public pressure. Last time, they were going to kill Windows 2000 and force everyone to buy XP or Server 2003.

Please tell me that there isn't someone stupid enough in the world to believe that crap you linked to. Please tell me that you were just being funny.

Yeah, I'm sure that Norton was in with Microsoft on the conspiracy when they updated their antivirus software to remove the "kill switch". Yeah, I'm sure that no one has ever clearly installed Windows 2000 after the kill date.

Re:if the records exist, RIAA or anyone can subpoe

[Rydia]

If they had cause to subpoena MS's store of your information about your computer, they sure as heck have cause to order information straight from your computer via a court-ordered diagnostic. And if you did anything to the data you'd be in contempt of court. What a difference!

NOT the usual spin!

[KingSkippus]

No, this spin is just... beyond. This is one of the funniest (and saddest) things I've ever read (emphasis mine):

Paul DeGroot, an analyst at Kirkland, Wash.-based Directions On Microsoft, said that while most consumers may find this sort of tracking by Microsoft intrusive, many corporations may actually welcome it.

When asked if companies that have installed more copies of Vista than they have purchased will find those copies de-activated, Microsoft said through its spokeswoman that companies "should think of it more like an application that tracks and protects their use of their Volume License keys and installations."

"Most corporations have no interest with getting away with anything at Microsoft's expense," he said. Indeed, corporations, especially those that have merged with another company or undergone a restructuring, often have a hard time keeping track of all the software they own. Most will "overbuy licenses because it's cheaper to do that then to designate staff people to actively manage them."

In other words, WGA isn't a means of cracking down on piracy, it's a useful tool that companies can use to save money! This message has obvously been brought to you by the same type of people who try to tell everyone that Digital Rights Management is a wonderful thing because it allows you to access content.

Jesus, are people really that naive? Why can't they just say what it is—a tool to keep people who haven't paid them lots of money from using their stuff. At least I could be on board with their motives. (Being paid for stuff I do is nice.) Am I the only one who is insulted not so much by WGA's existence as I am by how stupid they think we are in pitching it?

Re:NOT the usual spin!

[Fortran IV]

That entire section on tracking licenses made me laugh. According to postings on their newsgroups, Microsoft's own support people can't answer questions consistently about some of their licensing policies.

Windows Small Business Server 2003 (SBS) uses Client Access Licenses (CALs) to control how many users or workstations can authenticate to the server at one time. If you don't have a CAL assigned to you or your machine, you can't connect to the server. SBS 2003 comes with 5 CALs, and you can buy up to 70 more.

But according to their own Licensing FAQ, there is no mechanism in SBS 2003 for tracking CALs. Some quotes:

"Q. How do I know which mode I have selected? A. For the first 5 CALs that come with the server, you should complete the CAL license document. There is a field for writing in whether you would like to choose per user or per device CALs." Yes, you fill in a blank on the paper EULA to "activate" the first 5 CALs. There's no way to enter the information into the system itself.

"Q. Does [SBS 2003] provide a mechanism to track and display how many user or device CALs are in use? A. [SBS 2003] does not provide a mechanism to track or display CALs.... [SBS 2003] will display only the number of CALs that have been activated."

"Q. How do I know I am in compliance? A. You will need to maintain records of what you have purchased, and how you have assigned the first 5 CALs that come with the server. [SBS 2003] does not provide an automated way to track CAL use." You are expected to write down a list of the users and devices to which you've assigned CALs.

With such sophisticated license tracking in their server systems, I can hardly imagine how well WGA will work for home users.

Re:NOT the usual spin!

[jZnat]

Wow, and I thought that limiting to 1000 concurrent users on a single mainframe was bad (one of the low-end leases)...

Re:NOT the usual spin!

[Korin43]

Better to find out by having Windows stop working than to find out with a MS spokeperson delivers the court papers..

Re:NOT the usual spin!

[KingSkippus]

Then make it availble as an optional add-on. Problem solved, everybody wins, and you can use it as a real marketing tool without appearing so disingenuous and slimy.

Except that doesn't leave Microsoft the option of getting really nasty in the future. It's interesting how they want to leave that door open.

Re:NOT the usual spin!

[Artifakt]

You are certainly not the only one. On just about all the piracy and most of the other 'your rights online' issues, I keep seeing some people who want to do something currently questionable to illegal, and those people either have explanations that make good sense to me (like wanting their documents to stay readable through software "upgrades"), or they are trying to legitimize something they too (IMHO) think is wrong (like wanting to use photoshop without paying for it). Against these are some corporations that I would probably sympathize more with, but the corps keep giving out explanations that don't make any sense, and so I end up deciding they MUST have ulterior motives at least as bad as the WORST of the other side.
        Why won't any of the RIAA/MPAA/Propriatary Software types just come forward and say "We support your right to have a backup copy, to timeshift or spaceshift, to produce your own files in formats others you choose can access, and to treat your immediate family like they also can use your purchase without buying a seperate liscence*. In return we expect you to actually buy a copy." Since they don't show any signs of doing something like this (with whatever variations for the type of "IP" seem appropriate), I have to assume they have something else in mind, something nasty . (I'm doubtless exaggerating here - surely some of the software houses or RIAA members have endorsed at least some consumer rights - even though none come to mind offhand).
        Maybe Microsoft, etc. just want what I would consider excessive control. Maybe they want to drive me away from buying "IP" and force me to always rent it instead. Maybe they want to sell me the sizzle and not the steak. Maybe they want to never be legally liable for any mistake they make, no matter how justified. Maybe they want me to have to select from the most popular music and films only, so they don't have to carry any unusual acts to get my dollars. Maybe they want to drive me to use propriatary formats only, and make whomever I want to communicate with have to buy a copy of their software too. Maybe they are in collusion with a government that wants to give us all an echo, not a choice. I've heard all these theories, and which ones are true is still up in the air to me in many cases, but these industries keep sounding as though they have some rather nasty ulterior motives, and I don't have to know all the details to vote with my pocketbook.

* The RIAA/MPAA have generally spoken like a married couple with minor children consists of several independant consumers. The legal principle that a family is, in many respects, one entity, is very basic to our society (and is supposed to be one of the pillars of principle of the Republican right). For example, by refusing to recognize such rights as are needed for a husband and wife to make a copy of a recording so that one of them can listen to it on the drive in to work while the other listens at home, the RIAA has, in effect, said, society, the government and the law may hold that the two of you are legally one, but we don't. Why is the RIAA anti-family? (I could make a similar arguement about the MPAA, etc., but you really shouldn't watch movies or write letters while driving.) :-)
        I haven't seen this last arguement used at all on Slashdot. I offer it half-whimsically, but:
        If anyone wants to use it to build a genuine case that the RIAA, et. all. are anti-family, you are certainly welcome to milk it for all its worth.

Re:NOT the usual spin!

[Fortran IV]

I don't usually reply to AC's, but this one is simple to clarify. There is a mechanism in Small Business Server 2003 to record how many CALs are available, and the codes for the licenses—License Manager or some such name. There is also a mechanism that keeps a "rough indicator of the maximum usage" (Microsoft's exact words).

But there is absolutely no mechanism in the OS for tracking how the CALs are assigned—which users or devices are specifically licensed to authenticate to the SBS server. SBS allows a maximum of 75 CALs (that's why they call it "Small Business" and why it's substantially cheaper than Windows Server), but it will allow you to create hundreds of user accounts or connect hundreds of computers, and makes no effort to track whether those user accounts or computers are licensed. The best builtin tool in SBS for tracking CALs assignment (the one we use, in fact) is called Notepad.

One 'word' BSA

[user404]

Come on folks, think about it, Microsoft is the BSA (Buisness Software Alliance). $15,000 for each 'copy' of Windows... Bigger net, faster returns... when they just run a simple query where the ID is = and count is greater than 10, $150,000 in one shot, one visit. Now imagine a company of 8,000... They just want a mechism to get some serious cash...

Re:One 'word' BSA

[Achromatic1978]

to get some serious cash

Yeah, because the $45B+ Microsoft has in the bank in cash at the moment is just chump change ...

CSS

[pipingguy]

WGA apparently turns off Slashdot's CSS formatting.

Re:CSS

[icydog]

I think you're confusing the WGA malware with the IE malware.

Re:CSS

[pipingguy]

I'm using Firefox, and all CSS formatting is gone (Slashdot only, other sites are OK)

Turning the FUD tables on Microsoft

[FractalZone]

I have converted a large number of people over to ubuntu on their pc after scaring theim with the latest MS fud about not having WGA on there to spy on you they will get viruses and trojans ant other things instantly.

I have been having some success convincing people to move away from Microsoft's buggy bloatware by oh-so-casually mentioning how MS installs spyware (WGA) on their computers. I got the idea when I was showing a friend how to do an MS Update (he'd never even installed SP2, yet thought his system was reasonably current). He observed how my security software prompted me for permission before it allowed Update to actually do certain things. He asked why I did not DL and install WGA. I told him that Microsoft had no right to snoop around my system and that I didn't trust MS's spyware not to send personal information from my system back to MS. I mentioned that I was getting up to speed on Linux with the intent of *never* installing Vista on any of my systems. (I, too, am finding Ubuntu to be fairly straightforward.)

The industry (of which Microsoft is a vey large part) has "the masses" terrified of malware already and since WGA is best described as Windows Genuine Disadvantage in that it does not benefit the user in any way whatsoever, I am learning to drop just the right hints and let FUD work against Microsoft for a change. Mentioning how Microsoft tries to "sneak" WGA onto the systems of unsuspecting users and how it phones how without their informed consent just confuses (and thereby scares) them more. I point out that reputable companies with solid products don't try to infect their customers' machines with spyware.

What makes this so amusing to me is that I don't even consider myself a Linux geek...yet.

Re:Turning the FUD tables on Microsoft

[DerekLyons]

I have converted a large number of people over to ubuntu on their pc after scaring theim with the latest MS fud about not having WGA on there to spy on you they will get viruses and trojans ant other things instantly.

I have been having some success convincing people to move away from Microsoft's buggy bloatware by oh-so-casually mentioning how MS installs spyware (WGA) on their computers.

It's astonishing that you have to lie to get people to switch.
 
 

What makes this so amusing to me is that I don't even consider myself a Linux geek...yet.

You may not consider yourself that - but your behavior (willingness to lie and mislead) speaks much.

Re:Turning the FUD tables on Microsoft

[FractalZone]

It's astonishing that you have to lie to get people to switch.

Please specify where I lied. Microsoft's WGA *IS* spyware. It does not benefit the users of systems it infests.

[FZ] What makes this so amusing to me is that I don't even consider myself a Linux geek...yet.

You may not consider yourself that - but your behavior (willingness to lie and mislead) speaks much.

Lie? You are confused. Mislead? Not really, I state facts and let others' fear and ignorance do the rest. If that causes them to avoid Microsoft's buggy bloatware, I'm doing them a huge favor.

Also, you seem to assume (incorrectly) that one must be a Linux geek to realize how bad Microsoft has become. I was becoming disenchanted with Microsoft long before there was a Linux. MS-DOS was a real boost for the infant PC industry. Microsoft hasn't done anything uniquely amazing as far as technology goes since then. Even the way Microsoft's DOS became PC-DOS was more of a good business maneuver than a technological coup. Microsoft is known for grabbing others technology and running with it.

Let's face it. Most of MS's userbase is not very tech savvy. If they were, they could just disable or remove WGA. It is easy enough to do, after all. But in the long run, they're better off not doing business with a company that would stoop to using spyware such as WGA.

Re:Turning the FUD tables on Microsoft

[Bert64]

Actually, microsoft do have the right to snoop around your system and to send any information they want back to them. You gave them this right when you accepted the EULA. Don't believe me? read it more carefully.

Re:Turning the FUD tables on Microsoft

[FractalZone]

Are you referring to:
Consent to Use of Data. You agree that Microsoft and its affiliates may collect and use technical information gathered in any manner as part of the product support services provided to you, if any, related to the Product. Microsoft may use this information solely to improve our products or to provide customized services or technologies to you. Microsoft may disclose this information to others, but not in a form that personally identifies you.

If so, you have a strong argument if one considers all data to be technical data. But, the point is that if Microsoft was truly concerned about the quality of its products and its support for them, it would make updates available with no strings, spyware or other gotchas attached.

Re:Turning the FUD tables on Microsoft

[falconwolf]

I have been having some success convincing people to move away from Microsoft's buggy bloatware by oh-so-casually mentioning how MS installs spyware (WGA) on their computers.

It's astonishing that you have to lie to get people to switch.

As Windows is bloatware and WGA is spyware it telling the truth when you tell people thses facts.

Falcon

Re:Turning the FUD tables on Microsoft

[Fulcrum of Evil]

If so, you have a strong argument if one considers all data to be technical data.

If it isn't defined, then it means whatever is best for me :). Also, since when have MS provided me any support services?

