Slashdot Mirror
Vista Pirates To Get "Black Screen of Darkness"
jcatcw writes "Microsoft has just turned on Reduced Functionality mode, worldwide, and sent a letter to OEMs explaining the consequences of Vista piracy. These include a black screen after 1 hour of browsing, no start menu or task bar, and no desktop. Using fear as a motivator, the email warns resellers to 'make sure your customers always get genuine Windows Vista preinstalled.'"
"To help protect honest partners and fight piracy, Microsoft will continue to block product keys that are determined to be pirated, stolen or otherwise deemed nongenuine."
So, what is going to happen when M$ screws up and starts blocking products that are 'genuine'? This will happen and I'll bet that the least painful thing that a customer will be able to do is purchase a new copy. I doubt that M$ will go out of their way to check to see if a blocked customer has a legit copy.
"The ad concludes with "Don't risk it!" and "make sure your customers always get genuine Windows Vista preinstalled."
So basically, M$ is going to screw customers if their OEMs screw M$. This should be fun to watch. Just another reason for linux.
Asshats
Isn't using Vista enough punishment in itself?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What happens when this goes wrong? What happens when Vista is running in the Bank of America and it accidentally trips the entire network in to "Black Screen of Darkness" mode? What happens when a virus triggers this?
The first job of any operating system has to be stability. Without stability you have nothing and I can't honestly see a good reason to mess with the stability of your OS when you're making billions of dollars of profit a year. People do not have short memories when you turn off their company. They will avoid you for decades because an event like that could literally cost a company its existence.
Good enough is hard to shift. I personally think Grolsh is a superior larger to Fosters yet Fosters outsells Grolsh by a wide margin in the United Kingdom. Fosters is inoffensive and does the job well, it is "good enough." Windows is the same, it is good enough for the vast majority of people even though it is technically deficient to Mac OSX and Linux.
I think Microsoft is making a lot of mistakes with Vista. First of all, they released an early beta as the final product which left a lot of basic functionality horribly broken. Second, they added features that no end user wants at the request of record labels and the like. Thirdly, they've got sucked in to yet more anti-user copy protection.
How many more mistakes can you make before it starts to hurt? Who knows, but the competition is getting good very quickly indeed. I moved from Windows in January to Ubuntu and then Kubuntu..
To my surprise it is vastly superior to Windows XP and Vista. A year ago I would have called that fanboy-ism. Many of you are probably thinking that right now but I urge you to try it; you'll quickly learn you're wrong.
There has been much talk of the year of Linux and when that would be. The problem with the year of Linux is that you can only see it in retrospect. However, the signs are present that 2007 is in fact that year. We've had Ubuntu convince users like me to give it a go, I've heard people around me talk about Ubuntu who otherwise wouldn't have the inclination to try it. We're having people like ATI take the platform seriously and just today we've had Eve on-line announce a Linux port.
Is the year of Linux really upon us?
Simon
So when your legit copy of Vista dumps you to a blue screen of death, you can rest assured that you are experiencing the Genuine Advantage.
Back in the day, I used to play on a certain MUD (Eternal Twilight, ROM 2.4, I believe)...there was a command, if I recall, called something like "moron." When applied to a user, each time they used a command, said command would be disabled for further use, causing the player to slowly dwindle to non-functional oblivion. Ah, those were the days. Go Vista!
-G
Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
According to Microsoft, this is obviously the other way around: websites should change themselves to support the new Operating System.
Because we don't like this "OS independency" that websites seem to enjoy at the moment.
Sorry, it was too easy.
How hysterical. Earlier the blue screen of death came at no charge. No you have to pay to get the black one.
I wonder how long until some company loses a production SQL server costing millions of dollars because of this when they owned a group license. Its more then enough to stop any company from using vista if they where considering it.
It's not like that thing won't be cracked shortly after the implementation.
Besides, if all the pirated copies of Windows were to be switched to black... dang... that would be a nice day... Linux/OS X marketshare quadruples, spam is be only about 4% of internet traffic.
(Disclaimer to mods and pointdexters: no I did not RTFA, and yes I did pull those numbers out of my A.)
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Yes, it does. My guess is that M$ turns your computer into a node for some sort of grid computer they are running, which will run DDOS attacks on mirrors.kernel.org.
Palm trees and 8
Black Screen of Darkness Assails the knave
Defend yourself
With your shaving glaive
And the white foam of truth:
Burma Shave
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
I am glad that Microsoft is actually backing up the restrictions that they say they have on their software. I've noticed that many Linux vs. Windows debates are about legitimate use of Linux vs. illegitimate use of Windows.
And when I try to point out to people that there are strict legal limits on what you can do with Windows, they look at me like I am making something up. "But, I can install Windows on this computer...I have a CD my brother-in-law gave me!"
