backtop


Print 94 comment(s) - last by StrongBit.. on Oct 20 at 7:12 AM

Microsoft steps up its efforts against pirates with the Software Protection Program

Microsoft is taking the fight to software pirates and is stepping up its anti-piracy efforts with Windows Vista and Windows "Longhorn" Server. The "Software Protection Program" as it's called will disable key Vista components for non-genuine installations. Likewise, Microsoft Volume Activation 2.0 will make it harder for pirates to get away with using volume license keys. While Vista and Windows "Longhorn" Server will be the first products to use the Software Protection Program, Microsoft hopes to extend the technology to other software products in the near future.

With the Software Protection Program, customers will be asked to activate their copy of Vista with a valid product key within 30 days of installation. If the user fails to do so, the operating system will operate in a "reduced functionality mode." In reduced functionality mode, users will not have access to ReadyBoost, the Windows Aero user interface, Windows Defender or optional software updates. Users will, however, still be able to access critical security updates from Windows Update.

Microsoft also has the option to deem an installation of Windows Vista invalid at any time. Cori Hartje, director of Microsoft's Genuine Software Initiative goes on to explain:

If the software is discovered to be counterfeit or non-genuine, the user may be asked to reactivate their copy of Windows. Product keys can be blocked for a number of reasons, including if the product key is abused, stolen, pirated or seized as a result of anti-piracy enforcement efforts. Product keys can also be blocked if they are beta or test keys and have been disabled, if there were manufacturing errors in the keys or if the keys have been returned.

For corporate customers, Microsoft Volume Activation 2.0 is in place to deliver increased protection and management of customer volume license keys in managed and non-managed environments. “This helps provide a more secure deployment solution with multiple, flexible options for customers using volume license keys to deploy many installations of the Windows Vista operating system in one location. This process can be done in batches or individually by PC,” said Hartje. “These improved security and deployment technologies for volume licensing keys benefit customers by reducing the risk associated with the theft, leakage and illegal use of their volume licensing keys, as well as ensuring that the copies of Windows in an organization have not been tampered with.”

Software piracy is a major thorn in the side of Microsoft and it's doing everything in its power to help combat the issues with its next generation software products. Hartje remarked that 35% of all software installations worldwide were pirated or unlicensed in 2005 resulting in industry losses of $35 billion USD.

For more details on Microsoft’s Software Protection Program, you can view the company’s white paper (.doc).



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

almost sounds like
By noxipoo on 10/4/2006 2:05:51 PM , Rating: 5
vista will disable all the bloatware... might be a good thing :D




RE: almost sounds like
By hughlle on 10/4/06, Rating: 0
RE: almost sounds like
By daniel1113 on 10/4/2006 2:25:56 PM , Rating: 2
How is that ridiculous? The requirements are clearly stated, and my guess is that nearly EVERYONE that will be installing Vista has an internet connection.


RE: almost sounds like
By misuspita on 10/4/2006 3:09:46 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
How is that ridiculous? The requirements are clearly stated, and my guess is that nearly EVERYONE that will be installing Vista has an internet connection.


What if my work requires that my computer is not conected to a network? (recording studio, the main computer is not connected in any network for security of data reasons). So I am now forced to connect it just because? Not nice


RE: almost sounds like
By Hare on 10/4/2006 3:48:04 PM , Rating: 1
I'd quess there will be phone activation for those without Internet connection.


RE: almost sounds like
By Tsuwamono on 10/4/06, Rating: -1
RE: almost sounds like
By Enoch2001 on 10/5/06, Rating: -1
RE: almost sounds like
By Samus on 10/5/2006 2:27:44 AM , Rating: 1
microsoft is protecting their years of work the best they can. you can't blame them for trying. the volume license protection scheme is probably the first anti-piracy system i've seen from them that'll work, because face it, most pirated XP installations are from volume keys as they dont even require activation, and will always authenticate as genuine.

they need to change the volume license distribution system as well. that's probably on their list. vista is not unreasonably priced, with the two 'important' versions both below $200, and OEM copies in the $80 and $150 range.

That makes it only slightly more expensive than Windows XP MCE.


RE: almost sounds like
By trabpukcip on 10/9/2006 7:05:12 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Microsoft blows and lost my business a while ago when they tried to tell me that my store bought copy of windows XP was pirated. I phoned them and they said that its not genuine because i changed my system configuration(i put in a new CPU) so i told the guy over the phone to go screw himself and i just used a WGA fix to get rid of their crappy WGA stuff and turned off Auto update.


They only wont activate an OEM Windows if you change the motherboard as that is the main component of a computer.

If you have a retail box or retail upgrade, then you can activate on another motherboard, provided that you tell them that the old machine no longer is using windows or not functional.

What else have you changed besides just the CPU?


RE: almost sounds like
By tuteja1986 on 10/5/2006 3:34:33 AM , Rating: 1
Then you call up Microsoft and they will give you a key to activite your copy of windows vista... Microsoft ain't going to make it exclusive to people with internet.