Re:Turning the FUD tables on Microsoft

[FractalZone]

Great, now all they have to do is show where I signed an actual contract.

I was under the impression that shrinkwrap and clickthrough EULAs were still up in the air as far as their validity under contract law goes in many (most?) places. But I got to wondering. So I did a little bit of online research. IANAL (but I'd still like to finish law school...anyone want to donate tuition? :-) Anyway, I gather there are still a lot of issues related to EULA and shrinkwrap licensing that have not been clearly resolved in the courts.

I will point out that if a kid too young to enter into a contract goes through the motions of doing so, it might not be valid. Lots of other factors can invalidate contracts that might be valid otherwise. Wouldn't it be interesting if a whole lot of companies had their EULAs and/or other (shrinkwrap or clickthrough) licenses challenged in court by independent parties? A lot of little cases are much more difficult (and expensive) for corporations to deal with than one or two caases carefully selected for their (beneficial) precedent-setting potential. As long as all of the little cases seem to be more or less separate and distinct and are filed by unrelated parties, I imagine such a scenario would be a nightmare for the companies that use EULAs to walk all over end users who are generally intimidated by legalese. (This is, in fact, one of the areas of law that I wanted to get into.)

But, as a practical matter, if a company such as Microsoft did take me to court, point to their EULA and claim I had agreed to it, one of my responses would be to say, in effect, "Oh really? Show me exactly when and where I agreed to it. Where is your copy of the signed agreement?" If they tried to pressure me, I'd keep trying to shove the burden of proof back on them saying that if they maintain I agreed to anything, they must be able to prove it and that would certainly include describing when and where or showing some sort of tangible signed and dated contract. Would these arguments prevail? IANAL.

Re:if the records exist, RIAA or anyone can subpoe

[MonsoonDawn]

Records stored by Microsoft will survive destruction of your computer.

classic change of info

[Bubba-T]

It just says it will not turn off your computer. Windows will be dead but your computer will still be on.

Even more likely

[Anonymous Coward]

someone will find a new crack. I agree that only very few will switch to a different OS (ever notice how the same people who will scream at the first slight on unix or mac will take ten times more shit from windows?) but I bet that if this were to happen we would see "some hacker cracked winxp in X hours after new antipirate protection" over the internet.

Now can someone enlighten me on something? I'm really not all that worried about wga but I do have two cracked XPs, one qemu image and one native isntall. I always thought that wga was the windows registery thing you get at a fresh install, the very thing that I did NOT get in the cracked version I have. So was I wrong and is WGA something else or what? And how do I avoid it? Just not update windows or what? Thanks in advance.

They can't and won't eh?

[rbochan]

Tell that to David Coursey.

"SO, HERE I AM, sitting in a jet at 34,000 feet someplace above God-only-knows-where, using my computer and minding my own business when Microsoft threatens to essentially shut down my copy of Office. And at the very start of a week-long business trip, too."

And this coming from one of the biggest Microsoft schill sites on the planet.

oems and the wga

[Sfing_ter]

for anyone who owns or has worked on oem machines, dell, hp, sony et. al. if you run keyfinder you realize that the key used in the installation is not the key on the side of the box... I like many techs you initially wipe the hard drive and install from an updated cd with the latest drives etc., and try to use the key on the side of the box, then you have a 30+ minute call/s to microsoft, where you are harangued "How many computers do you have this installed on?" If you have a dell based xp install cd (since sp1) you can install that version on any dell (i have seen a dell w/winme machine updated to xpsp2 in this manner) and not be asked for a key during the... they also pass wga.

So, I guess it's like the war on drugs; it's not that you are using a pirated copy, it's WHO"S pirated copy you use...

whoever believes them raise your hand

[popsicle67]

I downloaded what I thought was a song off napster back in the day that somebody had laced with a bug that rewrote my FAT during a restart that was triggered by clicking on the file to play it(Catholic Girls-Zappa) I spent the next two days hovering between insanity and grim determination to track down the malefactor to kill him. In the end I wiped the drive and started over.If it was that easy for some random shithead, Uncle Willy won't have a lick of worry.

I'm one of those .001%

[jmichaelg]

No, Microsoft doesn't disable your computer - it just disables your ability to install patches which, given the frequency of OS exploits, is tantamount to the same thing as disabling your computer.

I'm one of those .001% - WGA thinks I pirated my copy of XP even though I bought it at Costco. When I disabled the "you have an illegal copy of Windows" balloon via the security panel, another little message popped up saying that I would no longer be able to download patches. I suspect WGA was unhappy because I had disabled several services such as remote registry and alerter.

I can understand Microsoft's desire not to get ripped off but at the same time, I'm not sympathetic if their software falsely accuses me of being a thief and I end up losing a couple of hours figuring out what their problem is.

Re:I'm one of those .001%

[SecretAsianMan]

I have all those services turned off too, a really minimal configuration. WGA works fine on both my Windows machines.

What's probably going on here is that someone using a key generator generated your key already, and that key has been used in a large number of installs. Or, perhaps MS reverse engineered a key generator and invalidated (via pattern matching) any keys likely to be produced by that keygen. You should call Microsoft support and ask for a fix, like a new key. That should prove quite fun.

Re:I'm one of those .001%

[Orion Blastar]

Well I own legit versions of XP. After the WGA was installed, somehow my Terminal Services service stopped working, and it disabled my fast user switching. WGA says I have a legit version of Windows, but seems to have done something bad to my system after it installed. Plus every week XP downloads a new version of WGA, wasting my bandwidth and eating up my resources.

Microsoft just ought to offer a cheaper version of XP and improve that CD-KEY formula so it isn't as easy to reverse engineer.

I've known people who were using MSDN copies of XP that they paid for with a MSDN license than somehow WGA finds as not legit. I am not sure why, but yes there seems to be some false positives. Even at .001% that is still a lot of people getting screwed by Microsoft because they bought a legit copy and WGA says it is not legit.

Once ReactOS goes to version 1.0, I think I'll be switching over to it.

Re:I'm one of those .001%

[OfNoAccount]

Actually failing WGA will still allow critical updates to be downloaded, according to this kb article at least:

" Note The Automatic Updates feature is not affected by the WGA validation check. Therefore, you can use the Automatic Updates feature to make sure that you receive critical Windows updates."

They also have some useful forum posts about how to resolve issues in their WGA activation forum

I can fully understand that you'd be annoyed though...

Re:I'm one of those .001%

[Pieroxy]

Once ReactOS goes to version 1.0, I think I'll be switching over to it.

Looking at the state of the art, I'd say there is virtually no chance you'll get there any time soon. Good luck.

This is good news

[Linker3000]

I am glad that M$ has cleared this up because while I am no fan of piracy, I think Microsoft has made enough money from its products to allow for a little 'free use' - for example, the laptop I am using now to type this message is using a copy of XP enabled using a keygen program and I don't see how this is likely to affect prof.*(!"$% NO CARRIER

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[babbling]

They might not be a nice company, but I hope they manage to make every single user pay for Windows, soon. I doubt they will, though, because I think they'd rather people use Windows illegally than use an alternative operating system.

We don't turn you off, we turn you in

[Opportunist]

In other words, the WGA won't shut off your computer. Instead, it will collect the data for a mass lawsuit against people who copied the system.

Makes sense. It IS after all more profitable, someone who you just shut down might turn to Linux instead of buying, while when you sue, he has to pay.

Re:We don't turn you off, we turn you in

[rebeldt]

So what, if you dont activate windows it will just shut off your comp?
      Stupid, If it tells you that you cant activate it, just call, make up bs and wala windows!!!
                        Microsoft is annoying, so is sony on all that, Maybe if they didnt make it so much money, people wouldnt "steal" it

Re:We don't turn you off, we turn you in

[Opportunist]

I guess people don't care how much money they make, they steal it because it is cheaper than buying it.

Then again, I neither need Sony nor MS. There are free (and legal!) alternatives, so there is no need for either corporation. As far as I'm concerned, I'd be just as happy if they didn't exist.

Ok, that's a lie. I would be happier.

NOT Necessary

[HermMunster]

First of all, it is going on everyone's computer, not just the pirated copies. It isn't just checking once, as it should. It is checking all the time.

This is the equivalent of calling you a thief every time it checks. Listen, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that when they check you today and you are legit and then they continue to check you repeatedly, they are accusing you of being a thief.

One time. The WGA notification is not a program I will allow on my computer. I purchased my 20+ licenses. I don't expect Microsoft to make me feel, as a small business owner, as if I am a thief.

I don't care about protecting Microsoft. I could care less about them and their profit. They pocket so much of that profit anyway instead of putting it back into development.

Microsoft's Vista is nothing more than XP with a new interface paradigm. Other than that new look they have cut all the meat out of the new features so as to make it a "no go" on the upgrade path. Everyone needs to understand that. Clearly VISTA is XP with a new desktop look. That's it. It isn't worth 200-400 dollars to upgrade.

So, if they make $3 billion in profit quarterly, wheres their loss at? Where's the loss of revenue to those pirates and why should I care less about Microsoft's bottom line.

Stop calling everyone a thief Microsoft.

Microsoft is playing a game with everyone. Over the past year they have been testing, probing, feeling to see how much violation of privacy we will take. Then they devise not just WGA but WGN. The WGN was tested in other countries first because they didn't want the outcry to be too loud from the US too quickly or it would turn the rest of the world off. So they slid their WGN into the EU and Asia in an effort to ensure it got done. Then they released it in the US under the guise that if the rest of the world allowed it and had no issue with it, the US should not either.

But of course, we value our privacy. We recognize that one company siphoning off $3 billion a quarter in profits really should be turning something back to the us. Listen, Bill Gate's donations to charity keep him from having to pay huge amounts of dollars to the government in taxes. This simply allows him to keep more of his money.

I've read the figures about how much his foundation gives, what their yearly budget is. Compared to $3 billion in profit every quarter $1 billion annually (from not just his donations, but others) is nearly nothing. Does he help the people in WA state where he enjoys laws that benefit his profit? From laws that give him tax breaks? Laws that provide him with a workforce that can be forced into 70-80 hours a week without compensation for each hour of work? He gives some money to libraries, schools, etc., but he does nothing for the community.

You can see this. Look at google earth and view the area around the location where his main offices are. There are no real parks, no special services, no assistance to public tranist. Nothing.

The bottom line is that WGN allows him to force purchases by those probably too poor to purchase his expensive OS already. XP costs alot of money for some. It is due to his monopoly that allows the OS to stay as highly priced as it is. Now he wants us all to upgrade to Vista which to anyone with a brain knows that it is just XP SP3. The security features could/should be incorporated into XP considering how much money we all paid for it and how irresponsible Microsoft has been toward the security of the OS, even after 2 years where they know that spyware/malware is so bad that even their head of the department for developing anti-spyware/malware tools tell us it is impossible to resolve all the problems and that we are just going to have to reformat every so often just to keep a safe secure system.

They'll justify Vista as a security fix when everyone realizes that Vista is just XP with a new interface and a huge increase in hardware requirements forced generally due to DRM implementations

Why not kill pirated copies of Windows?

[NetSettler]

The question is why not kill pirated copies of Windows?

Because pirated copies of Windows cannot be mechanically detected. All they can detect are "allegedly pirated copies". A consequence of this subtle difference is that they may (and already do) cause a great deal of trouble for users of non-pirated copies.

I have a number of computers, all running Microsoft operating systems. Each had a legit license when purchased, and all are therefore upgradable. I've got machines that are retired but still have licenses. Sometimes I buy full licenses because I get tired of chasing the prior license down so I can use the upgrade license. I am not short of valid licenses--I'm knee deep in them. And yet, perhaps because I have so many, I don't keep a neat file of which machine has which license--I just grab this or that disk and use the attached number for reload or upgrade since they're all running the same thing and I know I'm well-covered in payments. This means, though, that there's a good chance that if a disk dies and I have to reload the operating system, I'll reload it with the same license as I'm already using on another machine even though I've paid for multiple licenses. At some point I'll perhaps organize it, but I wish I could bill back to Microsoft the cost of the time on my part that I will have to spend in order to do that.

Microsoft invests a lot in detecting people they want to menace, but they invest nothing at all in having my machines share back and forth that there are more than enough licenses going around. They don't offer me the ability to back up license info easily on another machine, so that I have a kind of raid array of local machines that know each other's licenses. Nor do they do like Adobe and let me store my licenses at their site for easy reference.

They also let their OEM customers write special disks such that each machine needs its own OEM disk to reload. I had an OEM'd disk die recently and couldn't reload it for a month until I tracked down someone to get me a replacement disk for my OEM machine--I had the serial number, but not the disk, and it wasn't enough to use a regular windows distribution plus the serial number.

And every time I want an extra feature, even something stupid like a new skin for my paperclip, it wants my install disk. Not because that's where the feature lives--it could get it off the net--but because, although it's not admitting it, it's testing whether I'm still the owner ... or was ever the owner. I find that petty.

