Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Cracking Down On Indian Retailers
slashthedot writes "Microsoft caught some Indian retailers selling pirated copies of Windows by sending in a dummy customer to ask for a copy of Windows to be installed on their PC. The dealers claim that they are promoting MS software in this way. One retailer said: 'Since we are are not charging anything extra for installing the software, it means that we are actually not trading in pirated software. For us this is just a sewa (selfless act) that we are offering to our customers. Besides, the pricing of their operating systems is way too high for the Indian markets.'"
... I had read in a while - Robinhood style!
Seriously though MS should understand the very practical, priceless message the traders are giving them for free - Not many people in India could a) buy a branded PC and b) Buy a locally built one AND pay for the OS - Last I checked, XP Home was Rs. 4500 which is about 1/3rd the price of the full PC.
For one it is nearly impossible for Microsoft to stop the piracy in countries like India and China - even though India has laws to deal with it, there is little there to enforce them on that scale. Secondly if it is enforced, people would just find free alternatives like Linux, or simply give up on computers - none of which is good for MSFT. XP (NOT Starter - Indians are the choosiest customers and for the most part are fool-proof!) should be priced around 300 Rs or so and drive against piracy should be stepped up enough that people know that enforcements are increasingly common if Microsoft has any chance of selling legal copies to a common man in India.
I was talking to one of my friends (who happens to be from India) the other day about computers. I mentioned that I use Linux and he was absolutely amazed and asked me why I would do that. Linux is considered the poor-man's operating system and most computers that come with it are wiped and a pirated version of Windows is installed. I'm still trying to grasp the reasoning behind it, other than I think Linux has the reputation as "too poor for Windows"
Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
By the authority of my second sentence: Linux runs well and is ready to take over the desktop.
Well then Linux should be designed for windows compatibility. The only way Linux can take over is by providing a seamless transition to the point where it doesn't matter what application you need, your data will be accessible from both operating systems. Then, and only then Linux can excel. $$$ for windows, or $0 for linux. They both do the same thing give or take, they are compatible, the apps are cross platform, and it just comes down to money.
Regardless of whether or not that is true, Microsoft certainly does not think so by their actions.
"Some guys are taking our software without paying for it."
"That helps us. Network effects and stuff."
"Great! So we'll tell everyone to just go ahead and make all the copies they like."
"No, dumbass. Then we get no money."
"Okay, what if we just don't say anything?"
"We're real popular, and people will figure out pretty quick that we don't do anything if they copy it, and we'll lose a ton of money."
"How about we quietly enjoy the piracy while making a big show of going after a few of them so people still have that tiny, little bit of fear to keep them honest?"
"Sounds good to me."
a user moving from pirate windows to legitimate windows is a gain for MS (obviously)
a user moving from pirate windows to linux is a loss for MS (because it helps the mindshare of linux which in turn helps it into places that DO pay for the propietry software they use)
clamping down on piracy is obviously going to do both to some degree, which is more significant in a particular case is very hard to calculate.
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
The crackdown is not nearly as interesting as the vendor reaction: a general strike against M$. They have a guild and 350 shops have boycotted a M$ training session and pledged to purchase nothing from M$ for the next quarter.
This is a real culture clash and M$ is going to lose. Compare it to Gandhi's Salt March to Dandi and you can see where this is going. If M$'s $3 "education pack" is not good enough and they won't quit making alternate software difficult by vendor and driver manipulation, the people of the world will simply take what they want. M$ can no more stop this than the British Empire could keep people from taking salt from the sea.
I'd rather they discovered free software. It would be better for them and they could more easily implement things like DVD playing and advanced video codecs than people endumbered by dumb laws like the DMCA. Using M$ leaves the user open to M$ violation down, powers the botnet and props up M$'s awefull non free formats.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
For exactly this reason.
When I was in Indonesia, a similar crackdown happend (by the government). The reaction by businesses was immediate and strong: develop roadmaps for migrating all possible systems to Linux.
Full-page advertisements were seen in major newspapers advertising open source migration services.
It was really interesting. Nearly every computerized business that I came in contact with asked me about Linux and how suited it would be for their work.
Yes, a lot of them will install Linux.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
> Because it's so easy to install drivers for ATI and Nvidia video cards?
/boot/grub/menu.lst" to get rid of "splash" and "quiet" is the most hardcore hack I've done to date) but Nvidia drivers in the latest Ubuntu are a breeze.
;)
I know very little about Linux ("sudo gedit
I was poking around the menus after a clean install (from the alternate 7.04 disc) and found the 'Desktop Effects' button, so of course I clicked it to see what it was. It said I needed the restricted drivers to use these effects, is that okay? I clicked "Yes", it did some automatic voodoo and said it needed to reboot. I rebooted and BAM, Nvidia drivers installed. Piece of cake.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to the wiggly window abuse.
