Slashdot Mirror


Driver Update Can Cause Vista Deactivation

KrispySausage writes "After weeks of grueling troubleshooting, I've finally had it confirmed by Microsoft Australia and USA — something as small as swapping the video card or updating a device driver can trigger a total Vista deactivation. Put simply, your copy of Windows will stop working with very little notice (three days) and your PC will go into "reduced functionality" mode, where you can't do anything but use the web browser for half an hour."

10 of 875 comments (clear)

  1. Pirated version? by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is there a decent pirated version of Vista yet? I usually use the pirated version of software, even if I have paid for it. Everything works better that way... games don't need disks inserted, XP doesn't need activation or WGA, etc. The pirates have a better product.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  2. I don't get it... by oldosadmin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What other industry is there that abuses their customers like this? I feel like I'm being accused of criminal activity from the first second I install a MS product now.

    --
    Jay | http://oldos.org
    1. Re:I don't get it... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I feel like I'm being accused of criminal activity from the first second I install a MS product now.

      Likewise. This is why I refuse to install Vista on any new PC I'm putting together, or to accept the "upgrades" to things like Media Player that make them worse. I don't even have to jump to an alternative platform such as Linux or Mac, nor do I need to break the law and pirate something: I just buy XP instead. As long as people keep doing this, retailers will get the message and keep supplying it. When enough big retailers are losing out on profits because of Vista, they will make their feelings clear enough to Microsoft, and either the problem will go away or the Microsoft executives responsible will start going away.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  3. Re:Fool me once..... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When was the "fooled me once" time? I don't think it's twice yet.

    XP activation issues?

  4. Makes OS X and Linux look all the better by TibbonZero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If Vista had actually done all of the things it promised, and didn't do any bullshit like this then it might actually be a decent operating system. Microsoft's viability might have actually been there.

    Main differences being vs Linux/Apple is that Apple is a hardware company and could care less if a small fraction of their user base pirates an operating system as long as they are buying hardware and are spreading the good word, and linux makers... want either support contracts or nothing.

    --
    Tibbon
    tibbon.com
  5. Well they made their beds, so now ... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ... they should sleep in it.

    When MSFT was touting the The Total Cost of Ownership studies, did anyone ask, if the costs included reacting to unwanted updates? How many times people have spoken about vendor lock and the risk of putting all your eggs in one basket? Trashed everyone as MSFT hate-mongers. It will only get worse. If the revenue stream is threatened MSFT will slip in another forced update make it more and more difficult to switch to alternatives. Because, get this, MSFT can charge you all the way up to your switching costs. The only way it can increase revenue is by increasing your switching cost.

    Put yourself in MSFT's shoes and imagine what you would do. A security issue crops up. One team comes back with a solution that does not break all the competitors products. The other team comes up with a solution that incidentally breaks competitors products. Which one will you pick as "critical security update"? MSFT is doing exactly what it should rationally do, given its market share. It is the customers who are irrationally picking MSFT solutions against their own best interests.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  6. Re:Wow by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From what I've heard, Mac OS doesn't do this kind of stuff either. It's a little different, since it requires specific apple hardware to run the OS, but there's nothing stopping you from running out and getting a pirated copy of Leopard once it gets released, and running that on your older Mac. I understand how stopping pirates is a good thing, but it should never be done at the expense of your paying customers.

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  7. I've posted about this before by kimvette · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've posted about this issue before but was accused of making shit up just to slam Microsoft.

    Wrong. I used to be a die-hard Microsoft fan, until they introduced the broken Activation scheme. Even back in the days of Windows XP. driver upgrades or reinstalls could de-activate Windows. This is why I am so adamantly against Activation schemes - at least schemes which do not allow for license transfers. It sucks, too. If delivering a bunch of workstations to a client where the client wants them pre-activated and added to their domain, you have to activate the system. Now, sometimes one will run into incompatibilities and have to upgrade a wireless driver or video driver (or add additional hardware - and yes, I've even seen USB device driver upgrades trigger deactivation) and if you've got the OEM version, guess what? You need to wait on hold with Microsoft to re-activate the system.

    Granted, it doesn't happen often. It does have a knack of happening at exactly the wrong time.

    Microsoft: you own the market. Drop the activation scheme. Also, where XP is nearing end of life, isn't it time to follow through with your promise to release a patch which will eliminate the need to activate Windows XP? I mean, Vista has been out for nearly a year now. . .

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  8. Re:Fool me once..... by Ed+Avis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You need to port applications from XP to Vista? Microsoft is normally very good about keeping backwards compatibility - indeed, the need to stay compatible with old badly-written apps is the cause of much of the cruft in Windows. Do you have any examples of software that works in XP and needs rewriting for Vista?

    --
    -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
  9. Re:Fool me once..... by fuzz6y · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Name one. No one *has* to use anything. The definition of "have to" you are using is so narrow it is meaningless. You don't *have* to breathe oxygen. Unless you want to live.
    --
    If you're going to be elitist, it would help to be elite.