Forum Moderators: open
Windows Vista will have new antipiracy technology that locks people out their PCs if the operating system isn't activated within 30 days after installation.If Vista is not activated with a legitimate product registration key in time, the system will run in "reduced functionality mode" until it is activated, said Thomas Lindeman, a senior product manager at Microsoft. In this mode, people will be able to use a Web browser for up to an hour, after which time the system will log them out, he said.
Microsoft To Lock Pirates Out Of Vista PCs [news.com.com]
My vote is on 10min to 12 hours :D .
Normally I am white hat, but when it comes to Micro$oft; go lesser of two evils!
My Dad is in exactly the same boat as you. His one week old Dell PC started complaining about being pirated (the only piracy my Dad is aware of is Pirates of the Carribean).
Anyway, we ended up just installing some WGA kill program...Now he can't get to windows update on the web... nice, MS!
They are not ready for prime-time with the whole genuine advantage program.
What I'm more interested in is what the BENEFITS of upgrading to Vista are. It's often talked about functions, you can search that or sort that, but what's the real benefit for the user?
I personally can't see the problem in trying to prevent your software being copied
Generally, I agree, stealing is bad, yeah, ok.
But I think the issue here is that MS is making machines that are YET easier to mess up, right?
Everyone buys MS, yknow? Businesses, schools, churches, individuals . . . If it's really as simple as missing a 30 day window, sounds to me like this makes it possible for everyday people to make mistakes that could potentially cost them hundreds to hundreds of thousands of dollars to correct.
"Oops, Jimmy in IT screwed up the computers and says they don't work and the leasing won't take them back . . . guess we're out $60k."
Wouldn't you like to be the clueless administrative assistant in that situation?
If you add up all the dollars MS spends on preventing piracy and the loss of earnings from pirated software then you can get an idea of how much cheaper MS software would be if people didn't pirate it so often.
I don't think companies in quasi monopoly positions go "oh, we're making more money this year with our product, let's drop its price...".
It's usually the opposite.
If you add up all the dollars MS spends on preventing piracy and the loss of earnings from pirated software then you can get an idea of how much cheaper MS software would be if people didn't pirate it so often.
'Common. The numbers both the music and software industry publish as to how much they loose are REDICULOUS to say the least.
There is an old saying "statistics lie, and liars use statistics"
Do you know how they get those numbers? They add up all the value of all the pirated software and then claim that is what they are loosing. The fact is 97% of all copied software/music (much from 3rd world countries where the annual per capita is similar to the price of a new version of windows) would not have bought the software if they couldn't get a pirate version.
I am not saying it is ok to steal. What I am saying is that if Microsoft concentrated on producing a better product, instead of putting their efforts into anti-piracy features which will be defeated in a quarter of a second, they would do better.
I know many people that don't use Microsoft, and if they felt M$ produced a better product, they would probably buy.
I know a lot of people who use pirated software and no matter what the efforts by Microsoft, they will always use pirated software.
And I also know a lot of people with legitimate software that are being harassed with little to no support.
I am not saying it is ok to steal. I just feel this is a waste of money and resources that legitimate windows users end up paying to a Monopoly.
<controversial>Not to mention the hypocrisy of Microsoft (for people who know the companies less than squeaky clean history)</controversial>
"Oops, Jimmy in IT screwed up the computers and says they don't work and the leasing won't take them back . . . guess we're out $60k."
Maybe this is a little hardcore and somewhat off topic but I think I like the idea of some of people having an incentive to hire someone who knows what they're doing in first place instead of using their friend because they won't charge them and then complaining about how much it costs to get the mess cleaned up later.
I sincerely believe that it's generally better to spend a little more up front and get it done right than to cut corners and take your chances.
[edited by: WebDon at 8:09 pm (utc) on Oct. 4, 2006]
When I was reinstalling XP on a computer at the office I had a problem with one of the codes or something. I called MS and they had me running right within 10 min. I was surprised.
I wish companies would wake up to that fact. Why piss of the majority of your customer, to get at someone who's not even a potential client?
If you add up all the dollars MS spends on preventing piracy and the loss of earnings from pirated software then you can get an idea of how much cheaper MS software would be if people didn't pirate it so often.
Bull, as someone pointed out earlier, 95% of "pirates" would never buy Windows for $150. No wonder Linux is going to dominate outside US.
And to paraphrase a situation by mrjohncory:
"Oops, Jimmy in IT screwed up the computers and says they don't work..and Selma in payroll can't do paychecks, and Sally in accounting can't do quarterly report, so our shareholders are pissed and already started dumping stock...so we are suing Micro$oft for punitive damages"
This WILL happen..and once it will, there will be a "patch" or "workaround".. and oviously in 12 hours there will be a hack. The world will go on.
