Slashdot Mirror
Black Screens For Unauthorized Copies of Windows
arcticstoat writes "In a bid to deter people from using pirate versions of Windows XP, Microsoft is now updating its Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA) tool to introduce a few uncomfortable niggles for users of pirated versions of Windows. These include replacing the desktop wallpaper with a black screen every 60 minutes, although you can still replace it with your wallpaper of choice in the intervening period. As well as this, copies of Windows deemed to not be genuine will also have a translucent watermark above the system tray, which Microsoft calls a 'persistent desktop notification.'"
Can someone remind me why Microsoft wants to chase people off to other platforms again?
Most people I know who run 'stolen' software don't have the funds, are not otherwise law-breakers, and are not aware of alternatives. I've had great luck giving these people an OpenCD and explaining the law, and, in the case of small businesses, the BSA's tactics.
I wonder how long it will be before somebody comes along with a registry edit file that will replace the permanent watermark text with a link to Ubuntu?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Just another reason to pirate it since I've triggered the damn tool multiple times on Legitimately licensed product.
If we assume that one of the purposes of paying for Windows were to provide the user^H^H^H^Hcustomer with a "better Windows Experience" by means of fixing bugs and improving the Operating System in the next version, and due to the fact that Vista Sucks, I say we got ripped off and piracy is our legitimate right.
And don't get me started into viruses.
So, Windows is essentially a nagware product now? Choose to pay or not, depending on whether you think it'll be less painful? When will they append third-party advertisements to every file you save? When will it whisper subliminal insults into your audio stream?
[
i paid for windows vista ultimate edition *waits for laughter to die down* but after a few months, i discovered that the machine i installed it on had some dodgy RAM and i had to replace it. i don't know if it was because i changed the RAM or because the bad RAM corrupted something, but after that Microsoft decided that my copy of Windows was pirated, and put a permanent message in the lower-right corner of my machine telling me as much, and refused to let me use certain features, such as the Aero graphics enhancements.
personally, i suggest microsoft take a page from our founding fathers, and adopt a more "innocent until proven guilty" attitude (for example, offering a way to call them up and verify your CD Key) before implementing more draconian punishments upon the convicted!
i could live a little longer in this prison
What's funny is my desktop is intentionally black. Has been for years - through Windows 2000, Windows XP, and now Vista. I just like it that way.
Active desktop? Puh-leeze.
Pictures of cats? Why?!
Patterns? Too distracting.
Other colors? Meh.
I once tried BGInfo but even that was a black background with green text. It lasted a week before I took it out and went back to basic black.
My sources are unreliable, but their information is fascinating. -- Ashleigh Brilliant
i hope that's meant to be sarcastic.
i'm using a Dell my dad gave me as a gift when i went off to college, and it was supposed to come with a copy of XP (pre-installed). naturally, after a few years of use, i had to upgrade the computer/reformat the HDD/etc. during this process i found that Dell didn't actually give me a Windows XP setup disc. they had instead given me some Dell "system recovery" disc that would have re-installed all of their Dell-branded crap and bloatware from their software partners which i'd spent years removing and replacing.
i found it much more convenient to just borrow a friend's XP disc. however, i realized to my dismay that the XP serial number which came with the Dell didn't actually work with anything except for the Dell OS Recovery disc. and i wasn't going to use that disc (by now i'd lost it anyway) and have to spend a week uninstall everything and manually re-install all the new service packs and updates. so i just ended up using a "pirated" XP setup disc image i found on the web which included all the latest service packs and updates (minus WGA) and no other useless crap.
unfortunately, i accidentally installed the WGA update one day. and so every time the system starts, and seemingly every 15 minutes after that, i get told that my copy of windows isn't "genuine" which causes whatever program was in the foreground to lose-focus and is particularly annoying when you're typing.
The problem with these schemes by Microsoft is that they more often than not inconvenience legitimate owners of valid licenses. I've had more than a few cases of valid installations of Windows "deactivate". It's doubtful that WGA is "bulletproof" and won't flag some legitimate licenses as invalid and screw-up a loyal Windows users' system. Also, for those who really pirate Windows (are there that many pirates out there??), hacking around WGA is child's play. I think that this will turn more people off than stop pirates. I've been using Ubuntu 8.0.4, and I'm very pleased. I have no problem exchanging documents with Windows users, and since I'm doing development in Java, there's no incompatibility there either, since even the Windows guys are using NetBEans and Eclipse...Is there really much pirating going around that Microsoft has to waste programming resources to combat it? From what I see, people want to BUY XP. Microsoft could probably stop XP from being stolen altogether, if they just continued making it easy for OEMs to offer it, and continued support.
