Microsoft to Make Windows Anti-Piracy Program Mandatory

[Nilfennasion]

It's hopelessly optimistic to believe that Microsoft are being sued left and right simply because they are the number one software makers in the world. They got there, for starters, by stealing other people's products, programming their products so that they won't run well unless run on top of other MS products, and in extreme cases, commercially sabotaging other people's products. Microsoft has the worst track record, period, when it comes to security. The numero uno carrier of digital virii remains MS Word documents with Macros. MS operating systems are configured by default as open relays, making it that much easier for spammers and hackers. MS have used their own customers to spam other potential customers. MS' security and networking models are so rudimentary and weak that nothing less than a ground-up redesign of their OS products will yield the kind of stability increase they are touting for .Net... and the list goes on and on and on.

People are not just jumping on the Linux bandwagon because MicroSoft is "popular". Like the difference between RIAA product and truly underground music, they are jumping ship because the Linux community thinks of something other than just the bottom line when designing their product.

[adam]

If you are responding to my post, read it again. You misunderstood.

[BJ_M]

It's hopelessly optimistic to believe that Microsoft are being sued left and right simply because they are the number one software makers in the world. They got there, for starters, by stealing other people's products, programming their products so that they won't run well unless run on top of other MS products, and in extreme cases, commercially sabotaging other people's products. Microsoft has the worst track record, period, when it comes to security. The numero uno carrier of digital virii remains MS Word documents with Macros. MS operating systems are configured by default as open relays, making it that much easier for spammers and hackers. MS have used their own customers to spam other potential customers. MS' security and networking models are so rudimentary and weak that nothing less than a ground-up redesign of their OS products will yield the kind of stability increase they are touting for .Net... and the list goes on and on and on.

People are not just jumping on the Linux bandwagon because MicroSoft is "popular". Like the difference between RIAA product and truly underground music, they are jumping ship because the Linux community thinks of something other than just the bottom line when designing their product.

you may be right --probably are , i'm not defending MS as being all noble and squeaky clean - BUT I am defending them for wrong facts published about them...

[Nilfennasion]

Sure, there are all sorts of urban legends about Microsoft products that are exaggerated or just plain made up. A lot of them actually feature in Microsoft's own advertising (an employer being impressed by an elderly employee's ability to open documents for example). One of my favourite urban legends about Microsoft would be the one about Windows 95 being set to delete itself unless a few other MS products are installed with it.

However, I've experienced enough of the legends to know that a lot of them have a basis in reality. Windows 95, for example, garbled my entire hard drive after I merely installed a game (Jagged Alliance). Word XP has a way of stripping all the language and autocorrect information out of a given document. Without any request to do so from the user. An especially big problem for me since I rely on such macro-like features to insert accentations in certain words. My personal favourite would be when MS Word has been told no less than ten times that the user wants the default language for documents set as English (UK), but sets it to some other form of English instead, thus undoing all the autocorrect settings the user has so carefully maintained.

Mind you, this is just the cosmetic stuff. When I was in my early teens, a virus was never platform-specific because their authors needed to be skilled enough to work around any and all security systems to propagate their work. Anyone can author virii these days because MS has eliminated that basic skill need. All it takes now is knowing where the visual basic hooks are and how to exploit them.

Regardless of whether the complaints are based in fact or urban legend, Microsoft has brought them all on themselves. Now, they are acting like spoiled children who want to change the rules when that almighty umpire called customer opinion is starting to gear up to enforce them. To hell with MS, I say.

[richdvd]

People are not just jumping on the Linux bandwagon because MicroSoft is "popular".

I would disagree somewhat on this one.
Why does the average person switch to Linux? What is the great reason?
It's also funny how many people install Linux as a desktop OS and switch back to MS a short time after. You have to be really computer driven to be able to do things properly in Linux. The average person out there isn't.

[richdvd]

It's hopelessly optimistic to believe that Microsoft are being sued left and right simply because they are the number one software makers in the world. They got there, for starters, by stealing other people's products, programming their products so that they won't run well unless run on top of other MS products, and in extreme cases, commercially sabotaging other people's products. Microsoft has the worst track record, period, when it comes to security. The numero uno carrier of digital virii remains MS Word documents with Macros. MS operating systems are configured by default as open relays, making it that much easier for spammers and hackers. MS have used their own customers to spam other potential customers. MS' security and networking models are so rudimentary and weak that nothing less than a ground-up redesign of their OS products will yield the kind of stability increase they are touting for .Net... and the list goes on and on and on.

