Slashdot Mirror
Paul Thurrott's WGA Woes Solved
David Horn writes "Last week Slashdot ran an article regarding the trouble Paul Thurrott had with WGA. It turns out that after talking to Microsoft, he was actually running a pirated version of Windows, legitimately purchased from an online vendor. Paul admits that 'the truth is, I just made a mistake. If we learn something from that mistake, fantastic, but I wasn't trying to set up a life lesson for anyone, let alone myself.'"
What ever you think of the guy, you have to admit that he sure is a loyal fan. I'm prettty sure that had something of equivalent magnitude ocrrcured between some Linux distro and one of their users, said user would switch distro.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
How about an apology Paul? Damn ranting bloggers...
-Bill
Dissuaded you from buying, or from pirating? :P
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
it's not hard to find a conspiracy theory here. he bought an OEM copy of Windows MCE 2005 from some unnamed online retailer to "see what the experience was like"? yeah, right, he paid $100+ to experience the thrill of receiving OEM software. totally. alarm bells are ringing, Paul.
..I always download from torrents. I don't trusted these so called pressed CDs/DVDs
What kind of self-respected techie doesn't realize a pirated windows disk when he sees it? This story doesn't add up.
If some company would sell me invalid copy (pirated) ofo software on purpose I would post EVERY DETAIL on that company that I have.
Just to make others safe from that company. He didn't that leads to conclusion that he is full of shit. Also posting such insult requires me to be real about it since if I wouldn't the resseler would sue my ass.
Now after reading (yes I did read that crap) a bit lenghty article on how MS is great, how they suprised him with their support and kindlyness, how it can happen to anyone, blah, blah, blah. I just see MS marketing bullshit in it and the guy getting kind of rich from just blogging what MS suggest him to blog.
It is too obvious. I am not a language expert but I can even see different style of writing/expressing in discussed post that in his other works.
Time to straighten out all those knees that jerked a while back. Time for everyone that gleefully thrashed Microsoft to eat a little crow and basically admit the system did exactly what it was supposed to do - block an illegal copy of Windows.
It's classic debugging to know that when you try to solve a problem and keep thinking, "But this HAS to work!" you are making an incorrect conclusion somewhere. In this case, trusted person who knows how it is supposed to work has (he incorrectly assumes) a legit copy of Windows, Windows says it's a copy, nobody believes it is a copy. Many jump on anti-Microsoft bandwagon (the knee jerk helps with the jump) and just assume it's evil Microsoft. Did anyone ever post in the thread, "Gee maybe he has an illegal copy?"
This is a great lesson in a new problem we'll all increasingly face. How do I know, when I buy a copy of some content (movie, song, app, OS, whatever) that it's "legitimate"? How do I know it's not bootlegged? For years I've wondered this about music records. How do I know that Italian import 1972 Pink Floyd show is a bootleg, and not just some label I never heard of? How am I supposed to know that the Uruguayan vinyl of Hendrix at the Isle of Wight is just the product of some latenight mixing by Jimi of not enough multitracks and too many contracts?
Microsoft has made a nuisance with its "Certificate of Authenticity", but something that actually works like that seems necessary here. We deride the "broadcast flag", but what about a "copyright hash" that lets us know our transaction was made with the legitimate grantor of even limited copyrights (for our consumption)?
So much DRM is just a hassle or a ripoff that the publishers have poisoned the debate. How do we do what we need to do with DRM, without hanging ourselves from all the extra red tape it creates?
--
make install -not war
It helped notify an ignorant user of piracy, but it didn't actually help anyone at all. The only reason you would want another copy is because of the artificial restrictions MS puts on "non-genuine" copies. So yes, it got fixed, but they created the problem in the first place. It's an MS defect that he needed a new CD-key to fix. The pirated copy worked just fine.
Mr Thurrot wants me to believe that: He is not using a big-brand laptop that comes with a legit windows copy. He actually assembles his machines from scratch and buys a copy of windows from some "discount" nigerian on-line retailer, because he needs to save every penny out of his meager salary. He is so clueless that he would take one full week to figure this out. While being a well know columnist he never keeps the machine he receives to review. Microsoft doesn't supply him with endless licenses.
Your ad could be here!
"Say, these are awful nice kneecaps. It'd be a shame if, y'know, something were to happen to 'em. And accidents do happen... like accidentally installing pirated versions of Windows."
And a mega advocate of MS is going to sound an alarm without thinking up every possible way HE could have done something wrong prior to sounding an alert.... Doesn't add up. If I'm a big advocate of something, I'm going to go thru every possible way I could have done something wrong before publicly bashing something I love so dearly.
My Windows XP that came with my CD had NO case and a 6-page instruction booklet that says nothing. The CD itself has a broken OEM installer, in that it freezes during install at the same point... luckily if I boot off the CD and use that installer, ie not the OEM one with the bundled drivers and all.
I bet the Microsoft representative was named "Lucius Lavin".
I don't see any win here for the consumer, it's not like the price of Windows is going to come down as a result of this, the only thing we're going to see is this possibly helping Microsoft's bottom line at the expense of disrupting their users.
