Slashdot Mirror


Single Verizon IP Address Used For Hundreds of Windows 7 Activations

An anonymous reader writes with this story from TorrentFreak: A presumed pirate with an unusually large appetite for activating Windows 7 has incurred the wrath of Microsoft. In a lawsuit filed [in] a Washington court, Microsoft said that it logged hundreds of suspicious product activations from a single Verizon IP address and is now seeking damages. ... Who he, she or they are behind address 74.111.202.30 is unknown at this point, but according to Microsoft they're responsible for some serious Windows pirating. "As part of its cyberforensic methods, Microsoft analyzes product key activation data voluntarily provided by users when they activate Microsoft software, including the IP address from which a given product key is activated," the lawsuit reads. The company says that its forensic tools allow the company to analyze billions of activations of software and identify patterns "that make it more likely than not" that an IP address associated with activations is one through which pirated software is being activated.

203 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. From Micro-Soft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This great piece of history still rings true today:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_to_Hobbyists#/media/File:Bill_Gates_Letter_to_Hobbyists.jpg

    Many here should read, learn, and abide...

    1. Re:From Micro-Soft by spire3661 · · Score: 2

      This would a hell of a lot more true if Bill didnt take all that money and fuck us for 2 solid decades.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:From Micro-Soft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Its funny when you put that letter in the context of history:
      - Bill Gates used Paul Allen to steal computer time from other university staff
      - They used that stolen time, paid for by tax payers and donations to the university, to make their commercial software
      - Bill Gates received a personal loan from the richest person in Seattle (his father)
      - Bill Gates was driving a porche when he started uni - back then Porches were rare as hen's teeth

      If anything, that letter just points out how much Gates thought he was entitled to - an entitled sociopath who has made everyone think hes the Mahatma Gandhi of IT.

    3. Re:From Micro-Soft by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      Fuck off. You should know how reputable Dice reporting is, and if not wait four hours for the dupe when ignorant shits crap out the same crap only stupider.

    4. Re:From Micro-Soft by greenfruitsalad · · Score: 1

      i'm secretly hoping they'll discover it was a kid learning how to mass-provision desktops in virtualbox. ooooh the embarrassment.

    5. Re: From Micro-Soft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Porches have been around for centuries and are not known for their mobility.

    6. Re:From Micro-Soft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      More like two decades ago. But I guess once $company does $thing, they are forever guilty of doing the same $thing with anything else they do afterwards.

    7. Re:From Micro-Soft by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Regardless of the other facts, I dont see how expecting to be paid for a product that you made and are selling shows an entitlement complex. The things you mention, perhaps. The letter? Not so much.

    8. Re:From Micro-Soft by i.r.id10t · · Score: 2

      - Bill Gates was driving a porche when he started uni - back then Porches were rare as hen's teeth

      Nope, not rare. Not expensive either. About 2x what an American car would run. I've got the receipt for the '65 356C coupe my dad bought new in July '65, and his out the door price with an aftermarket AC unit was $3700. A '65 Mustang would've cost him about $2000.

      In the later '60s and early 70s there were the "budget" Porsches - the 912 and 914....

      Now if he was driving a Carrera2 or one of the 30 901 badged cars (Porsche got sued, changed the model to 911), then yeah, rare.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    9. Re:From Micro-Soft by t0rkm3 · · Score: 1

      GWB is about as poor an example of a sociopath as you can muster. There are quite a few documented cases of impromptu empathy.

      You can hate the machine, you can hate the politics, but don't hate the person. It narrows your mind and cheapens your thoughts.

      Bill Clinton is a little closer (as in harder to find impromptu, unexpected empathetic responses), but that's because he polished himself up earlier and better.

      Yes, I realize it's a spectrum. I also realize that there are jobs where you are required to shed empathy in the role, or at least a large portion of it. Any job where you hold fiduciary responsibility, for instance, as it may be proven that you didn't act in the best interests of the stakeholders and might be held liable. At that point, you have to ask "What is the exposure?" of a decision.

      Another excellent example, military leaders: The reduce their feelings to win tactically, or strategically... but I've known a lot of battle tested Marines, none of whom was a sociopath. In fact, when the boots and utes come off... I swear to god you couldn't find a bigger bunch of shit talking softies....

    10. Re:From Micro-Soft by dcw3 · · Score: 1, Troll

      A snake doesn't turn into a bunny just because time has past.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    11. Re:From Micro-Soft by dcw3 · · Score: 2

      For those who've read the link, note that Bill complained that they'd only made the equivalent of $2/hr. Just for reference purposes, minimum wage back then was $2.00 an hour in 1974, $2.10 in 1975, and $2.30 in 1976. Should they have made more?...debatable. This was essentially a start up operation (many never become profitable), and initial product development costs are often written off. In that brave new world, before EULAs, nobody bought untried stuff like this.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    12. Re:From Micro-Soft by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Meh. Most of the very rich inherent their money. This is fact.

      Bill gates is a bit special in that, not only was he rich, but pretty smart. Most of the very rich probably don't need to be all that smart. So when someone is rarely both, they can make a big splash, which he did.

      Though I agree, his, like many of the rags to riches stories you hear, are written by the victors so to speak. Best taken with a grain of salt.

      As to his Porsche, was it a new one? I worked with someone (now retired) who told me about having a Porsche in university also, and he wasn't from a particulary wealthy family. However he worked first, it was used, and his father owned an auto repair place... so it is all in the context.

    13. Re:From Micro-Soft by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Thats why we use the terms 'Nazi Germany' or 'Imperial Japan'....Gates/Ballmer Microsoft was ridiculously evil. Nadella Microsoft is showing real promise

      --
      Good-bye
    14. Re:From Micro-Soft by Cito · · Score: 1

      But, but, that rug really tied the room together.

      The dude abides

  2. Single shop most likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Probably a single shop selling pre installed M$ apps and O$s or possibly a legit shop doing repairs and a bad tech who is not using the customer's licence information because it is "already installed on their machine" or some such.

    1. Re:Single shop most likely by TWX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Last time I installed OEM windows using the correct OEM discs (Windows 7), I was not prompted for registration codes of any kind. I installed multiple computers across two or three models from one manufacturer with the same DVD and on checking what keys were used for activation they were all unique. I don't know if the installer somehow determined a preset key based on a unique identifier associated with the computer itself, or if the OEM sysprep process on the disc determined that the computer was from that manufacturer and generated a somewhat random key based on the legitimacy of the platform, but they all worked fine.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Single shop most likely by afidel · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know if the installer somehow determined a preset key based on a unique identifier associated with the computer itself
      It did, for large volume OEM's Microsoft has them burn the key into the BIOS which is why most don't come with the hologram sticker anymore, there's no need for it on Vista+ systems. The only problem it can sometimes cause is if you're doing a cross version and cross type install without an existing OS on the box (ie it came with 7 home and you're doing an upgrade install of 8.1 Enterprise)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    3. Re:Single shop most likely by rudy_wayne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's either a small shop or an amateur wannabe pirate. Either way, if your computers are hitting Microsoft's activation servers, you're a clueless dope who's doing it wrong. People figured out how to avoid that crap years ago.

    4. Re:Single shop most likely by ganjadude · · Score: 1
      I would have to agree based on this line

      Microsoft analyzes product key activation data voluntarily provided by users when they activate Microsoft software

      Now, if its something that was done by a pro pirate, they would not have "voluntarily" handed over that info and would have used a tool to block it.

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    5. Re:Single shop most likely by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      probably they're not doing even oem installs.

      the funny thing is.. MS should know if the activations are legit or not. also, if they are unsure, why the fuck are they touting the ip address publicly?

      -lassi

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:Single shop most likely by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      probably they're not doing even oem installs.

      the funny thing is.. MS should know if the activations are legit or not. also, if they are unsure, why the fuck are they touting the ip address publicly?

      -lassi

      It's likely a dynamic IP, and by now has been shuffled onto another customer anyway. Their legal team is only interested in who was using the IP during the time of the alleged pirating activations.

    7. Re:Single shop most likely by arth1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's likely a dynamic IP

      % nslookup -type=PTR 20.202.111.74.in-addr.arpa. ::
      Server: ::
      Address: ::#53

      Non-authoritative answer:
      20.202.111.74.in-addr.arpa name = static-74-111-202-20.lsanca.fios.verizon.net.

    8. Re:Single shop most likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A few OEM's went with motherboard tattoo's that contained the mobo information and self activated based on that.
      HP being the most common and well known.

    9. Re:Single shop most likely by russg · · Score: 1

      OEM computers can have Windows licenses burned on the ROMs. This means, as long as you install with the OEM media and the key matches that install, you don't need any license key during installation. Otherwise its just freaking magic.

    10. Re:Single shop most likely by wolrahnaes · · Score: 2

      The only problem it can sometimes cause is if you're doing a cross version and cross type install without an existing OS on the box (ie it came with 7 home and you're doing an upgrade install of 8.1 Enterprise)

      And let me tell you, trying to install 8.1 Pro on a Lenovo that shipped with regular edition 8 is a test of patience. The installer *really* wants to read that key and is not easily convinced to ignore it and let you enter the key that you actually want.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    11. Re:Single shop most likely by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, installing a legitimately purchased OS without jumping through a bunch of DRM bs, freaking magic. Of the sort every version of Windows before 95 was perfectly capable of, as well as pretty much every other desktop OS released between then and now.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    12. Re:Single shop most likely by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Daz loader. All anyone ever needs. I've slic modded my share of BIOSes too, but ever since EFI it's just less hassle to use the loader, and it works 100% of the time.

