Slashdot Mirror
Vista Can Run Without Activation for a Year
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."
Vista Can Run Without Activation for a Year
...as if installing and falling in love with Linux would take so long.
Ubuntu even installs faster and easier than Windows.
If Microsoft want to support the migration to Linux they shouldn't make such trollish statements!
---I have no problem whatsoever with activation. If people do not want to pay MS prices then there are alternative OSes they can use. There is nothing at all wrong with a company trying to ensure that people actually *pay* for its products.
Registering a product (serial number or likewise) is one thing. Things can be made inconvienant for the casual copier. No technology will deter the big guys, not now, not ever. So, any sort of burden you set up will be absorbed by the honest guy. At worst, you'll alert the honest guy on how to use your programs the way the big pirates do.
---This is the first time I've heard of Windows Activation being referred to as DRM. I think your knee just jerked, or perhaps you thought blasting DRM would garner you positive moderation.
Erm, it IS DRM. Or have you been living in a cave when MS brags how they can completely revoke drivers for the 64 bit vista, or how they can deny activation by their many means.
When a computer gets "revoked" after I PAID my cold hard cash with, I WILL still have it work by hook or by crook. If you call or treat me like a thief, I will become one.
---What you *should* get is -1 (Offtopic)
But you should get a -1 (Retarded, didnt think it through).
I've been a computer programmer (i.e. old-style language for "software engineer") for 26 years. I've owned various systems over the years with various OSes (Amiga OS, Windows, Linux, Macintosh Classic and MacOS X). These days, I daily use Linux and MacOS X.
Of all the OSes I've developed on, I'm the most impressed with MacOS X. The user-experience on the Mac is a joy. Linux doesn't have a great user experience, but I use it for developing embedded systems (what I do mostly professionally these days).
As for Microsoft's offering? Ugh. I was the least impressed with Windows. Windows made no sense to me. For a multi-billion dollar company, Microsoft's documentation was really poor. Their API was inconsistent and frustrating, especially when the docs said one thing and the OS did another.
Vista? Not even gonna bother. I think I'll stick with an OS which trusts the fact I actually bought it. I can't afford to be separated from my work because the OS decides its time for me to reverify myself as a legitimate user and I forgot where I put the darn activation key.
Years ago, people told me they didn't like Apple because it was a one-vendor hardware solution. Well Windows has turned into a on-vendor software solution. How is that better?
I think the public really should speak with their feet on this one. There are alternatives. People should use them until Microsoft gets off its "us against the world" mentality.
moderators: please tag parent haha
boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
What is funny about the parent post? It's insightful, not funny.
If it weren't Microsoft it'd be funny though.