Wouldn't it be preferred if MS used another method to find their lost revenue? Instead of relying on end users to go through the confusion (and possible further consequences of WGA). Afterall, how many end users are going to call Microsoft to report that their vendor is selling pirate copies of windows(or even realise this, a basic user won't understand) versus just buying a new code online from MS right away.
Paul's convoluted non-apology retraction just made Mary Jo Foley's day.
So he was buying from a company that he knew was already playing a little loose with the rules.
So, a company willing to bend rules is also willing to break laws? Big surprise.
The real surprise is that he wouldn't check the software. And that he'd forget how he got it. And so on and so forth.
This story is just
The biggest windows fanboy in the world running a pirate copy hah!
I have been using Firefox with the NoScript plugin for so long, I forgot what it was like to browse the internet without it.
I am currently using a loaner corporate laptop while mine gets replaced. Using the default IE install I click the winsupersite link in the article summary and WOW. Keywords, popups, I think I even saw a floating ad in there. I did not even read the linked page, the very next site I went to was to download Firefox on my loaner. I can't believe people still browse the internet with out add and selective script blockers.
Here is an idea for Firefox and/or extension makers. It would work for me, maybe not everyone and maybe no real demand for it though.. Allow a portion of the config for Firefox and/or extention configs to be placed in a web accessible place. You could "login" to Firefox from anywhere and have your browsing configuration available to you. It could even be cached locally and just "updated" on the next login from that PC. An internet based roaming profile for FireFox.
MS Rep: That's a real nice website you got there Mr Thurrott.
PT: Thanks.
MS Rep: It would be a shame if it was accidentally got blocked by IE 7 for being unsecure.
PT: Now how the hell would that happen?
MS Rep: You know. Things happen. Websites get added to lists. Thumbs get accidentally broken. It's a funny world.
PT: Come to think of it, I think I'm using a bad serial number.
MS Rep: Atta boy.
It's not stupid. It's advanced.
Firefox? Opera? Was it not compatible with anything but IE 6? Sounds lousy.
1. So which one is smaller then?
2. I find it amazing that Windows 2000 has a faster startup and shutdown time than anything. Am I alone here?
3. "The version of IE 6?" Correct me if I wrong, but I believe my IE 6 on Windows XP/SP2 saves web passwords?!?
Microsoft was (or still is?) giving away free licenses to people who were sold pirated copies of Windows XP without knowing it was pirated.
\
With the WGA program, Microsoft says a user who unknowingly purchases a counterfit version of Windows will receive a free copy of Windows XP, if they report the seller.
Details
Perhaps Mr. Thurrott should persue his copy.
640YB ought to be enough for anybody.
. . . confiteor. Best not to have columunists with an audience complaining that WGA is screwing over legitimate purchasers, so after a a little quid pro quo, his copy conveniently became "inadvertently pirated." Hogwash.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
How do I know, when I buy a copy of some content (movie, song, app, OS, whatever) that it's "legitimate"?
You can't. There is no difference between the "legitimate" copy and any other copy and that fact demands a rethink of copyright laws designed to protect dead tree publishing.
Copyright law in the US was formed a devil's bargain from the beginning. The founding fathers understood the purpose of such laws was the promotion of creative arts. They never wanted people to own ideas, which they correctly understood as something other than property. They did not even want people to own their publications forever. The goal was to encourage as much expensive publication as possible so that as many people as possible could be exposed to the country's current thoughts. They liberated their presses in a way the old world refused. The goal was to share. Exclusive franchises were established because that sharing was fiercely expensive.
Today the cost of information is now entirely in it's creation. A worldwide network has been built where it is possible to transfer entire libraries without significant cost. The marginal cost of copies is neglegible. There is no reason anyone should be without any knowledge. Once the knowledge is create, it should spread without bounds. People will continue to solve problems and create knowledge because they must if they want to get things done. Most people want that knowledge spread in their lifetime.
The problem comes not from the creators of knowledge but from those who would own it. Large publishers and others, long used to being gate keepers of information, want to retain that position. Windows is an example. The code was acquired though means both fair and foul. Much of it has been used to suppress rather than express as the death of Word Perfect, OS2, Palm and a host of other superior "competitors." In a few cases, such as Netscape, the code was liberated. In other cases, like Fastback and other backup programs, the code was discarded. Outside the computer industry things can be even worse. For every book you see at the major chain stores, there are hundreds in warehouses and thousands that never saw publication. For every song you hear on the radio, the story is much the same. Music, writing and other arts are part of human nature which preceded and will outlast the growing tyranny of IPA ownership. People are trying very hard to get around these would be owners to share and profit from that sharing. The current owners are not offering any share of those profits and will be routed around eventually. In the mean time, they are encroaching further and further into our basic rights to maintain their position.
Copyright needs a complete rework. Strong protections and exclusive franchises are no longer required to promote the creation and spread of the usefull arts. Strong "IPA" laws are now the largest barrier to the innovation and education they obsessively promote.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Everything else on the planet requires you to register and logon. But MS in it's infinite wisdom decided that making it 'transparent' would be better. And in the real world this translates to making it more error prone, fragile, complicated and generally unsupportable.