      Daz Loader is good, but it does not support UEFI installations, because of the GPT partition format.

      What comes to OEM installations, with some trickery there is also a possibility to feed the BIOS SLIC key to Windows Software Licensing Management Tool. This allows to install without an OEM-specific installation media, and it's also legal as you're using the legitimate key from the sticker.

    13. Re:Single shop most likely by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's just a TOR exit node.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    14. Re:Single shop most likely by richy+freeway · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's very very easy to do. Just use the "evaluation" serial (actually provided by Microsoft), which for Pro is XHQ8N-C3MCJ-RQXB6-WCHYG-C9WKB

      Then using PKeyui, extract the correct serial from the BIOS/UEFI and activate with that.

    15. Re:Single shop most likely by afidel · · Score: 2

      He's probably talking about a fresh install, not an upgrade. During the first stage GUI installer it won't even ask you if it detects a SLIC key, there are ways around it but it's basically doing the hokey pokey blindfolded for all the advanced user friendliness it provides (ie we know better than you mere mortal)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    16. Re:Single shop most likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Shhhh! First rule of Daz loader...

    17. Re:Single shop most likely by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Or a VPN provider of some sort.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    18. Re:Single shop most likely by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Ooh, or even better, an IPv6 to IPv4 tunnel broker used by some major brand of Wi-Fi router....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    19. Re:Single shop most likely by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 1

      If you read the court filing, you'll discover that MS has identified the keys as being stolen from their supply chain and of being the wrong type of OEM key that a computer shop should be using.

      And as for the publication of the IP address, that was declared in the court documents as required.

      The very interesting factoid from this is how did people steal keys from MS's supply chain, especially non-issued license keys. Sounds like an inside job.

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    20. Re:Single shop most likely by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1

      Have you people not heard of NAT?

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    21. Re:Single shop most likely by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Non-authoritative answer:
      20.202.111.74.in-addr.arpa name = static-74-111-202-20.lsanca.fios.verizon.net.

      Since "static" probably means that their ip is static. So here is what Verizon Wireless says about its static ip addresses.

      What is Static IP?
      With Static IP, your device uses the same IP address every time. For companies with secured networks, a device with a static IP address helps the network administrator open their network to the specific address, which gives you access to the company intranet. Medium and large-sized accounts, primarily business accounts, often need static IP addresses. This feature is not for everyone. Individuals and most small-businesses will not require a static IP address.

      Do I need Static IP?
      Static IP is for those who are using an application that requires Static IP addressing. These applications include:

      Telemetry
      SCADA
      Public Safety
      Wireless ATM
      Wireless Point of Sale
      Machine to machine addressable units

      How much does Static IP cost?
      A one-time setup fee of $500 will be charged at an "account level" for each Static IP account that is set up.

      This is definitely not a run-of-the-mill customer.

    22. Re:Single shop most likely by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      It might be easy compared to, say, a stage 2 Gentoo install, but it sounds like you're minimizing the problem. Having to install the OS with a trial license then using a third-party utility to determine the correct license are steps that shouldn't need to be taken with a Windows install.

      Overall I think Windows 7 is a great OS, but I had install problems with it too. My motherboard has SATA and IDE for disks (on the board, not separate cards), and I use both. For some reason, Windows 7 will refuse to install on any disk unless the IDE bus is disabled in the BIOS first. XP didn't have this problem, neither does Debian. I still don't know what would happen if I wanted to install it to one of the IDE disks...

    23. Re:Single shop most likely by Jobless+*topia · · Score: 1

      I think it's an open secret that you can legally use an unregistered version of Windows for evaluation purposes. So this is one way for a non-Windows user to do some Windows-only stuff, like ironically flashing custom firmware on your Linux-based Android device, unless it's a Nexus that can be flashed using only the Google-supplied command line tools.

    24. Re:Single shop most likely by Ecuador · · Score: 1

      I do hope they have cross-checked this IP with their service centers...

      --
      Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    25. Re:Single shop most likely by coofercat · · Score: 1

      My thoughts exactly - why don't MS just return "not activated" for all the activations from this IP?

      On another note, how come one IP is able to activate a bajillion copies of Windows? I tried re-installing Windows on an Asus EEE pc (not using the crappy pre-load) and my god, it was hard work. It's got a key on a sticker on the bottom of the PC, but even then I needed to phone some automated crapfest and type in about a thousand numbers into my phone and the computer to activate it. Whatever the person/people on that IP are doing, can they please publish it so that us ordinary, legitimate customers can benefit, please?

    26. Re:Single shop most likely by GreenEnvy22 · · Score: 1

      Yep, I've automated this so I have a PXE installer on our network that install Win8.1 Pro using the Microsoft key, then on first boot it installs all our apps, drivers, and retrieves the key from BIOS and activates with that. We end up with a consistant image state for all machines even across manufacturers. No more making an image for each model. This is all necessary because if you just let it detect the BIOS key at install, and the BIOS key is for Win 8 Pro, but you're installing 8.1 Pro, it won't work. This only works on Win8 and up, and only works if the computer does have a valid Pro license, which is all we ever buy. I don't know if MS would give their blessing on this method or not, but the end result is a properly licensed method.

    27. Re:Single shop most likely by richy+freeway · · Score: 1

      The only reason it won't read it is because the key in the BIOS is for 8 not 8.1, which it seems to care about during the installation process but not once you're in Windows.

      Bizarre, I know. But that's exactly how it is.

    28. Re:Single shop most likely by Vertigo+Acid · · Score: 1

      Verizon FIOS is not Verizon Wireless. VZW's network is almost totally unrelated to VZ the Tier-1 ISP and VZ the consumer ISP

      --
      Beta is bad enough to make me go edit settings like this sig that haven't been touched since I joined
    29. Re:Single shop most likely by arth1 · · Score: 1

      You put too much faith in the accuracy of the geographical guess of where the IP is. My static IP address is listed being in a shed around two blocks away from where my ISP is, and around 40 miles away from where I actually am. My dynamic IP address is listed around 5 miles away from where I am.

      (But thanks for the correction of the IP address to .30 instead of .20)

    30. Re:Single shop most likely by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      I went the OEMCD route for xp Pro on my EeePC (1008HA) because the Home sticker on the bottom returned as invalid!

      Next install is going to be OpenSuSE whateverversioniscurrent (13.2 now?) or Knoppix (7? I've already got it on an SD card and fuck me it's fast off there)

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    31. Re:Single shop most likely by Hans+Lehmann · · Score: 1

      I have residential internet service via cable from Time Warner, and although my I.P is theoretically dynamic, it hasn't changed more than a few times in the past five years, and then it was only because the cable modem had been left powered off for a while. So this case could also easily be just some guy selling computers out of the trunk if his car.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    32. Re:Single shop most likely by wolrahnaes · · Score: 1

      You missed the point.

      I'm trying to do a fresh install of Pro. The laptop has an embedded key for non-Pro, which I have absolutely no interest in.

      Windows "helpfully" jumps right past the key prompt in the installer when it detects an embedded key. Because Microsoft is Microsoft, for some reason though there is an upgrade facility I can't even give up and just put my key in to upgrade the non-pro install as it's not an upgrade key.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    33. Re:Single shop most likely by wolrahnaes · · Score: 1

      AC is correct, I do not care at all about the embedded key and would happily delete it if possible. I want to use the separate retail Pro key that I have, but the Windows installer insists on using the embedded key that is of no use to me unless I go way out of my way to convince it otherwise.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
  3. Proxy? by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Makes me wonder if this is a proxy, a Tor exit node, or some other form of gateway through which hundreds or thousands of PCs get some kind of Internet connection through.

    On the other hand, my work has 30,000+ computers that communicate through no more than ten public IP addresses, so if we weren't using a corporate solution for Windows activations then we might pop up in much the same way.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Proxy? by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      That's my thinking...

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    2. Re: Proxy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A corporate solution would involve volume licenses unless you want admits going insane.

    3. Re: Proxy? by TWX · · Score: 1

      I've seen it done before. Not lately admittedly, but I don't doubt that it's still the practice in some some cases.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re:Proxy? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Ditto your thoughts here. Wonder if MS even checked for such a possibility. I use a couple different VPN addresses routinely, and some others less routinely. I have no idea how many people use the same VPN's. Hundreds of thousands, maybe?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    5. Re:Proxy? by Puls4r · · Score: 1

      Over-react much?

    6. Re: Proxy? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My employer up until sixteen months ago did exactly that. Volume licensing would have saved them some money - not a whole lot of money, but some. But, the IT department was totally incompetent. Now that we've been bought out by a larger company, the IT department is far less incompetent, and we actually have machines that work, OS's that do what they are supposed to do, and something that passes for security. And, volume licensing.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    7. Re:Proxy? by TWX · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No one thought to sanity-check the huge mirror that Perkin-Elmer designed for the single most expensive and ambitious astronomy project that the world had ever seen, even though two secondary instruments disagreed with the 'correct' measurements that the primary calibration tool reported. Consequently it cost a billion and a half dollars, several years, and required a daring in-orbit repair of components never meant to be space-serviced in order to get the instrument working properly.

      In 2003, a NOAA weather satellite being manufactured fell off of its assembly tilting table because no one followed the directions to verify that the table's bolts were installed. The damage cost $135 million to correct.

      Mars Climate Orbiter burned up in the Martian atmosphere because no one bothered to rectify that one team used fractional units and another team used SI units, so raw data in one unit was assumed to be in another unit, causing the problem that led to being steered incorrectly and hitting the planet.