So, I am just as glad that Microsoft is doing something to demonstrate the nature of licensed software. If people want to use licensed, commercial software, I don't object to it (even though I use almost totally free software), but they should realize that means they have to pay for it.
Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
Good afternoon, as of this week, Microsoft has activated a function in Vista called 'Reduced Functionality.' This is a specific function in Vista that effectively disables nongenuine copies of Windows. Therefore anyone who has a pirated copy of Vista will experience:
"The Need to move to Mac OS X"
Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
In other news, Apple, Sun, and a billion linux supporters simultaneously screamed their praise at this latest initiative by Microsoft.
It gets worse. Let's take that line of thought a bit further. From TFA:
Great. Just what we need: deliberately make some machines more vulnerable to attack. As if those machines are the only ones that will suffer when they get infected.
A malware infection doesn't just impact the infected system's users. Those systems then become nodes in a botnet. They pump out more spam, more viruses, more phishing. They host phishing sites. They could theoretically be used for distributed computing projects... like cracking into paying customers' systems.
What's Microsoft going to say when a large site gets hacked, using someone else's pwned box as a launch platform, and the attacker got into that box because it was pirated, and Microsoft deliberately disabled the update that would have fixed a remote root exploit?
And what if the WGA server is down again?
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
One of the biggest problems in dealing with software piracy is that the copy protection mechanisms often punish legitimate users disproportionally. Who wants to put down $60 for a game that makes you put in a CD-Key, keep the CD in the drive while you play, establish/maintain an active internet connection to verify your right to play each time you start the game up? Especially when pirates get the same product for free without the aggravating restrictions?
It's never seemed logical to me that people who buy software should have to bear the brunt of copy protection when pirates get a superior experience without compensating the company producting it. So it's about time that Microsoft has figured out a way to degrade the experience of software pirates instead of that of legitimate users. Not to mention of course that it'll be nice to see Windows come down in price once this takes effect.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Let me get this straight.. Not even two weeks ago, their WGA system completely blew up leaving millions of genuine users "in the dark", and now they are do confident in their system that they are going to do something like this?
I think I will just wait a few days for M$ to shot themselves in the foot... This type of poor business behavior is not sustainable longterm...
We consult with a variety of $100m+ corporations in the Chicago area. Our last summary on Vista had three word: Don't Install It. One contractor asked us for a study (paid for by them) into Vista, and we sent them that very summary and billed them $1.50 (which I believe they paid).
I'm very open about IT developments to my clientele. I've explained to them for almost 20 years that MOST of the hype in an industry is designed to pad the pockets of consultants such as myself. Of our client base, almost none were going to be bothered by Y2K. I think we were one of a handful of consultants who didn't bill more than a few bucks for the entire Y2K fiasco, and we also let our clients know this. We make _more_ money because we are honest about the gimmicks of the trade: we don't want to make money doing work that isn't necessary. When a client takes us off a project, and the project drops in efficiency, they know we were needed. Most consultants, when fired, are a net positive to the firing client.
Vista will never run in my office, in my home, or in the homes and offices of my clients, until the third party software developers require it. For most large companies, Vista offers zero additional efficiency, profitability, or reduced downtime. How else can you sell an upgrade unless it does at least 2 of those things better than XP?
XP runs fine. I know it is hated, but it runs fine on hundreds/thousands of desktops and laptops and servers we maintain or provide services for. Is it efficient? No, but my customers know they're paying for the lower efficiency/stability by being compatible with the software and hardware THEY need (CAD, print RIPs, accounting flagship programs, etc). Vista offers NOTHING.
Let Microsoft kill pirate Vista installs: as far as I know, the only installs I'm aware of are pirated ones. Anyone who runs Vista now that we consult with gets a FREE downgrade to a legitimate XP license. That's how firm I am on Vista: I'll pay for the labor to downgrade it.
Microsoft's non-customers: in the Black
Our customers: giving MS the Red. Bank statement, that is.
So basically, M$ is going to screw customers if their OEMs screw M$. This should be fun to watch. Just another reason for linux.
So the problem, as you see it, aside from a MS Screwup(TM) is people suffering for purchasing from a shady dealer. People who buy from shady dealers should learn not to, not really MS's problem there, it's the cheapskates who do business with scumbags. People stung will have to go back to the cheatie dealer and demand satisfaction.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I'm honestly hoping this was typed in sarcasm.
I use sudo in my everyday conversations so I can gain root access.
Vista may actually be usable like that. Why aren't Microsoft sharing this upgrade with their paying customers?
Anybody remember this?
Windows Genuine Advantage Servers Down, Taking Users With Them
Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:26PM EDT
Breaking news: Some of Microsoft's WGA servers reportedly went offline last night or early this morning. What's that mean? If your copy of Windows tries to validate itself with Microsoft, it might be marked as unvalidated, or put simply, counterfeit.