It's cleverness like this that means that Microsoft doesn't know who its friends are. And it treats even its friends like enemies. I suspect that this will be its ultimate undoing.

What bugs me is not paying for its software, it's that the burden is constantly, aggressively, continuously, and in new and different ways to always be re-proving that I've bought their software. They give me those little stickers that go on the outside of the machine saying "certificate of authenticity" but I have no peripheral capable of reading those, so that stupid sticker does nothing more than drive up the cost of my machine... I still need exactly the right disk.

And I won't even get into the problems that come from changing a board set or moving disks around or otherwise confusing the machine into thinking you've cloned a license when you're really just doing basic disaster recovery or routine maintenance. Most readers are well familiar with this. But my point is, again, that the very best Microsoft customers are still treated like potential pirates as they navigate this space.

The real problem with Microsoft Genuine Advantage is that there's no advantage to software being Microsoft Genuine. You're still guilty unless proven innocent, with the burden on yourself to show you're not low-life scum. Having paid good money is still is not enough to keep you from getting routinely audited by the softwa

How should they do it?

[ammoQ]

a) It's already in your PC: if you believe that, just set the system date to Jan 1st, 2008 and see what happens.
b) They contact your PC and send the kill signal: Your firewall should intercept that. Otherwise, it's time for a class action.
c) Your PC calls home and receives the kill signal: Without WGA, your PC /doesn't/ call home, does it? Just let your firewall prevent that; if there is something in Windows that bypasses the firewall, it's time for a class action.

Re:How should they do it?

[WhiteWolf666]

a) I have no idea. I don't use Windows.
b & c) Have you read the legally binding contract you agreed to when you installed Windows? Nay; when you opened the shrinkwrap? I'll quote some sections for you:
* Reservation of Rights. Microsoft reserves all rights not
expressly granted to you in this EULA. ...
* Consent to Use of Data. You agree that Microsoft and its
affiliates may collect and use technical information
gathered in any manner as part of the product support
services provided to you, if any, related to the Product.
Microsoft may use this information solely to improve
our products or to provide customized services or
technologies to you. Microsoft may disclose this
information to others, but not in a form that personally
identifies you.

* Internet Gaming/Update Features. If you choose to utilize
the Internet gaming or update features within the
Product, it is necessary to use certain computer system,
hardware, and software information to implement the
features. By using these features, you explicitly
authorize Microsoft or its designated agent to access
and utilize the necessary information for Internet gaming
and/or updating purposes. Microsoft may use this
information solely to improve our products or to provide
customized services or technologies to you. Microsoft
may disclose this information to others, but not in a
form that personally identifies you.
* Internet-Based Services Components. The Product contains
components that enable and facilitate the use of certain
Internet-based services. You acknowledge and agree that
Microsoft may automatically check the version of the
Product and/or its components that you are utilizing
and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that
will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation
Computer.
* Security Updates. Content providers are using the digital
rights management technology ("Microsoft DRM") contained
in this Product to protect the integrity of their content
("Secure Content") so that their intellectual property,
including copyright, in such content is not misappropriated. Owners of
such Secure Content ("Secure Content Owners") may, from
time to time, request Microsoft to provide security
related updates to the Microsoft DRM components of the
Product ("Security Updates") that may affect your ability
to copy, display and/or play Secure Content through
Microsoft software or third party applications that
utilize Microsoft DRM. You therefore agree that, if
you elect to download a license from the Internet which
enables your use of Secure Content, Microsoft may, in
conjunction with such license, also download onto your
computer such Security Updates that a Secure Content
Owner has requested that Microsoft distribute. Microsoft
will not retrieve any personally identifiable
information, or any other information, from your computer
by downloading such Security Updates. ...
6. TERMINATION. Without prejudice to any other rights, Microsoft
may cancel this EULA if you do not abide by the terms and
conditions of this EULA, in which case you must destroy all
copies of the Product and all of its component parts.


In a nutshell, you explicitly authorize Microsoft to phone your PC, and update WGA. Also, you authorize Microsoft to install software on your system, and have it phone home at will. Furthermore, if you do not abide by these terms, Microsoft can cancel your license agreement, and your sole remody is to destroy your copy of Windows.

Re:How should they do it?

[chmod a x mojo]

Actually you ONLY authorize MS to read from / install WGA if you use windows update... if you choose to utilize the Internet gaming or update features within the Product , it is necessary to use certain computer system, hardware, and software information to implement the features. By using these features , you explicitly authorize Microsoft or its designated agent to access and utilize the necessary information for Internet gaming and/or updating purposes. Microsoft may use this information solely to improve our products or to provide customized services or technologies to you.
By their contractual language as long as you don't use windows update they have no right whatsoever to tell you that you must install WGA.

Re:How should they do it?

[WhiteWolf666]

Please re-read the next section:

The Product contains
      components that enable and facilitate the use of certain
      Internet-based services.
You know, like network drivers, a TCP/IP stack, Internet Explorer, and various command line tools.

  You acknowledge and agree that
      Microsoft may automatically check the version of the
      Product and/or its components that you are utilizing
      and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product that
      will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation
      Computer.

If you use "teh internets" from your Windows box, Microsoft can install WGA. It's really that simple.

Windows Kill Switch

[twmcneil]

Actually, what you are witnessing is the construction of the first Toll Booth to be set up on the Information Super highway.

Before long MS will be scanning your entire system for "assets" that you may not have paid for. Want to play a dvd on your machine? The system will phone home first to check your account balance before starting the movie.

The WGA is a demo to show **IAs how well the toll booth works. And oh by the way, MS will of course, retain a modest fee for staffing the toll booth.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[jhylkema]

That's what they're doing in China. I remember reading some Microsoft exec saying, "If they're going to steal software, I'd rather it be our software."

When will MS turn off activation?

[maxwells_deamon]

I haxe been worried about this since XP came out.

If I have a pc that runs Win 3.11 I can reinstall it at any time if I have the original media.

If a few years from now I want to reinstall XP what if the activation server is turned off?

I no longer have a valid copy. It will run only 30 days. A wonderfull way to force an upgrade to vista 2011.

Re:Says Who?

[drunkennewfiemidget]

I have some waterfront property in Lousiana I'd love to sell you.

Disabling security worse than outright shutdown

[WilliamSChips]

it just disables your ability to install patches which, given the frequency of OS exploits, is tantamount to the same thing as disabling your computer.

Which is worse for everyone, because it means exploits can get in much more easily, and therefore strike legitimate installs faster.

so what?

[delong]

This really perplexes me. What's the outrage amongst the geek population? You know we'll just wipe and reinstall. No more Windows update, big deal. Apply SP2 and wait out the Vista release. Steal Vista and continue, business as usual. :P

Re:if the records exist, RIAA or anyone can subpoe

[heinousjay]

If your computer has been subpoenaed and you destroy it, then you've not avoided jail time at all, because that would be illegal.

I'd like to know what kind of legal situation would arise where it's preferable to destroy the data and go to jail instead of handing it over. You'd have to be covering something pretty bad, and forgive me for saying so, but I have no sympathy there.

Re:Up to no good

[atomic-penguin]

I don't know why this is moderated as a troll.

Windows Genuine Advantage already does 3 of the above mentioned things.

1) It will nag you if it thinks your not legitimate. We had a customer who had to buy an extra copy to get rid of the nagging.
2) It will prevent you from getting non-critical updates. There is a solution: http://windowsupdate.62nds.com/ (non IE browser required)
3) It will prevent you from installing add-on applications (just about any tool or utility from http://download.microsoft.com./

Re:if the records exist, RIAA or anyone can subpoe

[MonsoonDawn]

1. Not everyone who gets a subpoena is automatically guilty 2. There are plenty of reasons why a law-abiding innocent person would choose to destroy information rather than have it revealed 3. There is nothing stopping Microsoft from handing the information over without a subpoena. 4. An individual may have the opportunity to destroy the information prior to receiving the subpoena Your hypothetical suffers from the common phallacy of "If you're not guilty then you have nothing to hide." If you don't understand why that is such a dangerous assumption then there is nothing I can say to communicate my point.

this is a surprise?

[treak007]

When it comes down to it, M$ is a big corporation that is on a crusade to fight piracy and more importantly, make a profit. Does it really surprise you that they will try to destroy pirated versions of Windows? If you don't like it, there are alterantives for Windows out there, so instead of complaining, switch. I don't see what the big deal is. M$ has every right to protect their intellectual property (although maybe they should me more forthcoming about what their software does). The Linux kernel has gotten to the point where most Linux distros can do everything a Windows box can do. The only reason people don't switch is because of this "difficulty" stigma that Linux has surrounding it. In reality however, figuring out how to do things in Linux require just some simple reading and patience.

Alright, I'm done ranting. The point is, yes of course a company thats job it is to make money is going to try to fight piracy in any way possible (regardless of how underhanded you think it is). But the great thing about the OS field is that there are alternatives. If you don't like how Windows is running, switch, simple as that.

thanks for bearing through that rant.

Alternatives to WGA and Windows Update

[nuckfuts]

If you really object to where Microsoft is going with WGA, here is a good article on how to remove WGA and use an alternative to Windows Update.

The article doesn't mention how to get access to other Microsoft downloads, however, such as Windows Defender.

They might not be a nice company

[falconwolf]

but I hope they manage to make every single user pay for Windows, soon.

The thing is is you don't try to force users to pay by screwing your legitimate users. Instead of getting more people to pay you may drive them away. That's what they're doing to me. I've been buying and using PCs with Windows for almost 10 years but the next computer I get will be a Mac. If MS includes Activation in a product I won't buy it if I can get away without having it.

Falcon

Re:They might not be a nice company

[Pieroxy]

The thing is, the next Windows (Vista) will not even recognize any of my CD/DVD burners/players (they are all RPC-1). So why should I install it again?

The switch is close my friend, and in my case it's not to Mac. Enough of proprietary nonsense.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[Penguin Follower]

Do you have a link with info on identifying CD/DVD burners as RPC-1 or not? As much as I'd love to leave the world of Windows (and I do use Linux when I can), but my job revolves around Windows support. I will have to run Vista at some point and I'd like to know if my DVD burners are RPC-1 or not.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[therufus]

You need to download the Upgrade Advisor Tool.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[sumdumass]

It doesn't matter to microsoft. They are the only viable solution to the vast majority of computer users out there. Once Vista is the norm, they hold even greater power. They can screw anyone they want and not recieve backlash as far as users switching in groves. Linux will not be a complete alternative for a while and MAC doesn't fit the need either. Even with thier "you can run windows stuff on MAC" it requires a valid windows license to dual boot. Far too many people will be stuck with windows and shitty problems without switching as an option.

Now, This "screwing the customer" might make it viable for an alternative to gain momentum. But all they have to do is watch that momentum, cut thier "screwing" off before it becomes threatening and walla end of threat. Those that do look elswere will be a drop in a bucket compared to the lockin they already have.

This could also be some ploy to develope more competition so they can defeate some of the EU anti trust measures. Were they are willing to give up some market share by forcing people to switch so they can guarentee a certain share by vendor lockin and claming there are alternatives availible.

We have already seen the plan to rent software by the year floated around by microsoft so it could be something to gain momentum on that too. Think about it. Windows costing $40 a year to run or you can now buy a full license for $400. The rental software could have a guarenteed imunity from this shutdown and activation hassle and customer screwing as long as the rental price is paid (the rental payment process includes the activation but is hidden by the rental payment). Also $200 divided by 6 year end of life cycle is around a $7 per year license increase when renting for $40 a year. Even if it is around $60 a year, it is easier to swallow then a massive price increase and guarentees them moe anual revenue then just selling upgrades, OEM versions and full product versions. An OEM license could come with one or two years prepaid so a customer doesn't thing they are getting screwed out of a warrenty.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[TheDugong]

Don't get me wrong. I have an iBook G4. Even though the geek in me prefers using linux, OSX is IMHO what a desktop OS should be. But... Apple have taken an open source OS added some stuff and then closed it. They remove posts of forums which point out bugs/problems with their products etc. I do not think Apple hold much of a higher moral ground and if they had MS's market share they would probably be doing similar things and everyone would be making posts like "My next PC will be a Wintel". Corporations are not your friend, so why take any sides? Use them as much as they use you.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[arminw]

.... it requires a valid windows license to dual boot.....

I wonder how this whole activation thing will work with virtualization? The virtual software hides the hardware details from the guest OS. Windows no longer has access to nor can it find out what the MAC or disk serial numbers are if it is running under OSX.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[HerbieStone]

... the next computer I get will be a Mac. If MS includes Activation in a product I won't buy it if I can get away without having it.

Well, the next logical step for mircosoft will be to "suggest" Apple to include Activation and AGA (Apple Genuine Advantage) too..

Re:They might not be a nice company

[arminw]

....I do not think Apple hold much of a higher moral ground and if they had MS's market share....

