Slashdot Mirror
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."
"Because we broke power management in the latest update. We will, however, make sure Windows doesn't boot once your computer is on."
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?
The question is why not kill pirated copies of Windows?
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.
Oh no... the people who already don't buy windows will hate Microsoft even more.
I'm sure they are trembling in fear.
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.
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.
What?
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.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
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.
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.
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
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.
Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
No, this spin is just... beyond. This is one of the funniest (and saddest) things I've ever read (emphasis mine):
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?
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.
...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
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.
.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'm one of those
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.
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
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
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.
FalconShould there be a Law?
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.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.