Comments on: Vista Views: Putting PCs on hold over piracy
Readers pitch on whether Microsoft is doing the right thing in using lockouts to enforce its antipiracy measures.
Most Popular
Latest tech news headlines
- Google hosts energy experts amid climate talks
November 30, 2009 6:01 PM PST
- Nintendo primed for holiday console dominance
November 30, 2009 5:00 PM PST
- Eclipse tells ex-community director to 'go away'
November 30, 2009 4:48 PM PST
- See all headlines
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
- Markets
Related quotes
Back then the objective was to make it difficult to pirate the software but it was a foregone conclusion that eventually the protections would be circumvented. Profit models were built on the assumption the software would eventually be copied and profits were estimated based on that. The protections were made to prevent the layman from pirating the software thereby protecting the majority of the profits.
Nowadays corporate pin-heads think they can come up with something that will stop all copying. They are smokin weed if they think this is even remotely possible. Creating ever more complex copy mechanisms to try and keep out the professional pirates is not only futile, but destined to eventually backlash against the company when normal consumers get overly fed-up with it.
Learn a lesson from the past corporates.
To think that you can stop an expert pirate is laughable. It's a challenge for them and they always meet the challenge.
I think the problem isn't the pirating itself, but the way the fruits of their labor is distributed.
It used to be either face to face in usergroups or on a BBS, but now it's on the internet so it's not you and 5 of your friends, it's you and 2 million of your friends and that's what terrifies corporate America.
Right now I have Win 95 Legacy applications and Dos Legacy applications that work. I can re-install those programs on computers and they work. Just like they should. If I can't connect to the MS server though on XP...the software is worthless. Symantec recently drove this point home. I crashed my computer and re-formated it. When I intalled their software it connected online then told me I had a problem. Problem? I paid for it! I called and they asked me to send in my Disks, Reciepts, and everything. Fine, but they didn't pony up any software to leave my internet security gap covered in the mean time. So I switched products.
If Vista is too much of a PITA, maybe I will look at Linux.
However, Microsoft did use its 100% monopoly on PCs to kill all other operating systems. So our only choice is Windows. Being that they stripped our rights from us I feel it is only fair that the governments of the world strip Microsoft's rights to protect against piracy from them.
As it stands Microsoft is getting its cake and eating it too. But, then our own US government proved themselves impedent when dealing with Microsoft's monopoly the first time so I don't see anything changing. Maybe we need a nice large expensive class action law suite. One that would strip Microsoft of the billions they use to fend of other legal challenges.
If I had a viable choice I would dump Microsoft in a heart beat.
Robert
FWIW, I don't advocate any litigation against Microsoft regardless of what they have or haven't done. Vote with your wallet, refuse to buy their software if you don't like their practices (I don't buy anything made by Sony or HP because of their business practices). I intend to run my copy of XP until the disk has moss on it if I need its functionality that long (hopefully I won't), but I've ignored my "benefits" from three class action suits so far and I have no intention of filing for any reimbursement in the future regardless of what any "courts" decide (you spend your money and you takes your chances).
The point is, if you don't like Microsoft or their practices, there are alternatives, even if you have to look for them. My son and older daughter are still "hooked" on Windows, but my younger daughter is running Linux on her laptop and OS X on her desktop. No one is forced to play Microsoft's game--people choose to, all they have to do is choose not to. And, if they don't choose not to, that's their business.
And, just to set a couple of things straight, between my day job at CUNY (yes you can figure out who I am now :) )and my consulting work I can get just about any software I want for free or at a very reduced cost. My opinions aren't based on MY cost to acquire software I want, but on what I think is appropriate with respect TO software. We (I) should pay for software/products we use, but we shouldn't be locked into any format forever and we should never be treated like theives because we bought a product. I'll never buy anything from iTunes since it's locked up and all I'm really getting is a license to use it as long as they let me and I'll never (again) buy anthing from Microsoft as long as they treat me like a criminal who wants to steal from them after they've got my money. (I will however, buy used CDs and rip them to MP3s so I can use them how I want and I'll break any/every attempt to prevent me from using my copy of XP under the same conditions I agreed to when I bought it back in '02).
So, (and I've been typing way too long while other programs run--I'm actually doing "work" while I write this :) ) vote with your wallet and let Windows Vista have the same market impact as Windows ME did and we'll all see what happens.
May we live in interesting times <g>
-R
...I have used every alternative OS available and have to say that they have pretty much shot themselves in the foot. It didn't require much, if any, effort on Microsoft's part.
OS2?
All you would have to do is use it to understand why it died.
MacOS?
Tied to overpriced hardware with limited choices.