      I never underestimate the ability for people to overlook the most basic things. If massive high-profile projects can be screwed up this easily, then a few people working a relatively unimportant thing like this could easily overlook things.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    8. Re:Proxy? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      since 2001, which was at least 14 years ago.

      I hate it when people show off their mad math skills.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    9. Re:Proxy? by TWX · · Score: 1

      Might even be a case where the ISP is actually not answering Microsoft's queries about the IP, so they felt a need to go public to try to embarrass the ISP into spilling customer information.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    10. Re:Proxy? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      or hes running the pirate activation server? and somehow is allowing it to phone home

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    11. Re:Proxy? by killkillkill · · Score: 1

      I'm glad he included it, 2001 doesn't seem that long ago... and I wasn't quite sure enough of what year it currently is to do the math myself.

    12. Re: Proxy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now that we've been bought out by a larger company, the IT department is far less incompetent, and we actually have machines that work, OS's that do what they are supposed to do, and something that passes for security.

      OMG, you mean there's a counter example? Every time I've seen a company get bought up the new IT department is less useful than the previous one.

    13. Re:Proxy? by TWX · · Score: 1

      That's my point, they used two other instruments, and both of those instruments told them they were wrong, and they pushed ahead with what they had anyway. This is a failure of both the manufacturer (Perkin-Elmer) and of the customer (NASA, the Federal Government) and given the boondoggle I really don't think that Perkin-Elmer should have been allowed to continue as a company. That NASA didn't test the mirror independently is also quite troubling. Even in relatively low-end, simple work it's necessary to check a contractor's work if one wants it done right.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    14. Re:Proxy? by Adriax · · Score: 1

      I'd laugh if it turned out to be Dell's test boot proxy and a glitch in the windows activation has it send the request despite having a cached activation.

      --
      I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
    15. Re: Proxy? by TWX · · Score: 1

      I've heard it referred to as, "Microsoft Blood Money" in meetings.

      What really makes me pause is that nearly every computer in the organization comes from a large OEM, the computers through the years that came from small OEMs still had licensed Windows with them, and those very few internally-built computers had OEM license packs purchased for them, yet we still end up paying and paying for something that we theoretically bought.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    16. Re:Proxy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's my point, they used two other instruments, and both of those instruments told them they were wrong, and they pushed ahead with what they had anyway.

      They had two null correctors that were expected to give them wrong answers even if the mirror was perfect, because the tolerances and specifications on the mirrors were beyond what those null correctors were intended for. Getting null correctors correct and without mistakes is a notorious issue that has caused problems for far more mirrors than just the HST, and only about a decade after they built Hubble's mirror did a better way to test correctness of a null correct get developed.

      There were certainly some management issues for the project, but the technical issue is not as straightforward as some people try to portray.

    17. Re: Proxy? by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      When I ordered a Dell through the corporate account, we had a choice to order Windows OEM, or Windows Volume. They'd inform MS of the order, as per our agreement, but we could retire a piece of hardware at the same time, and we'd have our licensed volume OS delivered installed (with our corporate image), at something like a $10 cost. But then, this was a 10,000 person company, with a 4 year refresh, so a few thousand computers a year.

      Having the corporate image pre-installed on the PCs was great, and only an option with volume licensing. So there is value somewhere, but not for the 100 seat company, they are almost always better buying with OEM installed.

      The real reason MS pushes for no no-OS option is they know so many OEM licenses exist that someone retiring a computer could buy one with no OS, then move the OEM onto it, and at least appear compliant at a glance. Move the sticker or swap the case, not a huge deal for a 100 seat place with 3-person IT, generally 2 help desk to do the grunt work, and one "manager" to hire the consultants to do the real work. The help desk guys sit bored, and can spend all day swapping hardware to avoid a license cost.

    18. Re:Proxy? by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      No because you'd have a volume license key which would make MS would expect numerous activations for. I assuming this is a not that (either a retail or OEM key), which is why MS are suspicious.

    19. Re: Proxy? by tburkhol · · Score: 1

      A copy of XP from release day to last supported day costs a whole lot less to buy a single retail copy, than to volume license it for most companies.

      Windows XP lived for 6, 8, or 13 years, depending on how you count. I can see a computer lasting for 6 years (certainly today, though 2001-2007 saw a lot of functional progress), but definitely not 13. Since the retail copy is licensed to a computer, upgrading the computer means buying a new retail copy. Volume licensing lets you just track the number of computers and the number of licenses, and simplifies record keeping. My recollection is that volume licensing had a break-even with a 3-4 year hardware cycle. And there are an awful lot of accountants out there who will recommend a business rent anything rather than buy it just because it looks better on the balance sheet.

    20. Re:Proxy? by nine-times · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, my work has 30,000+ computers that communicate through no more than ten public IP addresses, so if we weren't using a corporate solution for Windows activations then we might pop up in much the same way.

      The summary makes it sound like Microsoft is suspicious just because there are hundreds of activations from the same IP, but I don't think that alone would have attracted the same kind of attention. Because you're right, it could simply be a company with incompetent IT people, or even just a computer fix-it shop that is installing and activating Windows for people. The article says:

      Microsoft says that the defendant(s) have activated hundreds of copies of Windows 7 using product keys that have been “stolen” from the company’s supply chain or have never been issued with a valid license, or keys used more times than their license allows.

      So it's not an issue of "Microsoft thinks these activation are suspicious because they all come from the some IP address," but rather, "Microsoft knows these activation are suspicious because they're using faked/stolen license keys. A lot of them are coming from the same place, which makes Microsoft want to know what that place is."

    21. Re: Proxy? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Our previous "IT Guy" couldn't do a disk image. I tried to explain it to him, he acted like it was over his head, so I dropped it. We could have saved SO MUCH money, just by having disk images for welders and other computer operated equipment. Disk dies, grab another similar disk with similar architecture, image the thing, plug it in, and the welder is ready to work. Two hours down time, if I play grab-ass along the way. Instead, a disk dies, we call the vendor who sold the machine, the vendor promises to have a guy out to us within the week, the repair guy shows up with the wrong damned disk image, so it's another day before he comes back with the right one. Meantime, every hour in a 24/7 plant, that welder is costing a few hundred dollars because it's not running.

      The new IT guys actually get stuff done. Not my way, but they get things done.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    22. Re: Proxy? by tibit · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough, XP still "lives" and receives updates, since the embedded versions are in full support. There's one registry entry you need to add to get any XP to become "supported" as far as updates are concerned...

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  4. M$ liked piracy before ... by fashkaat · · Score: 1

    "It's easier for our software to compete with Linux when there's piracy than when there's not." -Bill Gates, Fortune Magazine, July 17 2007

  5. Confused by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Informative

    I understand "one key, many IP addresses" as being suggestive of licence violations, but why would "many keys, one IP address" be?

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    1. Re:Confused by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      yeah it seems more indicative of a small computer shop or a vpn of a business.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    2. Re:Confused by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Microsoft says that the defendant(s) have activated hundreds of copies of Windows 7 using product keys that have been âoestolenâ from the companyâ(TM)s supply chain or have never been issued with a valid license"

      It means whomever is there has a legit key generator for windows. Or a computer store who buys stolen keys to keep costs down.

      Regardless, I am sure google knows exactly who they are. You aren't really anonymous on the internet. All it would take would be a few curious admins at google or facebook to check their logs for the ip.Hell i bet reddit or someone has already figured out who it is.

      --
      -
    3. Re:Confused by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      OK, that's the bit that I was missing, the keys were fake. Makes sense now, thanks!

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    4. Re:Confused by hey! · · Score: 2

      There is no key generator. It's Microsoft own fault if they keys were stolen.

      Which does not make using a stolen key legal, any more than a broken window lock in our house makes that fair game for burglars. Nor is using a stolen key ethical (at least in most situations); the principled response to not approving of proprietary software is to use open source software with a license you can live with.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    5. Re:Confused by Boricle · · Score: 1
      Likely to either be:
      • Big corporate behind one public IP Address (probably not a problem, and would likely show up in their regular "true up" audits)
      • Small pirate with big volume registering unauthorized keys like crazy and either selling them somehow, or installing them onto machines in exchange for money.
    6. Re:Confused by EETech1 · · Score: 1

      That reminds me...

      Where is Hairyfeet?

    7. Re:Confused by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Who said it's many keys? It could be a few keys being activation many times, or it could be known dodgy keys being used over and over again. In any case I 'm pretty sure someone at MS know how volume keys and NAT works.

    8. Re:Confused by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Maybe MS has decided to crack down on computer repair stores. I used to work at one many years ago, and an MS rep told us that we mustn't activate Windows ourselves. We had to let the end user do it so that they would be forced to agree to the EULA.

      We pointed out that our customers expected a fully working computer that was ready to use when they got it back, but they were not interested. Maybe they want to enforce that rule suddenly.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Confused by houghi · · Score: 2

      Why would Google care who they are? And if you are talking about a search Engine, why not Bing?

      Or they could do Linux and do a whois. Or contact RIPE or whomever is in charge of IP distribution.

      I did not read that the numbers were stolen, just that they were used. Perhaps it is so high, because it is the only company who does things legally.

      Also for Facebook and Google checking their logs, why would they do that? If there is something illegal going on, then what should happen is that they go to the court. The court will then ask for lof the identity of the IP owner, who that must be able to tell who was connected at the specific times.

      It is called due process.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    10. Re:Confused by tepples · · Score: 1

      an MS rep told us that we mustn't activate Windows ourselves. We had to let the end user do it so that they would be forced to agree to the EULA.

      How would that work? Unlike Windows 7, Windows 8 automatically performs activation over the Internet during setup.