The rest of the story is here.
I can't wait until Vista tries to dial home, and they have another server blackout. I wonder if MS can be held legally liable the same way virus/worm authors are? You know, whenever some huge worm takes everybody's machines down for a day or two they tally up some outrageous dollar amount due to lost productivity? I smell a huge class action lawsuit waiting in the wings.
This is going to be seriously entertaining when it happens.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
The year of linux is already here.
It's just not evenly distributed.
If the copy of Vista is illegal, the machine will slow down, crash, and become vulnerable to viruses.
So, how does that differ from legal copies?
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
I'm curious if this reduced functionality is a function of the windows shell its self (explorer.exe)
In such a case I imagine that if this "feature" does kill explorer.exe, then simply loading up a different shell like Black Box (bblean) then atleast the local features would work even if windows update is still blocked.
Of course, their methods for stopping the windows update feature is not really clear at this point either.
Actually, it's also "fraud", or "dishonestly obtaining financial advantage by deception", depending on your local criminal code.
Not to defend vista, but lets get the facts strait. It seems that there are 2 modes to the reduced functionality, Basically if you don't activate you get the black screen and are screwed. They will treat pirates the nearly same as they do in XP with updates only. Sigh, I would have hoped for more aggressive blocking. Just to give people a chance to consider the true cost of Vista.
reference
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/925582
Ill summarize what you can do:
non-genuine key:
Can use Windows Vista features
Can activate Windows Vista
Can change the product key
Can log on without a time constraint to perform certain activities (no 1 hour restriction)
Can not use certain Windows Vista features such as Aero Glass and the Windows ReadyBoost.
Can not obtain some content from Microsoft Download center.
Out-of-grace period for activation:
Can activate Windows Vista
Can remotely script Windows Vista
Can change the product key
Can log on to Windows Vista for one hour to obtain a new product key or to access data on the local computer.
Can use most of the features that are available in Windows Vista.
Can activate the Windows Vista product key.
Can remotely access a shared network location.
Can remain logged on
Can run Windows Vista in safe mode
Can not play built-in games
Can not use premium features such as Aero Glass, ReadyBoost, and BitLocker.
Can not log on for more than one hour
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Sounds like an easy way for a rogue IT employee to take out an entire company. Simply publish that company's key (or their special non-activation copy of windows) as a torrent, bunch of people download it, Microsoft picks up on the flux of installs and pulls the plug, the entire company goes dark.
"Dear CEO,
I have a copy of your Windows Vista install key. If you do not transfer $1,000,000 to my swiss bank account by 5pm I will publish this key on teh internets. How expensive would it be for every copy of Vista you own to go dark for a few days while you negotiate with Microsoft?
Tick tock tick tock..."
Dekker Dreyer
I think it'd be quite fun to see the blue screen and a black screen battle in a fight to the death.
If you take someone's money by using a pirated copy of Windows, that's theft of money.
Taking property by knowingly exchanging a false token for that money is theft. Read the law in your state, they are all very nearly the same.
I recently wrote about this ...
Short version: Genuine Vista crapped out on me, screwed up a huge download (twice!) and initially refused to realise it was genuine. Only after installing an Active-X control (God, I hate those) did I manage to get it working (and it only offered that solution the second-time-around).
A sufficiently bad experience that I just deleted the windows VM and installed Ubuntu on a VM instead. So, yes, MS screwed me out of the $300 or so for the 'Windows Vista that is licensed for VMs", but it's the last thing I'll ever buy from them. Anyone want to buy a (used once) GENUINE copy of Vista ?
I don't pirate software. I don't see why I should be inconvenienced (at full price) because MS can't find their backside with either hand - if you're going to deny fake vista installations, then MAKE SURE THE DAMN SOFTWARE WORKS. PERIOD. NO IFs BUTs OR OTHER EXCUSES. [rant over].
Simon, disgusted with MS's attitude.
Physicists get Hadrons!
Actually, I think Microsoft should force the user to download security patches. I know most people I talk to think that waiting for software patches is punishment, especially over a slow modem.
"You are required to download 900MB of patches. Estimated time until completed is 8 hours, 23 minutes. Allow us to stream this anti-piracy movie while your computer is inaccessible. Download time now increased to 10 hours, 42 minutes".
Well split any hair you wish. This LOWERS Vista value to everyone.
I believe that Microsoft will discover that this is a tactic who's unintended consequences include a movement away from Vista - and to some extent from Windows in general.
Apple's moment to strike a hot iron is rapidly upon us.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Microsoft has some pretty smart people working there.
Microsoft is driven by marketing, not by smart people.
It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
I can't believe that 400 posts in this thread fail to mention that this is a hoax.