BeOS?
Good idea, but overly ambituous and like Linux, not focused on getting the core, especially drivers in place.
Linux?
Probably the best chance of succeeding, but first, it's gotta quit branching and simplify installs and configs.
Atari/Amiga?
Great products! But ahead of their time and suffered from some of the same problems as Macs.
All Adobe products (aka. Photoshop and Dreamweaver) work on Macs.
I am not an apple person, never have been (I think what holds me back is the one mouse button thing) but if Vista won't support legacy windows applications well then maybe it is time to try Apple.
should pay for it. It really is as simple as that - there are lots of
justifications for pirating software but none are valid. The
software is over priced? There are alternatives? It is buggy?
There are alternatives. You'd never buy it anyway so Microsoft
loses nothing - disingenuous. If it is on your computer pay for
it. Having said that, Microsoft is foolish to implement this
system. It is a waste of their resources, a drain on everyone who
is forced to use it, and ultimately futile.
The simple fact is that any kind of anti-piracy system can be
broken. Anyone who looks hard enough (and how hard is it to
boot up your browser and search in Google?) can find a crack or
serial number or work around for virtually any anti-piracy
system. Resources a company should be spending on improving
its product simply gets thrown away on trying to keep up with
the crackers and sharers.
But what's worse, as the anti-piracy systems become more
draconian they inconvenience legitimate users. This isn't a good
thing. It pushes users to look for alternatives and the company
loses more income.
Here's my story: My PC became unstable so I did what most
experienced Windows users would do - wiped and reinstalled
WinXP which forced a new activation. The instability continued
so I swapped out memory and then later I removed my video
card. That changed my computer enough that I had to activate
again. The instability remained and since I'd been thinking about
upgrading anyway I bought a new motherboard. Activation
number three was refused so I called Microsoft....where the
customer service representative delivered a lecture about
software piracy. I repeated my story pointing out that my copy of
WinXP didn't come bundled with a computer, it was legal, and
installed on only one computer. It had been activated several
times over a period of 5 days because I was experiencing
problems. The service rep (begin thinking of a bull servicing a
cow) baldly stated that activation existed to stop piracy and I
should own up and buy a new copy and he denied my request to
speak to a superior.
In frustration I hung up and called again hoping to get someone
else. I did and this person was equally rude but at least she 'gave
me the benefit of the doubt' but told me I shouldn't expect
another. I activated and I'm still using the computer. But
Microsoft won't get an upgrade to Vista from me. No way in
hades.
You made a lot of good points but I don't agree with your notion that "you'd never buy it [the software] so Microsoft loses nothing" as being "disingenuous".
For example Adobe products such as Photoshop cost a lot of money ($500 +). There are people out there who use pirated copies and all they do with Photoshop is fix up the family photos. If it became impossible for Photoshop to ever be pirated then all those pirates who use Photoshop to fix up the occasional family photo would not pay $500 to buy a copy. They would simply invest in one of the free or very cheap alternatives.
I am not saying steeling or pirated software is right, it isn't. But I don't agree that if there wasn't pirated software people would all buy legal copies. I also think the "lost revenue" figures from pirated software are WAY off because these figures assume the people would buy a legal copy if they weren't able to get the software for free.
Microsoft's claim that they are concerned about piracy is only partially true. They would give away Vista and Office if they had to - yes, for free - to maintain a monopoly on the desktops of as much of humanity as they can. Watch - if Linux ever becomes a serious competitor, they will under price Linux, even if it is free, for the opportunity to place links on a billion+ desktops to their marketing partners. Same as they did with Internet Explorer when Netscape became free. Same as they give away free anti-virus, free anti-spyware, whatever it takes to break the backs of competitors.
It is limited "piracy" that has allowed Office and Windows to keep out low-priced competitors. As long as people who can't afford MS can sneak a few copies onto their machines, they'll continue to keep the high-priced packages instead of investing in Microsoft's low-priced or free competitors. If folks can't sneak a few copies at all because MS really decides (as they could have at least a decade ago) to make copy protection iron-clad, masses of folks would drop MS, Adobe, etc. very quickly, and those monopolists would suddenly be faced with real competition.
It has always been the small competitors of MS, not MS itself, who have suffered (lost money, lost their companies) due to piracy of MS's software, not Microsoft. Microsoft knows this very well, of course. Every pirated copy of Office is a copy of Open Office that doesn't get established in some corporation; every pirated copy of Windows is one less Linux installation that might serve as the seed for en masse replacement of Windows in some company or municipality.
