Slashdot Mirror
Pirating Software? Choose Microsoft!
An anonymous reader writes "ArsTechnica is running a story regarding comments by Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes, who had a pithy comment on the subject of software piracy. His view is that, should software piracy occur, Microsoft's desire is that the pirated software should be theirs. Potentially, in the future, they could then convert the illegal users from the 'dark side' into legit users who obtain licenses. 'We understand that in the long run the fundamental asset is the installed base of people who are using our products. What you hope to do over time is convert them to licensing the software.' Obviously Microsoft prefers the market to use their software even if it's pirated, rather than the alternative: the use of free software."
missed the first couple of sentences.
Pirate away!
But most people don't like the settlements and license compliance audits that eventually catch up to them.
But does the linked article come with instructions on how to install vista without getting owned by product activation/genuine advantage and with the ability to successfully receive and install automatic updates ;) ?
Does this surprise anyone? An installed base is marketing base. If people have pirated your OS instead of installing a competing product, the only issue you have is getting them to pay for it instead of convincing them to switch. Seems the former is much easier than the latter from all experiences so far. You also have the ability to sell them additional packages for your system without having to develop/sell such product supporting third party software. Another win, even if you can't convince them to pay for the OS to begin with.
I recall in the late 80s early 90s MS almost encouraged piracy, in an effort to kill off a slew of alternate OSes.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
...and this has long been one of the reasons I love to see Microsoft trying to crack down software piracy.
:)
The more they tighten their grip, the more star^H^H^H^H people will slip through their fingers.
Off course, it's better much better if people pirate your product. This is why piracy doesn't usually hurt the big companies that have a well established product but rather those that are trying to compete with them.
This has been going on for years. Plenty of software companies who sell high cost specialist software applications accept and don't bother with low level piracy because it ensures there is a base of users who when they grow up/get a job will be most comfortable with that specific product. It has been the case for years in 3d design software.
Microsoft wants to increase its installed base even through piracy. The goal is to "convert them to use the software" later...
And how is this new ? wasn't it how they won the home user market ?
The "logic" behind those comments vary little from the neighborhood crack dealer who gives the first "hit" for free.
Get you on the habit, get you hooked, then pay through the nose... so to speak.
The problem with socialism is that they always run out of other people's money. - Margaret Thatcher
Now that they've finally admitted it, will they stop with their WGA and activation junk? Activation is a pain for legit users, and now it seems that MS wants illegitimate users to work around it. I'm not really sure what it's there for anymore.
It's easyer to convert users using "free" (read: pirate) software to legit users for the SAME software than converting users from an alternative, even if that is free.
...to your loved one: I'd prefer you to cheat on me as much as you want rather than being honest and just break up with me when you're fed up with me.
Yeah, this is obvious, and I'd argue that it's not really even news. I'm not sure that Microsoft has ever tried to hide the fact that they would prefer people run their software, even if that means they're running a pirated version. It's just that they've never openly stated this until now.
If every person who pirates Microsoft software suddenly switched to Ubuntu and OpenOffice, suddenly the Microsoft lock-in (eg. doc files, wmv videos, wma audio files, etc) would not be quite as powerful as it is at the moment.
Of COURSE they need market share! YES, piracy is a sales tool! Glad to see they are finally admitting it. All of the software companies have a long history of discounts and giveaways targeted at the people who are likely to look for alternatives instead of paying full price. "Academic" discounts are just the beginning. It's important to take lots of money away from the people who have lots of money, but you can't let the other customers choose a low-cost alternative. Pretty soon, the low-cost alternative rules the market. That's how we got MS-DOS leading to Windows instead of CP/M leading to Unix. The last thing Bill wants is a competitor who does to Microsoft what Microsoft did to CP/M and Unix. Before Microsoft was monopoly, it was THE low-cost software provider.
When the price of the product is a problem in the beginning, I fail to understand why people accept "introductory" discounts and giveaways, knowing full well that future versions will be more expensive (and generally not discounted) once they are "locked in". Then again, some fish are known to bite the same hook repeatedly. You would think the pain of being hooked, reeled in, and grabbed by a fisherman would teach the fish something. Evidently not. The "free worm" is remains a powerful incentive.
I'm running a pirated version of Gentoo, and that's where I'm staying.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
So, if I wanted to pirate a readily-available closed-source proprietary operating system for my PC other than Windows, what would I pick?
More Twoson than Cupertino
Apart from it now being about keeping people off gnuware there's nothing new about this, they were saying what, 10, 15 years ago?, that they didn't really mind the rampant piracy of their software because it would get people hooked and they'd come back and buy legit. Move along folks, nothing to see here.
-uso.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
The user who pirates software is less likely to buy the product; this is a classic case of "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?"
Unless of course, this becomes a case of "the first one is free..."
We need to make people loyal to FREEDOM.
Help end the use of Sigs. Tomorrow
Here in Brazil, Sérgio Amadeu, head of ITI (Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia da Informação, Portuguese for National Information Technology Institute), claimed that Microsoft tactics are those of a drug dealer: provide the stuff for free or nearly free, get the "customer" to be addicted, and then get money out of him. He was legally threatened by Microsoft for saying so. http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7654.
Any company with half a gram of common sense would rather you pirated their software than use a competing product. Of course they'd also rather you paid for their software, but given the choice of course they'll value install base for themselves over install base for a competitor.