Yes. You failed to control your product. Too bad for you.
That's all I need to know about you to end this conversation.
Not quite the same thing, but I've been using a pirated copy of XP ever since, after some hardware upgrades, it refused to let me reactivate (citing I had used all my reactivations... I had never reactivated before? Yes, it was a new, genuine copy.) and forced me to ring customer service.
Of course, this sent me to a call centre in india where I was told the "servers were down" and they were unable to help me at that time. It took me literally 5 minutes, the same time I spent waiting for them to pick up, to download and burn a new copy that had SP2 and updates slipstreamed into it that required no activation, and not once since then have I had a single problem.
Meanwhile, I hear stories from my friends who are getting false positives on their assorted XP and Vista installs, the majority being OEM copies on dells...
When this sort of protection is causing more of a hassle for legitimate customers rather than pirates, there is a serious problem. I highly doubt this new update to WGA will affect my install in any way, shape or form.
Ezekiel 23:20
I wholeheartedly agree that much of the copy protection methods out there are disincentivizing ownership, but as far as copy protection goes what Microsoft is doing here is pretty passive. They're not locking anybody out of anything. These are only a couple visual reminders that you're not using a legitimate copy. In fact, to me it seems like kind of an improvement over their typical shitty behavior towards customers. With all the hell people have raised over product activation, WGA, etc. I shudder to even think of what would happen if they used the type of DRM we see on video games. These guys routinely put in rootkits and stuff that will disable or damage hardware. These guys sell products that routinely lock out paying customers. Game developers were always terrible about this. Remember when we had to turn to page 93 in the manual and type in the fourth word of the twelfth sentence in order to get the game to start up? Why is it we basically give these assholes a free pass while jump all over Microsoft for having comparitively friendly copy protection? I think any copy protection sucks, but any meaningful argument against it is going to gain a lot more traction if we go after the worst offenders.
It doesn't actually run in the background. It does the authenticity check at startup, and it vets your computer when you try to install an update which requires authentication, and that's it. And there are actual, honest-to-goddess important updates that won't install without such authentication.
*shrugs* but I guess I'm not what you'd consider a "smart" user, in that I choose to let it do its rigamorole on the 4 computers I have running Windows... my laptop, which dual boots with XP MCE, my HTPC which is running Vista Ultimate (both came from MSDN), and my parents' laptops, running XP Home and Vista Home Premium respectively.
Incidentally... none of those systems have ever had issues, performance or otherwise, with WGA. I'm not saying that it doesn't screw over legitimate users. But I am saying that I've never seen an issue with it, and that the ability to install security and stability updates that you couldn't otherwise install outweighs the marginal increase in boot time, which is about the only thing you actually notice when you install/activate WGA.
If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
Dell actually uses a different key on their recovery discs than the one that's on the side of the computer.
If you open d:\I386\winnt.sif The key is listed in there somewhere. That key also works, and I believe that in the past when I rolled my own discs, that was the one I'd use. IIRC I took the disc from my brother's computer and enter Dell's registration key. That generally worked just fine.
But that was years ago, and I don't really deal with Windows much these days.
Think about it. Microsoft could have did stuff like this. Thankfully, they didn't.
Change the homepage to Microsoft's website, perhaps a page about Windows XP and piracy.
Have Clippit pop up in the corner of Windows XP, saying, "It looks like you're using a pirated copy of Windows. Would you like to purchase one now?"
Slow one's Internet connection to 56kbps speed, except when doing Windows Updates.
Disable any and all video capabilities.
Limit the display to 800 x 600 at 8-bit colour.
Disable accessing certain file types, such as video files, music files, etc. (Jokingly, because if you pirate Windows, you might be pirating other things as well.)
While I don't disagree with you in any way, I'm always curious why people are upset when their RAM is being used. As I understand it, Vista pre-loads into RAM applications that you use often, thus (ideally) speeding up load time. RAM is there to be used; why do we get upset when we see near-100% usage? Personally, I don't care what XP's RAM usage is when I boot up, as long as it's responsive. If increasing XP's RAM usage to 1.5GB on bootup by loading stuff I use regularly would make my applications load faster, I would beg for it to be done.
Anyone have any ideas about this?