    11. Re:Confused by holiggan · · Score: 1

      If it's a volume license key, it should be ok (and even then that should be "triangulated" with the number of activations allowed). If it's a retail key (that should be used on only one computer), that's not ok. Also, if a KMS server is being used (that acts as a sort of "proxy" for internal activations), and its key is blacklisted, also not ok. These might be some of the forensic analysis that is done on that data. Just an educated guess :)

      --
      "A sysadmin is a cross between a detective, a police officer, a gardener, a doctor and a fireman"
  6. small business? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Could it be a small computer business shop that did windows activation on the behalf of their customers?

    1. Re:small business? by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      One hundred times this. I manage a small shop. We reload boxes due to major infection or failed hardware every day. We have a static IP. This could be us (except we are on Comcast but you get my point).

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    2. Re:small business? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      I'll bet that you don't reload and activate using stolen keys or keys which while valid haven't actually been issued to anybody yet.

      The reason they are going after this IP is because they've been using stolen keys, keys that haven't been issued yet and apparently doing a LOT of activations. I'm guessing the stolen key thing is what got the spotlight put on them and the excessive activations is what made it worth Micro$oft's time to go after them.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  7. Voluntary IP address submission? by waynemcdougall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    IP address is part of the

    product key activation data voluntarily provided by users

    Ahhh. This must be some strange new usage of voluntarily, of which I was previously unaware.

    --
    Recycle PCs and build a wireless community network www.hillsborough.org.nz
    1. Re:Voluntary IP address submission? by alangmead · · Score: 2

      You don't need to activate the product over the internet. You can activate over the phone. I haven't looked into it closely, but I'd check if the code the machine generates includes the MAC address. Or if it still includes it if you disable the network driver. Or which MAC address it will use if you add another network adaptor (PCI or USB) which you can throw away as soon as you are done.

    2. Re:Voluntary IP address submission? by dansdoan · · Score: 1

      Voluntarily, to Microsoft, likely means: "Within the conglomeration of legal jargon we know no one will ever read, but we prevent access to our software if you do not claim to have read it, it states in technical terms, appearing Greek to the non-Greek layman: we collect your IP when you activate our software."

    3. Re:Voluntary IP address submission? by LVSlushdat · · Score: 1

      Kinda like the definition of voluntary that the IRS uses.. where you "voluntarily" file your yearly "confession" or we ruin your life... There for a while the IRS was using the term "voluntary compliance" everytime they opened their mouths.. Two words that don't go together very well...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    4. Re:Voluntary IP address submission? by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 2

      Technically the user voluntarily uses Windows. So any data send by Windows is send voluntarily. Please note that informed consent is not used.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    5. Re:Voluntary IP address submission? by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Where you give up your phone number..... Nice..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  8. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    That's what you get with your motherboard-network card switching frenzy.

  9. subject by TFlan91 · · Score: 2

    Haha, IP Addresses are people now too

  10. Probably using a vm image before activation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    User is using a fresh vm image on boot snapshoted before activation.

  11. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not all license keys are created equal. The one you get with your machine is only good for one activation, but there are also corporate keys issued to big companies that can activate many, or even unlimited, number of computers. Microsoft has a problem disabling the key because it would cause the legitimate customers' keys and computers to fail.

  12. The main branch of the Seatle public library? by MouseTheLuckyDog · · Score: 1

    Does the Seatle public library offer free WiFi without a login?
    If so then I would bet a lot of people go there to activate Windows illegally, to avoid getting caught.
    If not then a Starbucks in the urban center.

    In any case I am curious exactly what it is.

  13. Re:Wondering by NotInHere · · Score: 1

    Wrong, its really verizon.

  14. Re:Huh? by Puls4r · · Score: 1

    Not so mention that hackers cracked the key generating code for Windows 7. Same with MS office. They generate codes and try them until one works, and bingo you've got a legit code.

  15. Issues by Alomex · · Score: 1

    I don't know about that account, but I do know that at my workplace tons of legit copies of windows 7 have started complaining that they are invalid copies. Clearly Microsoft has issues with their authentication procedures.

    1. Re:Issues by PRMan · · Score: 1

      but I do know that at my workplace tons of legit copies of windows 7 have started complaining that they are invalid copies. Clearly Microsoft has issues with their authentication procedures.

      My first thought would be that the PC techs at my company are morons and did it wrong/illegally.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    2. Re:Issues by Alomex · · Score: 1

      Normally it would, but this includes OEM installed Windows 7 copies as well as site wide licenses that ran without a hitch for years. Searching on the web one can find reports of this happening to other people. Running the authentication tool is of no use. It really points to a glitch on the Microsoft side.

  16. revenge of the syph by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

    maybe it's a single windows machine riddled with some virus

    --
    Nullius in verba
  17. Re:Huh? by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2

    Not so mention that hackers cracked the key generating code for Windows 7. Same with MS office. They generate codes and try them until one works, and bingo you've got a legit code.

    They've never cracked the key generating code for Windows 7. They just found ways to work around it.

    In late 2001/early 2002 somebody figured out the algorithm to generated Volume License keys for Windows XP, and those don't need activation (so that companies with lots of computers don't have to activate 30,000 units). Starting With Windows XP Service Pack 2 Microsoft changed some things so that those generated Volume License keys wouldn't work any more. So you have to find a legit Volume License key somewhere (not all that hard to do).

    Starting with Windows Vista, and continuing on to Windows 7, Microsoft changed things again. Microsoft changed the system for Volume License keys, making them not a viable option for pirates. Windows installed on OEM PCs was now using a system that referenced information in the computer's BIOS. Google "System Locked Pre-activation". So people just started flashing their BIOS with the necessary stuff. Windows thinks my homemade PC is a Dell.

  18. Re:Huh? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    The keys i got from Microsoft Dreamspark through my college have activated at least 5 (all mine) computers.

    --
    Good-bye
  19. Forensic by Livius · · Score: 2

    I'm not sure noticing massive re-occurrences of the same IP address really counts as using 'forensic tools'.

    Microsoft has lowered the expectations of the whole of human civilization.

    1. Re:Forensic by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

      really counts as using 'forensic tools'.

      Can you... enhance the IP address?

      Quickly, before the electrons mutate.

    2. Re:Forensic by Falos · · Score: 1

      I can't, the perp must have a cryptoscrambler. They're going to get away... unless the field agent goes stealth op and sneaks in close enough to hack their wifi!

  20. Why wait for hundreds? by Marginal+Coward · · Score: 2

    You'd think it would make more sense to simply shut off the "suspicious" activations for a given IP before they got to hundreds. That would seem to be a whole lot faster, easier, and cheaper than filing a lawsuit. (Let's do the math: 200 copies times maybe $100 each = $10,000.)

    For comparison, I recently installed a new website using Wordpress, which I'm relatively new to. I got the excellent "Wordfence" security plugin running early-on, which uses a default limit of 20 failed logins within 5 minutes before it bans an IP. My new site evidently got attacked by a botnet (I assume) a few days later because there was a burst of 14 failed logins within the span of a few minutes, each one from a different country. The logins were pretty-much a tour of the ragged edges of the Internet: they came from Russia, India, Mexico, Brazil, Thailand, Belarus, Vietnam, etc. When all that failed because I had used an obscure admin account name and a strong password - and because Wordfence shut all those IPs down - the botnet evidently gave up.

    Though a limit of 20 worked fine, even that seems like more than is necessary to allow normal/legitimate login failures, so I might lower it. I certainly wouldn't raise it to 200. Or file a lawsuit about it.

    1. Re:Why wait for hundreds? by Marginal+Coward · · Score: 2

      Correction: $20,000...looks like I can't do math any better than Microsoft...it's late...

  21. Defendants by fred911 · · Score: 1

    Why wasn't Verizon subpenaed for the identity of the lessees of the IP and named in addition to the Doe's? Additionally, how does John Doe (1-10) defend against process that hasn't been served, how can a court try a civil case in absentia?

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    1. Re:Defendants by PRMan · · Score: 1

      Part of the trial will be for the court to unmask the John Does once Microsoft can prove they have a legitimate reason to unmask them.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  22. Re:Huh? by armanox · · Score: 1

    I thought Microsoft removed desktop Windows from Dreamspark? It's not quite what MSDNAA used to be.

    --
    I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
  23. At the same time by justthinkit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At the same time it is also true that Microsoft is famously tolerant and encouraging of software professionals. Offering software at cost (like offering me Office 2000 for a hundred bucks, way back when), providing dev tools and beta products for free or close to it, and tolerating staggering levels of out-and-out piracy...in the interest of having their products used by a truly large sample size.

    If it wasn't for Microsoft, we would still be on mainframes and mini-computers. Paying jacked up prices. For crap, frankly.

    The only part of the Microsoft game I don't care for is trying to ship old wine in new bottles (i.e. every version of MSOffice since 2000) and especially the force-marching of us to a worse product (the downward progression away from XP). With XP, Microsoft could have created a decent 64-bit version. They could have given us (essentially) unlimited RAM usage on 64-bit XP. And they could have left it to us to decide when to move on to a product...IFF we thought that product was better. But then they would have had to make a real effort at making future Windows products truly better.

    --
    I come here for the love
    1. Re:At the same time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If it wasn't for Microsoft, we would still be on mainframes and mini-computers. Paying jacked up prices. For crap, frankly.

      The above is revealing of a profound ignorance on your part.

      Either that or you are a Microsoft shill.