I really don't see how this is news, or that there's really anything to discuss.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
Which is precisely why Free Software/Open Source folk need to be even more anal retentive than the BSA regarding software piracy. Zero tolerance! Report em all. Take piracy off the table as an option and we can make some major inroads from people who can't afford Microsoft and other commercial products now. And later they wouldn't bother switching from something that they already know and is free.
:) So lets help stamp it out. Microsoft wants to make WGA even more locked down? Great! How can we help!
There really isn't an excuse to pirate anymore. In days gone by there just wasn't an option for people who couldn't afford software that cost far more than the hardware, especially in the developing world, starving students, etc. But now we can offer those people a safe, legal and effective alternative. Piracy is just unfair competition for us.
Democrat delenda est
First and foremost they want you to use their software, even if you steal it. Not only are you then a potential customer, but you're friends/family/colleagues will also be more likely to use MS. Also, they'd rather you steal their software then help the competition. Heck, they aren't allowed to give their software away for anti-trust reasons, so having it stolen is the next best thing.
The funny thing is that the article states that software theft is a major economic drain. I wonder how much of that is the needless effort put into protection schemes that don't work and lawyers to sue...well anyone for anything. This number will of course be far less than the amount estimated for lost sales..
Seriously, what film student didn't get a pirated copy of softimage, illustrator, 3dstudio max, photoshop when they used it for school? Its often a known thing by the publishers. In school, sure its okay. But once you get to a commercial setting; You, or your company pays for what you are using. If those students had to pay for some of that software thier software costs would be as high as their school cost+ books. The best part is that these students eventually buy the product when they make enough money to do so because its what they are familiar with.
Every pirated license is someone who is not seriously using a competitor's operating system. If it were really, really hard to pirate Windows, Apple's customer base would explode and the number of people who would demand serious usability on par with OSX and Windows out of desktop Linux would expand tremendously. Microsoft knows. This. It's just a form of total war. Microsoft would rather burn the fields down than allow their enemies to use them, if you need an analogy.
I often hear that people pirate PC games to try them out and see if they enjoy them, and then buy later. It appears that Microsoft is in a sense indirectly giving this argument validity. I.e. They think its better for us to try out their products, see if we like them and buy later, rather than using their competitors' software. Feel free to correct my logic if I'm reading this wrong.
Adobe has been doing this for years. And it works. I don't know how many of my peers pirated Photoshop 3.0 only to go on to buy a license for 7 and CS and CS2 later in life.
What I don't get is the validity of TFA's statement in parallel with Microsoft's scarily effective product activation.
I always knew they thought it. I'd say part of Microsofts empire, a larger part then they will ever admit, was built on the back of piracy. Microsoft was content to sit back and let home users pass their disks around, for a very long time...even during the dongle craziness of the 1980s. They didn't even have any copy protection on their disks IIRC. Why? Because the businesses would still buy it anyway, and once all the home users were used to MS there was pressure for the businesses to buy it.
It was actually a clever marketing strategy. Now that they're the defacto standard they can tighten the grip. People will squirm, a few will slip through their fingers...but most will likely grin and bear it.
i would not use MS-Windows even if MS gave it away as Freeware...
i rather run my pirated copy of Linux...
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
There are only a couple change from the long ago is the present. The first is the demand that new PCs come with a properly licensed version of Windows. As far as I can tell, this program helps cover the fixed costs at MS, and was probably necessary due to extreme inefficiencies in the organization. MS thrived for years giving away the OS. The second change is the formalization of take home a copy policy. Employees can now, at least sometime, legally do what they were doing anyway. This is useful to MS as it keeps employees from user other OS then infecting the office with the other OS.
The big issue was corporate, and MS cracked down on corporate in the 90's. This needed to be done as people were becoming enormously wealthy on the back of MS products, and not paying MS the proper considerations. The sad thing was that firms that followed all MS rules, bought all the software, were still punished with expensive and useless audits, expensive not only in terms of real costs, but untold costs in terms of customer loyalty. I for one grew to like Windows NT quite a lot, but after seeing the place I was working suffer, never upgraded to 2000 for my personal machine.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Former paid users, becoming pirates after realizing Windows isn't
A) Worth paying for
B) Worth looking for your old install CD for
Not that that describes me, in any way.
Also, apple software is easier to pirate, excluding server. Don't even bother trying to pirate OSX server. Not that I've tried >_>
Microsoft finally found their genuine advantage...
I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
I'm a developer and I use a ton of Microsoft software. However, I never actually pay for any of it, through a combination of MSDN subscriptions and "borrowed" software. If I actually had to pay for Microsoft software. I'd be a heck of a lot more F/OSS oriented. And Microsoft's quote underscores why I don't feel bad about using their software for free. I realize (as do they, apparently) that by simply using their products I'm helping them - one less developer gone over to F/OSS.
.NET to Linux+MySQL+Ruby+Rails.
Before you bash me as a bad guy, I am making a concerted effort to move over to F/OSS personally and professionally. Right now I'm involved in an effort to convert a client from
OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
back in the 80s the easiest wp package to copy was Word (Lic key 123456789), so, when the big Corps were performing research to decide on which WP to standardize on, they selected Word because more people knew Word. Nice strategy Jerry
I'll never get them to use Linux, dammit!
Don't blame me, it's usually 2 in the morning when I post
Bill Gates said the same thing 9 years ago.