HEY MICROSOFT: IF LOGONS ARE GOOD ENOUGH FOR MY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS RELATIONSHIP WITH AMAZON THEN IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOUR $79 OPERATING SYSTEM, YOU FUCKING RETARDS !!!!!!!!
No, all that is happening here is MS creating such a complex system of distribution and prices, with registration codes that are long and difficult, all while trying to personalize a commodity product. Start with the first item. MS fought for regulations that mean that any manufactured PC must, for all intents and purposes, have Windows installed. So, even if a site license exists, you are still paying for windows. Yet even in light of this, MS still insists on selling upgrade and full products, even though the percentage of people who have not bought a previous copy of windows is small. Of course a copy of windows is linked to a machine, which is another senseless complication. Such complications as upgrade versions, home versions, pro versions, etc, simply allows the crooks an opportunity to manipulate the already confused end user.
Which leads to the second issue. MS Windows is now a fully commoditized product. It owes it's success to being part of fully interchangeable system, which allows beneficial cost reductions for all concerned. The problem is, of course, that MS does not want MS Windows to be a commodity, and therefore treats it as a vertical market application. So, I can't take my copy of MS windows and choose to install it on a single given machine. I am told which machine it belongs to. This does not happen with any other component of the system. OTOH, every copy of MS Windows is all but identical, so the machinations necessary to create this leads to a rube goldberg machine.
If MS would just sell MS Windows for $100 and get over all the hubris that somehow MS WIndows is a special thing would go away. If they want to continue the fantasy that somehow MS WIndows is not a cheap commodity, then they should do something like individualized DVDs, each encoded with their own ID.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
If some company would sell me invalid copy (pirated) of software on purpose I would post EVERY DETAIL on that company that I have.
Why all the vindictiveness and personal effort? Are you really that morally outraged that M$ did not get a large portion of your purchase price? The copy fooled you, can't you understand it fooling the person who sold it to you? The retailer got it from a regional wholesaler who got it from an even bigger wholesaler. If you think having a message about "legitimate" software flash on your computer is bad, you should see what they do to the company that sold you that crap. M$, through the BSA, puts mom and pop stores out of business all the time. Why waste your time contributing to that?
You could avoid all of it and have a better outlook on the world by running free software. I just don't understand the moral outrage that copyright warriors are able to muster for minor violations of the "IP" of the world's riches companies. There are real disasters happening right now in the Sudan, in Lebanon, in Gaza, in China and other places. Hundreds of thousands of people are still displaced right here in the US from Andrew, Katrina and Rita. Five hundred thousand people have been robbed of their homes and livelyhoods in Lebanon and those who can't escape over bombed out bridges are about to be "flattened" from the air by people who think they are all terrorist supporters of Hezbolah. Others are far more worthy of your actions and support than M$ and their new "get legitimate" nonsense.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I've legitimately purchased a license of windows that turns out to be pirated and now I have to jump through a bunch of hoops in order to get everything straightened out.
Worse than that, you can't possibly tell if it's "pirated" or not. In the end you have to take M$'s word for it and fork over the cash if you want to keep using your computer the same way. M$ has not always told the truth in the past and others have gleefully defended such "sharp business practices." I wonder how gleeful they will be on the receiving end when they foolishly fork over their hard earned cash to their former heroes.
It's better to be running free software. M$ has always been about cheap and easy. Now they are neither cheap nor easy. It's amazing how their "Get the Facts" nonsense touts "legal uncertainty" about free software while they are actively screwing their own user base - again.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I have a Compaq laptop that I bought online from HP's e-commerce site. So I assume they're using "genuine" WindowsXP. Recently, I began to get a little popup from my task bar suggesting that I might have a non-genuine version of Windows and to "click here to find out how you can fix this" or somesuch. I just chuckle and close it, but I suppose I should figure out what is really happening at some point. Fortunately, it's my old laptop that is used infrequently (but has up to date patches).
I mean if Microsoft is evil then they'd do something like this and doing something like this would prove Microsoft is evil - it's a perfect circle!
It's much easier to point out that free software users don't have these kinds of problems and give them a copy of Mepis to solve their problems. Yes, M$ has taken the upgrade train and user extortion to new lows but it's nothing new nor is it the worst part of running non free software. Following every detail of the M$ lie machine is a waste of time.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
"You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
he was getting the disk through a "loop hole" where he could buy it if he also bought some "hardware". ... So, a company willing to bend rules is also willing to break laws? Big surprise.
No one would be able to play these games if M$ did not in the first place. Their licensing and price structure is insane and some think there's a method to the madness - the ability to extort.
If you can step outside the Bill Gates distortion field for a minute, you might see the absurdity of it all. How are you, your retailer, their wholesaler or even M$ themselves supposed to be able to tell one pressed CD from another? They are identical as the "pirates" have presses just like the "legitimate" publisher. The only difference is where the money goes and I doubt even Carnivore can track that mess. Reality is that you don't need Windoze in the first place and that software ownership is an obsolete business model that never had a legitimate foundation. It was a swindle all along.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Good newspeech!
How can a software company get away this this at all?