It will be really interesting to see if and for how long Microsoft could really stick to an enforced near-zero-piracy policy. My guess is that if they do, they will have to lower their prices even below the near give-away prices they charge Dell et al, in order to compete with increasingly sophisticated free and functional O/S's and office applications. They can't afford many repeats of Munich - a whole major municipal government that has tired of tithing Microsoft for the right to do public business and has switched to Linux.
Microsoft is first and foremost a monopolist, and will do whatever it takes to stay on the majority of desktops, if they have to lay off half their people and give away their software to do it - which they may have to do if they get serious about preventing piracy. It's an "open" market - for a monopolist like MS big enough to give away anything for free that a competitor might have the audacity to sell to try to make a living.
So in reality, GWA and the spyware built into Vista are aimed not at obtaining a return on investment for Windows, but to maintain control of what does and does not appear on a billion desktops. That's the prize, not software licensing fees.
RW
MICROSOFT is a company--with no rights to install or limit use of any software in a private computer, period!
For the most part, when a person buys any off brand computer, he risks getting pirated software without knowing it, and then HE gets punished by a private company for doing so!!! NOT GOOD!!!
Time for a reality check people---This is a violation of personal freedom, and not for your own good, it's for the good of MICROSOFT ONLY.
It will not be used outside of the USA, and will not be persued beyond possibly a few test cases, for the purposes of creating media hype and a fear factor in the public.
I for one, would fight it in court at every possible level, but sadly, my pockets are not as deep as MICROSOFT pockets, so I would lose, but in the long run so would MICROSOFT from the bad publicity it will create.
All of you that think it's ok are fools, yes, fools--you follow like sheep, allowing one bit of freedom after another slowly get taken away, without a protest, not even a wimper.
MICROSOFT IS NOT A GOD, NOR IS IT A GOVERNMENT--IT'S A BUSINESS, AND GOOD AT IT'S PURPOSE IN LIFE--AND SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO DICTATE THE RULES, BUT BE FORCED TO FOLLOW THE RULES DICTATED BY THE PEOPLE--AS 99% OF ALL OTHER BUSINESSES HAVE TO DO.
I like MICROSOFT, but sure as day becomes night will scrap every piece of their software I use and switch to Linux or a MAC system before I ever allow them to dictate to me how I can use or when I can use MY PERSONAL PROPERTY, PAID FOR WITH MY HARD EARNED MONEY.
Get real people, allow this, and it's just the tip of the iceberg.
OFF MY SOAPBOX----Phyxer944
I bought a legal copy of XP, SP2 to run on my Mac. The first time it was easy enough, it authenticated and was ready to go. Then I got to my first reinstall, and the wonderful anti-piracy scheme informed me that I needed to contact the company because I'm only allowed to authenticate once.
What?
Now any time I need to reinstall their operating system - on the same machine, mind you - I have to call Microsoft to plead with them to let me do it. I have to beg the company to allow me to use software I paid for?
The funny thing is, if I wanted to circumvent the authentication crap I could. Easily. A quick search on the web shows dozens of cracks and hacks that cripple the authentication and let people use illegal copies.
But WHY should I have to resort to using those on a piece of software I actually paid for? And now the news is that Vista is going to be even more complex?
To hell with that. I'm hardly computer illiterate, but there are millions of people out there who are lucky to know which end of the mouse faces up. How the hell are they supposed to be able to navigate this complex, anti-consumer approach that treats everyone like pirates instead of customers?
I'm sorry that I even bought XP. They make it so hard to deal with that it's just not worth trying. Let them continue to sabotage their software. Let them continue to promote vaporware operating systems for years on end and then finally release software with this kind of unintuitive, paranoid attack on their customers. I'm sure the proponents of alternate operating systems are loving it.
Reality is that their methods only hurt paying customers. Windows XP activation was cracked before the OS hit the shelves in 2001. The same has already happened with the first Alpha release of Vista to testers.
MS, Adobe, Symantec, and cohorts have released false data on piracy costs to the US gov't. They bloat their numbers with mark-to-market accounting and push the lost theoretical sales off on the American Taxpayers. Why should we just assume what they say is correct? It's in their best interest to falsify numbers to reduce their already heavily reduced taxes.
If MS is worried about piracy they need to start thinking outside of the box. With billions in their coffers, wasting millions upon million on unworthy anti-piracy measures only demonstrates that MS is no longer innovative and that Vista itself won't be that much better than Windows XP.
I used to be a very "legal" software user, and still am overall. But until Microsoft provide appropriate compensation to me, and to tens of millions like me, who trusted them enough to purchase ME, I will consider Microsoft products "fair game" for pirateing.
I am fairly confident that I am not alone in this.