Not really. Microsoft just has to push harder and actually *MAKE* people pay for windows/office. That would be enough for the average Indian to give up on Microsoft software.
It is pricing that drives the Indian market. The only reason why people in India use Microsoft software is because it is effectively free. An unbranded, entry level desktop costs about 20,000 rupees (about 500 US$).
Most home computers are used for multimedia entertainment, games, programming and document preparation (by grad students) and internet. If one had to use exclusively Microsoft software (the so called genuine version of it), it would easily cost an additional 30,000 rupees (about 750 US$). That is significantly higher that the price of hardware and people would just spend *a little time* learning linux (which is pretty popular in India) rather than spending *a lot of money* buying that software.
Compatibility is a non-issue if everybody switches to linux.
I stay in Hyderabad and about 8-10 months ago, I have begun seeing large advertisements all over the city by Microsoft, urging people to insist on "Original Microsoft Software". Interestingly, I don't see them anymore these days. I guess Microsoft's toll free call centers would have been flooded with calls from Indians asking them to explain what "genuine software" is, and how it would make their life better :)
My guess is that people would consider "purchasing" software if and only if it is significantly cheaper than the hardware. Something like 2000 rupees (40 US$) or so for the OS, office applications, compilers and a couple of high-end games all put together.
If that's the best complaint you've got, I'd say Linux must be ready for the masses.
It's not.
I was a Windows user but was using Linux on my server (Linux is great for a server). When I had some problems with a laptop that I thought were attributable to XP, I installed Linux on the laptop. I was surprised it mostly worked, but there were always some limitations. No serious power saving modes, a complete inability of the OS to turn off the backlight of my laptop screen when it should've, and when I shut the laptop screen the screen would stay on so the laptop keyboard could get a good look at the screen while I stored it in my laptop carrying case.
When I had to get a new laptop last year, it came with XP pre-installed (obviously). I gave it a few days and I just got used to everything working the way it is supposed to. My computer would actually hibernate when I closed the screen, the screen backlight would actually turn off when it was supposed to, and there were easy-to-use power-saving options.
Now I suppose it's possible everything got resolved in the last year, but I kind of doubt it. And even if those particular options work, the reality is that I still need Windows applications for what I do (specific cross-platform compilers, in-circuit specialized USB-based tools, QuickBooks, etc.). No, I'm not interested in an "equivalent" and, no, GnuCash is not even remotely equivalent to QuickBooks. I need the Windows applications in question. And last time I tried Wine on my last fresh Linux OS install, it literally didn't work with any of my applications--it wouldn't even complete the install process.
So, no, Linux is not ready for most desktops and ready for very few laptop desktops. Sure, I don't doubt that some Linux geeks and OS tweakers can make everything above work, but the fact remains that Linux is not ready for the desktop until it doesn't take a geek/OS tweaker to make these basic things work.
I used Linux for 2-3 years as my entire laptop-based desktop, but I got tired of the limitations and the work-arounds and tired of spending time dicking around with the OS rather than getting real work done. So, for now, I'm back on Windows. I hope at some point Linux truly is ready for my desktop.
Same deal in the Philippines. Windows XP Home (OEM) costs Php4900 ($106 US) retail. While Office 2007 off the shelf is Php8000 ($172 US) for the cheapest version. Minimum legal wage set by the government is Php8400 per month, in reality people are lucky if they make half of that though.
Linux is pretty popular over here, you can have it installed wherever you buy a PC, though many retailers charge more to install it than an original licensed copy of windows for some stupid and illogical reason.
I'm not quite sure what my point is though.
I knew someone would not pay for Windows.
Since I have a collection of old hardware I still use, I have problems with the one copy per machine license model. OSS has a much better model.
This is why my Wife has the single XP machine with MS office & Turbo Tax. It's also why I retired Windows 98 on a PIII machine and installed Ubuntu along with my Windows 2K laptop and a home built P4 white box (Media Center with TV tuner card and DVD burner)
The Windows license is clear, install on one machine only and do not transfer an OEM install. MS policy is why I have one XP machine and 3 Ubuntu machines.
I don't need 4 copies of XP, Office, Nero, AV, etc. As soon as the MS compatibilities go away, we can convert the XP machine also and save on the upgrade/update treadmill.
The truth shall set you free!
My basic theory (born out as I have seen in other countries):
Given a choice of free of charge software, people usually always pick those they perceive to be the industry leaders. When they have to pay for that software (especially when the real income equivalent, i.e. hours of labor to pay for it, is high), they have to slow down and ask what they need.