How would it be with the "loophole" plugged? Whenever a new OS is released, forced to buy it with a full system, so the software can be branded by a hardware key and not be moved off that box?
Maybe that was the idea.
Will Ballmer ever burn out?
I don't know about anyone else, but where has it been proven this version was actually pirated? It said clearly: After originally posting this article, I was contacted by Microsoft. The company was interested in figuring out why I was seeing WGA notifications and asked if I'd be interested in working with them to figure it out. Absolutely, I said. What could go wrong? Microsoft sent me a WGA diagnostic tool, which generates a text file with the results, which include, among other things, the final three portions of the five-part Product ID used to install Windows. I sent this file to Microsoft and awaited the results. Microsoft contacted him after being worried about the bad PR. Paul Thurrott sent Microsoft the information and awaited the results from them. So in this case, Microsoft to avoid taking any kind of hit or bad PR, said it was pirated. Was it really? or just another one of the false positives? Did Microsoft prove this to him in any way? Also, was there any pursuit of the vendor that sold it? I mean, no mention of Microsoft asking him about that is there? Paul Thurrott, from what it seems like, managed to have been convinced easily and had taken every word they said like it was the only possibility. All in all, if you look at it that way, Many things happen: A) Microsoft doesn't get the bad PR B) Microsoft attempts to prove they are right about the software doing its job C) Microsoft now can claim it is not their problem, and for someone who doesn't have another key for themselves to use like he apparently had handy, would be stuck to get another version. Sure they can claim who sold it to them, but without real proof of the fact, it won't do much good. Does anyone yet know of a case where someone reported who they bought it from and actually did get a new key from Microsoft?
I signed up for a new bank acount here in New Zealand, with "Kiwibank". I got the account just fine, I rush home to put in my temporary pin (only lasted 72 hours!) and find I couldnt change the pin. I did the new pin again and again, and typed the security letters that came up, and it just wouldnt work. I did it three times wrong, and got my account BLOCKED. I was so annoyed, I found the number and rang the helpdesk, to cut the long story short, it took over 2 hours to reset, and the guy still couldnt help. Turns out, the code for verifying and changing my pin just plain wouldnt work in Firefox! I launched IE and it "Just Worked". That is unless it was Bill Gates stealing my bank account details........
---
I don't know about anyone else, but where has it been proven this version was actually pirated? It said clearly:
After originally posting this article, I was contacted by Microsoft. The company was interested in figuring out why I was seeing WGA notifications and asked if I'd be interested in working with them to figure it out. Absolutely, I said. What could go wrong?
Microsoft sent me a WGA diagnostic tool, which generates a text file with the results, which include, among other things, the final three portions of the five-part Product ID used to install Windows. I sent this file to Microsoft and awaited the results.
Microsoft contacted him after beng worried about the bad PR. Paul Thurrott sent Microsoft the information and awaited the results from them. So in this case, Microsoft to avoid taking any kind of hit or bad PR, said it was pirated. Was it really? or just another one of the false positives? Did Microsoft prove this to him in any way?
Also, was there any pursuit of the vendor that sold it? I mean, no mention of Microsoft asking him about that is there? Paul Thurrott, from what it seems like, managed to have been convinced easily and had taken every word they said like it was the only possibility.
All in all, if you look at it that way, Many things happen:
A) Microsoft doesn't get the bad PR
B) Microsoft attempts to prove they are right about the software doing its job
C) Microsoft now can claim it is not their problem, and for someone who doesn't have another key for themselves to use like he apparently had handy, would be stuck to get another version.
Sure they can claim who sold it to them, but without real proof of the fact, it won't do much good. Does anyone yet know of a case where someone reported who they bought it from and actually did get a new key from Microsoft?
I don't believe Paul Thurott. This story has the smell of a press release. We know that national news media is paid to broadcast certain stories by the Bush Administration. Would it surprise you to know that tech journalists are also used thus?
You are welcome on my lawn.
I'm calling bullshit on this for one simple reason: Microsoft has such insanely inept (or evil) "anti-piracy" people, that they don't know what is or is not pirate. I once called M$ to ask why the microsoft.com web page (at that time) said that XP home supported remote desktops, but my recently purchased copy did not. After they insisted that it did for more than 20 minutes, the chick on the other end of the phone lost it and started screaming that I was a software pirate. She phoned my employer, my school, and my parents among others.
Another time, I had a legitimate copy of Windows 98, that I had purchased and been unable to return after finding that my PC came with an OEM copy (it was still shrink wrapped.) I listed it on eBay. My auction was closed under eBay's organized criminal activity (they call it VERO.) I asked why, and M$ said that any copy of any M$ software listed with an OPENING bid below the retail price had to be pirate. They said the secret service would be arresting me shortly. After I sent a demand letter, they said I could send them the copy and they would determine if it was pirate. I documented the hell out of it, and sent it to them. They eventually said that it was legit, worth more than $100, and that they had destroyed it because it was not feasible for them to return every legit copy they evaluate. You see, M$ claims that some of their products are pirate so they can stop resale, and thereby drive up the price. They also use this tactic to shut down bargain resellers to fix the price. M$ bribed the judge, and my case for slander, extortion, and price fixing never went to trial.