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-212942.html
"Although about 3 million computers get sold every year in China, but people don't pay for the software," he said. "Someday they will, though. As long as they are going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade."
The Chinese were/are pretty sensitive to the "addicted" keyword. It probably reminded them of the British opium business in the 1800s.
The only worse than being pirated is *not* being pirated
This technique isn't restricted to competing against free software, nor is it anything like new. Back in the early 1990s, a friend of mine in Jordan developed an Arabic word processing program. Their program cost $85.00, and was much better than MS Word's arabic interface. Nevertheless, my friend went out of business because people could use the unprotected M$ software for free. After all the competitors were out of business, M$ started using legal smackdowns against large clients to make them pay.
Is Shareware model really comparable with "the crack dealer at the corner of the street?". Microsoft is being accused of... agreeing that letting people try their software before they buy it is better than hindering people from trying their software... Very surprising...
Piracy is what helped Microsoft get so big in the first place. Everyone had Dos and Windows on their 386/486 back in the day. Disk copying and BBS file trading was fairly common, but the biggest vehicle for unlicensed software was the indie computer shop. They would sell copied floppies with a legit-looking printed label, something ridiculously easy to make even in the 80's and 90's because even the authentic products didn't have fancy artwork to set them apart. Unknowingly, those small time retailers built Microsoft into a monopoly, by preinstalling unlicensed copies of Dos and Windows onto every single PC. Not every shop did this, but it was much more common back then than it is today, at least in North America.
In a sense, maybe this is Microsoft admitting that they've done enough (or even too much) to slow down piracy. It's one thing when someone slips you an illegal copy without your knowledge, it's another when someone willfully pirates software. You want to protect #1 (and put his scamming salesman in a small cell with a guy named 'Tiny'), but #2 is usually a techy type, or a kid, or maybe just a broke student who couldn't afford the $300 OS but needs it for his/her/its work. Like the MS rep said: at least they're using our software instead of someone else's. MS may not make any money from that bootleg copy, but they're still glad no one else is making a buck off that user. Better to let a cracked XP run free than to watch that user defect to Apple or Linux.
The lovely part is that Microsoft is absolutely right!
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Well this is all in their Motto..."In God We Trust"
The god whom they trust is the thing their motto is inscribed on.
With this goal, nothing else matters. Just be as creative as you can, and you shall be rewarded.
Then, after that, when you got nothing else to spend for, do some charity.
report them to the authorities when their potential new friends/customers are binge-drinking at a fratparty that they can't go to so they'll be forced not to go there anymore and in stead go to nerdy CS student parties where they get free booze from CS students desperate for friends? :p
odd notion, that
I recently blew $380 on Microsoft office (CRAP!!! That's expensive!) for my new laptop. It was not long before I not only wished that I hadn't but resented it as well. I had forgotten about their heavy handed copy protection where you have to go through a 10 minute registration process (on the phone -- the Internet is faster) registering the product. This essentially locks your copy of Office to your computer. What happens though if your laptop is stolen? What happens if it gets dropped and broken so you have to get a new laptop? Well your SCREWED and you have to order a NEW copy of Office for ANOTHER $380. What is more, I legitimately purchased the product (my mistake) and they are treating ME like the criminal.
Since Microsoft doesn't trust me, I hereby make a new resolution. Screw you Microsoft! From now on, I'll take my $380 and use it to take the kids on vacation, treat the wife to dinner, or do something much more worthwhile. The only Office product that I'll install is one where they trust me and if I drop my laptop and get a new one, I can install it on the new laptop for FREE!!! From now on, I'm only going to install OpenOffice not only on my personal computers but all the computers for my two businesses. (I own two - one software dev and the other not.)
Microsoft, you've made an OpenOffice believer out of me! Thank you and Screw you.
</RANT>
I don't have a sig.
This has been M$ strategy for ever. You can buy pirated copies of software in Asia for a $1. Then all of a sudden, in Singapore they started cracking down on illegal software, and now you have to pay the US prices there for the software. There were crackdowns in China as well. M$ turned out to be the ultimate drug dealer!
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/11/143523 1&from=rss
Having a huge percentage of people being used to one software product makes it more probable that they buy it when they finally have the money and the choice.
Not only is not news, it hasn't been news for a long time. Here's what Bill Gates said in 1998 about software piracy (about 9 years ago):
"Although about 3 million computers get sold every year in China, but people don't pay for the software. Someday they will, though. As long as they are going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade." -- Bill Gates at University of Washington "town hall" meeting in 1998
So, no, despite what TFA says, it is not the case that Raikes' words "do not appear to echo the sentiments of his company..."
My blog
Look, a lot of OSS software is free, already. Where are the users? Most OSS for projects that are not server-room based haven't gone anywhere at all, even with a price tag of $0. OSS just doesn't cut it for many users (it's missing several critical apps that keeps me from switching to the whole Linux/OSS platform). Even if comparable software exists, it's often unusable non-geeks. It's already illegal to do what people are doing (pirating software), and people know there's a risk to getting caught, but people do it anyway! I don't think that prosecuting more piraters is really going to have an effect. If people haven't come running for Linux and the rest of it already, they're never going to.
I don't respond to AC's.
the plain language on my boxen says I can install it on my home pc, and my laptop, for the one purchase....so long as I don't use both copies
at the same time-- it's a one use at a time license....
with the one purchase copy...
