Microsoft pulls Windows 7 download tool
Microsoft has halted distribution of its Windows 7 USB/DVD Download tool after questions were raised as to whether the software utility makes improper use of open-source code. The tool is designed to help owners of Windows XP-based Netbooks get Windows 7 onto their machines.
(Credit: Microsoft)
Microsoft has halted distribution of a tool aimed at making it easier to put Windows 7 on Netbooks amid allegations that the utility makes improper use of open-source code.
The software maker said on Tuesday that it has pulled down the Windows USB/DVD Tool while it investigates the issue, which was raised last week by Windows blogger Rafael Rivera on his Within Windows blog.
_270x48.JPG){kind=logo}
In his blog post, Rivera said Microsoft appears to use code from a tool called ImageMaster that is licensed under the GPLv2 open-source license. The General Public License, like other open-source licenses, allows code to be freely used by others, but has its own set of terms and conditions, such as sharing any modifications made to the code.
Microsoft confirmed it has launched a review of the matter and taken the utility off its online Microsoft Store until that inquiry has been completed.
"Microsoft is looking into this issue and is taking down the (Windows 7 updating) tool from the Microsoft Store site until its review is complete," the company said in a statement. "We apologize to our customers for any inconvenience."
Though somewhat arcane, the utility is important because it solves a technical challenge in upgrading the operating system on Netbooks and other PCs without an optical drive.
Microsoft had been exploring for months different ways of trying to help users of Windows XP-based Netbooks move to Windows 7. The tool, which was released last month alongside Windows 7, allows users to take a downloadable copy of the operating system and create a bootable drive.
The issue is also a thorn in Microsoft's efforts to show that it can play nice with the open-source community. As ZDNet blogger Mary Jo Foley notes, this isn't the first time Microsoft has been accused of misusing GPL code.
The latest dust-up comes as Microsoft is celebrating the third anniversary of its deal with Novell, one of Microsoft's biggest--and most controversial--efforts to blend its world with the open-source world.
Under that deal, Microsoft agreed not to sue Novell customers for their use of its Linux distributions.
Microsoft has also released a number of products under various open-source licenses itself, though typically not under the GPL, which it sees as one of the more restrictive licenses. Redmond has been particularly critical of terms in version 3 of the GPL.
The software maker did release a few Linux drivers under GPLv2, although it appears its hand may have been forced there. Some have suggested the drivers contained GPL code, meaning that they would have necessarily needed to be released back under the GPL.
Microsoft has taken a number of different approaches to open-source software, particularly Linux. The software maker has at times accepted the notion of a heterogeneous world where Linux and Windows co-exist, pledging to do better to make sure IT administrators can manage mixed environments.
At other times, Microsoft executives have lashed out, painting open-source software as violating hundreds of Microsoft patents. In its lawsuit against TomTom earlier this year, Microsoft for the first time made those accusations in court, alleging that TomTom's implementation of Linux in its GPS systems infringed on Microsoft patents. The two companies quickly settled the matter, although terms were not disclosed.
During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina. 
That said, Microsoft creates its own negative PR in endless waves. It's not journalists' fault for simply reporting it.
It's not her job to pooh-pooh or spin Microsoft's foibles, just as it isn't her job to evangelize the company either.
Don't like that? Well, deal with it.
I have to agree with you- Ina's seen both sides in may things and has a pretty balanced outlook on MSFT's adventures.
On that note: it's too bad that the majority of *comments* here are biased FUD (on all sides) rather than open fair discussion. (With some exceptions.)
Ina possesses an xy chromosome pair. He's a male, regardless of what cosmetic surgery he has undergone. Deal with it.
...because as we all know kids, everyone should always carry around a mitchondrial replication machine and GATC comparator wherever we go!
Clue: the gender thing was a courtesy - the fact that she still writes fairly balanced articles is something you're just going to have to swallow, mm'kay? Thx in advance.
But they won't do it, will they?
That's not quite true. If the product is a derived work, the whole product needs to be available under the GPL.