This issue has really nothing to do with that, but since Apple makes its money on hardware, they don't worry about software protection and all the gyrations that MS forces users to go through. It is not cost effective to pirate a whole Mac computer. With Apple you are the owner of the computer, with MS, they own it and you are just a renter who has to abide by the lease agreement (EULA and activation) or you get evicted (computer shuts down).

Re:They might not be a nice company

[TheDugong]

"With Apple you are the owner of the computer, with MS, they own it and you are just a renter who has to abide by the lease agreement (EULA and activation) or you get evicted (computer shuts down)." MS owns the software, not the computer. You are free to install the OS of your choice. This is exactly the same on a wintel box or a mac. I cannot freely distribute the OSX software that came with my iBook. My point was why make a fuss about moving to Apple? They are a corporation just like any other. If having complete ownership of your OS is an ideal then an open source OS is really the only way.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[arminw]

.... I cannot freely distribute the OSX software that came with my iBook.....

Of course not, and there is no reason to do so since every Mac comes with OSX. Apple makes the whole computer and doesn't really need to take such draconian steps to prevent copying. Hardware cannot be copied for free or nearly free. There is no other product outside of computers where the entire functionality thereof is NOT provided by the manufacturer thereof. Windows PC computers are unique in this.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[TheDugong]

"Of course not, and there is no reason to do so since every Mac comes with OSX" Except for upgrading of course... I mean nobody had a legal version of windows pre XP and upgraded to a pirated, me hearties, version of XP. "There is no other product outside of computers where the entire functionality thereof is NOT provided by the manufacturer thereof. Windows PC computers are unique in this." Except of course that they do not have to be *Windows* PCs. (on a side note, the entire functionality is not provided by the OS either. Also, there is rarely any product where everything is provided by the manufacturer, does Toyota make the nuts and bolts it uses?). Any corporation will use almost any method they can to extract money from "customers", be they Apple or MS. The higher the market share the more the corporation can get away with.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[uvajed_ekil]

The thing is is you don't try to force users to pay by screwing your legitimate users. Instead of getting more people to pay you may drive them away. That's what they're doing to me. I've been buying and using PCs with Windows for almost 10 years but the next computer I get will be a Mac. If MS includes Activation in a product I won't buy it if I can get away without having it.

I agree. I've used MS products for 15 years now, mainly because they were the de facto standard and I needed interoperability. I've dual-booted MS$ and Linux for years now (as well as dabbling in OS/2, BeOS and FreeBSD), and I can now just about drop Winblowz completely, though I think my next personal machine will be a Mac, finally. Installing Windowz and maintaining it on machines not connected to the internet (yes, they do exist) is an especially rabid, PMSing, man-hating bitch and a half. I'm definitely about through with their antics, since I've now migrated entirely to Open Office.

Thanks for the memories, I guess. All the BS associated with Windows has prompted me to learn alternate operating systems. Thanks again, MS! Your own products and policies are your worst enemy.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[JavaIsGreat]

Simple Solution That I suggest

Operating System: Ununtu/FC5/FC4/SuSE
Desktop GUI : KDE/Gnome
Browser : Firefox
Mail Client: Thunderbird
Productivity Suite: Open Office 2.0
Project Management: Planner
Finance Application: GNU Cash
Application Server: JBoss/Geronimo
RDBMS: PostgreSQL/MySQL/DB2 Express Community Edition
Dev Tools: Sun Java Studio Enterprise Edition for Java/KDevelop for C++ or Simple plain old GCC/Eclipse for both
N Number of other pretty useful tools/utilities just check Ubuntu or FC5.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[C4P741N]

Does it work on Linux? .msi file, what I am meant to do with a .msi file?

Re:They might not be a nice company

[Pieroxy]

Any drive can be RPC-1 or RPC-2, it just depends on the firmware installed. So even if you do have RPC-1 drives, you'll just have to flash them as RPC-2 to make them work... but then bye bye multi-region play...

Re:They might not be a nice company

[arminw]

.....on a side note, the entire functionality is not provided by the OS either.....

If all brand markings were erased from say a dual boot macbook pro running Windows, there would be no way to tell that you were running a product from Apple. Repeat: It is the SOFTWARE that makes a computer perform its function. The hardware allows for that to happen. If you run Windows unprotected on the internet, it will get infected by all sorts of evil software. Running OSX on the SAME hardware will not allow any of that crapware to run. Software is the tail that wags the dog.

Re:They might not be a nice company

[falconwolf]

Well, the next logical step for mircosoft will be to "suggest" Apple to include Activation and AGA (Apple Genuine Advantage) too..

It could happen and if Apple ever does it then my next computer would run Linux. I have an Alpha, DEC Alpha, dualboot with Redhat and WinNT but it's been a few years since I really used it.

Falcon

Misdirection

[Sir Holo]

FTA: "No, Microsoft antipiracy technologies cannot and will not turn off your computer," said a spokeswoman with Waggener Edstrom, Microsoft's public relations firm.

Ah, but will it disable my installation of Windows? That's the part I care about.

She did not answer the question. She did not deny that WGA can diasble your installation of Windows. Why do we listen to PR flaks so uncritically?

Re:Misdirection

[BCW2]

In the end that is really all that matters.

Of course since M$ changed the rules and made the oem version of XP sellable for the standard $99 it might make sense to have a mad rush at legal XP copies before ME2 comes out next year, it will be cheaper that way. Then there will be even less reason to spend more money on what will, as always, be a poor beta of a possibly real product.

Re:if the records exist, RIAA or anyone can subpoe

[novus ordo]

"The only safe windows box is one that has no connection to the internet."

Sorry, under USC 195843 sec. 398 this is illegal.

Re:Sad...

[macdaddy357]

You can never be sure something is true until it is officially denied.

WGA

[falconwolf]

Here are a couple of plausible theories that make WGA's existence productive, while not infringing on anybody's rights.

This doesn't explain how or why someone sends in their Dell for service gets it back and it refuses to run Windows. Yes, an article Friday I think it was had this as one of the examples of what WGA did to a user.

Falcon

Story was made by M$.

[twitter]

So, another hyped story killed with a modicum of common sense

Common sense does not apply with an organization like M$. From the fine article:

A ZDNet.com blogger reported earlier in the week on a conversation between a Windows user and a Microsoft support staffer, who allegedly admitted that users who refused to install the WGA update would be given 30 days before their copies of Windows would stop working. ZDNet.com said that Microsoft refused to deny the report at the time. But later, Microsoft appeared to sing a different tune. No, Microsoft antipiracy technologies cannot and will not turn off your computer,

That's what I remember too, amazing.

There would have been no kill switch story if M$ had just been honest to begin with. They are not honest, so all you are left with is the facts: WGA installs itself, if you don't have it they won't give you "updates", when installed it phones home every day.

Speculation based on those facts and previous behavior is natural. For years, minor changes to your hardware would stop your M$ computer from working ether through technical failure or forced reregistration. Given their willingness to ship buggy product and previous mechanisms that "turn your computer off", a reasonable person would guess WGA would be doing the same thing. Indeed, what's it going to do if it does find a "non genuine copy"?

M$'s intentionally bad non free driver situation can be compared to live CDs. Knoppix, auto configures in less time than it takes XP to boot and still has room for a complete office suite and web server. Changing hardware in a M$ computer is tricky at best. Even if you are successful, you will often be forced to re register.

M$'s practice of forced reregistration on minor hardware changes has no parallel in any industry.

The William Gates Agent [WGA] is going to suck.

Re:Story was made by M$.

[jb.hl.com]

There would have been no kill switch story if M$ had just been honest to begin with. They are not honest, so all you are left with is the facts: WGA installs itself, if you don't have it they won't give you "updates", when installed it phones home every day.

You have the facts, they came from Microsoft. Please explain how that isn't honesty.

Speculation based on those facts and previous behavior is natural. For years, minor changes to your hardware would stop your M$ computer from working ether through technical failure or forced reregistration. Given their willingness to ship buggy product and previous mechanisms that "turn your computer off", a reasonable person would guess WGA would be doing the same thing. Indeed, what's it going to do if it does find a "non genuine copy"?

It's not registration, or reregistration. See below.

Most likely withhold security updates. And Microsoft has no responsibility to support people with pirated versions of their OS, nor to allow people to use pirated versions of their OS. They made their policy nice and clear; you either activate and prove your copy of Windows is legal or it won't let you use it. This is common knowledge, and most people (most LEGAL Windows users) don't care.

M$'s intentionally bad non free driver situation can be compared to live CDs. Knoppix, auto configures in less time than it takes XP to boot and still has room for a complete office suite and web server. Changing hardware in a M$ computer is tricky at best. Even if you are successful, you will often be forced to re register.

Knoppix does NOT auto-configure in the time it takes XP to boot. That is a FLAT OUT LIE. Jesus, twitter, you've reached new depths. XP takes about 20 seconds to boot, Knoppix can take minutes on the same PC. And while it may have an office suite and a web server etc, it's still incredibly slow by virtue of running from a CD.

M$'s practice of forced reregistration on minor hardware changes has no parallel in any industry.

They don't force you to "register", they force you to "activate". Register implies they keep details on file. As it is, the activation does not require any personal details, and as such it is not required to give your name or any details about you to activate. If you're concerned that they'll send the name you supplied during install, don't supply a name during install. Call yourself Jimbob Glory or Piss Corp. if you must.

And while we're on the topic, it's not "minor hardware changes", but please read this. That actually IS reregistration. They DO keep your details on file. See the difference there?

The William Gates Agent [WGA] is going to suck.

Another fantastic coinage from twitter, that amuses noone, converts noone, attracts noone and is about as incisive, cutting or insulting as calling Bill Gates "Fwuffy Bunnykins". Bill Gates left Microsoft. Did you not get the memo?

Re:Story was made by M$.

[Fulcrum of Evil]

You have the facts, they came from Microsoft. Please explain how that isn't honesty.

They still haven't denied that WGA will disable windows - they just claim it won't turn your computer off.

Most likely withhold security updates. And Microsoft has no responsibility to support people with pirated versions of their OS, nor to allow people to use pirated versions of their OS.

And the problem is that most people don't like being watched. they make the stuff that makes most PCs worthwhile. Who in their right mind would allow one company that sort of power?

Re:Story was made by M$.

[Achromatic1978]

Changing hardware in a M$ computer is tricky at best. Even if you are successful, you will often be forced to re register.

I have never once, in several dozen PCs, had to reactivate Windows due to hardware changes. Some of these changes:

• Changing of NICs from one manufacturer to another (PCI RealTek to Intel EtherExpress)
• Upgrading of RAM from 512mb to 1gb to 2gb
• CPU upgrade
• Installation of wireless miniPCI card
• Upgrade of notebook graphics card

Re:Story was made by M$.

[jb.hl.com]

They still haven't denied that WGA will disable windows - they just claim it won't turn your computer off.

I'd say that's talking down to people (for some people, at least, turn off PC might equal disable Windows).

And the problem is that most people don't like being watched.

There's nothing about being watched. It's checking a random string of characters against a list of other strings to see if it's a banned one. That is all. If Microsoft were monitoring peoples' webcams you'd have a right to be concerned, but as it is...nah.

Re:Story was made by M$.

[raptorjb007]

I find that it is intimatly tied to the Mass Storage controller. If you change this, ala new Motherboard or somesuch, then you have a good chance of needing to reactivate. You can change any other compenent, Video, sound, ram, cpu, but if you install a new motherboard, especially one with a different Mass Storage controller built in, you may find yourself deactivated. I ran into this issue a bit when trying to create a usefull OS image accross slightly different PC's models....stupid company leasing tis pc's every two years and they wer enever identical only similar.

Re:Story was made by M$.

[Reziac]

I know XP often ignores hardware changes, but other times it gets all disauthenticated over something as simple as swapping out the CPU or moving a PCI card to a different slot. Personally I think the hardware authentication thing is just plain broken, and subject to all sorts of quirks depending on stuff like driver load order, CPU instruction set, etc, etc. that normal people would never think about.

Re:Story was made by M$.

[Fulcrum of Evil]

I'd say that's talking down to people (for some people, at least, turn off PC might equal disable Windows).

That doesn't matter. The fact is that, unless MS addresses the specific objection, we have to assume that they're being evasive. MS has a lot of lawyers, and they're sneaky with language.

There's nothing about being watched.

WGA checks up on you and sends info back to MS. Most people will percieve that as being watched.

Re:Story was made by M$.

[jb.hl.com]

WGA does not check up on you! Microsoft would have no reason to do such things, nobody can ever give a conclusive reason as to why they would spy on users. WGA is a serial number check, nothing else.

WGA

[_Griphin_]

As long as Windows 2000 SP4 isn't turned off, I'm happy!!! :)

Kill Phrase

[BinBoy]

Laputan Machine.