      Here are a few things you should research so you can educate yourself :

      * Xerox PARC

      * Apple Macintosh

      * DR-DOS

      * Commodore

      * OS/2

    2. Re:At the same time by dryeo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If it wasn't for Microsoft, we would still be on mainframes and mini-computers. Paying jacked up prices. For crap, frankly

      Why would you think that? There were lots of decent personal computers in the early '80's, most with operating systems at least as good as MS DOS, including graphical ones like GEM that were better then the early crap that was Windows. Even on the PC there were better versions of DOS then MS DOS which were killed by anti-competitive behaviour.
      You are right about MS understanding the benefits of getting programmers and consumers hooked though, encouraging people to copy their software at cost (the price of a floppy usually) but they were very anti-competitive for the longest time and probably did more to hold computing back as any company.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    3. Re:At the same time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't there be? Without OS/2, there wouldn't be windows.

    4. Re:At the same time by sjames · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Without Gates, Tiny BASIC would have ruled the day on micros instead. The rest would have unfolded in a similar way except people wouldn't have mental scars from dealing with Plug-n-Pray. IF anything, MS held the industry back.

    5. Re:At the same time by DamonHD · · Score: 1

      GEM? Our bug-fix library on top of GEM was bigger than GEM itself.

      Not saying that DOS/Windows was anything other than unnecessarily crap and buggy for a long time... (And it'll still take another decade for me to fully trust Microsoft to write 'reliable' rather than meretricious code...)

      Rgds

      Damon

      --
      http://m.earth.org.uk/
    6. Re:At the same time by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      If it wasn't for Microsoft, we would still be on mainframes and mini-computers. Paying jacked up prices. For crap, frankly.

      Smells like the "great man" theory of history. Sometimes it's true, i.e. if Winston Churchill hadn't been where he was we'd probably all be speaking German now.

      In this case? Nah. If Microsoft hadn't done it, somebody else would - and possibly better.

      They were second choice for the IBM contract. They only got it because the guy selling CP/M goofed off & missed the meeting.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    7. Re:At the same time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If it were not for Microsoft everything would be like Linux is what you meant to say. The first code bill brought to a computer club everyone made a copy
      he did not like it from the start.
      Someone should have kick him in the ass and told him to get the fuck out of here if you dont want to share like the rest of us.

    8. Re:At the same time by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Someone should have kick him in the ass and told him to get the fuck out of here if you dont want to share like the rest of us.

      This. A thousand times this!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    9. Re:At the same time by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1, Informative

      They were paid to by IBM. If MS didn't do it, IBM would have found someone else.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    10. Re:At the same time by shitzu · · Score: 1

      ... providing dev tools and beta products for free or close to it ...

      This is more of a give the first sample of crack free and keep your lower level street dealers high to keep your market share methodology, not a service to mankind you make it sound.

    11. Re:At the same time by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'd look at some other sources if I were you.

      Fighters with the guns pointing forward had been the norm since the middle of WW1. One example was the Hawker Hurricane, which was in service before the Spitfire was developed, and which outnumbered the Spitfire by about three to one in 1940. Both were generally considered inferior to the Me 109.

      What really made the difference was radar plus Dowding's organisational system. Oh, and home advantage.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    12. Re:At the same time by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why would you think that?

      I think the monoculture MS created in the late 80's to early 00's was a net gain for IT in general because the standardisation of Wintel as a PC platform allowed less nerdy types to get involved and help grow the pie. You can hate on all the bad things MS did, but the fact is having a standard platform during it's infancy was good for IT, just like how the Model T jump started the auto industry. We are now entering a post MS era so can lose the hate, and focus on Apple, Google, Facebook, Tesla etc, but the fact remains, any new industry has a critical growth phase, and the likes of MS and Cisco helped make that happen.

    13. Re:At the same time by Whiteox · · Score: 1

      You are so wrong that I reckon you're a troll.

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    14. Re:At the same time by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Smells like the "great man" theory of history. Sometimes it's true, i.e. if Winston Churchill hadn't been where he was we'd probably all be speaking German now.

      In this case? Nah. If Microsoft hadn't done it, somebody else would - and possibly better.

      Why, because you say so? If you think IBM could've done it then you've never had anything to do with IBM ever.

    15. Re:At the same time by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What really made the difference was radar plus Dowding's organisational system. Oh, and home advantage.

      I've read a little about the war. IMO there were 1000 different things that could've easily changed the result (Chamberlain, Churchill, El Alamein, Tobruk, Enigma, Operation Valkyrie, Manhattan Project, Battle of Britain, Stalingrad... hundreds of others) Attributing something so massive and complex to one or two things seems a little simplistic.

    16. Re:At the same time by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1, Interesting

      > If it wasn't for Microsoft, we would still be on mainframes and mini-computers. Paying jacked up prices. For crap, frankly.

      Nonsense. Apple demonstrated, at a similar time, that personal computing was affordable. Bill Gates and Microsoft successfully assembled the business suite that helped drive PC sales, but there were other designs and even operating systems evolving that were compete.

      Also note, Microsoft did not "create" the 64-bit core of Windows NT and Windows XP. They lifted a great deal of it, wholesale, from VMS with the help of Dave Cutler when they hired him and his development away from DEC. The lawsuits over this were fascinating, but please give credit where credit is due.

    17. Re:At the same time by msauve · · Score: 2

      So, your logic is that if there weren't a Standard Oil, there would be no gas stations, and we'd still be riding horses.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    18. Re:At the same time by Grench · · Score: 2

      One example was the Hawker Hurricane, which was in service before the Spitfire was developed, and which outnumbered the Spitfire by about three to one in 1940.

      Hurricane pilots were responsible for more shoot-downs of German aircraft during the Battle of Britain than Spitfire pilots were.

      This is partly due to the Hurricane being available in greater numbers, and partly because the simpler design of the Hurricane meant that the aircraft had a much shorter turn-around time (for rearming and refuelling) than the Spitfire did. The RAF also tended to field the slower Hurricane to shoot down bombers, and used the faster and more agile Spitfires to tackle the bombers' escorts.

      --
      He's Jesus, for Christ's sake.
    19. Re:At the same time by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      For example, conventional wisdom from authorities was that the Spitfire was completely impractical because... you had to turn the plane to aim it at the target, as there were no gun turrets.

      Buh? At the time of the Spitfire's development, fixed forward firing guns were the *standard* on all fighter aircraft, that design feature having become universal fairly early on in World War One.

    20. Re:At the same time by tommeke100 · · Score: 2

      A lot of operating systems of early "affordable" Personal Computers (Apple 2, Commodore 64, ...), mostly running Basic were actually licensed by Microsoft as well. So really, although the industry in general would have come around eventually, it's still Microsoft that understood early on that Software was were it's at. It's actually IBM that fueled the convergence to the PC with their open standards.

    21. Re:At the same time by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Done what, exactly? Created a command-line personal computer? There was a healthy marketplace full of those - some affordable, some expensive. Within a year or two of release of the Lisa, there were a bunch of windowing environments - some quite competitive like the Amiga, some terrible like Windows. I don't mean to dismiss the level of prestige that IBM brought to the table as far as businesses were concerned, but it's not as if businesses would not have eventually adopted PCs. Visicalc was already making PCs common in the business environment.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    22. Re:At the same time by Merk42 · · Score: 1

      The only part of the Microsoft game I don't care for is trying to ship old wine in new bottles

      So you'd get longer aged wine for cheaper since it's marketed as younger? Sounds good to me!

    23. Re:At the same time by Bonzoli · · Score: 1

      Or you could be running a DR dos product or an Amiga without hidden loops slowing it down to match a PC crap speed for 4 years before being found by a PHD hobbiest. BTW MS was paid to write amiga dos.
      Please don't pine away for the good times that never existed except in the paid for articles to promote MS and its planned marketing process.
      Nor blame hobbiests for using software that they then took to work to solve real problems that made him the richest man on earth. They could have taken other software that exists if it wasn't broken intentionally.
      Please go back and reread those 208 monopoly findings.

    24. Re:At the same time by hairyfeet · · Score: 1, Interesting

      IBM was a perfect example of how MSFT's many early successes were based on the having the preceding phrase "And then the other guy did something REALLY fucking stupid" having been uttered.

      Case in point IBM....OS/2 was a damned fine OS, ran rings around the DOS based versions of Windows, and could multitask like a champ even on a weak sauce 286....so what happened? IBM did not one but several REALLY fucking stupid things, 1.- When Intel refused to license the 386 for second sourcing IBM refused to buy it, instead sticking with the 286 (which they made) damned near until the Pentium was released. This meant the cloners were not only cheaper they were MUCH faster at a time where every MHZ counted, 2.- Those same cloners, which IBM absolutely had to have if they were gonna launch a mainstream OS? Well they tried to kill them by fucking them on the MCA bus (which caused the cloners to adopt the E-ISA bus which was literally an MCA slot turned backwards) and then if that wasn't enough? By the time of OS/2 V2, a time when the average cloner was paying less than $10 a copy for Windows in bulk? They demanded $200 a copy for OS/2! Needless to say it was treated as plague blankets by the OEMs so even when IBM offered it at steep discounts the OEMs didn't want it.

      As for TFA? Its a small PC shop that has a repair guy that is either incompetent, getting a shitload of laptops without the restore discs (as some of the builders...cough Lenovo cough...rig theirs in such a way they won't even restore from the partition without a restore disc...that costs $30 to order) and just using some "Razr1911 Corporate Edition Keygen" or they are being forced by the owner. Don't think that is possible? I've actually gone on interviews and had PC shop owners want to know if I'm familiar with Windows Server and WSUS and when I'd state yes they'd tell me flat footed they wanted me to set up a server so every PC they sold would get updates NOT from WU but from them, one even saying "So we can use this disc" and whipping out the infamous Razr1911 XP Pro Corp disc.