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
i'd choose linux if it were better for gaming. so unfortunatley, i choose to stick with windows at the moment. i hold no allegiance to software though. i use what works best for me.
You constantly struggle for self improvement - and it shows.
Hooray for bad Engrish on fortune cookies
On a trip to the Far East some years ago, a fairly well informed colleague told me that Seiko had become so concerned about the potential damage to its reputation from badly made counterfeits, that it had started to make the counterfeits itself secretly in the effort to drive the counterfeiters out of the market. No idea if its true, but its a thought provoking line of reasoning.
Microsoft's user base is indeed its best asset. (Which is not exactly to say Goodwill.) That user base is so large not just because M$ software can be so easily pirated, but because just about every useful high- or low- end app is available cracked. Not so for Mac to anywhere near the extent. And let's face it, there are about 64 gazillion more apps for Windows. The fact is a Windows user can run anything he needs to to do whatever he wants. And he can do it with a nondemo version of the application that really allows an informed purchase decision. There is no way Mac can compete with this, and it may (here come the negative mod points) even be an advantage over Linux, if you need an esoteric kind of app and aren't up to coding it solo. I think people often fail to consider this.
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
I'll admit to having several legitimate copies of software now that originated from old pirated copies...
It is much less expensive and often more practical to start with a pirated copy, and then buy an upgrade later on to "legitimize" it. Many years ago- I could barely afford my own computer hardware, much less software to run on it. A friend gave me copies of Windows 3.1 and an old version of Office. I eventually paid for upgrades to both (through several versions), and have legal copies of Windows and Office now. MS has gotten a lot of money from me they probably wouldn't have if it wasn't for those original "pirated" discs.
I'm willing to bet a LOT of people using insanely expensive software (from companies like Adobe/Macromedia, for example) have done the same thing.
Granted the upgrades themselves probably aren't technically legal since they weren't upgrading legal copies of the software to begin with. I somehow really doubt that MS or other software companies care at this point, since they are raking in the upgrade revenue they wouldn't otherwise be getting.
Ironically- I don't have either installed anymore- as I run Ubuntu with OpenOffice now.
I've said this about 40 times in other threads on microsoft cracking down on piracy, or implementing some ridiculous piracy protection scheme. They want you to pay for your software, and barring that - they want you to use their software for free.
A long time ago a small, nobody 'heavy metal' rock group made a recording of their 'jam sessions', labelled it 'garage days' and told people to distribute it like crazy. copy copy copy - give it out for free. They're now known as metallica, the clueless sods chasing down music pirates and doing horrible PR campaigns against Napster.
Microsoft is exactly the same. If they weren't the #1 operating system in the world, do you think they could attempt to charge such ridiculous prices for software and 'require' that you purchase a new computer every three years? Not likely.
I hope people quote this article from now on, every single time microsoft fucks over their customer base and tries to claim they're 'losing money' from piracy. What a joke.
---
Nothing funny about this joke.
Ace
You mean this? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-267736284 9377990424
I once had a signature.
MS would rather strengthen the Network Effects associated with the use of their software/file formats.
Being too effective at fighting piracy (especially in large, developing markets) runs the risk of weaking the Network Effect.
This is actually older than 8 year old news. This is more like 15 or more year old news. I was hearing this in the 80's, for crying out loud. It appears that Ars articles are now fast tracked to the Slashdot front page. A funny symbiosis, since Ars seems to get most of their own stuff from Slashdot and then comment on it and call it an article.
I'm not sure what this says, but I suspect there are a lot of people who do not upgrade because an operating system is fundamentally ignored by the average user. To them, it is 'just part of the computer'
So once it's on the computer, they don't spend too much time thinking about it.
I am open source, and Linux baby!
How do you think Microsoft became so prominent in the first place?
This is is a nice opportunity to point out that `unauthorized copying equals theft' cannot be true.
Ever heard e.g. a car dealer say: `We don't like people stealing cars, but if they do steal cars, we'd like them to steal ours'??
Or Joe Sixpack: `I don't like people stealing money, but if they do, please steal mine'?
Exactly, this is well-known. Piracy is a crucial part of the Microsoft strategy, and it works very well.
What I think is important to realize is that this is something somewhat unique to software. You don't see BMW being happy that their cars are being stolen - although there might be some 'prestige' factor in being the car thief's favorite, more theft can quickly (1) cause people to fear owning BMWs, and (2) cause the insurance costs for owning a BMW to skyrocket.
Microsoft's piracy strategy is only possible because piracy isn't theft; it's copyright violation. No actual product is stolen. And this is because generating copies of software has no cost, i.e., zero marginal value. This interesting property of software is the basis both for Microsoft's piracy strategy, and for FOSS in general - but with completely different results.
FOSS is not the only license software alternative to Microsoft, as much as the OP would like to have us believe.
Sadly for the OSS movement, the very fact that millions of people are willing to risk fines or imprisonment to pirate proprietary software tells you all you need to know about the value of free open source software. In harsh statistical terms, nobody wants it, even for free. I run a web site (Apache on Red Hat and very happy with it, before you ask) with a cross-section of visitors fairly representative of the market, and my logs show consistently that Linux users never amount to more than 0.7% of visitors. You can make of that what you will, but any way you look at it its a pretty damning indictment of the desirability of OSS to the broader human race. The usual counter-claim is that there is something wrong with people for not wanting something "manifestly superior" but this is purest bull (not to mention disrespectful to potential customers - another hallmark of the OSS movement). After so many years of trying, it is clear that there is something very wrong with the way OSS is being sold, and very right with the way Microsoft goes about its business. If people are prepared to steal your stuff, its because they value it in the first place, QED.