It is amazing that Microsoft would rather spend money and customer satisfaction on making new products difficult to break than to make amends to those previously loyal customers they ripped of in the past.
Who wants to steal a system that thier current software can't run on?
First, MS told users they'd need bigger, badder PCs to get all the features of Vista. Now, it seems they may need a whole new software library too.
While MS certainly has the right (and even obligation to its shareholders) to stop piracy any way that it can, I'd say that issue will run a distant second to all of the complaints that you will see when users "upgrade" thier systems and can't run the software that they used every business day in XP.
Microsoft lose more money by blocking valid software uses with the new Vista "security model" than anything they could have lost to pirates.
At some point, Microsoft (and everyone else) will just have to realize and admit that you can't substitute code for intelligent PC use.
Enough with trying to save PC users from themselves. Let them lose enough time, money and data and they'll learn.
Hey Microsoft, there's no patch for stupidity! For God's (and our) sake, please stop trying!
It's really not hard to get legacy applications to run in Vista. Really. It's called Compatability Mode, and it works pretty darn good. Granted, you may need to actually click on the HELP menu, but sometimes people are too proud and stubborn to look under HELP or read the manual for things before complaining.
All the concerns this person has brought up would have been taken care of if they had simply clicked on HELP. Come on, it's not hard. It's right there on the screen. Got a question? Click on HELP. It's four little letters and nobody will know you did it, so your ego can stay intact. Just click on it- you'll be surprised when you are given answers. But then you wouldn't be able to write a blog about how horrible the OS is.
HEY! That's our job to be the bloody pirates matey!
Captain Blackheart Ballmer doesn't like competition from theives out there...!
Walk the plank!
Pot calling the kettle black when MS complains about piracy in software...
In order for us to move to Vista "reliably" we would need to deploy 65 License servers and manage them. This has actually led to the evaluation of Linux as a desktop replacement. Many companies talk about that, but in our case it is an actual project that is ongoing. The loss of our business alone would cost them about $6-8 million per year. Those types of numbers add up quickly.
Microsoft seems to believe that they own the market and that no one could live without them. If this trend continues they will find themselves losing market share quickly.
I can almost see the headlines in the paper now
1st - the part that you can dole out hundred's of hard earned dollars for software your just technically borrowing as you never own programs you spend a bundle on (read your end users licensing agreements people) so there are some issues with the spent on rent for software you need, and need you do. And the split point is the fact you do own your computer hardware outright (well most of us do) and nobody whatsoever has the right to tell anybody what they can and cannot do with that hardware, unless permission has been given to (whomever) by the pc owner to have carte-blanche control over such devices.
The solution to anti piracy would be to suggest alternative measures to prevent the operating system from deteriorating, without the o/s wrecking the hardware or rendering it useless. There are hardworking citizens that are not aware of what they are purchasing when it comes to computers ( I still have clients that cant grasp RAM over Hard Drive Space - and never will) so EULA's abound and dollars flying about, you cannot punish the hardware purchaser for something they may very well may not be aware of, and rendering their newly purchased pride and joy absolutely useless will just veer them away from the entire experience altogether.
We all know (techies and newbie's) that this train has now left the station and to accomplish anything these days you have to have access and user skills with a computer and the train is going forward never retracting it's path back. Not going to happen; - so scaring potential newbie?s is not the Anti Piracy solution.
All I can say is I spend countless hours of finding new techniques to get new users on board and as any facilitator knows the questions can be daunting and time consuming. We best not be addressing these other smaller portion issues with more media gobble-dee-**** so the general population has to spend another $400 they don?t have just to educate themselves on this issue, which is a battle between the big guys and a rogue group of hacker wanna-be's.
In closing, I have read pages and pages on this issue and one point does shine through. The issue of Pirated copies of any MS operating system being distributed around has been a benefit to Microsoft. I know this from my own early days when I first installed my Windows 95 cd on many newbie computers and with my own valid serial number (cd-key).
I was contacted by Microsoft about my cd-key appearing on a multitude of systems and my reply was quite simply put back to them as such: " considering I am trying to sell this new pc user a new environment in which they can upgrade and make additions to the O/S on their own or try to sell them the alternative to Microsoft (being Macintosh for the most part) and I did not once sell anybody my Windows O/S. I just installed a copy so they could become more affluent with the processes and make Microsoft Upgrades and Office (etc) purchases on their own, which option does Microsoft prefer me to facilitate?"
Albeit I was left alone and watched my P?s and Q?s when daring to tread along this iffy behavior (which I have now stopped) but all of those pc newbie?s have made Microsoft purchases on many different programs as a result, including the newer Operating Systems as XP Pro or XP Home.