I have been thrown out of several job interviews after I was asked what software I run on my home computer. I run Linux, which I do not pay for. According to one bimbo who worked for IBM in 1998, "Anyone who does not pay for their operating system is a pirate, and should be dealt with."
Let's face it, piracy is a cry that is used to extort customers of the BSA / MPAA / RIAA into doing anything the companies say. If you use commercial software, you are a fool. If you pay for commercial software, you are committing racketeering, and should be "dealt with".
Sic Semper Gates!
Andy Out!
1. Windows notifies Paul that his copy is pirated.
2. Paul assumes not that his copy is pirated, but that it is a WGA bug.
3. Microsoft notifies Paul that his copy is pirated.
4. Paul believes his copy is pirated.
What changed between 1 and 3? Just that a person was telling him (using another automated WGA tool), rather than WGA telling him?
So Paul didn't bother to think about whether he might have bought a pirated copy, until MS told him to think about it?
I suggest mods go through this troll's history and bring his score back down to permanently 0, where it was a month ago.
Why can't these trolls go back to digg, where they belong?
i mean calling someone a homosexual is bad enough
but then to insinuate they work at best buy..that is simply to much.
I was worried those new apple ads were making PC users look bad, but luckily you have come to the rescue proving once again we windows folks are sophisticated and classy.
bless you sir
actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.
I'm pretty sure anyone who has the brains to use Linux knows enough not to work at Best Buy. That's just a given.
On the contrary, I think you're working for Best Buy and trying to FUD Linux so you can get more sales and pretend to fix computers.
There is an industry of service providers who provide opinions about products (or other services). You as the reader may be aware that the reviewer has a bias, but at least a minimum level of quality is expected. This Double-Barrelled story is *extremely* disturbing, because it involves logic flaws all across the scenario grid.
... is indeed fake. However, the story appears technically flawed. I grant he's not Alpha grade, but I would grant his technical knowledge at least a B to B+. From all kinds of approaches, his second post creaks heavily at best. This makes the Social eval very complex.
My initial opinions:
Microsoft: Huge company, containing some reasonably intelligent technical crews with a history of sloppy execution, hampered by an albatross code legacy, and a completely untrustworthy marketing department.
Paul Thurrott: A moderately skilled technical reviewer, who is financed by Microsoft-directed sources to make the process at least a little more open. Microsoft can usually take "a small amount of heat" such as the post about User Security, because the response "okay, the next build improved this" is still better than a nebulous perception of "what evil is the Redmond Behemoth up to?"
***
Episode 1: Harsh Report on WGA
A. Technics: Could be a Beta, pushed out too fast. Presumably at least "partially" operational. I understood the technical critiques as False Positives, not Silent Negatives.
B: Concern over social impact of False Positives, possibly sloppy code, and Distribution Ethics.
Eval: "Small Heat Microsoft can afford to take" to gain credence for Paul.
Episode 2: "Look, WGA found my copy was a fake!"
A: Technics: The entire point of the post is to rule out the False Positive. I would bet money that *however derived*, the copy tested
B: Social: "This post is all wrong, but *which way?*"
B1: Initial post meant as Small Heat, M$ told him it became Big Heat, and Post2 is a paid attempt to dissipate Big Heat.
B2: Paired post totally engineered by M$ over Paul's objection, with pay. This would be the variant of Straw Man, in which WGA "working" silences more serious concerns by distraction.
B3: If he did "just pick up a quick copy" which was flagged by WGA, he should have been nervous, thus avoiding the first post. If the initial post is straight up, which becomes a phenomenal technical blunder requiring the desperate "better bleed credibility fast and cauterize than let this fester". This would be "Career Ending Blunder barely saved by M$, who unhappily decides they have no one developed to fill his niche as Friendly Reporter".
B4: Some other weird mix of obscure mixed motives. Examples include: Paul takes a Faux Credibility Sacrifice. Casting aspersions on the 2005 edition, in which their lawyers failed to bust the "hardware loophole". Vague doubts about "trusted vendors". Adding to the "Ominous Mystique" of M$.
Whichever version is true, generating Warm Fuzzies for Microsoft is nowhere in sight. I'm still trapped by circumstances to Windows, but I will work to migrate to OSS replacements of office & web apps, and urge&assist others to do the same.
--TaoPhoenix
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
As an MSDN subscriber and software license manager at my company, I actually read the EULAs that govern the use of MSDN licenses for products like the OS, Office, and everything else. It is not legal to use them for commercial purposes.
Leave Paul's little 'oversight' with MCE 2005 aside. He states in his article that he generally uses MSDN for all of his software. Given that he runs a site about MS stuff and is clearly a big user of their software, it stands to reason that he uses Windows servers, XP workstations, SQL, Frontpage for site authoring, Office for email and all sorts of other things. None of this is legal under the terms of the MSDN license.
I don't have the EULA handy, and there are many subscription types, but all that I have seen clearly state that it cannot be used for commercial purposes, or to develop/maintain your own IT systems.
Just thought I'd point this out.
# Erik
GM makes crappy cars, the one I got recently smashed into a tree, and I only had 2 drinks!