... Microsoft can still generate revenue by suing you if you pirate their software.
(A) I you buy their products, they own you.
(B) If you pirate their software, you owe them - which is the same as (A).
Either way, MS wants the world to think there is only options A or B.
Their carrot compared to alternatives made the decision to go to Apple or Linux a simple choice for many. ... Because there is NEVAR! piracy on Macs of multi-$1000 video-, audio- or print- design and production software not available on Windows. And even if there is, those publishers of niche professional software who have orders of magnitude fewer users than consumer software publishers would again never go after Mac users.
Of course, no one ever pirates Crossover or any IDEs running on Linux...
Free Software/Open Source folk need to be even more anal retentive than the BSA regarding software piracy. Zero tolerance! Report em all. Take piracy off the table as an option and we can make some major inroads from people who can't afford Microsoft and other commercial products now.
That's a very bad idea which plays into the M$ game plan and makes you a scape goat. Getting the user to "pay later" is what the BSA is for.
It's better to have nothing to do with "piracy" and help people with things that just work. M$'s dirty secret is that they depend on a community of users just like free software does. It's more than rip offs of BSD and start up companies. The average person does not know how to install Windoze, much less find and install a cracked version. The real enabler of M$'s plans are those people who "pirate" and many of them are right here reading along with you - the fixers. M$ is losing them because free software does things better. That more than anything else will end the lock in. Everyone of us supports a group of friends and helps them get things done. It's up to us to stop piracy and the M$ domination. The word is getting out and that's what really scares them.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Their statement is 100% living in the "reality based community". How many kids played around with pirated versions of Macromedia Studio or Photoshop, and are now working at real companies making real money... and buying real licenses?
Yeah, it sucks that there aren't alternatives to piracy (unless mommy and daddy can bankroll your tinkering), but if you are going to learn to use a product, and potentially make a living from knowing that product, doesn't it behoove a software vendor to make sure you are learning their product?
That's just smart business. Free = Worthless.
Nothing like stating an obvious fact that we've all known was true for a long time. I suppose its nice that someone over there finally admitted it, even though he's inevitably getting a slap on the wrist from his superiors I suspect.
Dugg down for being a brain-dead obvious thing.
Oops, sorry, wrong site.
P.S. - Slashdot... WORST... CAPCHA... EVER!! I can't read that crap worth a shit. It's supposed to make it difficult for scripts to post, not legit humans. Someone should tell our fearless leaders that one can be entirely too clever.
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
I have some mutual funds that own MS stock. It pisses me off about the piracy of MS software that is robbing my fund of value. But I'm also pissed off by MS offering students copies of Office and other MS products for pennies on the retail dollar, which also robs my fund of value. Really, does Jane Student, attending a $30k a year university, need to get Office at a discount?
I want a shareholder revolt. And I want it now.
I didn't have to install Windows Vista; well kinda. When turned on for the first time out of the box it prompted for some various items and than went. No problems at all. I personally don't see why you would spend the money to upgrade the system unless you are in the dark ages of computer OS anyway.
Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
I will pirate ubuntu FTW!
//Nothing to see here, please move along.
Yep. And WGA has hurt them more than it's helped I'm sure too. I know a few people who would probably update to IE7 but can't due to WGA issues (legitimate or otherwise). So they use Firefox, and fire up IE6 on the rare occasions when some idiot developer's coded his site for IE only. Great for Mozilla and other OSS, MS is shooting themselves in the foot.
When you buy a laptop now, it usually comes with three free months of Microsoft Office. If Microsoft were smart, it would extend that to a year to really get people hooked on it.
The statement itself is obvious as day.
... "but we'd rather you do that than use free software." In other words, software piracy is OK when it suits our interests. In other words, software piracy is better than using free software. Really, what sort of a message is this sending? (Not just to the pirates, but to people who take MS seriously).
But I am surprised that MS have come out and said this publically.
They're treading very thin ice here... they have always taken a harsh harsh stance on piracy, yet it's (by their own admission) in their best interests for people to pirate their software. You can't have it both ways, Microsoft.
Basically they have said "Piracy is evil and illegal and it is the worst thing you could possibly do to an honest hard working company such as ourselves"
It's simple, they haven't changed monopoly thinking. They have not recognised their actions could or would have consumers looking at alternatives. They were fully expecting everyone to migrate to Vista. Vista has had a pretty cool reception.
Very much so. Let me add my blog here on what I observed last weekend w.r.t. piracy of Vista:
Last weekend saw me in Low Yat, the almost world-famous place as far as 'cheap' software is concerned. No, I don't buy my software in Low Yat, I download legal software for free from the notorious places like Debian and GnuSolaris. My visit had to make with my dire need of some RAM.
Most obvious and visible as a non-event was the latest event of Microsoft. Vista launched officially on January 31st, 2007. I was in Imbi Plaza in 1998 after Windows 98 had been released. So I was for Windows ME and for W2K in 2000, as well as in 2001 after the launch of XP. Then, you could watch the sales-show of crowds of locals and Mat Sallehs, the 'white men', grep-ing their copy; and many of the latter customers taking copies for their friends and relatives back home; for at least until a legal version showed, from the employer or an OEM.