Why piss of the majority of your customer to get at someone who's not even a potential client?
Because you've become a bureaucratic behemoth that can no longer see the big picture? Or because your business decisions are made by legions of accountants and lawyers, not the engineering, entrepreneurial and philosophical types that originally made your product famous? I'm just guessing here.
Naw, not so fast . . . I honestly think MS does pretty well considering how huge they are. I use *some* of their software every day without a lot of problems.
"Do you know how they get those numbers? They add up all the value of all the pirated software and then claim that is what they are loosing. The fact is 97% of all copied software/music (much from 3rd world countries where the annual per capita is similar to the price of a new version of windows) would not have bought the software if they couldn't get a pirate version."
That is the truth. I have a friend. Let's just call him "I" (now the feds are gonna be knocking down my door). "I" has pirated software and if "I" wouldn't have gotten a pirated copy, "I" wouldn't have went out and bought them. Therefore, "I" didn't cost the company any actual money because "I" was never a potential customer. "I" just wanted something for nothing. Not saying its not illegal because it is. The numbers on how much piracy costs companies are just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off. Then because of "potential" lost money, costs on software goes up, then there are actual potential customers that aren't willing to pay that much.
P.S. - I'm not antiMicrosoft. I actually pro whatever works best for you. I use windows mostly, then kubuntu/ubuntu, followed by redhat, and then finally OS X. I just don't agree with how MS spends their money. I think it should be less on piracy and more on everything else.
The fact is 97% of all copied software/music ... would not have bought the software if they couldn't get a pirate version.
Bull, as someone pointed out earlier, 95% of "pirates" would never buy Windows for $150.
Where did these percentage figures come from?
then one day ..you need to re-activate your suddenly trashed doze ...XP was supposed to be too stable and well protected ever to need a reformat ;-))..remember the hype ..
thats the day that Redmond say no ..because someone has a keygen generated XP running ..which has the same base ID that yours does ..and they already activated theirs ..via Redmond .( not the only way to do so ..but the most comon used by those who just "torrented" themselves down an iso ..but dont know how to do anything else )..and Redmond has decided on a first come first served basis that theirs is the legit version ..the lucky people get to speak to a rep from MS who know just how dumb that is as way to verify authenticity and they give you another working active code ..MS theory says that only one answer can come out of the hash made from your install ID and your machine and so it ought to be failsafe ..
that "security" would only work if corporations and constructors couldn't get "clone your HD" deals from MS and if certain other things couldnt be worked around ..
now if they'd used the same level of security that they put into Xbox from the very first one ..it would have been a whole different ball game ..but Xbox was wrapped much tighter be just a game player to stop people getting their hands on a pentium III with a near 10 gig HD and usefull RAM ( for it's day at $150.oo it was a third the price for those specs that equivalent pc was ) and running linux on it as it didn't have doze of any normal flavour installed ..that was the real nightmare to be avoided ..( whatever the PR dept said otherwise ) ..so that protection was wrapped into the bus ..
I know at least 8 ways to open XP and get it working without the phone call ( there must be more ..but I got bored and it was just academic exercise to try them out ..some of what you see as "working" on the tubes ..doesn't and is laughable ) ..mine are legal because ..amonst other things ..I may get controlled at any time .. and the OS is cheap ..although it costs me much more here than it does in the states and the translated help files are not done well ..;)
but it certainly wasn't fear of not being able to "update" that made me stay legit with XP..( rather than burn an iso or clone an HD and "adjust" the reg .. ) ..
already the best way to not have problems with doze is in this order ..
run a regmon ..
dont click OK ( without really knowing what you are saying yes to ) ..anyone can make that lil grey box ..
and disable auto update from doze..
you can always get the updates from the sites that do standalones of whatever it was ..and you wont be Redmonds beta tester of their latest panic driven hotfix ..and are then less likely to hose your OS ..
vista has already been distributed "working" in the alternative channels of the tubes ..no - one is much impressed ..and the exploits have been and are being discovered as we type and read ..
the greatest barrier to the unauthorised distro of vista will be the machine specs required to make it do anything other than crawl ..unlike XP which whilst it does prefer 1 gig of ram and a P4 or equivalent will run on a laptop with a celeron 400 and 64 megs of ram ..( just dont ask it to dance and make coffee on those specs ;-) ..nor run office ..( although I have a toshiba that is those specs and has office in there ..I dont use office tho ) ..but it can email and even run zbrush and some other awkward stuff ..and old toshibas are solid ..
but MS's vista protection is already obselete ..and considering that they let the OS out in test so widely ..they knew that anyway ..adding in a layer of slightly better protection wont stop anyone ..and MS probably dont intend to do so ..
they and their partners in software such as Adobe etc would rather you ran cracked doze than free linux ..
edited ..some spelling ..missed some more ;-))
[edited by: Leosghost at 11:38 pm (utc) on Oct. 4, 2006]
MS have forgotten what got them to where they are. If it were not for everyone being easily able to pass copies of Windows, from 3.1 to 98, around they wouldn't have the market share they enjoy today.