      So with that many hits? Its a shop, either a DIY refurbing PCs on the cheap or one of the reasons listed above. You'd think with MSFT wanting everybody to upgrade to Win 10 and this place using Win 7 (one of the 3 OSes that get upgraded) they'd STFU and be happy to have so many new installs ready for Win 10, I guess old habits die hard or some of the Ballmernator's buds are still working in that dept.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    25. Re:At the same time by morgauxo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It doesn't matter where they are now. The point is there were alternatives. Without Microsoft one or more of those alternatives would have had Microsoft's user base. Of course.. that would have probably resulted in more money going into that alternative.. which would have meant more development.. taking it to a further level than it was originally developed.

      So.. no, we would not all be on mainframes without Microsoft.

    26. Re:At the same time by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      Hold on I will comment once my _____ (insert one of the above OS's) boots so I can reply....

      Oh wait....

    27. Re:At the same time by tibit · · Score: 1

      I don't even know what kind of activations those would be. XP can be preactivated by installing proper keys that match the OEM BIOS, no need for any special disks. Windows 7 can use either that or the loader. So for XP and 7, you don't need to activate anything. For Windows 8, IIRC there's no way to do an illegal activation on unmodified software anyway, and with the key in the BIOS, you don't need to do anything special and the proper key is there already - so the activations are legit. Someone must have been really incompetent, I think...

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    28. Re:At the same time by operagost · · Score: 2

      So the Hurricane was the Y-Wing, and the Spitfire was the X-Wing?

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    29. Re:At the same time by tippen · · Score: 2

      IBM did not one but several REALLY fucking stupid things, 1.- When Intel refused to license the 386 for second sourcing IBM refused to buy it, instead sticking with the 286 (which they made) damned near until the Pentium was released.

      Interesting version of history you have there... The 386 went into full production in mid-1986. IBM released their first 386-based computer in 1987 (PS/2 Model 80). The Pentium came out in 1993.

    30. Re:At the same time by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I think MS did more than just create CLI PC...

    31. Re:At the same time by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 2

      You have that backwards.

      The OS/2 development effort funded Microsoft Windows development through contracts prior to Win3.0. If IBM corporate headquarters had pulled its head out of its ass and stopped the infighting between the PC division and the big iron divisions, Microsoft would still be a pipsqueak minor player. But Gates took advantage of IBM's management infighting, wriggled free of earlier contract clauses like a toddler escaping from the constraining hug of its nanny, tweaked what was basically an in-house interface model for the OS/2 prototype into a "cooperative multitasker" running on top of 16 bit DOS (no true pre-emptive multitasking possible), and birthed the Win3.0 monstrosity. The rest of the story, up to WinNT, was Gates' expertise as a marketeer and hypester extraodinaire.

      It did not help at all that IBM was relying on Intel to make the 80286 chip truly capable of multitasking. That again was a fault of IBM management, who were not listening to its own engineers since they were management, in talks with Intel management, and thus they knew better.

      Gates was right on when he described the 80286 as "brain dead", but that came later.

      --
      Will
    32. Re:At the same time by TheTrueScotsman · · Score: 2

      When Intel refused to license the 386 for second sourcing IBM refused to buy it, instead sticking with the 286 (which they made) damned near until the Pentium was released.

      I developed on OS/2 in the late 80s. I used various IBM PS/2 machines, including Model 80 (Intel 386DX) and Model 55 (Intel 386SX).

      So it can't quite be true that IBM refused to buy the 386.

    33. Re:At the same time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      EISA is definitely not MCA turned backwards. It's physically and electrically totally different. GP needs to be modded down by someone who has a bias toward facts.

    34. Re:At the same time by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 1

      I don't know how reliable it was but I once watched a TV "what if" simulation of a war in which the UK lost the B of B.
      The ensuing invasion would have cost a freakily huge number of German lives. A great many of them before they even landed. To get anywhere they would have needed to take out the navy too. After that there were several very well equipped lines of defence. The theoretical invasion force never have got past the second line. The Battle of Britain of course averted all that for a much lower death count.

      Not sure why they would have inisted on people speaking German mind. At least not as a first language.

      All totally off-topic of course.

      --
      No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
    35. Re:At the same time by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      I'd need to see some citations about that.

      I have good memories of those days. I had an Apple ][+ in 1980. It ran the firmware "OS" that Woz had written in 6502 Assembler (hard copy of that was part of the documentation and helped me learn enough Assembler that I thought I was hot stuff) and it ran Applesoft BASIC as an interpreted language. I believe Wozniak and Jobs developed Applesoft BASIC themselves. I know it was not from Microsoft. It was 6502, and Microsoft was all 8080.

      The Commodore, like the Apple ][, was a 6502 machine. Neither of these had anything to do with Microsoft, which was only working with the 8080 instruction set.

      Radioshack's TRS-80, affectionately known as the "Trash-Eighty" for its frustrating keyboard failures, might have been able to use some variant of IBM DOS, but it was usually set up with CP/M.

      Microsoft's DOS was not much of a player until around 1990. It was the no-cost alternative to IBM-DOS (marginally better but harder to find) and DR-DOS (much better but also not so easy to find).

      --
      Will
    36. Re:At the same time by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 2

      This is one of the few Gates myths with some truth behind it. He published GW-BASIC ("GW" for "gee whizz") some time in the 1980s. It was a major breakthrough: an interpreted language that could be used to develop and run custom applications on the small-office-home-office computers of the day, but which had several features of compiled languages. It was brilliant. It is still brilliant, its just that these days Javascript, PHP, Perl, and the like do what used to be done in BASIC, and much more.

      The world would be a lot different if Gates had continued to focus on software development, instead of turning away from that to become last century's greatest marketeer and hypester.

      --
      Will
    37. Re:At the same time by cnaumann · · Score: 1

      True but...

      A the time Model 80 was their ONLY model that used the 386, it was top end and crazy expensive. I never actually saw one. IBM was still offering entry level models based on the 8086. The cloners had long since abandoned the 8086 and had a large offering of fairly reasonably-priced 16MHz 386 machines in their arsenal.

      They also offered entry level PS2 machines with ISA slots, but for some reason they did not offer any machines with both ISA and MCA slots. This was probably a good technical decision, but it was a marketing disaster. Then there was the non-standard HDD, non-standard floppy drive, non-standard graphics, etc.

      In 1987, people were still looking to IBM to set PC standards, but they did such a craptastic job at such an unreasonable price that they became completely irrelevant.

    38. Re:At the same time by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I thought we were talking about IBM?

      If that meeting with Bill Gates never happened, IBM would still have found someone to provide an OS for their PC. Apple would have still produced the Lisa, ushering in the GUI era. Only an idiot would minimize MS's influence on computing, but let's not pretend that we would all be using carbon paper and typewriters... the PC market was very active when the IBM clone steadily gained prominence, with several vendors of mouse-driven GUIs.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    39. Re:At the same time by tommeke100 · · Score: 1

      I think we are both right in the sense that Woz indeed wrote the first Basic which was actually called Integer Basic for the Apple 1 and early Apple 2s. It had no floating point support (hence the Integer Basic), because Woz was mostly interested in writing games which did not need floating points. Since it was one of the most cited critiques by users/developers, they licensed Basic from Microsoft which they called AppleSoft and subsequently used as their primary Basic, however Integer Basic was still available. Both Wikis about AppleSoft BASIC and Integer BASIC contain this information.
      Commodore licensed BASIC from Microsoft as well, adapted it for their 64, but did not print a MS copyright notice, which they did on the 128. There is actually a MS easter egg, if you type some obscure command, it will display MicroSoft! Again, this can be find on the Commodore BASIC wiki entry.

      What you're saying about MS-DOS is not true though. I remember loading MS-DOS 3.0 from big floppies in school, and that came out in 1984. It's true that at that time the IBM-PC was mostly a business machine, as most kids had C64 and Amigas to play with. It's only once the 386 came around that gaming took off on the PC.

    40. Re:At the same time by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 1

      The discussion has switched from operating system to language. WRT operating system, DOS was never used on any of the 6502 machines. Apple developed its own. I believe Commodore did as well. Radio Shack could have used DOS since it was an 8088 processor, but mostly, maybe always, used the CP/M system instead.

      I did not know that the BASIC language was licensed by Apple and Commodore from Microsoft. It must have been easier to port from 8080 assembly to 6502 assembly than to develop from Kemeny and Kurz' minicomputer original.

      I cut my teeth on Applesoft BASIC, but I used only the integer subset; the floating point was too demanding, although now I don't recall why. Whether it ran too slowly, was too resource intensive, or-- probably-- was too hard to program and debug. I did some home accounting/budgeting, but did it all in pennies rather than dollars, and avoided division operations.

      Since the Apple ][+ was the native computer of the original VisiCalc, its 6502 base code and its proprietary DOS were responsible for moving the PC from hobby toy to business computer. For an accounting firm to be able to do some of its spreadsheets in house is what triggered business' interest in PCs. This was a couple of years before the IBM PC even existed.

      You are right on the timeline of IMBM-DOS, and I was misremembering. IBM PCs first arrived around 1982 as I recall, with IBM originally planning a single one time production run of 250,000 that would, they thought, completely flood the hobbyist market. Then Visicalc came along, then Lotus 1-2-3 for the IBM, and then IBM foolishly lost control of the market they had created by getting caught up in internal power struggles, while all the IBM clones came along. I believe the Compaq came out in 1984, along with a bunch of lesser machines. They went with MS-DOS as IBM would not sell its DOS to hardware competitors. However I was working with MS-DOS v3.1 as the newest and best in 1987 on a Novell network, and in my recollection v3.0 had come out only a year before that. But again, I might be misremembering. 'Twas a long time ago, in CPU years.