So, I ask ? did Microsoft loose in any of those transactions? No, they gained more customers in the long run.
Now years later, you want to disable a computer and render it unusable after the 30 days has passed, where these people have spend hundred?s and thousands of hard earned dollars in upgrade after upgrade ? never to own the darned program whatsoever?.. There must be an alternative. If someone breeched my home security and rendered it unusable, they would face criminal charges, or if somebody disallowed me the legal and proper use of anything I own, they could very well be facing charges of many kinds?. Microsoft crosses that line by rendering anybody?s hardware unusable, PERIOD.
Thanks for reading
AJ
1st - the part that you can dole out hundred's of hard earned dollars for software your just technically borrowing as you never own programs you spend a bundle on (read your end users licensing agreements people) so there are some issues with the spent on rent for software you need, and need you do. And the split point is the fact you do own your computer hardware outright (well most of us do) and nobody whatsoever has the right to tell anybody what they can and cannot do with that hardware, unless permission has been given to (whomever) by the pc owner to have carte-blanche control over such devices.
The solution to anti piracy would be to suggest alternative measures to prevent the operating system from deteriorating, without the o/s wrecking the hardware or rendering it useless. There are hardworking citizens that are not aware of what they are purchasing when it comes to computers ( I still have clients that cant grasp RAM over Hard Drive Space - and never will) so EULA's abound and dollars flying about, you cannot punish the hardware purchaser for something they may very well may not be aware of, and rendering their newly purchased pride and joy absolutely useless will just veer them away from the entire experience altogether.
We all know (techies and newbie's) that this train has now left the station and to accomplish anything these days you have to have access and user skills with a computer and the train is going forward never retracting it's path back. Not going to happen; - so scaring potential newbie?s is not the Anti Piracy solution.
All I can say is I spend countless hours of finding new techniques to get new users on board and as any facilitator knows the questions can be daunting and time consuming. We best not be addressing these other smaller portion issues with more media gobble-dee-**** so the general population has to spend another $400 they don?t have just to educate themselves on this issue, which is a battle between the big guys and a rogue group of hacker wanna-be's.
In closing, I have read pages and pages on this issue and one point does shine through. The issue of Pirated copies of any MS operating system being distributed around has been a benefit to Microsoft. I know this from my own early days when I first installed my Windows 95 cd on many newbie computers and with my own valid serial number (cd-key).
I was contacted by Microsoft about my cd-key appearing on a multitude of systems and my reply was quite simply put back to them as such: " considering I am trying to sell this new pc user a new environment in which they can upgrade and make additions to the O/S on their own or try to sell them the alternative to Microsoft (being Macintosh for the most part) and I did not once sell anybody my Windows O/S. I just installed a copy so they could become more affluent with the processes and make Microsoft Upgrades and Office (etc) purchases on their own, which option does Microsoft prefer me to facilitate?"
Albeit I was left alone and watched my P?s and Q?s when daring to tread along this iffy behavior (which I have now stopped) but all of those pc newbie?s have made Microsoft purchases on many different programs as a result, including the newer Operating Systems as XP Pro or XP Home.
So, I ask ? did Microsoft loose in any of those transactions? No, they gained more customers in the long run.
Now years later, you want to disable a computer and render it unusable after the 30 days has passed, where these people have spend hundred?s and thousands of hard earned dollars in upgrade after upgrade ? never to own the darned program whatsoever?.. There must be an alternative. If someone breeched my home security and rendered it unusable, they would face criminal charges, or if somebody disallowed me the legal and proper use of anything I own, they could very well be facing charges of many kinds?. Microsoft crosses that line by rendering anybody?s hardware unusable, PERIOD.
Thanks for reading
AJ
- Piracy vs faulty licensing
- by chasrobin October 15, 2006 6:59 AM PDT
- I am an IT person who does desktop managment daily.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- piracy is faulty licensing but.......
- by Dale E Marcum October 22, 2006 8:05 PM PDT
- Has any bright people at Microsoft thought about drastic price reduction or even free to consumers with a small charge to business? You cannot have "piracy" for something not worth pirating! The increase in sales seems to me would be tremendous. Maybe I am living in lala land with this idea however! But then again......
- Like this
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (40 Comments)I can tell you from experience we almost never have WGA issue's.
What does worry me about Vista is the limited number of re-installs and being able to transfer keys to new hardware.
When a users box dies we generally have a machine standing by with a baseline install.
Pop the license on it restore the users data if not already available from redirected network folders and bingo up and running in less than an hour.
Vista sounds like it will fail to fit this kind of quick turn around users have come to expect in the corporate world.