People are not just jumping on the Linux bandwagon because MicroSoft is "popular". Like the difference between RIAA product and truly underground music, they are jumping ship because the Linux community thinks of something other than just the bottom line when designing their product.

you may be right --probably are , i'm not defending MS as being all noble and squeaky clean - BUT I am defending them for wrong facts published about them...

I agree with BJ_M.
Lots of unproven facts floating around.

[bazooka]

People are not just jumping on the Linux bandwagon because MicroSoft is "popular".

I would disagree somewhat on this one.
Why does the average person switch to Linux? What is the great reason?
It's also funny how many people install Linux as a desktop OS and switch back to MS a short time after. You have to be really computer driven to be able to do things properly in Linux. The average person out there isn't.

I use Linux for server stuff.

For anything else, I use windowsXP

[Nilfennasion]

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

The average idiot switches back to MS because MS has oversimplified things to the point where as soon as the file association between a document and a program is inadvertently changed or deleted, they are lost. MS has conditioned the market for years to click on pretty pictures and expect things to happen. Those of us who remember the good old days of DOS can remember when our productivity increased exponentially when we followed the need that DOS created to gain some insight into what we were doing. Windoze has been specifically designed to discourage the end user from learning. Linux has not, and that scares a lot of people, blissfully unaware that their productivity has not increased one iota since 1995, into going back to simplicity. Or oversimplicity in this case.

Those who defend MS on the basis that people go back to it after trying something that involves getting an insight into the process... well, let's just say that when I was a small lad, I used to go to school with a lot of such people. When I was trying to learn to read in a language not my own (already had English down pat), they were actually enjoying Play School.

[edDV]

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

The average idiot switches back to MS because MS has oversimplified things to the point where as soon as the file association between a document and a program is inadvertently changed or deleted, they are lost. MS has conditioned the market for years to click on pretty pictures and expect things to happen.


Those of us who remember the good old days of DOS can remember when our productivity increased exponentially when we followed the need that DOS created to gain some insight into what we were doing. Windoze has been specifically designed to discourage the end user from learning.

Linux has not, and that scares a lot of people, blissfully unaware that their productivity has not increased one iota since 1995, into going back to simplicity. Or oversimplicity in this case.

...

This is intended as a joke right?

[Nilfennasion]

No. I wish it could be.

I am so utterly sick of the "I tried Linux and went straight back to MS" defence. Really. My response was intended as a slightly polite version of the "Awwww baby... was the learning curve too scary for you?" rebuttal. You cannot expect to be just given control of the processes of your system. You have to learn how to take it. MS does not want you to learn, simple as that.

[richdvd]

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

The average idiot switches back to MS because MS has oversimplified things to the point where as soon as the file association between a document and a program is inadvertently changed or deleted, they are lost. MS has conditioned the market for years to click on pretty pictures and expect things to happen.


Those of us who remember the good old days of DOS can remember when our productivity increased exponentially when we followed the need that DOS created to gain some insight into what we were doing. Windoze has been specifically designed to discourage the end user from learning.

Linux has not, and that scares a lot of people, blissfully unaware that their productivity has not increased one iota since 1995, into going back to simplicity. Or oversimplicity in this case.

...

This is intended as a joke right?

LOL...I'm through with this guy.

[Nilfennasion]

Like I would discuss the colour of orange juice with someone who defends MS product on the basis of it being simplified enough for them. :P

[BJ_M]

is grass really green ?

[richdvd]

Like I would discuss the colour of orange juice with someone who defends MS product on the basis of it being simplified enough for them.

Computer Details/Setup:
Operating System: Windows XP, SP1

If you hate it so much, then why are you using it? :P

[Mythos2002]

My problems with Windows XP is the points system they have. I like to change hardware in my PC quite a bit, and Microsoft doesn't like it if you do that too much. I forget how much you can change before you have to contact them.

I would have no problem buying XP if I could simply install it into the next PC I buy when this one craps out. However, I am not going to pay $399.00 for the full version of XP Pro and have Microsoft tell me I can only install it on one PC. I know that goes against the whole reason they came up with activation, but I don't like it. There are 3 PCs here. Only one is capable of even running XP because the other 2 are dinosaurs, so I would only be using it on 1 PC at a time anyway.

I think they should come up with something better like giving each person who buys their full version a license for the number of PCs they own and have it where you call them during activation and they get the MAC address of your NIC or whatever it is they go by. It would be a pain, but it beats having to pay an extra $100.00 for each PC you own.

I also realize I'm only talking about a small percentage of us who actually build our own machines. Most others who buy Dell, Compaq, etc. usually buy the OS with their machines.