Dead. This year, dead. Low Yat was crowded as always on weekends, but the crowds would rather bother about the 4 GB thumb drives for US$ 25 and whatnot; but leave the blueish DVDs with the famous logo once too often aside like stale bread. I did ask a salesperson and was qoted RM 10 (US$2.5) immediately. Ultimate Professional Premium, whatever that version is called. Meaning, with a bit of haggling I'd made off with the almost original Vista DVD for probably RM 8 (US$2). 'Almost original', because it was said to contain all necessary cracks to avoid legal problems like product activation. In any case, I didn't dare to start dealing. In the end I might have had to buy it, and to me any write-once medium with Windows on it is a coaster anyway.
Now, that makes me wonder about those numbers published by Steve Ballmer, when he first said the uptake was slow and finally - after a dive of the Microsoft shares by 5% - stood corrected by himself, beaming with great sales results. The best I could describe the reception of Vista in Low Yat would be luke-warm. There are - I guess - two reasons for this: either the general public has acquired a deep sense of law-abiding attitudes, or simply couldn't bother less about Vista at all. Your guess which is applicable !
This is the beginning of the end. Not that Microsoft would be bankrupt over five or ten years; surely not. We will see Vista show on most desktops over two years already. Vista will be OEM-ed as one and only pre-installed Windows on new machines. Therefore it will take market share; and it will take a market share above 50%. But the excitement of the general public will wane to a point of almost complete dis-interest and un-excitedness. Exactly the opposite of what happens with Mac and Apple's followship. Since everyone knows that Microsoft products are simply overpriced (or underperforming for their price tags, whichever you prefer), this does smell like the beginning of the end.
I confess it in front of my friends of the FOSS community, while rumbling home in the Monorail, for the first time in my life I had a brief feeling of pity for the employees at Microsoft.
But of course this is so; It has always been so.
Piracy of applications and operating systems removes price as a competitive factor in the market. In a perfect world of free goods, you choose only superior goods, never inferior goods, because price is removed from the decision mechanism. That is a proveable outcome in all microeconomic analysis.
This means that as long as Microsoft can leverage its existing sales from other products to offset losses in emerging applications to out spend and outperform the competition over the long haul so that it their product is viewed as the superior good, it will always be the last company left standing when piracy plays a factor in the marketplace.
RT's Law of Piracy: Piracy in software application and operating systems supports the creation - and maintenance of - a monopoly.
This is not news. It is what made Bill Gates the richest man in the world.
.Robert
The BSA nailed me on campus for DLing one of the latest versions of Photoshop (what's worse, it was a bunk copy that only had the trial + keygen and my university has a site license for Adobe products) and had my internet access removed right before finals. I swear that I'll never use an Adobe product again (and I partially blame them for my GPA). Nazi extortion tactics aren't a great way to make customers, but it is a good way to drive poor students to free open-source alternatives.
The main thing that is finally pushing me to use only Open Source software is the amount of spying and bloat and DRM nonsense MS is using to make sure I'm honest. I *am* honest and if you want to harass your honest paying customers with this crap, don't be surprised that we get resentful and prefer open source software that doesn't have all this bloat.
as it is impossible to Pirate GPL software.
Tired of Trojans, Viruses and Pirates? Use Linux.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
I recall being mod-ded down several years ago for saying the same thing. Eh-eh-eh-eh-eh-eh, now I use Kubuntu Feisty Fawn. I offer a prediction, "that when Linux Project Authors add documentation,(with examples of usage), AND installation via something like 'apt-get', that Microsoft 'chair' holders will begin macro gravity testing."
"Slowly, one by one, the Penguins steal my sanity." - Unknown
...they have a better chance of getting people to pay for their software BEFORE they actually try it.
Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
Well I say this to that:
To hell with MS. I shall continue to pirate Linux exclusively!.
In both of their major product categories, the competition is either free (Linux, OpenOffice) or tied to specific hardware that's bundled with the software anyway (MacOS). So... I'm not sure what their point is.
Vista isn't even as good as it's prior OS yet. WTF R U ON? I am no Linux guru (though I have used Knopix, red hat, and have used VI on a few occasions) but if you look at Benchmarks both real world & synthetic, XP is the top performer overall.
It's not like XP is DOS or something
Application support? XP is still on top. Server performance? Maybe not... but you get the idea. The "Average Joe" (not the dodgeball team) won't be running servers anytime soon.
When it comes to UI, sure maybe vista is better. It does some neat things that XP could use. The GUI is supposed to work better for High DPI monitors (like my 2048x1536). That is a B*(&% in XP. I could spend all week trying to get my monitor to look right at that resolution in XP. P.S. custom DPI breaks APPS.
Oh, and GAMING. I haven't seen a reputable magazine/website show me that Vista is great for gaming. Infact it's about a 5% decline in almost every test I have seen (about 40)
I can't say I know for sure on any of Vista's Qualities though until I get a copy. That won't happen unless Ultimate is given to me to test for a while. Any MS reps out there need to sell to an applications admin for a semi large corporation send me a message, and a free liscense please.