Why he speaks the truth

[Provocateur]

denied that WGA will kill pirated copies of Windows

Because it's not going to kill pirated copies of Windows, it's going to F***ing Kill (TM) pirated copies of Windows.

Jeebuz, a thousand odd posts and nobody came up with the Ballmer.
 

Re:Why he speaks the truth

[Compaq_Hater]

Laughing my ass off on that one ! :), Ballmer gotta love that lunatic some much entertainment.

I would mod it funny if i could, almost lost a mouth full of coke on the choke.

CH

i feel sorry for proprietary OS users

[flacco]

it's bizarre watching so many people jump through these software vendors' hoops like trained pekingese dogs at a circus. i haven't used a proprietary OS in about five years.

do yourself, and your self-respect, a favor, and make the switch. it's easier than ever these days. really.

5% to 10% who actually switch -seems realistic

[Lonewolf666]

5% to 10% who actually switch - I think that would be a realistic number if Microsoft manages to kill all pirated versions.
It would also be a nice boost for Linux, compared to the current desktop market share that seems to be maybe 4% - a cursory Google search did not find a current statistic, so I'm going with an extrapolation here.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[Skynyrd]

Any luck with your sig?

Phoning home because of new hardware

[falconwolf]

There's far less cause for it to phone home if it wakes up in the same old body. There's some complexity going on if you replace a hardware component; defining "a computer" is tricky.

I've had two PCs that had the hd die before they were a year old. The one I'm using now has had two hds die and I added another one. In a few months I may get a new motherboard. I see no reason MS needs to know anything about any of my changes.

Falcon

WGA

[dezurtrat]

Yea, this kind of stuff is why we get the crap we do from Microsoft. Instead of creating the best products out there they are simply worried about creating technology to protect their market share.

This reminds me of Xerox in the early computer days when they could have ruled the PC market. But no, they were simply trying to defend against the future. See where it got them??

You had better pay attention MicroSHAFT!

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft should be happy there are pirates for windows...it was and is because of the pirates that M$ was able to get a large dominant market share

A large user base (whether legal or not) gave M$ an upper edge to its competitors

Business and support usually goes to where the people are
Why do companies make hardware and software for Windows? -because it has a large userbase
Why do people use windows? -because it has a large current userbase (they go where their friends, families, relatives are)
(offtopic but this is similar to Instant Messenging - Why are so many ppl using AIM? -same reason, because other ppl are)

This is one of the reasons why Steve Jobs offered to give away OS X free to the $100 dollar laptop project (though it wasn't accepted ;p) because more ppl using the OS = more dominance = more business oppurtunities

So to me it seems Microsoft is doing economic suicide by going after the pirates (aggressively anyway)

Sure they can

[iguild]

Even if they cannot (which is ridiculous), a "Security Update" via Windows Update will surely help them deactivate any "illegal" copy.

China

[seven of five]

What happens when 50,000,000 PC's in China won't boot?

Microsoft innovates?

[falconwolf]

MS-DOS was a real boost for the infant PC industry. Microsoft hasn't done anything uniquely amazing as far as technology goes since then.

And it wasn't even Microsoft who came up with DOS. If I recall my history right at first IBM went to Digital Reseach to work on DOS. DR worked on it some then handed it to Microsoft

Falcon

hackers

[falconwolf]

Too bad the majority of malicious 'hackers' don't have any clue about the ethical potential of their skills.

Hackers have an ethic, but at least you used "malicious". Now, Hackivists specifically use their skills for ethical reasons

Falcon

Re:hackers

[BCW2]

Why would you want "ethical" hackers when dealing with a company as un-ethical as M$?

Re:hackers

[Khyber]

eEad up on my posting history - you'll find out I know quite a bit about white/grey/black hat hackers, plus the original hardware hackers in themselves at TMRC at MIT back in the '50s. I'm no n00b. :) Stephen Levy was there - and I have all of his books.

Re:hackers

[falconwolf]

eEad up on my posting history - you'll find out I know quite a bit about white/grey/black hat hackers, plus the original hardware hackers in themselves at TMRC at MIT back in the '50s. I'm no n00b. :) Stephen Levy was there - and I have all of his books.

Unfortuantely most people don't know about hackers or their history. What most believe about hackers is from the stories the mass media feeds them about how this hacker launched this DDOS or that one stole company X's database containing credit card numbers or are otherwise criminals. I don't know how many tymes, though it's been dozens, that I've corrected or tried to correct people who thought hackers were all criminals. Though I haven't yet I've thought of writing to a writer who gives or leaves their reader with the idea all hackers are criminal to try to correct them and maybe call them a hack themself. Afterall reporters and other writers were called hacks at one tyme.

Oh, I've got one of Stephen Levy's books, "Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution", and loved it.

Falcon

donate for a tax writeoff?

[falconwolf]

Listen, Bill Gate's donations to charity keep him from having to pay huge amounts of dollars to the government in taxes. This simply allows him to keep more of his money.

I'm not standing up for Bill Gates, actually if you look at my posting history you'll see I don't like Microsoft, but Bill donating the money to his foundation doesn't allow him to keep more of his money no matter how you look at it. Actually he keeps less of it, tax writeoff for what is donated isn't $1+ for each dollar donated, ie you don't get more than a dollar tax writeoff for each dollar donated. You get less than a dollar for each dollar you donate, depending on what your tax bracket is each dollar donated may only allow you to writeoff 39% or whatever.

Falcon

Re:donate for a tax writeoff?

[BCW2]

The maximum deduction for a charitable donation is 50%.

Re:donate for a tax writeoff?

[HermMunster]

You're misled about how much Bill Gates donates. His Foundation has approximatley $1 billion anually. Bill and Melinda only donate a portion of that. Most of it is from other sources. All foundations are like that. Bill's portion is probably only a small percentage. This leaves him in the position of having nearly 50 billion dollars in wealth. Although he doesn't keep making that much every year he also doesn't receive that much in cash and his income comes in in different ways. In essence, he's using the foundation, just like all rich people do, to pay that money to charity instead of paying it to the government. As we all know the write off allowed by the government is typically higher than which a person would pay in taxes, due to how it changes your position on the tax tables. So, yes, he's coming out ahead this way instead of paying the money directly to the government where he probably would end up paying more overall.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[dufachi]

If Microsoft was willing to cut the price to the home user for their OS, there wouldn't be a need to pirate it in the first place. Set a price point around 30-40$ US for the full retail edition and you'd see a massive decrease in piracy.

Somebody noticed the politically correct terms

[guruevi]

[quote]cannot and will not turn off your computer[/quote]

This might be correct, but how about greatly impairing the use of your Operating System? How about refusing any software installs/updates or coming with an annoying popup that your software is pirated. Those too are an intrusion of my computer as is "just" calling home even without any action from their side.

They probably won't turn off your computer, they just will make sure you can't use it anymore or disable certain (important) functions.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[Duds]

I don't think $100 for an OS that apparently had a 5 year shelf life of free updates (try getting that from apple) is at all bad when people pay more than half that for "LOL Shoot people in the head 199"

That's copy protection for ya

[Animaether]

Basically I'm sure the software for his Palm introduced a new networking component that has caused this. It happens with our software all the time. We have a licensing mechanism that ties into a few hardware parts of the computer - the basic HDD serial number and the MAC address being two of them which is public info. So if you introduce a new NIC of any sort, the license breaks. And of course people can go "OMFG WTF!?" all the want - but here's the deal... for those people who, for example, use a USB bluetooth dongle and plug that in and out all the time, the license breaks and unbreaks (we get them a new license which now ties to the MAC of the bluetooth dongle) then breaks again as they remove it, etc we make a new license key that ignores the MAC address.

Now guess what has happened, twice, already...

They come to us and say that they had to replace the HDD after a crash. They send in a new authorization file, we check - the MAC is the same, the machine name is the same, the HDD s/n is different. Fair 'nuff. So we should get them a new license.

Or should we? Because in two verified situations, all the end-user did was rename a second computer, stick their bluetooth USB key in that, and generated an auth for it. So guess what happens? We get them another license file for what should have been the same computer with a different HDD, but which is essentially a second computer; because the MAC identifier was the USB key, the license type is MAC-less, and so will happily run on that computer.

Instant free extra licenses - 'piracy' at its best.

So although the author may whine about a change, probably a network stack change, he has his colleagues in the industry to thank for it - because we all know it's not going to stop the users who specifically set out to get an illegal copy, but it will stop those sneaky bastards who prefer not to get caught with pants down with a known illegal copy and instead have a 'licensed' copy to show to any auditing entity.

In a perfect world, people would be honest. In a perfect world, copy and licensing protections wouldn't have to exist. Here's to all software becoming free-as-in-beer and professional coders finding a way to make a living through other means, so that everybody benefits. Just a shame that's not going to happen anytime soon.

Re:That's copy protection for ya

[HiThere]

Interesting justification. Possibly even true.

Guess what? I don't care. If you are threatening to shut down my computer, that's an excellent reason NOT to use your product. Ever. Under any circumstances. Or ever recommend it.

Now I'm not a typical user, since I read the nlank-dashed MS EULA and decided already that I didn't want to go there. Over 5 years ago. That MS has just gotten worse since then only re-confirms that I made the correct decision. When I must, I use a Mac. Otherwise I use Linux. And when I use a Mac, I don't use MSOffice and I don't use MSIE. I use Seamonkey and NeoOffice (or, recently, OpenOffice2).

You'd never guess that I started out as an MS appologist "Not that bad, for a monopoly" I said. Well, at the time it was true, but it's not true anymore.

So. Do I beleive that "They won't shut down your computer."? No. I *DO* believe that that's the official party line, and that if the hoorah is too much they may delay implementing it until Vista has people more securely locked in. And I believe that this comment was a "trial baloon", but I don't think that it being shot down will change their plans, only the timing.

Re:That's copy protection for ya

[StikyPad]

Way to go, you caught the guy trying to get an extra license key! If someone's going through that much trouble, just give them the extra license... he probably needs the 60 bucks more than you do, plus you already sold him one copy. Stop mugging the golden goose.

Re:That's copy protection for ya

[arminw]

...... In a perfect world, copy and licensing protections wouldn't have to exist......

In the real, imperfect world, Apple's solution of making the hardware and software together, for each computer gives them the freedom not to have to go through all of this stupid, wasteful activation crap. It is pretty hard to make a free copy of a whole computer. This is only one good reason to prefer their computers over Windows. Apple makes it easy to replace an existing hard drive with a bigger and/or faster model and then re-installing the OS back thereon, together with all users and settings. No need for a user to phone Apple or have an internet connection.

Once MS makes it hard enough for ordinary, honest users to keep their own computers running, perhaps more and more people will begin to see the advantage of a company that makes the whole widget, all as a seamlessly operating thing that "just works". What other product is there, whose continuing functionality is at the whim of its producer, other than a computer running Windows XP or later? It seems that the attitude of MS is that THEY own your computer and therefore can "license" its use to you on terms they decide, since you are just renting it from them. Why should a car owner have to get permission from the manufacturer to replace or modify the engine or some other part of the car? Apple's model is that the user OWNS the vehicle, MS makes people passengers in a taxi, where MS, the taxi driver decides the route and fee to a destination or whether you are even allowed to go there at all. As a home owner, you are allowed to make minor structural modifications to your living space or repaint the whole place in weird colors, but as a renter, you better get permission from the landlord first. MS sees itself as the landlord of every computer running Windows.

Re:That's copy protection for ya

[Dr Damage I]

So although the author may whine about a change, probably a network stack change, he has his colleagues in the industry to thank for it

Incorrect. He has Microsoft to thank for implementing antipiracy measures which generate false positives. If it's that easy to genuinely generate a false positive and it's that easy to fool Microsoft into issuing a new licence, then these antipiracy measures are hurting only those people that Microsoft should least want to hurt. paying customers

Re:That's copy protection for ya

[orim]

Instant free extra licenses - 'piracy' at its best.

Well, another way to look at it is this: you should be having per-person license, not a per-machine license. That person has already paid you once, and be happy with that. This especially pertains to individuals, and especially when it comes to software you actively use (as opposed to background services/server software, etc) - cause guess what, I only have two hands and I can only work on one copy at a time.

Price your stuff so people can afford a copy, and don't be so anal about licensing. The rest will be ok, and you and your company won't spend sleepless nights worrying about all those millions of fake licenses floating around.

Relax a little.

Re:That's copy protection for ya

[Gridpoet]

"In the real, imperfect world, Apple's solution of making the hardware and software together, for each computer gives them the freedom not to have to go through all of this stupid, wasteful activation crap. It is pretty hard to make a free copy of a whole computer. This is only one good reason to prefer their computers over Windows. Apple makes it easy to replace an existing hard drive with a bigger and/or faster model and then re-installing the OS back thereon, together with all users and settings. No need for a user to phone Apple or have an internet connection."

i'm sorry i just dont call this a "good" reason to prefer them. If apple ever moves to a position of dominance, like the one MS is in now, the will be just as controlling and monopolistic as MS. Only it will be worse, because now Apple could decided that they dont want ANY other OS running on the hardware and so the whole world would be stuck with what apple dictates you run. I perfer at least having the semi-open hardware that we have now and the small amount of choice it gives me.