      --
      Will
    41. Re:At the same time by James-NSC · · Score: 1

      One example was the Hawker Hurricane, which was in service before the Spitfire was developed, and which outnumbered the Spitfire by about three to one in 1940.

      TL;DR = That's not entirely true, the Hawker Hurricane entered service 10 months before Vickers-Armstrong Spitfire, but the first maiden flight of a Spitfire happened about six months before the first maiden of a Hurricane.

      Long:
      Spitfire began production on/around June 1936, Hurricane production began, also, in 1936. The first maiden of a Hurricane Merlin II was on 12 October 1937 - and those planes then immediately entered service - but the first maiden of a Spitfire came months prior to the Hurricanes, the Spit's "eight minute maiden" was on March 5, 1936, but while displayed in proper flight later that June (27th) 1936, it didn't enter full scale production until the following summer, and service followed that August 1938.
      It was that delay in entering full production and the additional man hours to complete each air-frame (Hurricane took less time to & cost less to build - 10,300 man hours vs the 15,200 for the Spitfire - though the Spitifire, even with the same armament, was much more advanced than the Hawker, but on the same hand, the Hawker the more rugged of the two)... and not to mention that Vickers, the parent company, didn't really want anyone other than Vickers to build the Spitifire (initially). That all conspired to reduce the overall number of Spitfires produced in comparison to the Hurricanes, but only during the lead up to the Battle of Britain. Overall, more Spitfires were produced during the total war effort.
      Some 14k Hurricanes were produced (includes Sea Hurricanes), but the first production commitment for the Spitfire was for a paltry 310. Even so, Castle Bromwich (a primary Spitfire production facility) was producing 320 aircraft per month at it's height and a total 12,129 Spitfires were produced from that facility alone and when the last production Spitfire rolled off the assembly line in Bromwich, a total of 20,351 Spitfires had been produced (all variants) - outnumbering the final count of the Hurricane by over 6k aircraft.

      While it is true that the Hawker outnumbered the Spit ~3:1 or 2:1, depending on where you get your stats, entering the Battle of Britain, the Sptifire suffered significantly lower attrition rates during those months, particularly the Autumn months, than it's counterpart. Even so, the Hawker downed more enemy assets than the Spit and had a significantly lower R&R (re-arm/re-fuel) time than the Spit, under ten minutes with a good crew for the Hurricane, almost 30 minutes for the Spitfire... So YMMV depending on what you flew. It's quite possible the Hurricane suffered higher attrition rates because there were more of them to shoot at and their pilots never really got any down time. A Hurricane pilot would be lucky to get a bathroom break, where a Spitfire pilot could have a break and a cuppa...

      At the end of the war, universally, it is the Spitfire upon which victory fell - both in general estimation and in the hearts of the British people... but for those of my fathers & grand-fathers generation, well, they still argue pro/con Hurricane/Spitfire to this day...

    42. Re:At the same time by Kenshin · · Score: 1

      "If it were not for Microsoft everything would be like Linux is what you meant to say."

      If it weren't for Bill Gates, some other entrepreneurial weasel would have taken his place.

      The free software types rarely knew how, had the resources, or even wanted to bring their technology to the wider world.

      --

      Does it make you happy you're so strange?

    43. Re:At the same time by sjames · · Score: 1

      I used GWBASIC a few times. It was a good BASIC interpreter but it didn't really stand out against others. By the time GWBASIC came out, the micro world was moving to C. Very soon after, Turbo C bacame the compiler of choice.

      A real innovation (for micros) was Desqview. It brought quality muntitasking and even IPC to the DOS world. That was quite a feat considering that DOS was very much designed and programmed as a single threaded "OS". All on a CPU that was only mostly suitable for multitasking.

    44. Re:At the same time by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You need another book or five. The Spitfire was a very good fighter, but was developed in the usual manner. Fighters, as a general rule, didn't have turrets. The British actually did build a fighter that was a big leap into a radical idea, the Boulton Paul Defiant that had a turret. It sucked.

      The Battle of Britain was not nearly as close-run a thing as some people think. At one time, Fighter Command was pretty close to pulling the fighter squadrons north, and just letting the Germans dominate the airspace of southern England, but the Germans changed their tactics (the Germans had no idea what to do, or how successful they were being, having limited information on what the British were doing). At that point, an invasion would have been opposed by the Royal Navy, who could have destroyed most of the invasion force by running destroyers through the German flotillas at high speed. (The Germans actually did do a test of their landing plans, under ideal conditions, and they didn't work anyway.) Now, if you want to wish the RAF and the RN away, we get to the problem that the Brits really did have large military forces on the island. They were mostly badly equipped (but getting better equipped all the time), so it would have taken a real military operation to conquer Britain. It would have also taken real logistics, the sort that wouldn't have worked since all British ports in the area were rigged for demolition. Every so often, the British military likes to wargame out the invasion, and it's incredible how much they have to change reality to give the Germans a chance.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    45. Re:At the same time by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Sounds reliable to me, and I've read fairly extensively about the subject.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    46. Re:At the same time by JWSmythe · · Score: 2

      Yup, if it wasn't Microsoft, all kinds of other companies could have dominated the desktop market. IBM (OS/2), Quarterdeck (DESQview/X), Apple (Mac OS), NeXT (NeXT), any number of *nix companies (X11), and others.

      Microsoft got big because they got the consumers interested, and questionable deals with vendors.

      Plenty of people only know the tunnel-vision version of computer history and they believe Microsoft is it. They either don't remember (or are too young to have seen) software boxes (ahh, the good ol' days) had logos to indicate which OS they worked on so you could pick the right one.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    47. Re:At the same time by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Without the force of Churchill's personality, it's likely that the government would have been swayed by Lord Halifax into making some kind of settlement with Hitler.

      In that case, the other things wouldn't have had the chance to happen.

      Maybe the US would still have got the A-bomb. But with only one front to fight on it's possible the Germans would too.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    48. Re:At the same time by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Had a buddy that had a Pentium 90 with OS/2, only one in the dorm. It was a bit of an oddity. However you're right, they did multitasking a lot better then MS. As to the clone issue, that wasn't a mistake but a strategy. The computer in question was MADE by IBM. They likely changed more, because they didn't want to compete against themselves. They wanted to be a (and were) a computer builder. They were more expensive, and had a bit of prestige as it was an "IBM". Basically the exact same model that apple was successful at. They didn't market it as well, nor make it as exclusive however, which is perhaps why they failed.

      As for the whole IP address thing. You are probably right. Also, who cares? In the same breath the article talks about "hundreds" of activations, while MS analyses "billions" of activations. How is that a relevant or important value. If you are tracking literately BILLIONS of activations, wtf do you care of a couple hundred all share the same IP? Some lawyers got to earn their keep I suppose, or they are trying to get the hype machine running for arguing for more IP (the other kind) protections and extensions.

    49. Re:At the same time by Hamsterdan · · Score: 2

      "The Commodore, like the Apple ][, was a 6502 machine. Neither of these had anything to do with Microsoft, which was only working with the 8080 instruction set. "

      Wrong on both counts. Commodore's BASIC interpreter was written by Microsoft. Apple's Applesoft was also written by Microsoft (albeit much slower than Integer BASIC).

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

      Integer BASIC is the one Woz wrote (by himself)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...

      --
      I've got better things to do tonight than die.
    50. Re:At the same time by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      As I said, there's plenty of such cases where one person or event contributed to the result. Had one of Hitler's officers not moved Stauffenberg briefcase bomb a few centremetres at Wolf's Lair then the war would've ended a year early, and there probably would've not been 50 years of Cold War, Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden, 9/11, the Iraq war, or ISIS.
      Crazy to think how much different the world would've been had that one guy looked the other way for a few seconds.

    51. Re:At the same time by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      Nit, the operating systems of those systems were written by the creators of those systems. Microsoft created basic interpreter packages ( some installed by the creators ).

      The units presented the basic interpreter to the user as the "home screen", so I can see how you would think this.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    52. Re:At the same time by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about it being either IBM or Microsoft?

      There were a number of other players around in that day.
      Any of them could have taken things in good directions.
      I liked the non-MS directions better, in general.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    53. Re:At the same time by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

      Windows XP was the first consumer operating system to incorporate multiuser capability and reasonable security measures. But its security is so primitive compared to modern versions of Windows that it really does not belong on a network anymore.

      On one hand, corporate networks regularly face threats that were not common when XP was developed. With the persistence of pass-the-hash and Kerberos attacks, Windows needs better authentication and authorization. These requires changes to core OS functions, and the new stuff is not being ported back. Kerberos armoring (MS implementation of FAST) and claims-based authentication are the long-term solutions to these particular issues, but neither technology is present in Windows XP.

      On the other hand, users require application sandboxing and sane OS defaults at home. Since most applications expect default settings and most Windows users are incapable of making informed security decisions, you have a serious problem when the defaults are not good enough for typical usage. Windows XP suffered from inadequate defaults at launch, and SP3 only slightly improved the situation.

      My opinion: Windows 7 / IE11 are the minimum requirement for a networked MS PC. Enterprises really should be running Windows 8, but public reaction to the UI pretty much killed that OS.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    54. Re:At the same time by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the detailed and thoughtful reply.

      The main counterpoint I would make is that Microsoft made the decision eons ago to stop supporting XP. So naturally, today, it is out-of-date in many serious ways.

      The time for Microsoft to act differently regarding XP was ten+ years ago. Instead they chose the more money route of forcing us all to upgrade. Reminds me of the Keurig decision Slashdot is discussing today.

