Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Vista Can Run Without Activation for a Year

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the procrastinists-in-luck dept.

An anonymous reader gave us a heads up on this article for people who like putting things off. It begins: "Windows Vista can be run for at least a year without being activated, a serious end-run around one of Microsoft's key anti-piracy measures, Windows expert Brian Livingston said today. Livingston, who publishes the Windows Secrets newsletter, said that a single change to Vista's registry lets users put off the operating system's product activation requirement an additional eight times beyond the three disclosed last month. With more research, said Livingston, it may even be possible to find a way to postpone activation indefinitely."

4 of 357 comments (clear)

  1. ATTN: SWITCHEURS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    If you don't know what Cmd-Shift-1 and Cmd-Shift-2 are for, GTFO.
    If you think Firefox is a decent Mac application, GTFO.
    If you're still looking for the "maximize" button, GTFO.
    If you don't know Clarus from Carl Sagan, GTFO.

    Bandwagon jumpers are not welcome among real Mac users. Keep your filthy PC fingers to yourself.

  2. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    That is what they say, but I don't think that's true. They rather have me running Vista illegally than running Linux legally. Why? Because it increases their market share, which in turn benefits to them. I am also more likely to choose Windows in my business decisions or demand Windows Vista from my employer because "that is what I know".

    Yep, because I want my employer sending out my pay check with the OS that's so insecure, I didn't even have to pay for it...

  3. Re:Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Um, because Linux has sucked ass since the day it was unleashed from the putrid minds of untalented, stupid developers?

  4. Re:Why bother? by tomstdenis · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Fair enough. And can I write to Blizzard support when the game stops working in Wine? (actually, I have no idea how good their support is so that's a half-genuine question). Point is, if I'm buying your software, paying for support and maintenance, I should be the one who gets to decide how to use it.

    And when you have games like WoW, which aren't really making any technical use of a feature that Linux or BSD can't reproduce, there is no reason why they would hinder their product as to only work on one platform.

    At anyrate, I'm not a WoW player so I won't be installing Wine anytime soon.

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.