Microsoft is part of the consortium of supporters of ACTA (the mis-labeled Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) which isn't about counterfeiting at all but copyright. It includes support for a 3-strikes rule where Internet users that have been *accused* of copyright infringement 3 times (no proof required) will have their Internet connections pulled.
Microsoft has been accused of infringing copyright far more than 3 times already this year, so clearly they should have their Internet connection revoked. Anything less is hypocritical and should be understood as an embarrassment to Microsoft.
Congrats on them doing the right thing this time... and here's hoping they actually contribute to the code they swiped this time, and not just yank something offline.
"Congrats on them doing the right thing this time... and here's hoping they actually contribute to the code they swiped this time, and not just yank something offline."
That's a rather backhanded way of acknowledging that MSFT did the right thing, isn't it?
For all the hue and cry over piracy, there's a lot to be said that is worse than even the RIAA's definition when it comes to someone doing it commercially.
Now IMHO, it was likely incompetence, a mistake, or even a bit of intentional wrongdoing on the part of one or two Microsoft employees/contractors. But however it played out, what happened was still wrong - no different than if anyone were to swipe Microsoft code and pass it off as their own.
Let me put it this way - if some company were caught swiping Microsoft's IP and passing it off as their own commercially, how exactly do you think Microsoft would have handled it? (...before you answer, look up Tom Tom - I'm willing to wager that Tom Tom had to pay a ton of money to avoid the courtroom...)
Personally, Microsoft got off light - the Linux folks merely asked that it either be removed or the source code supplied. There could have been some serious damage done to Microsoft's reputation and/or bank accounts.
http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11183-0.html?forumID=89&threadID=173539&messageID=1765547
http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11183-0.html?forumID=89&threadID=173539&messageID=1765547
And they sure can't claim to have been unaware of things like the GPL. After all, they have been bashing the GPL quite often, which implies that they know it...
They expect people to not use pirated copies of their software, so they should not use pirated software, either. But they seem to have a case of "do as I say, not as I do."
The only good thing they did was pulling it back. But that doesn't remove the license violation that occurred.
...I'm sure that the "deal" wouldn't be at standard rates, let alone anything favorable. After all, if you have them over a barrel (or think you do), and have enough money to back up the threats (meritorious or not).
"Not as evil as you would make it seem..."
It isn't a question of good or evil - this is business tactics/ethics/etc we're talking about here, not religion.
==
"And they sure can't claim to have been unaware of things like the GPL. After all, they have been bashing the GPL quite often, which implies that they know it..."
They've released products and code under the GPL (usually inadvertently or with no other choice), and have done so for years (starting with Microsoft Services for UNIX, if memory serves). - there is, nor can there be, a claim of licensing ignorance on Microsoft's part w/ the GPL.
However, because MS messed up and decided to "punish" XP users by not taking the time/effort to create an upgrade path (other than "upgrade XP" to Vista and then Vista to Win7) from XP to Win7.If Laplink can do it, then SURELY MS could have done it also! Especially with the prices they are charging for upgrades for what is essentially a Service Pack Plus for Vista.
Also, MS was sorely remiss for not making bootable USB a standard method of doing the upgrades or even full Win7 installs. The files read off the USB drive much faster than a DVD.
Anyway, there are freeware methods to creating bootable USB drives for Win7 available on the web. I'm going to be trying them soon for my first XP to Win7 upgrade this weekend.
Scott
USB drives are so cheap, one should simply be able to buy Win 7 on that as an alternative to DVD at your local super store.
1 - it's still more expensive than DVD by ~50-fold, (hmm.. $5 extra though? Not bad!)
2 - Not everything likes to boot from USB. (well.. slim chance tho.. but, same with DVD and netbooks)
3 - That would be too cool for MSFT. (Wait, ... )
Well, actually they SHOULD do it! Get a clue MSFT!
Yes. But MS seems to be unable to do this simple thing of putting a bootable image on a USB stick. It is not a problem for Linux distributions.