That's what I said in a related comment when this story broke out.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
Comment removed based on user account deletion
For one site that he can't use IE7 on he's decided the best course of action is to run WinXP in a VM so he can use IE6. Do Firefox and Opera not run on Vista? Or are they also unable to post to WinInfo?
This guy, his favourite OS and the sites he is affiliated with are poster childs for stupidity.
The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
Everyone here who spotted it from the time of the first article gets +5 perception points.
Being cynical, isn't perception. IT'S ALL IN YOUR MIND.
Remember that and keep an open mind instead..
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
It might be the actions of a man receiving a sufficient paycheck from a corporation, eager to demonstrate that their dubiously named "Genuine Advantage" program actually detects and makes the user aware of a "counterfeit" copy of Windows that they might have bought unknowingly, when in fact it's widely perceived to be nothing but obnoxious spyware, of no tangible benefit to the consumer at all.
Just tossing that out there as a possibility. People trade dignity, self-respect and the respect of others for money all the time.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Hmm, I am not surprized at all. If we think about it w2000 essentially was NT4SP6a with USB support and new explorer interface (and a few nifty networking additions that essentially were rewrites from broken implementations in NT4).
:)
And NT4 was - well, respectable. Despite being Microsoft'e and of course nothing is perfect, but I still consider it to be most successfull workstations OS for the masses of the last few decades
I really dont know who Paul Thurrott is - nor do I care - all I know is I dont have his problems - I dont do windows and windows dont do me
If you go out and buy someting in good faith, you really didnt make a mistake. You were ripped off instead.
Now, id like to see what happens if one of us little people had that problem ' you got the error, screw you, go buy 10 copies or we sue you'.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Paul Thurott BUYS A COPY OF WINDOWS LEGITIMATELY, then finds out later on that the ONLINE RETAILER sold him a pirated copy. Yet he says that HE made a mistake? Sure, it's not Microsoft's fault, it's the online retailer's fault. It's not Thurott's fault .. yet he sits there and tells everyone that HE made the mistake.
What an ass kiss.
And I think that you are an admin for some Windows servers that require constant attention so you can be angry at the world and continue your childish rants. But you're making money, because its Windows, so somebody has to do it. Congrats.
When you buy a legitimate OEM copy of Windows - from someone like Dabs.com or NewEgg - it comes in a cellophane wrapper with a hologrammed CD inside and a license sticker on the outside. There's also a scantly little booklet in there entitled "Welcome to Windows XP" or somesuch.
I could understand Thurrott not expecting the hologrammed CD if he's never bought a separate copy of Windows before. Windows 98 & 2000 used to come with a screen-printed CD, and I guess many PCs with Windows pre-installed still do; for some reason if you're a small OEM then you get the full pack of hologrammed CD, sticker & leaflet that I describe above, but it seems that if you're a major-volume OEM like Dell or Packard Hell then you're allowed to buy the stickers separately & stamp your own "restore CDs" or (as many big OEMs are now doing) offer to let the user burn their own restore CD. I guess they get a discount for this.
But does Thurrott really expect us to believe that he doesn't know what an OEM sticker looks like? When he purchased this alleged copy of Windows, the license number must have been printed on something! Wouldn't you be a little suspicious in this day and age if you were buying an OEM copy of Windows "just like all the PC manufacturers use" and the license key was hand-written on a scrap of paper? Ok, I'm exaggerating, but everyone knows what an OEM sticker looks like - Thurrott must have bought a laptop with Windows pre-installed; he may build all his own PCs, but he must have worked on a friend's PC, or handled an OEM-built PC in someone's office. All these computers will have a proper OEM licence sticker on them - stuck on the underneath of the laptop, for sure; on many PC towers I see nowadays the sticker is on the top of the PC, right at the front, but they're rarely hard to find. Microsoft deliberately make these stickers distinctive and hand to fake - the one I have here even has hologramming along the edge.
If Thurrott bought this copy of Windows for an article then he would have kept the receipt to claim against tax. And I concur entirely with Kosmosik that if he was burned by a retailer sending him a dodgy copy in this way then he'd be shouting their name to the rooftops! Also, as a tech-savvy computer professional * cough* there's no way he'd throw away the original disk and license number that they sent him - it's obvious that you might need it to reinstall some day, and it's no effort at all to drop the disk in a file or folder with all your other software licenses.
So something here really doesn't add up. He might not be prepared to admit that this is a copy he pirated because he didn't have the MSDN subscription disk handy at the time, but that's the only conclusion I can come to.
Stroller.
not only does this story not add up, it stinks to high heaven. I smell the tale of spin doctors. The MINUTE you try to pass off some story like this as a "oh it turns out I was running a pirated version I bought off the internet". GMAB !!! There are DOZENS, if not hundreds, of online retailers ( pricewatch, anyone ) who'll sell you License Keys, NO CD's, just the license card with the key itself. What gets my goat is the audacity that he thinks people will just dismiss this as, "Oh, poor Paul, he made a mistake". Putz! What kind of a payoff did you get for covering up that there was a bug in WGA. Pirated Auth key my A$$.