Re:That's copy protection for ya

[arminw]

...... If apple ever moves to a position of dominance, like the one MS is in now, the will be just as controlling and monopolistic as MS.....

Since Apple is in the hardware business, they do not need to become another MS. If Apple becomes really huge, they'll be an indirect threat to MS, because for every sale that Dell and other PC makers lose to Apple, means fewer OEM Windows sales. However the fact that Apple's hardware is very good and will also run Windows is a mitigating factor for MS. In all consumer goods, except personal computers, the manufacturer makes and is responsible for the entire product. In computers, it is the software that is most important, not hardware. An Apple computer running Windows can collect just as much malware as any other brand, but when running OSX is mostly safe. Apple alone realizes this and that is why, especially for consumers, is a better choice. I expect more and more consumers to realize this fact and Apple will sell more hardware than ever. I don't expect Apple to pre-install Windows any time soon, but many third party re-sellers already do this and sell dual-boot Macs. Because MS gets full retail price for each Mac installation, they already make more money from each Mac with Windows installed. MS Mac applications business is also nothing to sneeze at.

Re:That's copy protection for ya

[Animaether]

Oh, I fully agree that they shouldn't be able to haphazardly shut down your computer or fail it from booting altogether.

However, I might agree that they should be allowed to pop up a warning messagebox telling the user that they have an illicit copy, and that it will run for a further 30 days (counting down from that first instance) and after that the machine will boot in a minimal (e.g. DOS) state only. Similarly, our software simply fails to run - it doesn't destroy anything, and any in-progress pieces of work will still complete, but no new ones can be generated. It's a pain for both our end-users and ourselves, but sadly a reality both sides have to live with.
"Might", because they would need a -very- fast turn-around for those users who are perfectly willing to verify that their copy is legit, and they would need to make that as user-friendly as possible.. and that's -with- the 30-day margin in place. Seems they typically only offer that level of support to those whoy pay extra, unfortunately.

My rant was more about Office and its failing to run according to the article author; which I'd also argue is a bit silly to just fail to run, instead of giving the user at least a 7-day margin, but I can understand -why- it failed to run, at least. Don't agree with it, but understand it %)

Re:That's copy protection for ya

[Animaether]

*grin*

Read my reply above to your sibling poster, and I think you'll see we're fairly relaxed about it. And for what it's worth - yes, large portions of our software does run in the background as a service. Those parts that don't do get licensed separately. A user who has a license to work with can do so behind any computer they want on the same network, event through VPN if they're so inclined. If two people need to work concurrently with the same software, on two separate machines, they'll need 2 licenses.

We're also not particularly anal... 10 minutes on google will quickly find us plenty of kids and students using an illicit copy instead of our free version, and we could certainly e-mail them and whatnot... but it's just not worth the effort. But when it comes to a commercial entity, be it an individual or a larger establishment, we will definitely drop them a line.

Re:Wait, explain to me again...

[ratboy666]

I certainly purchased Microsoft Office. As to not being able to go to the download site... Microsoft has it in the WGA FAQ -- Windows 98 and ME can go in, XP needs authorization, non-MS platforms don't work.

So, if there is an update to my purchased copy of MS Office which I cannot retrieve because WGA won't work on Wine, because (naturally) Wine is not an Genuine Windows platform, isn't that pushing Windows monopoly into another area?

Alternatively, does Microsoft have a monopoly on OSs and office suites as well?

And does having both monopolies somehow cancel the Sherman Act? I don't know.

Ratboy

Microsoft's view: Pirated Windows Linux

[gareth.fletcher]

Microsoft will much rather let you use a pirated copy of windows, than to let you use Linux.

Re:Why the FUD?

[Fantastic Lad]

Fuck slashdot, straight up. you assholes don't have the common decency to give MS or Gates a good icon. There is absolutly nothing impartial about slashcock or it's faggot editors.

Yes. Political cartoons can be too much for those with delicate sensitivities. Poor you. Anyway, impartiality was never something Slashdot claimed to have, so why on earth would anybody complain?

There are a hundred and one reasons to think very poorly of Billy boy, and people who like computers are generally very aware of them.

Conversely, those who side with the psychopathic corporate initiative to take over the universe are often quite ignorant of MS's many transgressions, --which probably also means, (if they are into computers), that they aren't particularly smart or generally aware of much of the world. --Typically, such people seem to have the boring host of garden variety fears running rampent through their brains; the fear of homosexuality in your post jumps out at me, and thus your belief that calling somebody a 'faggot' is actually a damaging insult when all it really does is make mature people shake their heads at you.

People only use insults that they would be unhappy to have used against them. I'm a prime example; I'm calling you stupid and ignorant because I'd hate to be called those things myself. You, however, are using 'faggot' as an insult which leads me to think that you probably have a deeply nestled thing for naked men. Poor, poor you.

-FL

Re:Why the FUD?

[J_Doh!]

Not adding anything to the argument here...... but hey, great reply! If there is a place for him and his ignorance, you just put him in it.

Trolling the editors

[Frightening]

..which leads one to think what WGA really does then

Hear that? That's the sound of grammatical rules getting flushed down the toilet.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[sumdumass]

The people willing to pay that money for shoot people in the head games aren't the same people complaining about a $200 OS that can be found for $100 (for an upgrade but then it is a $300 software if you count the price of the valid products your upgrading from) if you sacrifice some features (OEM software) and know enough to locate it for that price.

The fact is, most people pirating windows will pirate the $50.00 shoot 'em up game. Now if The OS cost $30-$40 and there is pressure or hoops to jump through then paying the $40 seems alot more reasonable then the $200 for full version or $200 for previous version plus a $100 upgrade or an insuficient OEM version that cannot be used to upgrade.

The "five years of Free updates" doesn't really matter much in valuating this. From an end user perspective, It is taking five years for them to get thier software working corectly. You don't buy a car that needs to go back to the manufactuer off and on for five years to get everything working right. End users don't see a difference between this and software. They purchased the working copy of the software not the "in development" version.

"switching to Macs"? MISTAKE!

[Anonymous Coward]

The only thing more pathetic than a PC user is a PC user trying to be a Mac user. We have a name for you: switcheur.

Remember that the Mac was designed by artists, for artists. You don't speak its language. A shiny new Mac can introduce your apartment to a modicum of good taste, but it won't make you experimental, or adventurous, or avant-garde if you weren't that sort of person to begin with. That's why its interface will always mystify squares and dweebs like you.

Don't force what doesn't come naturally. You'll be much happier to stay with an OS that matches your personality. You'll be doing the rest of us a favor, too; just leave Macs to Mac users and we'll leave beige to you.

Re:"switching to Macs"? MISTAKE!

[jrobinson5]

As soon as I read this, I bookmarked it and saved it on my hd. How true.

Re:"switching to Macs"? MISTAKE!

[JavaIsGreat]

Very True. Infact I dont understand this flame war by Mac Fanatics. By the Way I am a Linux User and my home box runs ONLY linux. Aty work I am forced to use Windows but still that works. If you talk about OS as OS only and then Application as Application only then my first preference is Linux(FC5/Ubuntu) or Windows. Mac looks beautiful, amaziing, splendid but doesn't help in paying bills. Companies uses Windows or Solaris or Linux or any other *NIX or Mainframes or OS/2 to run the world's IT but never a Mac.

Whoa

[dcam]

FTA:
Through its spokeswoman, Microsoft said that "80% of all WGA validation failures are due to unauthorized use of leaked or stolen volume license keys."

20% is a pretty bad false positive rate.

Re:Whoa

[Sigma 7]

FTA:
Through its spokeswoman, Microsoft said that "80% of all WGA validation failures are due to unauthorized use of leaked or stolen volume license keys."

20% is a pretty bad false positive rate.

Only if WGA is only capable of detecting unauthorized volume license keys. For reference, WGA will flag WINE as an unauthorized copy of Microsoft Windows.

While false positives do exist, 100% events - 80% known positives != 20% false positives.

Re:Whoa

[dcam]

Thanks for the correction. I misread that sentence to say that 20% of the time WGA was wrong when it flagged a machine as unauthorized.

From the MSDN blog

[DigitAl56K]

http://blogs.msdn.com/wga/archive/2006/06/30/65281 8.aspx

Our genuine customers deserve the best experience, and so over time we have made the following services and benefits available only to them: Windows Update service, Download Center, Internet Explorer 7, Windows Defender, and Windows Media Player 11, as well as access to a full range of updates including non-security related benefits.

In other words, pirating Windows may be the best way to get hold of a copy that does not violate antitrust laws.

Re:Wait, explain to me again...

[nacturation]

So, if there is an update to my purchased copy of MS Office which I cannot retrieve because WGA won't work on Wine, because (naturally) Wine is not an Genuine Windows platform, isn't that pushing Windows monopoly into another area?

Oh, please. Maybe you didn't read the system requirements on the box. Did you find Linux-based Windows API implementations listed there? No? Didn't think so, because it's not supported. Wine isn't even Windows -- you can't activate Wine by using a Windows registration key as it's only an API compatibility layer. If your configuration is listed on the requirements box and you find it no longer works, then you have a genuine issue. But how does not getting updates for a configuration that Microsoft never said it would support in the first place have anything to do with a Windows monopoly? Did your Linux vendor force you to purchase Office along with your Linux installation?

Tin Hat Mode

[bmo]

Microsoft is a founding member of the BSA

Microsoft collects all this information about your computer, including what is being run.

Microsoft then...leaks/gives this information to the BSA.

BSA makes a list, checks it twice, finds out who's naughty or nice
(whether it is true or not)

BSA auditors are coming to town!

--
BMO

What is the WGA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Morpheus: WGA is everywhere. It is all around us. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out your Window's licence or when you turn on your HTPC. You can feel it when you log onto the work LAN... when you go to church websites... when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Morpheus: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else you were born into bondage. Into a prison that you cannot taste or see or touch. A prison of upgrade cycles. ...
Morpheus: What is WGA? Control. Windows Genuine Advantage is a corporate-generated dream world built to keep us under control in order to change a human being into this.
[holds up a photo of a bank ATM]
Neo: No, I don't believe it. It's not possible.
Morpheus: I didn't say it would be easy, Neo. I just said it would be the truth.

Re:if the records exist, RIAA or anyone can subpoe

[t0rkm3]

Perhaps the spectre of data mining would make one ponder the danger of this issue.

Similarly to AT&T handing over calling records, MS hands over records of "suspect" material to the federal prosecution pursuing a case for the RIAA.

Voila!! Mass prosecution resulting in more money for both the RIAA and the US govt.

That conspiracy theory is beside the point. Our default should always be less power for large entities and more power to the individual. This preserves liberty and prevents persecution. Corporations should be treated with as much (if not more) distrust as the govt.

Re:if the records exist, RIAA or anyone can subpoe

[Fulcrum of Evil]

And if you did anything to the data you'd be in contempt of court. What a difference!

Nah, only if you did it after getting the subpoena. Beforehand, anything goes, more or less.

Fun with facts && math!

[3p1ph4ny]

I'm a college student at a state university in the midwest.

Have you seen what MS charges college students? You only get a discount on XP Pro last I checked, and its still 99 dollars. With the special Microsoft licensing deal at my last uni, I could get it for 89.. wow the savings.

At the bookstore, I can get a copy of Windows XP for $7. With the university 10mbit line, I can download a disk w/ a keygen from usenet in a matter of minutes (a shorter time than it takes me to walk to the bookstore and back). I'm writing this on a slackware system.

Apparently you make enough that 99 dollars isn't much money. To some people, thats a fifth of their rent or half their weekly paycheck before taxes! If Microsoft shut them out, they would be forced to use an alternative OS. Microsoft doesn't want to lose poor people. I got into computing in my teens while I lived in a trailer park. I can tell you that everyone with a computer ran windows 3.1 or 95 in there. (well except me and a friend who pirated NT4) I was a freak when i tried redhat 5. Aside from the obvious hatred of trailer parks I now have, I don't see these people affording anything or wanting to switch off windows.

I have completed one year of schooling in the Electrical Engineering field. I work at a shipping warehouse for a large department store.

Next year, my monthly rent will be $296. Nowhere near the $500 you imply in your post. Also my biweekly paycheck after taxes is about $850 (working 60 hours/week).

Re:Fun with facts && math!

[eldorel]

Next year, my monthly rent will be $296.
In Baton Rouge, LA right now a one room apartment is $300 a month. This used to be a dorm room for a bible college, so that should give you an idea of how small we're talking. I don't even have a kitchen. The 2 bedroom we are moving into next month is $900, and the cheapest 1 bedroom with a kitchen is $550. so 100$ is easily a fifth of rent.

my biweekly paycheck after taxes is about $850 (working 60 hours/week).
so for 120 hours, you make $850. That comes out to approx 425/wk at 60 hours. However, not all of us have a job that offers overtime, so lets calculate your pay at 40 hours, shall we?