Looks like you didn't read the article. MSFT has been attempting to do this very thing, but the limitations imposed by the code they had used prevented it. No, they cannot do what Linux does here. Remember, Microsoft is a commercial enterprise and would have to license the technology.
Are you really trying to tell me that Microsoft is so bad that they can't develop a tool on their own to make a bootable USB stick???
It is not rocket science... If MS can't even do something as simple as making a bootable USB stick, how much must their OS be broken???
Geez. According to what you say, all the smart people must be working on Linux, and all the mediocre people at MS can't get the code done to make a bootable USB stick...
2) @Dan: You do not understand the GPL at all. Microsoft would be free to continue distributing the software by simple dint of including the source code with it, and licensing that bit of software and its source code under the GNU GPL. There is nothing preventing them from doing this. No one is forcing Microsoft to pay for anything.
Next time, sue the entire Internet for using the words Microsoft or Windows.
Let's see how far you get.
Yes, it would be a good idea. Certainly a better idea than a hack like this ridiculous tool that they are apparently unable to write without stealing somebody else's code.
The USB version, like this tool, would always be a niche product.
And as far as the tech support nightmare is concerned, some people used to think the cd tray is a cup holder. If people don't understand basic things about a computer, they should a) not try an upgrade themselves, and b) they should not be on the Internet in the first place. These are the people who don't have virus protection and turn their computers into a node in a bot net.
My parents use a Linux system that I installed, and they know how to use the tools they need, like Open Office, Firefox, etc.
Microsoft should be able to just write such software.
Or are you saying that they are too clueless to do that???
There is no patent on making a bootable USB disk.
Seriously, your parents can't read instructions? Something like:
1) Shutdown your computer.
2) Insert USB copy of Windows 7 into any available USB port.
3) Turn on computer.
4) Answer the prompts.
I think you underestimate your parents! :D
The only downside is if the BIOS is not set up to allow the system to boot from a USB source. However, how much worse is that to deal with than people who do not have a (functioning) DVD drive in their system (i.e. CD only systems (required by employer), netbooks, etc.).
Scott
Makes me wonder how bad their OS is...
Its more or less a server thing, and honestly, MS doesn't need all that much input on this Beta. They do have a good product with this, and they are ready to start packaging it. As much as I would like to agree about the comment re: Linux, just can't. If Linux ever truly threatens MS, they will simply file suite against the users for using patented s-ware of MS's. That's another debate.,
<a href="http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=2191764">Acai Berry Detox</a>
And Linux already threatens MS. According to a recent study, the Linux market share for netbooks is 32%. That's why MS dropped some of the silly restrictions they originally had put on Win7 for netbooks. That's why MS created the tool discussed in this article in the first place. Netbooks don't have DVD drives, so an OS has to be installed in a different way. Linux has long had installation options from media other than CDs/DVDs. Installation from the network, or from USB, are old hat for Linux.
Once again, MS is playing catch-up. And they got caught playing foul...
It is not rocket science.
As with everything netbook related, Microsoft got caught by surprise, and they don't seem to have people who can manage to create a bootable USB stick (which, as others said, isn't that hard.)
Instead, they stole somebody else's software... and got caught...
RT
www.privacy-stuff.be.tc
Fact? or myth?
Ok... There is no trouble with the reporting here. I find Ina to be biased toward Microsoft ... and in fact... that is what this story is... oh, look, Microsoft quickly does the right thing while it investigates an *oversight*...
Give me a break... this was a blatant shameless act of hypocrisy. .... whoaaa... the software giant needs to abuse the open-source community and risk being taken to the matt by illegally violating the gpl.... while all the time refusing to let valid customers load their Win7 product because their stupid software company can't get the key validation stuff to work... geeez... don't U folks get it ????
Microsoft... liar, cheat, third0rate software hack and corporate bully. .... <<======
Ok-! so he wears a dress now... GET OVER IT.... lots of girls wear dresses....
- by 2506thuybinh November 14, 2009 8:43 PM PST
- I want to join in.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(68 Comments)