Piracy thus reduces the effective size of the total market. People aren't forced to decide whether to pay for new copies of the software, so they pick what they think is the path of least resistance. Add cost, and these people are brought back into the market and have to choose.
When I worked at Microsoft, I used to say that we had to do something about piracy because, "Piracy is anticompetitive and it hurts our competitors even more than it hurts us." I got a wide range of reactions from that statement. If there was no piracy of Windows, Microsoft *might* make a little more money. But I guarantee you, there would be a *lot* more Linux use out there too. Heck, there might even be more users of OS X...
I personally think we all need to do what we can to discourage software piracy. I think it is the greatest obstacle out there to the total dominance of open source software.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Unlikely. Anything from ID, and anything based on one of ID's engines.
And even with that, it's quite stupid to talk about software in brick and mortar stores. You aren't likely to find OpenOffice or Firefox in Wal-Mart stores either, but they're still two incredibly popular pieces of software. The software world is changing, and Linux has been at the forefront. With people getting their music online, whether legally or illegally, it's very clear people are willing to embrace online distribution, especially when they're getting something for free, which is the case with most Linux software.
The majority of Linux games aren't commercial, but derivitives, or otherwise free open source efforts, which often produce quite good products. And should Linux gain even a little popularity, yes, you'll see game developers developing ports using Wine, in the same way Corel did, and only natively writing/optimizing the performance-critical parts. In the mean time, Wine is only a stop-gap measure, and certainly not important to the capability of Linux gaming.
You're not very good at searching. Not my problem, or Linux's.
Not even remotely true. 100 years from now you'll see clones of pac-man and Tetris doing quite well in the market. Mame and other emulators seem to be incredibly popular, despite the fact that all the games it supports are several years old. And even more, small arcades all over the country have games that are more than a DECADE old, still making plenty of money. Street Fighter 2, Mortal Kombat, and Cruisin' USA come to mind immediately, though there are hundreds of others.
Incidentally, the idea that games are a killer app for an operating system is ludicrous in itself. Apple has plenty of desktop market share, with far, far fewer games than Linux supports. Millions upon millions of videogame consoles are being sold, which makes a lot of people who really aren't using their PCs for much gaming at all. Plenty of PCs more than a couple years old are still in-use, and haven't been upgraded to play the latest and greatest games released this year...
I could go on, but if you haven't got the point by now, I don't think you ever will...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
I'm an Indian, and I can tell you that your information is wrong.
Linux is not considered a poor man's OS. It is just that most of the software here is pirated and available almost free, that people don't have the incentive to learn Linux, except the technically oriented people.
I've seen people buying high end systems (about 800$), from local dealers with pirated window xp, ms office and loads of cracked games, and 1000s of mp3s all free as part of the deal.
In big cities like Bangalore they have started cracking down on people selling pirated CDs.
god n. : the Supreme Being, indistinguishable from a good random number generator.
Linux is NOT considered the poor-man's OS. It's mostly the elite OS used by a bunch of college-goers. There aren't any computers which come with linux in India (excepting a few acer models which I doubt anyone buys). Most windows pcs are running pirated versions and they're mostly for gaming or, as the other parallel comment says, for .NET and windows specific programming.
There are some interesting ethical situations here.
While the 'selfless' act helps the customer directly, it robs the producer of what is being 'selflessly' given away, whether it is Microsoft, or a small software company. The people doing the distributing may be gaining 'karma' points on one side but are losing them on the other side of the transaction.
The excuse of not being able to afford the 'real' product because of discrepancies in income between the United States and other countries has a lot of bearing here. In today's globalized world you need to keep up with current tech in order to succeed. If you can't afford it, then copying it can almost be rationalized.
The rationalization falls apart when you reach the point that you want your own products protected on the global market. It is hard to demand IP protection when you are not doing a good job of protecting other people's products.
To add another level of complexity to things, consider the fact that a lot of software businesses in the United States are creating service and research centers in places like India. While I trust that the businesses are buying legitimate copies of Windows and other software, are they keeping track of what their employees and subcontractors are doing? While these people may be making a lot more than the average citizen of India, the temptation of getting something 'free' might outweigh the ethically correct action of paying for it. (Of course there may be reduced cost programs that get hardware with legitimate software to this subgroup. But being in the United States, I don't hear of them.)
Ideally, everybody should be held to the same ethical standards, with allowances for all types of income discrepancies. Perhaps software, movies, music and other IP products should be priced based on personal income by country, with limits on what you can own based on what you earn. If you want more, you need to earn more, relative to the personal income ranges of your country.
It is something to think about that will continue to be a problem until all people world wide have similar income ranges.