      --
      I come here for the love
    55. Re:At the same time by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Yeah yeah, coulda shoulda woulda... but didn't.

    56. Re:At the same time by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      Were actively prevented using tactics that were illegal ( and immoral ).

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
  24. How else do you get Windows to boot? by OrangeTide · · Score: 2

    If you can't reinstall it 100's of times until it starts working, what else are you supposed to do? Pay Microsoft for support, that smells like anti-trust to me.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:How else do you get Windows to boot? by TFlan91 · · Score: 1

      hahaha, this made me laugh.

      i remember ghosting hundreds of machines a day for deployment and at least a dozen a week just supporting

  25. What about a small shop ? by aepervius · · Score: 2

    A small shop installing *legal* windows 7 onto PCs would be a normal explanation and would be a single IP with many activation. How the heck do they come to "one IP+many key==pirate" ? A pirate would activate only 1 key. In fact it would be more like 1 key+many IP.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  26. heh, pirate's only wrongdoing in MSFT eyes was... by postmortem · · Score: 1

    using Windows 7 instead of Windows 8.

  27. Re:Huh? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    I got Windows 8 keys from it, before they merged 32/64 bit versions into one key.

    --
    Good-bye
  28. Quick... by TFlan91 · · Score: 1

    Someone at Verizon give the White House this IP!

    1. Re:Quick... by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Whitehouse.gov or some other top level domain like whitehouse.com?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  29. It's the L.A.P.D. who's behind this! by larpon · · Score: 1
  30. So Microsoft doesn't get NAT? by Lost+Penguin · · Score: 1

    Wow, it's not like every PC has a non shared T1 running direct to Mickeysoft.

    --
    I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
  31. It's legitimate by X10 · · Score: 1

    It's a store that pre-activates Windows on your new pc, for your convenience.

    --
    no, I don't have a sig
  32. John Doe Suits Baseless, Says DC Federal Judge by ihtoit · · Score: 1

    From a Slashdot submission last year (OK it was one of mine, but that is NOT the point!):

    Four people accused of sharing illegal copies of the movie "Elf-Man" persuaded a federal judge there is not enough evidence to support copyright infringement claims against them.
                        Elf-Man LLC, producer of the direct-to-DVD release "Elf-Man" sued Eric Cariveau et al. in Federal Court a year ago, accusing them of sharing a peer-to-peer file of the movie.
                        Elf-Man claims the defendants illegally copied and distributed the movie online.
                        "Despite the industry's efforts to capitalize on internet technology and reduce costs to end viewers through legitimate and legal means of online viewing such as through Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime, there are still those that use this technology to steal motion pictures and undermine the efforts of creators through their illegal copying and distribution of motion pictures," Elf-Man's attorney Maureen VanderMay wrote in the complaint.
                        U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik granted Elf-Man's motion to initiate discovery on the IP addresses of defendants, but noted that "the risk of false positives is very real."
                        "It is not clear that plaintiff could ... make factual contentions regarding an Internet subscriber's infringing activities based solely on the fact that he or she pays the Internet bill," Lasnik wrote in the order.
                        Elf-Man named 18 individual defendants in its first amended complaint. A default judgment was ordered against two of them; claims against the Doe defendants were dismissed. Claims against four other named defendants were also dismissed on the grounds of their implausibility.

    Source: http://slashdot.org/firehose.p... (news for nerds, my arse!)

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  33. What moron activates 7 that way? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    DAZ activator is cleaner and does not report you by trying to activate.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  34. Fuck that bullshit and that stupid article. by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

    I've activated at LEAST 150 to 200 Windows 7 keys on my IP in Australia over the past 3 years (re-building one of my 4 machines regularly, friends and machines I also sell)

    There's only ONE thing which Microsoft should be focusing on here.
    IS IT A VALID KEY
    Period, that's it - is the key valid? Not being used a second time? Yes or no, period. Doesn't matter if he or she activates 1 or 1000 codes, for fucks sake.

    1. Re:Fuck that bullshit and that stupid article. by PRMan · · Score: 1

      And they are. The article says that numbers were stolen from their supply, meaning these are being activated by a KeyGen guesser.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  35. "... voluntarily provided by users ..." by fygment · · Score: 1

    Oh! It was optional to provide that info?

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  36. long lost Microsoft activation server?

  37. The 1st version of Windows was a toy, by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "GEM ... was pig awful, but better then Windows at the time."

    GEM worked. It ran Ventura Publisher. I had investigated previous typesetting platforms; they cost $1.4 million.

    The 1st version of Windows was just a toy, a dishonest suggestion that Microsoft should get respect, in my opinion. The second version of Windows had problems with fonts.

    Far later, Windows 98 had an unstable file system.

    MIcrosoft makes more money if its products have flaws.

    1. Re:The 1st version of Windows was a toy, by tibit · · Score: 2

      Can confirm. Used Ventura Publisher a lot back in the day. IIRC, it took a day to pre-render a full set of outline fonts, and you had to have an empty hard drive for it... It worked great, though! I also vividly remember running Ami Pro with its bundled Windows 2, and then Win 2 Corel on Win 3.0 :)

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    2. Re:The 1st version of Windows was a toy, by Bookbeans2007 · · Score: 1

      MIcrosoft makes more money if its products have flaws.

      Not that I disagree with you, but do you have anything to back up this statement?

  38. Re:Huh? by Voyager529 · · Score: 1

    I thought Microsoft removed desktop Windows from Dreamspark? It's not quite what MSDNAA used to be.

    I never remember seeing desktop Windows in Dreamspark. It's why I still have a laptop running Windows Server 2008R2.

  39. 100s does not mean much by kangelos · · Score: 1

    100s does not mean much if this IP is a corporate gateway. In a campus with a dedicated gateway/proxy one may observe just such behaviour. Now if it is a continuous stream of registrations things change. In any case $soft may well enough research it just to see what is hidden behind it and quite frankly I would like to know too to see if my non-assumption is correct. Regards .A.

  40. Re:Or a bug by tibit · · Score: 1

    Dude/dudette, you're doing it wrong. Seriously. And not "holding it wrong" wrong, but just fundamentally wrong. I have never had a Win 7 activation issue, and I don't even try particularly hard.

    --
    A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  41. Re:Umm its the LAPD!? by bobbied · · Score: 1

    Now if that's where this IP physically terminates, that's interesting..

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  42. I've got him beat by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    I have a computer repair business with a non-static but rarely changing IP address. We sold and activated Windows on at least 100 desktops last year and had to reinstall Windows on probably about 50 plus activate them. So if they think 100 is suspicious, they're idiots.

  43. Re:Real user or proxy? by bobbied · · Score: 1

    A TOR exit node operated by the LA PD? Makes sense in a evil big brother kind of way..

    https://db-ip.com/74.111.202.3...

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  44. Brillant by DrYak · · Score: 1

    I cut my teeth on Applesoft BASIC, but I used only the integer subset; the floating point was too demanding, although now I don't recall why. Whether it ran too slowly, was too resource intensive, or-- probably-- was too hard to program and debug. I did some home accounting/budgeting, but did it all in pennies rather than dollars, and avoided division operations.

    And that was a brilliant idea.
    Floating point can have weird rounding errors if you don't understand clearly how they behave. (see here for an example).
    Using an integer number of a smaller unit (pennies) is better in those cases, and "LONG" data type can still represent a big amount of pennies for your situation.

    Several real-world finance software do actually use the same approach (a integer "BIGNUM" of a small unit, instead of floating point).

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  45. Cyberforensic methods? by hucker75 · · Score: 1

    Cyberforensic methods? Yet they allowed the activations? Surely the activation shouldn't work if it's a pirate.....

  46. Problems? Most people buy new computers. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    Yes, I do.

    One story: Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster (July 17, 2005)

    Most people don't have the technical ability or time to deal with computer problems. They buy new computers. That makes more money for Microsoft, because Microsoft get the full wholesale price again, even if the new computer has the same Microsoft operating system version.

    Also, I wrote this article that discusses the conflict of interest: Microsoft Windows XP "end of life": Conflict of interest.

  47. Re:At the same time - Amiga by gabrieltss · · Score: 1

    Hell the Commodore Amiga's DOS was FAR superior to MS-DOS. The ONLY reason Microsoft's stuff became more popular is because they were better at marketing and at "lock in" than anyone else. The Amiga was a FAR superior OS than what Microsoft had at the time. Hell the AmigaOS was doing Preemptive Multitasking when Windows was trying to still figure out how to do Task Switching properly! Hell Commodore even GAVE out to the public domain their intuition library - which was their multitasking library. Bill Gates cr@P for software is still JUST THAT CR@P! Look at the leaps and bounds Linux has made in the past decade alone. Heck Microsoft was turning a blind eye to the piracy of early versions of windows for the SOLE reason to get as many people using it as possible. Once they had the monopoly and and run most of the smaller players out of the market THEN they started clamping down on piracy of their software!

    F* Microsoft!

    --
    The Truth is a Virus!!!
  48. One likely obfuscation might be by niftymitch · · Score: 1

    Naval Surface Warfare Center Corona Division.
    It is in the service area and could be the fixed address
    of some tunnel for security purposes. Simple google proximity
    search no direct personal knowledge.

    This topic could get very very quiet.

    --
    Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
    1. Re:One likely obfuscation might be by niftymitch · · Score: 1

      FWIW: http://www.navsea.navy.mil/nsw...
            Opportunity to have essentially unlimited use of one of the most powerful computer complexes in the country.
      Still guessing... I have no direct knowledge or information.

      --
      Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.