60 hours = 40 at time and 20 at time and a half, so 70 hours at normal pay
$850 bi weekly, so 425/wk after tax.

$425/70= $6.07

$6.07*40= $242.80

So according to my math, a $99 windows licence does, in fact, cost approx half of your weekly income before overtime.

Re:Wait, explain to me again...

[ratboy666]

I assumed the risks. But I find the idea of LOCKING these two together to be, um..., interesting and frightening.

Win32 is a API. Since its main implementation is a closed source program, programs written to it have to follow the API guidelines. As part of (the main part of) anti-trust settlements, Microsoft has to ensure a "level playing field" for API usage.

Which means that Microsoft Office should run on any Win32 implementation (given that the implementation follows the API specification).

And it does. Microsoft Office works for me (when I need it). But, it seems that WGA is required for updates (bug fixes to code I have purchased). And I am being locked out of that? Basically, being forced to use the monopoly implementation of the API specification. Now, the reason I have Microsoft Office is that I get all kinds of material from clients, and have to revise and create material for... Microsoft Office. It appears to have a monoply status of its own.

As a result, I am forced to use it (and I do pay for it.). Now, I may be forced to base on Windows, or ignore updating the software. I can't use Windows XP (the "phone home" stuff is a killer; I deal with confidential/trade secret/secret material).

Do you have a solution?

Ratboy

Turning the FUD tables on Microsoft, Big Time!

[FractalZone]

Wanna scare the crap out of giant, monopolistic software companies such as Microsoft? Tell your legislators that you want to see lemon laws applied to things such as Microsoft Windows and Office. If their products don't work reasonably well as advertised (in other words, taking all of Microsoft's marketing hype at face value and ignoring the carefully concealed (in fine print) disclaimers, then the companies should be held liable.

Take a look at the following from the Microsoft XP EULA:

[....]
16. LIMITED WARRANTY FOR SOFTWARE ACQUIRED IN THE US AND CANADA. Microsoft warrants that the Software will perform substantially in accordance with the accompanying materials for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of receipt. If an implied warranty or condition is created by your state/jurisdiction and federal or state/provincial law prohibits disclaimer of it, you also have an implied warranty or condition, BUT ONLY AS TO DEFECTS DISCOVERED DURING THE PERIOD OF THIS LIMITED WARRANTY (NINETY DAYS). AS TO ANY DEFECTS DISCOVERED AFTER THE NINETY DAY PERIOD, THERE IS NO WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF ANY KIND. Some states/jurisdictions do not allow limitations on how long an implied warranty or condition lasts, so the above limitation may not apply to you. Any supplements or updates to the Software, including without limitation, any (if any) service packs or hot fixes provided to you after the expiration of the ninety day Limited Warranty period are not covered by any warranty or condition, express, implied or statutory.

17. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES. The Limited Warranty that appears above is the only express warranty made to you and is provided in lieu of any other express warranties or similar obligations (if any) created by any advertising, documentation, packaging, or other communications. Except for the Limited Warranty and to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, Microsoft and its suppliers provide the Software and support services (if any) AS IS AND WITH ALL FAULTS, and hereby disclaim all other warranties and conditions, whether express, implied or statutory, including, but not limited to, any (if any) implied warranties, duties or conditions of merchantability, of fitness for a particular purpose, of reliability or availability, of accuracy or completeness of responses, of results, of workmanlike effort, of lack of viruses, and of lack of negligence, all with regard to the Software, and the provision of or failure to provide support or other services, information, software, and related content through the Software or otherwise arising out of the use of the Software. ALSO, THERE IS NO WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF TITLE, QUIET ENJOYMENT, QUIET POSSESSION, CORRESPONDENCE TO DESCRIPTION OR NON-INFRINGEMENT WITH REGARD TO THE SOFTWARE.
[....]

Microsoft touts its buggy bloatware as being wonderful operating system software, business software, etc. Yet (despite massive advertising campaigns to the contrary in practice) it won't guarantee that its software is going to do much of anything in particular.

Wouldn't it be interesting if Microsoft was obligated to live up to its marketing blather?

When you buy or lease new a car from a major automobile manufacturer, you can reasonably expect that it will do the things that one expects a car to do and that any wacky, extremely contraintuitive disclaimers like the one in the EULA above that the manufacturers sneak in are not going to make a bit of difference if your new car just doesn't work the way we all expect cars to work, especially if it doesn't do the things it is portrayed doing in advertisements (such as start and operate, respond to the controls, not blow up burn up or release lethal quantities of toxic gases inside the passenger compartment, etc.)

What I am suggesting is that Microsoft be far more concerned that its products do what they as touted as being able to do and not have the time to waste on crap like incomprehensible EULAs and spyware such as WGA.

It would n

Besides -- They'll only do it to pirates.

[darkonc]

Well, OK -- Pirates and the US Navy (they've already done it to the US Air Force).

There is a difference, isn't there?

It also depends on what you call a "kill Switch".
I can just see it now, though....

Lt: Seaman! There are two battle cruisers about come inside targeting range! What *are* you doing????!!! .
seaman: It says: "Functionality temporarily disabled. Please insert installation CD and enter activation code." I'm looking for the installation CD, but I don't even know if we have a CD player.
Lt: Oh, man... They were removed for security reasons....
Intercom: Brace for incomming round!

Maybe not kill...

[Deanodriver]

I'm not certain that MS would switch off features in pirated versions of Windows, but what's to stop them from doing other things to non-legitimate versions? For example, the Aero interface on Vista could be disabled for non-genuine Windows versions, the maximum screen resolution could be 1024x768, only utilising one core on dualcore CPUs, etc. That seems much more likely than switching every PC off, I believe.

Re:Wait, explain to me again...

[nacturation]

As a result, I am forced to use it (and I do pay for it.). Now, I may be forced to base on Windows, or ignore updating the software. I can't use Windows XP (the "phone home" stuff is a killer; I deal with confidential/trade secret/secret material).

Do you have a solution?

It sounds to me that based on your requirements, classified material and XP usage are mutually exclusive thereby making Office unsuitable for use with such material. The solution is to use other software if the material demands such sensitive handling and then implement that as a policy organization-wide.

Another option would be to update Office on a bare-bones XP install, watch what files and registry entries get updated (see Filemon and Regmon), and then roll those updates over to Linux. This could potentially be automated with some grunt work up front.

But how do you know Office doesn't phone home under Linux and potentially leak information there? Do you require whitelisting of outbound connections on a per-application basis? And while you may create Word/Excel documents on Linux in a secure environment, odds are good that those reading them are using XP, so all your precautions would be moot anyways.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[BlueCodeWarrior]

For the millionth time, you do get free updates from Apple. 10.4 is a completely different OS than 10.3. You get the 10.x.y updates for free, which are the equivalent of Service Packs.

Oh, and Windows XP is just Windows NT 5.1, so Microsoft does that too. They just don't make it as obvious.

Re:Wait, explain to me again...

[arminw]

....Do you have a solution?.....

Yes, Use MS Office for Mac. It works with files from Windows computers and you can download all the updates for free without activation.

Transactional validation is necessary

[cbhacking]

So... because the authorization program repeatedly checks your oftware, it's calling you a thief -- that's the gist of your argument, yes? I sure as heck hope cops never start operating the way you think software should. "This isn't the OS we're looking for. We checked him out one time - at least, he says we did, and there was a guy that looked like him - and he wasn't carrying anything. He can go about his business."

Software doesn't know if it has been tampered with. By your argument, WGA should set a bit in the registry or something, and never check again. When WGA validation is required, the computer sends that bit as a boolean value indicating whther it passed muster. Wow... how long would it take a hacker to crack that and pirate a full-access copy? It doesn't matter WHAT it is - a bit in the registry or a 2048-byte cryptographic key - anything that allows the computer to validate itself without MS making the remote, transaction-based check is pointless. That kind of authorization for (example) a bank account would never fly... so why should it be used for access to a restricted download or service?

For that matter, it would be easy for somebody looking to sell cheap, 'Windows Pre-Installed' hard drives to take one machine with a valid copy, let it validate itself, and and then use a disk imaging program for $50 or less to pirate the untouched, fully valididated, and ready for WGA checks copy of Windows onto a many hard drives as they want. Nobody is "calling you a thief" any more than the airport security guards asking you to step through the metal detector are "calling you a terrorist," hey are simply making sure, just as a routing security check, that you are who and what you say you are (or your OS is as valid as you/it believe it to be).


BTW, you've apparently never used Vista, or just LOVE to hate on MS, but that's quite offtopic.

Re:Transactional validation is necessary

[HermMunster]

I have 20+ licenses of Windows XP. I have used Windows from the beginning. I have been in the computer industry for over 20 years. I was an early adopter of DOS. I used wordstar, wordperfect, lotus 123, etc., back when they were the kings. I was an early adopter of Windows 286/386 and encouraged everyone to switch to the Windows like environments. I spent a great deal of time promoting the types of environments that allowed for programs to have similar interfaces because DOS programs all had different interfaces and that alone was hurting the acceptance of computers in the average home and business. I have followed the history of Microsoft and read a tremendous number of books over the past 20 years on the making of the software industry, which, BTW, is more than just Microsoft. I use Windows every day on all my computers except a couple of Macintoshes I have except for 2 years where I used Linux as my desktop and server platforms. I did this because I wanted to commit to learning Linux. I do not use Linux now and I have not had it installed on any of my computers for quite some time. I have Vista installed on one of my computers and have gone through it pretty thoroughly. I have paid particular attention to what is different between the two and what is not. Visually, the interface looks different but functionally it is the same operating system as XP, period. Even some of the screens within Vista still show the old XP screenshots. Vista does have a 3d accelerated interface but that is not a necessary part and it does not distinguish it as being a different OS. The desktop paradigm is exactly the same except things have been modified to give it a different tree structure (menus, dialog boxes, control panel) but the functionality is almost identical. Vista is XP with a more complex interface with 3d effects. The over heirarchy has changed but underlying it is still XP. They have incorporated a security feature which prompts you to authorize every change but that is not enough to qualify it as anything more than a security SP, of which it is very similar to the way Linux does it. It certainly is like the Macintosh OSX does it, but those don't define the OS. The idea that your purport is that everyone should be searched every time they leave a store with my groceries just so that the store owners can ensure that no one is leaving the store with pilfered goods. Windows doesn't change from day to day. This means that when I activate and I validate I have indicated my willingness to be searched and to show Microsoft my good reputation. When they still insist on searching everyone every day just to catch the thief that may be stealing their software, even though my computer doesn't change that often (from day to day, week to week, or even month to month). In other words, if they know I am legit yesterday or two weeks ago, there's no reason for me to keep allowing them to search me to ensure I am legit today. If they continue this behavior and they know I was legit yesterday and two weeks ago then the only conclusion is that I am somehow distributing my code to others so they can install and hence I am aiding them in their theft, making me an alleged thief.

Re:Transactional validation is necessary

[cbhacking]

I have 20+ licenses of Windows XP. I have used Windows from the beginning. I have been in the computer industry for over 20 years. I was an early adopter of DOS. I used wordstar, wordperfect, lotus 123, etc., back when they were the kings. I was an early adopter of Windows 286/386 and encouraged everyone to switch to the Windows like environments... Okay.... and you point is? I'm only one user; I doubt I've purchased more than 5 copies of XP for use on my various machines, and that's counting the copies that come pre-installed. I don't quite see why this train of thought matters.

What, exactly, do you suppose Windows should do so that MS knows it isn't pirated when you try to do something requiring WGA; a nearly-instant check of your computer and OS against a remote database being apparently unacceptable? The one and only thing that comes to mind as being really acceptably secure is to have MS generate a very long key, and then have your copy of Windows send that key whenever validation is required. Of course, this would make it ridiculously easy to violate the whole point of WGA; cloning that authorization would be dead easy, and since nobody is checking whether the computer sending it is the same one the key was issued to, that would be, well... pointless.

If your complaint is that WGA checks frequently, regardless of whether you're trying to download service packs or whatever, let me remind you that the essential puprose of WGA is to (help) prevent piracy. Most people cannot tell, on their own (and even fewer bother to try) whether their softwae is pirated or not... but I hope, at the least, that most people are good enough morally that they would do something if informed that their copy of Windows was stolen. Even if they lack the morals, they might do something to make the damn message go away. Since WGA is effectively transparent in it's day-to-day checking, it doesn't cost you anything... and you the issue of people ghosting hard drives is actually a serious one; some people do it, despite WGA, but not many. In the days before WGA it was much more common. The WGA scans aren't because MS is worried that YOUR copy of Windows might suddenly be a pirated one, they're worried that a copy of Windows that tinks it's your copy might be pirated. Honestly, why do you care?