That brings up some questions. Is piracy of XP really that big of a widespread problem? Do pirated copies make up even 1/4 of the machines with XP on them? How many people actually build their own PCs now compared to those who just buy one that is already built from Dell and others?

I was thinking about running a small business of building, upgrading, and repairing machines for people, but it is next to impossible now. I cannot compete in today's marketplace for several reasons.
1. There are already dozens of places who do that now.
2. Many of them have connections where they can get their parts from overseas cheaper than I could.
3. Most people I know would rather just buy a computer from Dell, Compaq, etc. because it is easy, and they have a good warranty from what I hear.
4. I cannot compete with the low prices of packaged systems because the cost of the OS is so expensive and I would not break the law there. I don't know how Microsoft found out, but they ran one of those small OEM stores out of business because they were selling machines with Illegal copies of XP.

Sorry to stay, but I hope you can see what I mean. I know most of us on this forum probably build our own machines and a lot of other people do, but I bet it is a very small number compared to those who buy from Dell and the other manufacturers.

I like Windows XP and I like Linux. I have found that each OS has its own advantages and disadvantages. I just don't like Microsoft's tactics sometimes. I can understand not wanting Piracy, but don't charge nearly $400.00 for your OS and be such buttheads about about it. $100.00 is plenty if you can only install the CD on one machine and then throw it away if that machine dies.

Those with more knowledge about how Microsoft works concerning XP please correct me as I am making some assumptions as I see things and may not be correct. I try to be as accurate about information as I can be, so I don't mind being corrected.



Mythos

[richdvd]

My problems with Windows XP is the points system they have. I like to change hardware in my PC quite a bit, and Microsoft doesn't like it if you do that too much. I forget how much you can change before you have to contact them.

I would have no problem buying XP if I could simply install it into the next PC I buy when this one craps out. However, I am not going to pay $399.00 for the full version of XP Pro and have Microsoft tell me I can only install it on one PC. I know that goes against the whole reason they came up with activation, but I don't like it. There are 3 PCs here. Only one is capable of even running XP because the other 2 are dinosaurs, so I would only be using it on 1 PC at a time anyway.

I think they should come up with something better like giving each person who buys their full version a license for the number of PCs they own and have it where you call them during activation and they get the MAC address of your NIC or whatever it is they go by. It would be a pain, but it beats having to pay an extra $100.00 for each PC you own.

I also realize I'm only talking about a small percentage of us who actually build our own machines. Most others who buy Dell, Compaq, etc. usually buy the OS with their machines.

That brings up some questions. Is piracy of XP really that big of a widespread problem? Do pirated copies make up even 1/4 of the machines with XP on them? How many people actually build their own PCs now compared to those who just buy one that is already built from Dell and others?

I was thinking about running a small business of building, upgrading, and repairing machines for people, but it is next to impossible now. I cannot compete in today's marketplace for several reasons.
1. There are already dozens of places who do that now.
2. Many of them have connections where they can get their parts from overseas cheaper than I could.
3. Most people I know would rather just buy a computer from Dell, Compaq, etc. because it is easy, and they have a good warranty from what I hear.
4. I cannot compete with the low prices of packaged systems because the cost of the OS is so expensive and I would not break the law there. I don't know how Microsoft found out, but they ran one of those small OEM stores out of business because they were selling machines with Illegal copies of XP.

Sorry to stay, but I hope you can see what I mean. I know most of us on this forum probably build our own machines and a lot of other people do, but I bet it is a very small number compared to those who buy from Dell and the other manufacturers.

I like Windows XP and I like Linux. I have found that each OS has its own advantages and disadvantages. I just don't like Microsoft's tactics sometimes. I can understand not wanting Piracy, but don't charge nearly $400.00 for your OS and be such buttheads about about it. $100.00 is plenty if you can only install the CD on one machine and then throw it away if that machine dies.

Those with more knowledge about how Microsoft works concerning XP please correct me as I am making some assumptions as I see things and may not be correct. I try to be as accurate about information as I can be, so I don't mind being corrected.



Mythos

Excellent post.
That pretty much sums up my views.

[adam]

You can buy a license that allows you to install the os on multiple computers. I don't know what to say, that's their product. The price that is set (usually around $300 US for XP Pro when not on sale and $200 for XP Home, and less for other MS os'es, never seen anything consumer level close to $400) to have it installed on one pc. If they were going to let you install it on multiple pc's they'd have to charge more. That's the os market. People buy one copy and don't need to buy a new one for a loooong time.

[lordsmurf]

<deleted><nevermind>

[edDV]

My problems with Windows XP is the points system they have. I like to change hardware in my PC quite a bit, and Microsoft doesn't like it if you do that too much. I forget how much you can change before you have to contact them.