As for my personal clients that I uh accept suggested donations of $75/hr for (and often get more), well I tell them to stay the eF away from vista unless they want to find another computer guy. Now is not the time, and it looks like a year before it'll be "ready." There just isn't enough support for legacy apps and hardware yet. Sure, my usb key will work, but what about that old scanner? What about the Dazzle that grandma uses to convert her VHS home movies to YouTube? What about the children?
After all that I think maybe you were trying to be funny?
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
will never enjoy the monopoly of Win98, 2000, or XP Pro (remember the early corporate keys?). By forcing activation and WGA from day one with Vista, they're shooting themselves in the foot. If they really wanted early widespread adoption of Vista, they would have released it without activation or WGA (or made it ridiculously easy to break) and then imposed it later, same as they did with XP with the Service Packs checking for valid keys. Microsoft has killed the goose that laid the golden egg.
This reminds me of an article about Iran. No one wants to write software for the Iranian market. Iran refuses to sign on to international copyright treaties. Also, they speak a unique language, Farsi.
There is no commercial incentive to write a Farsi word processor. So, the Iranian open source community produced one. This drives open source operating system usage in that country.
Many people are addicted to nicotine, but that doesn't mean they like fags ..... just that they prefer coughing their guts up in the morning and smelling like an ashtray, to the "fuckmeiwantafagiwantafagsobadlyohjesusiwantafag" feeling. They probably never even liked them when they were kids; but you've got to smoke because it's what all the cool kids do because it's what grown-ups do. By the time you realise you don't really enjoy it much, it's too late. You sold your freedom to choose for the price of twenty Bensons and you can't get it back.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
Potentially, in the future, they could then convert the illegal users from the 'dark side' into legit users who obtain licenses.
Started with legit 3.11, pirated '95-XP (excluding ME, never touched it), now I use Linux. Microsoft: you lose and you always will, glad to see you finally admit defeat.
Wait a second. Isn't that kind of like a car manufacturer saying they'd rather have people steal their brand of cars than have them walk or bicycle?
There's something deeply wrong about saying you'd rather have people steal your product than be legally using something free.
"I don't know about the Open Source camp, but the Free camp as led by RMS would strongly disagree with you. RMS has said that if you have proprietary software and your neighbor wants a copy, you're morally obligated to copy it and give it to him."
Well I don't believe RMS is that stupid, but assumming he is? He shouldn't have a problem moral, ethical or otherwise to what Google (web services) and Tivo are doing with HIS code. Anything else is hypocrisy.
I worked at Microsoft as a contractor for a group
that officially didn't exist, called Unit 357.
It wasn't until right before my contract ended that I realized
what our statistical analysis was about.
The apparent policy is a planned leak of keys for different
products, at various points in their lifetime. The analysis
is about tweaking the total revenue growth, thru a give and
take, with the leaked keys being disabled later thru future updates.
The analysis covered different countries, amount of time to
leave the leaked keys enabled etc. I don't believe there
was any direct paid connection to hacker groups for the distribution
of the keys, since our analysis had some factors relating to
unreliable distribution.
It's not about pirating the OS, it's about pirating everything else.
I realized that this was probably part of Microsoft's strategy back in college, when I noticed that almost all of my fellow CS students fell into one of two groups:
1) People who use Linux or some other OS which includes the dev tools for free
2) People who pirate Visual Studio
Then I noticed how stupidly easy it is to pirate Visual Studio compared to the copy protection on a whole lot of software that's far less expensive - say, your average video game.
Of course, this lead to the realization that if Microsoft didn't make Visual Studio so easy to pirate that you can barely spill a beer on your keyboard without accidentally obtaining an unlicensed copy, then a whole lot of Windows users who are learning to program would end up switching to something like Linux just because they couldn't afford to be programmers on Windows. Which would lead to a rapid erosion of Windows's developer base, rapid growth of Linux/BSD's user base, and insanely fast growth of its developer base.
Isn't this the same business model that drug dealers use. Give them the first couple of hits for free and get them hooked so they buy more. Does this make warez sites micro crack slingers?
sorry for my comments, I'm drunk
They are hoping that since everyone seems to do the opposite of what Microsoft says, (buy a Zune... upgrade to Vista... embrace HD-DVD) this will make pirating MS products seem like a total newb thing to do and no one will do it. Or... perhaps I'm thinking too much about it.
It is as bad as you think and they really are out to get you.
>Obviously Microsoft prefers the market to use their software even ...
>if it's pirated, rather than the alternative: the use of free software.
let's be serious. Microsoft does not take free software as a serious competitor for most of it's software. They *do* take google, and the products of a few other companies seriously, but no one there seriously expects users to start installing linux en masse and using openoffice in the place of real office.
They were merely echoing what a lot of software companies believe: that the pirated versions of software often act as a sort of trial.
All I was saying is that I didn't have problems with activation, which is what the top of this thread was about. I never said Vista was the best, I had to get a new virus protection, as most don't run on it, I have had to get a new DSL Modem to support Vista, but I had ABSOLUTELY NO ACTIVATION PROBLEMS!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don't swear at me if you don't understand what I said, and yes I was being funny at the end, I told you NOT to get Vista unless you were running DOS or i.e. Win 95. If you buy a new computer, I would highly recommend even with the minor problems I have had.
Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
Seems that this is pretty obvious to someone if you sit and really think about the piracy problem for a moment. If you're not going to get *money* for your software, you might as well get mind-share.