European Linux user, living in Antwerp
"Let us play this MP3 file you've got here. Whoops! Download time now increased to 13 hours, 15 minutes."
I realize you made this comment in jest, and I'm certainly no fan of MS, but since you got modded insightful I feel I need to point out the speed reduction chosen by MS was picked to not be noticeable on anything less than a gigabit connection. So, unless you're downloading at over 1Mbit/s from your ISP (and in turn every hop to the MS update servers), there won't be any noticeable change in your download rate.
Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
Clever marketing. Microsoft dorks them and you get to be the hero. The PR value is priceless.
:) Bothers me I didn't think of it on my own...but I'll get over it.
:)
That's the plan! Actually, the referrals that we pass on from the "good business" freebies could be very profitable, so there's more than just a simple "return customer" PR perspective there. Nothing better than one CEO saying to another "This company actually downgraded all our new accounting PCs from Vista for free, and they're running so much better."
We can't count on Microsoft but we can always count on good 'ol Adam. It's a good investment in time because I've got money someone says, "Hey, since you're here, can you look at..." which are the magic words that mean you get the bill the call anyway.
Actually, if it was minimal work, I'd probably cover that, too. Some clients LOVE seeing freebie invoices, especially since the freebies always say "September 10, 2007: $620, Discount: $-620" But of course there are always issues beyond that service call that would bring more cash into the near-future than we'd lose.
Keeps your face fresh around the office, you can schmooze while you're working, talk to them about alternative operating systems...it's a great idea. One that I fully intend to shamelessly copy.
Here's another one for you that worked for some subsidiaries I helped start:
Take the going market rate for small-sized businesses (5-50 desktops, 1-3 servers) and nuke $5-$10 an hour off of it. If the going rate is $80-$120, charge $75-$110. Offer a $10/hour preferred-bonus on all hours billed, and place that bonus on your monthly invoices. If your invoice is for $1500 one month, $1200 the other and $2000 the third, the third month's invoice would say "Bonus Available: $440" Include with your invoice a small catalog of bonus options and let the customer use their bonuses to purchase them (for the business, for their home, etc).
The subsidiary that did this increased their market share significantly over just the first 3 months of me working with them. The bonus hardware was offered at MSRP, so the actual bonus dollars only cost them $3-$6 per hour, and the bonus hardware was not covered under any labor warranty, which increased the service/maintenance cost over 3 years to cover double to triple the cost of the hardware. If I remember correctly, one customer (a headhunter) replaced their entire workstation and server network (maybe 10 machines and 1 server) in 2 years with "free" bonus hardware, and the CEO got a laptop for his kid for college "free" also. Net profit dropped only 3% versus expected profit, because gross billing was way up due to the bonuses.
The new subsidiary I am starting in Northern Illinois will be taking the idea to the home support group (sort of like geek squad, without the geeks, focused on home networks of CEOs and management types who have terrible luck getting their in-house guy to come over). "Free" stuff like Tivos, restaurant dining certificates, and golfing certificates should do very well in the 5 areas I'm hoping to target.
When people in IT complain to me that there isn't a lot of work, I just have to shrug. There's work at every price tier we investigated: from the $40/hour consulting monkey (no offense) to the $300/hour consulting guru. The problem is marketing: don't be a geek, be a business owner. Don't be a geek, be a parent. Don't be a geek, be a music nut. I'll never understand the lack of inspiration in the IT field, if we took most of our ideas nationally, there'd be huge profits ahead. Too bad I'm too A.D.D. to focus on a national roll-out
Good luck!
I wish I could agree that Apple's moment to 'strike a hot iron' is a good thing -- however, Apple is just as bad about vendor lock in as Microsoft is. Some might venture to say worse. Especially in a situation like this where our main gripe is Microsoft's overall control of your computer regardless of the situation. Apple can in theory do the same thing, but so far, hasn't bothered except to make it overly difficult to run their flagship OS on standard off the shelf hardware.
Oh well, maybe someday we'll see a cool thing like Apple's hardware actually becoming as cost-efficient to own as normal x86 hardware...but I don't intend to hold my breath.
This would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.
2002 - Microsoft releases Service Pack 1 for Windows XP and announces that it will lock out pirates
2004 - Microsoft releases Service Pack 2 for Windows XP and announces that it will lock out pirates
2005 - Microsoft introduces Windows Genuine Advantage and announces that it will lock out pirates
2006 - Microsoft announces increased tightening of WGA to lock out pirates
2007 - Vista. Lather, Rinse, Repeat
The funniest and most ironic part is that Vista is a huge steaming pile of crap. After nearly 9 months of struggling with Vista (that runs like molasses on a fast dual core machine with lots of ram) I gave up and went back to XP.
Microsoft will be doing people a favor by shutting them down.