I've had this happen twice when swapping drives around etc. The second time I had to call them. I told the MS guy that I change HDDs around often for video editing (not the OS drive). He may have changed my profile. I've never had the XP auth come up again.

I would have no problem buying XP if I could simply install it into the next PC I buy when this one craps out. However, I am not going to pay $399.00 for the full version of XP Pro and have Microsoft tell me I can only install it on one PC. ...

If you upgrade an old machine you pay the upgrade price. If you build a new machine, you are able to purchase the OEM version of XP if it is purchased with the hardware (CPU, motherboard etc.). This puts you closer to what you would pay to Dell, etc.


Also, XP has been around a long time now and MS hasn't charged for SP1 or SP2 upgrades. In the old days we had to pay ~$90 every couple of years for upgrades for Windows (1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 2.1, 3.0, 3.1, 3.11 Windows for Workgroups, 95, 98, 98se and ME all required upgrade payment) and even more $ and more often for Mac.

[ViRaL1]

OEM Home is under $100, and Pro is under $150.

As far as the whole 'freedom' thing goes, you have all the freedom in the world to choose an OS. I'm not sure about ALL the big names, but I know DELL offers their systems without an OS, so for those who don't want M$, have at whatever you can find. In respsonse to...

Completely remove ALL of Internet Explorer and go with Firefox and NEVER get a pop-up or spyware again!

You're kidding, right? Just because Firefox isn't as susceptible to popups and spyware as IE is, doesn't make it invulnerable. It's a matter of popularity. It's merely software designed by normal everyday people, and it will be broken like everything else. As far as spyware is concerned, a large portion of it doesn't even come from pop ups, it comes from people not paying attention to what they're installing. I'm no fan of M$ myself, but I don't think it's unfair for them to validate your version of Window$.

It's funny looking at all the arguments and all the complaints of how 'I'm not stealing anything, why should I be treated like a pirate?' It's reminiscent of post 9/11 airport security where people complain 'I'm not a terrorist, why should I be searched?' While it may sound OK when you're the one being searched, it doesn't help the whole to skip someone just because they don't feel it's fair. The whole POINT of validation is to separate those who are pirates from those who aren't. Make no mistake, M$ has had some problems and some setbacks, but they didn't get to be where they are by being total morons. They WILL sell software and they WILL make their numbers, as a PAYING CUSTOMER speaking to OTHER PAYING CUSTOMERS, I'd rather they made it by cutting down the amount of piracy and getting more sales rather than charging those of us who DO understand the reasoning and DO play ball, MORE to make up for the losses. If you don't want to validate you're only hurting yourself, no one at M$ will lose a wink of sleep.

Window$ is NOT yours.

[Zisguy1]

2. you can run win98 aps in win2k in emulation mode ..

No, not all (emulation mode or not). Specific example: Helix Nuts & Bolts (old utilities proggie). The EXE's just won't run, period, no matter what under Win2k.

[BJ_M]

well most then -- but why woudl anyone want to run nuts and bolts on ANY machine anyway ?

[lordsmurf]

This thread has become stupid.
What started as news has become a pro/con MS flamefest.

If you like MS, go here: http://www.microsoft.com
If you hate MS, go here: http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com

[d_unbeliever]

pufff :P
you can connect to microsoft website and get any windows updates or patches using "fake" product keys or validation keys which are widely spread on the net a long long time ago....Service Pack 2 of Windows XP has already cracked. ive seen also pirated copies of Windows bundled with all the service packs and updates that you could ever want. i don't encourage people to do this and our company has strict rules in against using pirated softwares but i know people who have done this.

my point is: no matter what microsoft do its all in vain....useless.

there are more clever guys out there than those microsoft people...

[ViRaL1]

This thread has become stupid.
What started as news has become a pro/con MS flamefest.

If you like MS, go here: http://www.microsoft.com
If you hate MS, go here: http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com

It's hard to take you seriously with your tongue sticking out like that.

P.S. - thanks for the linx.

I have to say it's a bit of a joke that there are more M$ alternatives around than there have ever been before, yet people still complain about it like they have no options.

[BJ_M]

as for firefox - which i really like and use -- its not perfect either ..

http://msn-cnet.com.com/Firefox%3A+When+is+a+flaw+not+a+flaw%3F/2100-1002_3-5517201.ht...2510&tag=mymsn

[ViRaL1]

Say it ain't so Joe!

[BJ_M]

i think thread has run out of juice ......

[BJ_M]

please continue Pro (ish) or dump on ms bashing in the OT please ..