The kernel differences necessary to implement dynamic permissions elevation - and reduction, as in the case of IE7+ - are not minor. Having the UAC prompt when needed, and (usually) not prompt when unneeded, is something even Linux lacks (at least, I have yet to see a distro capable of it). Kudos to Apple for putting the ability into OSX; that kind of thing isn't very easy.

I think the last time I saw a WinXP screenshot in Vista was build 5280... there may well be a few in the most recent build, though. Are you suggesting the first thing every interface developer should do after a mod is go update the screenshots?!? It's beta; complaining about stuff like that in a product half a year from release is crazy. File a freaking bug report. They've redone the interface (I'm not talking 3D, I'm talking about things like instant search on ths Start menu and an Explorer navigation interface making it much easier to jump back 4 folders and sideways 3, etc.). They've expanded NTFS, improving journaling and adding shadow folders (very big change, nothing like it in previous versions) and symlinks... without breaking backward compatibility. They've improved power management, improved backup utilities, improved system restore, added background defrag, greatly improved the firewall, integrated Defender, added SuperFetch...

Enough of a shopping list? The checkout and exit is that way. The scanners by the doors will make sure you've paid for it all. It really doesn't matter if you've been through them before... but then, they don't actually interfere, either. All they're doing is suggesting you might be a thief.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[Duds]

Ah, the "XP didn't work properly thing".

I was referring to the upgrades to Media Player, to Movie maker, to messenger, to anti-spyware.

All of which were free from MS and the equivilents, when they even existed, charged for by Apple.

Not quite THE bottom line...

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Bottom line: the matter of whether or not WGA will prevent a copy of Windows from running remains unsettled.

And below that: be very, very afraid.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[Duds]

Apple have not given out multiple complete generations of their media player, movie maker etc for free.

10.4 is not "a completely different OS", it's what 1.0 should have been in the first place, much more so than any shortcomings that were ever present in XP build 2600.

It wouldn't stop your computer.

[Vitus Wagner]

It would just file a lawsuit against you in the your local court. Then you can defend yourself and prove that you really have a license, and WGA is wrong. It would cost you just... say five times more than license.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[Fred_A]

Of course it's completely different, it doesn't have little stripes over everything, did you even *look* at it ?

Typical of those windows users to reduce everything to technical issues... ;)

Re:Why the FUD?

[chawly]

You really are a very silly person. You really need to take a primary school reading course. NITWIT ! You don't have the sense that God gave goats !

MS Offers a cheap way out

[hardboiled.tequila]

If you click through the "Buy Windows Now" prompt, you are taken to a page which offers to send you a real live version of XP Pro at OEM pricing. So the cheapest way to buy Windows retail (not Edu, not OEM with hardware) is to pirate it first, then pay for it later.

A brave GNU world

[Nicolas MONNET]

In a perfect world, people would be honest. In a perfect world, copy and licensing protections wouldn't have to exist.

In a perfect world, copy and licensing protections won't exist, because they will have annoyed so many users that they will have all turned to Free Software.
I like those annoying copy protection scheme -- that's how MS is shooting itself in the foot. WTG, crooks.

XP Boot

[twitter]

XP takes about 20 seconds to boot

In your dreams or when it blue screens.

Re:XP Boot

[Toby_Tyke]

XP takes about 20 seconds to boot In your dreams or when it blue screens.

I just did a quick test, on the machine I'm typing this on. Timing from the point I hit enter at the GRUB boot screen, XP takes 17 seconds to get to the log in screen. Ubuntu takes 40 seconds.

If you feel like replying to this, try something better than telling me I'm dreaming.

Re:XP Boot

[jb.hl.com]

Wow. Just, wow.

Re:XP Boot

[jb.hl.com]

Even after that, it's about 10 seconds on both Windows and Linux to get to a desktop. Fair comparison I think.

Re:XP Boot

[iced_773]

Keep in mind who you're replying to. Check his posting history. You should see an AC who, while still a stalker, makes a very valid point by posting links to all of twitter's extreme anti-MS posts. The eagerness to bash "M$ Windoze" when Windows isn't the problem is why he is on my Foes list.

Please don't feed this troll in the future.

Re:XP Boot

[Toby_Tyke]

Very true. But XP is pretty unlikly to take 23 seconds longer than Ubuntu to get me to the desktop. I must say I've never timed it, but I'm stil pretty sure it's faster to go from login prompt to desktop pn XP than it is on Ubuntu.

By the way, this is a fairly bog standard PC. 1.3 GHZ processor, 512 MB of RAM. It's two years old and it was hardly cutting edge when I built it.

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[mdarksbane]

The ridiculous thing is that almost all their piracy concerns are happening abroad.

In most developing nations the only people who might buy legitimate copies of windows are the corporations that are outsourcing to them. Any software store in bombay has rows of pirated Windows CDs on sale.

Greater than 90% of all software piracy happens in places like India and China, but these are the number they quote whenever the BSA talks about how much money they are losing to piracy every year to make new laws or practices to make things difficult for their legitimate customers.

Of course, the real reason there's that much piracy in asia? An Indian programmer working for an American company who has outsourced their operations and pays very well makes about $200 a month, and on this lives as well as a programmer here in the US. Windows XP Pro in India costs more than a solidly middle class family's monthly income.

I'd sure as hell pirate it, too :P

Re:Please, this was never going to happen...riight

[Goose In Orbit]

Don't know about 1.0

1.0.4 maybe... ;^D

Why?

[s31523]

WGA that checks users' computers only once a month, rather than every day.
Why would authentication need to happen more than ONCE, PERIOD?

Soon, Windows will ship with a USB stick that has the Key on it, or some other hardware, that will enable the install.
Remember the old school days when you had to plug some adapter into the parallel port to get your software to work!

This is how it will go:
(user inserts Windows CD)
"Thank you for choosing Windows"
Please insert your Hardware Authentication Module (HAM)
(seconds later)
Windows has found new hardware, do you have a driver, or would you like to search the internet?
user clicks search
I am sorry, but your version of Windows has been identified as illeagal. Please contact Microsoft.
(reboot)

...

User gets a copy of Linux, installs and throws sells his new Windows copy on eBay.

Re:Why?

[base3]

Soon, Windows will ship with a USB stick that has the Key on it, or some other hardware, that will enable the install.

Not a chance, because then they'd be without excuses for not allowing transferable licenses. They like selling the same person the same version of Windows several times via forced OEM licensing too much to use a dongle other than the machine itself.

Windows for Warships and WGA

[brufar]

The Warships Phone home using WGA.
WGA reports the OS isn't valid.
The ship sits dead in the harbour in a time of crisis...

On the Brighter side if the UK ever decides to attack the US we can simply have MicroSoft disable their Navy..

"Where do you want to go today ?"

Re:Word of the Day: Switcher

[utopianfiat]

I can smell your double decaf vanilla latte through your thick-rimmed hipster glasses, you might want to wave your plaid shirt before the aroma gets in your bleached spikes and you become so overcome with grief that you spill it on your Diesel jeans.

A macintosh is a computer built with software preinstalled on it- given, that software is a bit more bulletproof than what you're used to (M$W), but it's still published by a trigger-happy patent-hoarding company that has just as much a bottom line as everyone else.
real mac user: ignorant of the double-standard they set.

windows kill switch

[phirzcol]

i first installed a copy of xp that did not have a valid licence for it, about a month and a half ago after the auto update system ran for a few days i rebooted to install an update and it came up with the chance to purchase a new licence or it would not let me into windows now i have a valid copy and it has time set wrong on it, microsoft announced that i has a pirate copy of windows and gave me the chance to purchase a new licence from them but after a countdown allowed me in, does this seem to be a change in the way microsoft is handling the update?

I'd be raging mad

[Just Some Guy]

You had to spend 10 minutes on the phone begging someone to allow you to use the software you purchased, but you're OK with that because they were pleasant. Exactly how bad do your vendors have to abuse you before you stop defending them?

Kill_Switch.mp3

[HTH NE1]

Heavenly shades of night are falling, it's twilight time,
Out of the mist your voice is calling, it's twilight time,
When purple colored curtains mark the end of day,
I hear you, my dear, at twilight time.

They're lying...

[TaleSpinner]

...and how can I tell? Because Bill's lips were moving. No one who watched or read _anything_ about the anti-trust trial could ever believe that Microsoft would not lie through their corporate teeth if they thought it would make them a dime or protect them from any kind of competition.

And by the way: Bill giving away billions that he bilked from customers is not charity. You have to give away your _own_ money for it to be charity.

I hope they're lying

[spykemail]

I really hope they're lying, and Microsoft really does intend to go through with something like this. All we would have to do is buy enough copies to get a false reading from WGA then get Apple to run it in a commercial. And if my favorite software company won't do it, maybe some pro-Linux group will.

Game over man, game over.

switching

[falconwolf]

The switch is close my friend, and in my case it's not to Mac. Enough of proprietary nonsense.

I've got a box with Linux, and WinNT, installed but I haven't used it in years. When I first thought about getting a Mac I also thought about installing Linux as well making it dualboot. But with OS X based on BSD I can just use it. Besides I like Macs, if development had kept up and it was still in production I'd get an Amiga.

Falcon

ReActOS vs. Vista

[Orion Blastar]

Odds are, which one will be done first. Then the new odds would be which one is done right with the fewest bugs and security exploits.

Re:Allow me to solve your licensing problem

[Animaether]

We do check against more than one piece already - that's why they'll continue to run now. The MAC one is the odd one out simply because the licensing is a floating license setup that goes over the network. That's something we've recently addressed, so it's no longer an issue.

You'll never catch me saying that 'home copies' is ever a good thing, though - not for our product. It works for Adobe with Photoshop, it doesn't work for a more niche product. E.g. you'll get plenty of people saying that home users really have no need for Photoshop anyway and should be getting Paint Shop Pro or even The Gimp - with many countering that Photoshop is what the industry is using, and that is what they should learn if they want to make it in the commercial world - and then going on to claim that once they are in the commercial world, they'll buy Photoshop (right.) or their employer will (they likely already had a license.. no extra there). But say it's a product like a computational fluid dynamics app... what home user could justify having a shared copy of that? ;) Whereas a commercial entity, say a car designer, might ponder the convenient way to get an extra license instead of ponying up the extra $$$ to purchase one (CFD apps are expensive buggers. Glad we don't make them.)

We certainly don't treat our customers as enemies, and they certainly don't see our licensing as such either... we're in the very thankful position to have the vast majority of our customers agreeing with the need for licensing (knowing very well that those who aren't legit will often underprice them on bids), and sharing a "not amused" stance on those who use an illicit copy commercially. (Views on home/student/non-commercial use is pretty diverse ranging from a tough stance to prodding for making a free version for these users.... which we do, with only very slightly limited functionality, but limited enough for it to be a hassle to use in a professional setting.)
When a commercial license does die completely for whatever reason, we have a very short turn-around to getting them a new one, and if any particular production time is lost on it anyway, we compensate this as much as possible.

Personally I think we're being pretty good about it all, while being realistic. Like I said... if it were a perfect world, I'd have our coders do away with the licensing parts altogether. As it is, we seem to have found a middle road that is acceptable to both sides.

Re:Wait, explain to me again...

[ratboy666]

Great... but it doesn't play. MS Office/Mac and MS Office/Intel suffer line-break and formatting problems between each other. If it were THAT simple, I would have gone with OpenOffice.org (which reads ALL documents, except one).

But, the formatting issues are nasty.

I think my answer is the isolated Windows XP box "in the corner". It is allowed to "phone home" once, and is then disconnected from the 'net. MS Office is installed, and user documents on a removable disk. User documents are moved around on CD-ROM, if transport (say, for emailing) is needed.

Every three months, the hard drives containing data are removed physically, the OS drive "toasted & ghosted", and the machine is allowed to "phone home" for any updates.

This should work, as long as the "toasting" is secure. I believe that is more secure than my clients systems. Just need to make sure the process is logged.

Ratboy

Re:Wait, explain to me again...

[arminw]

..... It is allowed to "phone home" once, and is then disconnected from the 'net.......

If you have a router on your network, just block the MAC of that computer from the Internet. That way you don't have to physically unplug the network cable and can still transmit the data on your local network.

You must use some rather complex formatting. Interchanging Word 2004 files with Windows users have not been a problem for us. However, even some Office 97 files sometimes look weird on the current office on Windows. Even within MS Office there can be some anomalies. We don't exchange any Excel or Powerpoint data, so that could be another issue.

If you already have one of the new Intel Macs, the virtualization route is one you might investigate. The XP VM can be connected and disconnected from the network by software commands to the virtualization engine. The advantage of having two computers for the space and powering of one is considerable. We here are still stuck with PPC Macs and the slow, but fast enough for now, virtual PC emulator.