"Spin Doctors", he cried, "Spin doctors most foul !"
Slashdot, you just made my day.
He is an MS MVP. These people get free MSDN subscribtions, which today runs over $10,000 for the one they get, though if actually purchased separately would be $100,000+. Normally this MSDN subscription is for development or demonstration use only, except for Office which can be used as a normal Office. However, MVPs for the most part are not in development; they use the software, a constantly-updated pack of 50 or more DVDs, for their "work", which is to promote MSFT and support MS users in varying ways. Anyway, he got busted! or rather, the software he was using did. WGA is like a virus-detector. Would you rather it not tell you that you're infected? Ignorance is bliss and all that?
Paul Thurrott eats pig testicles. Regularly.
And no, I'm not wearing a tin foil hat.
Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling a pig in mud. Soon, you realize the pig is dirty, and he likes it.
Only $79? That seems too cheap. Are you sure you didn't get a pirate copy?
warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
"Stalker. I'm proud".
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Well I actually monitor many Windows Servers. We outsorce our IT. They dont require constant attention cause I know how to implement a Windows Server Environement.
I love my job and wouldnt call it Childish rants. More so it's the truth that Linux hippies cant hack. The fact is Linux just sucks in business environments, because it does not have what Windows has, that would be convinience that Microsoft gives us. Such as Live communication CRM, and other nice tools.
What does Linux have? Open sores for the world to come in? Yeah thats a secure network.
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
670/1000 on the troll rating board.
It's Paul Thurrott, MS fanboy. The whole thing was orchestrated from the very beginning, come on guys! Let's not be fatuous. This guy most likely runs MSDN copies of Windows because that's what most of us do, those who have MSDN subscriptions that is. Steve Ballmer probably wanted Paul to "whine" at Microsoft about his WGA woes, then MS would swoop in like an angel on the wings of the phoenix and GIVE him a free copy of Windows to save his poor deceptive blogger's life. Then Paul (or someone with a clue) decided it was a little over the top and decided to concoct this moral story about how even goody-two-shoes Paul was fooled by these evil pirates. It's more of a message to tech weenies, inspiring them to check the legitimacy of their copy of Windows, and buy a legit one.
Let's take a different crime: say you were out with some friends and you were drinking a little too much, and decided to smash some guy's windows. One of your buddies gets arrested and possibly jailed, everyone else gets away scot-free. Wouldn't you turn yourself in out of sympathy for your pal, and maybe negotiate a lesser punishment as he was only partly responsible for the damage ? Yes you would. This is a similar case.. Paul is supposed to be our buddy, our pal, our chum... right ? And he got nailed, but he did "The Right Thing(tm)". Should we all follow in his footsteps and be kind to the almighty Micro$oft ? Riiiiight.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Oh wow, it made me laugh that I was actually correct in my assumptions. I'm sorry that Linux lacks the many issues such as bugs, virus', and spyware that your windows machine has, and I'm sure that you have a great friendship with the tech support group over at microsoft, but I would rather have a problem free machine and just stick to doing things myself. Have you really ever watched over a Linux server? Some distributions are more difficult than others, but as long as you actually know what you're doing it's simple. Oh yeah, AND FREE. I have never had a single problem with any of my linux boxes. My father owns 2 windows computers with many programs attempting to keep them safe, but he still has to clean them off weekly because of all of the garbage that they accumulate, and he still gets virus'. On the other hand, I have 3 Linux machines which I have never had to clean off, that I have never had crash, that have never gotten a virus, that has never gotten spyware, and that doesnt do anything without my permission, and I got it for free. I'm confused as to what open sores you are talking about. The biggest problem I've had on my machine was when I had a windows partition, but I've solved that problem. People have their preferences. Many prefer windows because it does everything for them and because they dont mind giving Bill Gates a bj to have a monopolistic superpower as a puppeteer. I prefer Linux because there are so many distributions that I can choose from that I have something that works for me, and that fits my needs, and something that is reliable and wont fail on me unless I say that it can. I appologize, you are watching over windows servers so I'm sure that you have something that you need to be doing right now.
i read the EULAs for ALL of the XP series, Home, Pro and MCE (retail and OEM versions). ALL of them say they may not be used in "Production" or as a server (as does the MS Action Pack, which is where i first saw the phrase). this makes no sense, especially for the Retail Pro version. i think the definition of Production is misused in the EULA or misunderstood by me and the at least the last two replies... unless there's some UBER $500 or $999 version of XP Pro i'm not aware of...
I got my copy off MSDN and WGA thinks my copy is stolen... Whatever, I usually develop the mac ports anyway. Fuck windows.
I have had a similar experience as Paul Thurott (sp?), whereby I purchased what I thought was a "legitimate" copy of XP PRO and loaded on my machine a number of years ago. The license key loaded correctly, etc. and I never had any problems with AUTOMATIC UPDATES....until WGA came along! The first instance of problems is when I was asked whether I wanted to allow WGA to load and I indicated yes, and then a "scan of system" came back with the dreaded you are running a "pirated" version of XP PRO or something to that effect, and that in order to continue with AUTOMATCI UPDATES I would need to buy an authorized version. Well, I believe I have and authorized version, but I never kept anything about who, where, etc. I bought the software from! So, CATCH-22 and of course, I don't do Automatic Updates anymore, only manual.