If it were not for everyone being easily able to pass copies of Windows, from 3.1 to 98, around they wouldn't have the market share they enjoy today.
Interesting point. I was thinking that it was about time that they started to really lock down the puters they are put on. Myself will weigh the options of linux if the windows proposition isn't over the top more exciting.
Can anyone out there actually give a single solid reason for upgrading to Vista? If reports about it being resource-hungry are accurate, frankly you'd have to have a screw loose to use it (or a supercomputer on steroids).
Kaled.
**but MS's vista protection is already obselete ..and considering that they let the OS out in test so widely ..they knew that anyway ..adding in a layer of slightly better protection wont stop anyone ..and MS probably dont intend to do so ..
they and their partners in software such as Adobe etc would rather you ran cracked doze than you run free linux**
big ad agencies and design studios ..
followed by the slaves to web fashion who have more money ( plus CPU cycles and RAM ) ..than brains ..
unles Adobe can be persuaded to do some thing "really must have" to flash and / or photoshop that they and MS can convince or insist that you need vista for ..the uptake will be slow ..
or unless they can make a "need it to see the content" deal with the new generation of blue ray / HDDVD product or software dev companies ( ahead? et al ) and the hardware market they will have hard time selling it's "advantages" to the home market ..
and the last nero already runs blue ray ..and strangely enough has MS type totalitarian designs upon any hard drive it gets near to ..
here at least ( France ) if you want to run vista ..the basic spec machine will cost you over $2000.oo without screen ..and will still be slow ..you need to spend ( or already have available because you run high end 3D apps ..at least $3000.oo worth of hardware ..again not counting screen ) ..
about the same cost as autodesk's 3dsmax ( latest ) if you arent updating ..
even though I can write the cost off ..I dont need vista installed to run that kind of app ..
transparent ( alpha channel icons ..oh my! ) isn't an incentive either :-)
well, pardon them for not wanting people to rip them off. People have a choice: MSFT, apple, linux, another OS or not use a computer; stealing is not justfied (or at least whining when the owner is craacking down).
I know as I have ahd to do it about 3 times... They are not all that bad...
Windows Vista will have new antipiracy technology that locks people out their PCs if the operating system isn't activated within 30 days after installation.
I really had to laugh at this. Their heads are so far up their own and each others backsides at MS that they actually believe their own hype.
I totally agree that they should want to protect their product but haven't we heard these types of claim before from MS?
Two words come to mind when reading that statement: Pantip Plaza
Now if that name is familliar to you then you'll know exactly what Im talking about, if not it is a shopping mall in Bangkok, Thailand that deals in IT and electronics. It is probably the most blatant seller of pirated software, games, cd's & dvd's you are ever likely to see in such surroundings. This is not a market or backstreet stall.
All microsoft, adobe, symantec etc products are 100baht. £1.40 - $2.60. It is one of the most popular tourist destinations in Bangkok and very popular with the locals.
For MS to think that Vista won't be on sale here with a bypass to their antipiracy technology then their heads are buried very deeply. Nor wiil I be surprised if it is on sale before the official launch too. I recall seeing beta versions being sold in Jan 2005 there.
That is just one place I know, what of all the other countries that do the same?
Though it does fall back to the point that these buyers at Pantip Plaza aren't lost customers as most (at a guess) wouldn't pay for an original in the first place.
stealing is not justified
Also, so far as I am aware, MS has never stated on product packaging that they will only provide patches for a limited period of time.
From a legal point of view, MS should allow users to upgrade to new operating systems using existing CD keys but with functionality limits. Given that MS already implements functionality limits (XP PRO/HOME, etc.) it is clear that there is no technical reason for not doing this - merely a commercial one.
Kaled.
Hilarious:
[forums.microsoft.com...]
If this is for VLK, what the heck hope does the average user have?
Let's see: MSFT with a brigade of lawyers and $billions to lose if they get sued decides to violates British law. I, somehow doubt it.
Second, even IF what you say is right, you don't "take things" because you think it will even the score, you let the law decide. Not to sound as holier than thou, but if you steal, at least don't expect any updates; it's not too much to ask.