The original post only gives you half of the picture, however. True, if a user is going to pirate a piece of software, then you want them pirating *your* software. However, even more, you'd prefer that someone pirate your software over *buying* your competitors product, because it gets you mind-share, like in the original case, but it also denies funds to your competitor. And you can bet your buns that Microsoft understands this aspect of the puzzle as well. - Joe
I've been using OO.o 2.x and up for quite long time (since beta 1.99) and I must say that I haven't yet encountered situation where I'm un happy with OOo compatibility. That is working in a University that has mixed environment (both OOo and MSO are available. Sometimes you have to import MS documents, other times ou have to open a document that has went through several MSO OOo exchanges) and regularly recieving PPT jokes in my inbox. I have got to complain yet.
Either you've used a too much old version of OOo. Or you've got some strange kind of documents.
Joe also has, as proven by numerous click-through license, a very high tendency to click on "next >" without reading the windows and try to see if he can get with it (only stoping to read when he has to - for exemple, say, when a License key must be typed).
And if you click-thru a Linux installation (or at least on SuSE's YaST), the system ends up installed with one default windows manager & desktop (KDE most of the time), one application suite (FireFox + Thunderbird + OpenOffice.org).
For any given distro (as long as it can be clicked thru - so Debian is out of question because it doesn't force enough defaults) Joe sixpacks are likely to end up all with exactly the same installation, down to the partition scheme.
As for the distribution it self, I think there's room enough for some regionalisme. I think a couple of different distros may be joe'd (ex.: Ubuntu, Fedora % openSuSE), regionnal preferences. Joe will pick whatever is most popular on his side of the ocean. If other distros are more popular elsewhere, or if there are a thousand of small specialist filling very precise niches, Joe doesn't care. Just like current Joe don't give a damn about Mac OS X.
People should stop mix "too much choice is confusing" with "there's a default but you can freely change it for several other solution".
even if each distro can install at least 20 different browsers, most of them only install FireFox by default. There is no difficulties in making choice if ou just accept everything.
The only actual problem will be, once Joe decides to actually use his "choice" ability. He choose some software to install and start serching for the "setup.exe" at "all.downloadz.net". This is currently wrong most of the time : starting the distro's setup, and choosing softwares to add from the packet manager would be the way to go for him. Executable installers are still seldom on Linux. Although I personally find it OK, this a Joe desire that must be addressed (How can we make one-single
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
You guys constantly turn a blind eye to the fact that 'they would rather pirate it than take the other free option'
This goes with everything yet no matter how much you point it out with any topic, especially the fact for the thousands upon thousands of torrent downloads constantly going on right now of Windows Vista yet there is a free alternative out there with maybe a few hundred downloads on the torrent.
Numbers speak more than a lot of the constantly story telling of how a happy ending Linux will come in and save everything, yah right been hearing that constantly the last 5 years of the hard push of the Linuxies agenda.
This strategy is not new. It was key in out competing Novell NetWare which used to have the lion's share of the PC server market back in the early 90s. NetWare had a strong anti-piracy (DRM) system. It required a license key that specified how many total connections the server would accept. After it reached that threshold, it would refuse new connections. You could not start the server without the license key, and if you duplicated the key on another server in the same network, both servers would stop working and create constant error messages on the console and beep like 'heck'. Microsoft Windows NT on the other hand, only required you to enter how many connections you promised you had purchased. I never heard of anyone getting busted for entering more connections than they owned. Then MS created NetWare Services for Windows, which emulated NetWare connections, also without any key required. So, as PC hardware became more powerful, you could easily consolidate multiple expensive NetWare licensed servers into a single Windows NT server. As the record shows, NetWare did not survive. I think this strategy had a lot to do with that. It's also interesting from the point of view that the system with strong DRM was beat out by a more easy going licensing system. Maybe a lesson for other digital media.
This already happened in some countries that were captive markets.
An example is Egypt. In the early 1990s, everyone pirated Microsoft's products. By the mid 1990s, there was no presence for any other operating system there (Linux was hardly mature, and Mac was expensive because of the hardware).
Then the "Intellectual Property Police" was sent after businesses to check licenses, and fine people not having legal copies of Microsoft Windows, Office, Oracle and Autocad.
The results are huge amounts of money for Microsoft and the local businessman who was the Microsoft monopoly (with whatever connections with the government they have), specially when Bill Gates visits Egypt, he is a guest of the president himself.
For consumers (home PC use), pirating is still the norm, and I don't know what they do about WGA. For business, this is no longer an option.
Happy side effect: Some small businesses converted to Linux, although they are very few.
Read more about the details on an article I wrote on Arabic on the Internet: Microsoft and Arabization.
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
What the fraggle...?
Sorry, but this demonstrates the problem w/ typed comunication. I misinterpreted what you said due to lack of tonal conetation. (sp?)
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.
oh, lastly, and take no personal offense, I mean none.
Most people who would be still using Dos, or Win95 are going to be either poor, or corporate. Even the poor don't use those to my knowledge though. There are however many corporate situations where a dos box is still in use (I saw one just the other day. It kinda freaked me out) Corporations w/o substantial IT resources will not be switching to Vista from Dos. They will still probably take an XP-Pro or 2003. Again the problem being app support.
I am truly sorry for the What the fraggle, I realize now that it was kind of childish in this situation.
How much is your data worth? Back it up now.