If you prefer Linux as a PC that is jsut fine and dandy. Infact im sure Linux makes a great Home PC. But in the busines world I dissagree.
The reason there are not as many viruses and what not with Linux is because no one cares to exploit Linux's holes. Most businesses run Windows Server OS's and thats where the good are. Very few companies run Linux server.
Another reason to run Windows server is integration. Windows Live communication CRM Sharepoint Portal server ect...
This is what makes windows great and I see none of this coming out of Linux.
And lets not start with drivers.....
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
For the record it says Microsoft & Genuine printed at 45 deg bend sinister with a metalized strip on the right side- in visible light, I'm not sure what other goodies show up under laser light or non visible light. However, I have to say that if I hadn't looked, I wouldn't have been able to tell you.
I used to work for the company that MFG's the holograms for UL - the pretty ones that go on the xmass lights. There are up to 24 seperate holographic items on those little suckers. However, if it has a pretty hologram on it, how many people actually sit there & examine every string of lights they buy to check that they have the right hologram? I'm going to bet pretty close to nobody.
Last time I bought & activated a copy of Windows, I never even opened the package, just used my copy of the CD & read the numbers off the Genuine sticker through the celophane & typed them in. (I toss the CDs & sticker in the bottom of the case if it's not vented there - that way I never loose the driver CDs.) If it was a bad copy, I would have never known.
All that said, if I had bought a copy from a company to do an artical about the experiance, you had better believe I would have another blog posted about how they charged me full price for a pirated copy of XP. Since there's nothing except an 'opsie but MS is great' - either this guy is on happy drugs, or it's a shill.
Even if windows made themselves the sole retailer for new copies of XP, etc, there is still the issue of selling used copies (which in many countries you really can't illegitimize, despite what many corps are trying to do).
our driver support is superb. How come 90% of the devices out there aren't supported by a default install of Windows?
Dude, you're a fucking troll. All your past posts have nothing but pointless, spineless rants.
Our security is better BECAUSE we are open source. We're more stable because of it. Our security model is 100x yours. Wake me when a TRUE MULTI USER OPERATING SYSTEM comes from the Microsoft Foundation. It's not happening. Vista will prove they still can't do it.
Anything you want on Linux you can have. CRM? Sure. SugarCRM. Go look it up. It rocks.
The truth is that Linux is stable, reliable, and it WORKS.
You want network directory? We have Novell's eDirectory and Fedora Directory Services which is maturing quite well.
We print, we file share, we route, we network, we run and run and run securely.
What does Windows do?
Wait are you refering to drivers installed in Windows to alow for devices? Hmm yeah theres only thousands of devices out on the market and god knows how many drivers. At the time of XP's release im sure they had a good number of themdown pat, but as time goes on more comes out. Im sure Vista will offer a great deal of drivers by default.
Are you by chance refering to something like a Terminal server? If so then let me lay this on you. This is why you run Windows, and how you save a business money. Setup a Cluster server with Terminal server installed (With Virtual PC) and create a redundant network. Then install Thin clients through out the office, infact WIRELESS thin clients. Have them connect using terminal server on our little cluster server. Save TONS because you dont have to spent a crap ton of money on comptuers, you dont have to run cable drops. Ontop of that your network is 100% remote managable, and much more secure as you have no PC's in the office to steal.
Is this what you mean by a Multi user OS?
As far as Linux being stable...Well im sure it is. you knows Windows is stable if you know how to run it. People bitch about windows cause they dont know what the shit there doing. Rather than take the blame its easier to blame the man who made the software. I never have any issues with my networks.
Uhh...the same thing? lol
Its funny tho because you still have not touched on the issue with Linux being a "Business friendly" operating system. What does Linux have that integrates with a business man's life to make it easier? Please educate me on this.
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
you never said anything about a business man, you were referring to business environments. why the hell is a business man running his own network? that's why you hire IT people. The business man should not have to care about the backend. where are you going with this? by the way, we can do thin client setups too. and virtualization... vmware, xen, qemu -- whatever you want. on that take a good hard look at VMWare ESX Server. It's all on Linux. We can do thin clients too... pxe booting, redundancy.. etc. We dont have Terminal Services licensing to deal with either.
A business environment...not an IT Environment. A Business environment includes business men..."Ironic eh?"
Basically the comes back to the root of the statement. Microsoft has all of these features and to some there a pain, but to thoes who know how to actually run a windows network...its a breeze. With all the integration Microsoft add's to employees....Makes things so much better. Linux just doesnt have all that Windows has.
The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
linux works as long as you actually know what you're doing as well. If you spent half the time learning how to use and work with it correctly as you have spent complaining and bashing on it then I'm sure that you wouldn't mind it as much. But if you must continue, at least name specific problems that you feel it has so people might actually be able to give you an answer to these problems. And have you ever tried using a linux? If not you're as bad as my 10 year old brother who refuses to eat sour cream or whipped cream because they're too sour, even though he's never tried them before. Just be logical.