RE: almost sounds like
By Trisped on 10/4/2006 2:31:51 PM , Rating: 1
Not quite that bad
quote:
The "Software Protection Program" as it's called will disable key Vista components for non-genuine installations.
So this only applies to Vista right now. If they add it to other software, like MS Office, then you will also have to activate that.

Think of it as Windows Genuine Advatage renamed.


RE: almost sounds like
By kamel5547 on 10/4/2006 3:04:16 PM , Rating: 1
Well that seems to be the way things are headed, tons of other products "require" activation, from Mcaffee to Adobe to AutoCAD you either need to call in or activate online, I can't imagine the call in option will be completely removed, but I would expect that it will become more complex.

Maybe they should just bring back the dongle, at the office we still sue those for some engineering software.



RE: almost sounds like
By imaheadcase on 10/4/2006 5:07:55 PM , Rating: 1
Well its safe to say those programs and many more you can disable the activation. Adobe had some sort or online activation i beleive, but never had to use it


RE: almost sounds like
By rushfan2006 on 10/4/2006 3:20:31 PM , Rating: 5
Oh here we go with the whining on this one...

Some observations I find interesting in the realm of IT/Technology "communities"...

-Isn't it funny if you are just talking about broadband access, then someone says "lol..I'm still using 56k dialup"...then that person is flamed with all kinds of stuff ranging from "dude do you live in a cave?" to "OMG you can't be serious, EVERYONE has broadband nowadays".

Yet come to a discussion on an anti-piracy program that requires you to have a 'net connection to check the authenticity of the install and suddently its "omg..that is an outrage!". lol.

-You'll read an article on a board about software piracy and how big of a problem it has become. Its generalized though, not naming any particular software company. So then the replies to that topic is more or less, with a few exceptions of course, "Yes something should be done about piracy" or "I do agree companies have a right to protect their products from piracy".

Yet, a company comes out with a program to protect their products from piracy and suddenly you have hordes of people that are whining and moaning about it such a program?

-Finally, if you start a debate on the reliability of enterprise networks today - and just for giggles you play devil's advocate and argue with everyone in the forum that current networks aren't that reliable, servers fail way too much, etc. You'll very like get flamed and some passionate replies saying you don't know your arse from a hole in the wall.

YET....a software company comes up with a anti-piracy program that requires verifying your install with their servers and suddnely people are saying "This is ridiculous...oh great...just great...now we have to rely on their servers just to install my OS!!".

My point: I love how everyone changes their stories to suit their biases depending on what company the article is about.

My thought on this program...good for MS. It's all about perspective people -- I'm someone who honesty pays for my OS all the time, everytime. Therefore I don't worry about this stuff...at all. Is there an outside chance that the system could have a glitch and mistakenly interrupt my install or degrade me....of course there is. That's why they invented something called a RECEIPT. (genius I know)...

Secondly, MS is a professionally global BILLION-dollar company, they know they are hated probably more than they are loved the world over. Do you HONESTLY think that MS would WANT their system to glitch up and cause their honest-paying customers problems? If you say yes to that you are just an idiot of the highest order.

It would hurt their bottomline.

This is too nice a program actually, if I were MS I wouldn't just disable some features -- I'd have it disable the ENTIRE OS.


RE: almost sounds like
By bob661 on 10/4/2006 4:33:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is too nice a program actually, if I were MS I wouldn't just disable some features -- I'd have it disable the ENTIRE OS.

quote:
Do you HONESTLY think that MS would WANT their system to glitch up and cause their honest-paying customers problems?

Aren't these statements contradictory?


RE: almost sounds like
By jconan on 10/4/2006 4:52:51 PM , Rating: 2
2nd that. what about ms not supporting those who bought "music under play for sure" in zune? those honest paying customers won't be supported under zune. they will have to buy every title again just to play it in zune since the earlier purchased music isn't supported in zune... ubuntuu


RE: almost sounds like
By rushfan2006 on 10/4/2006 5:00:22 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't re-read the article, so unless they edited it to include the stuff you are talking about in Zune I'm purely talking about the OS related stuff.

And for the record, you guys are hilarious...if you are an honest paying customer (and assuming you keep your invoices/receipts) MS (nor could any company...at least US based) CAN NOT deny you full service of their product that you paid for..its against the law and you would wind HANDS DOWN in a court.

Likewise if you had proof you bought the music in your zune example...there's no WAY the law would ALLOW MS to say "you have to buy that same content again".

Use some common sense people.


RE: almost sounds like
By modestninja on 10/4/2006 7:57:29 PM , Rating: 2
I always puchase my OS... I've still got my orignal XP pro that I purchased 4 years and just upgraded (basically rebuilt my computer) making it so i had to install the OS again. At this point do you think that I have any idea whatsoever where my receipt is? No way am I hanging on to a receipt for that long just to prove that I purchased something.

Also, if this system for Vista had a glitch then you'd be stuck wasting a ton of your time trying to clear up someone else's mess.


RE: almost sounds like
By rushfan2006 on 10/5/2006 7:39:50 AM , Rating: 2
I don't care what you say my opinion is the same...

Which is people basically want their cake and eat it too...that is a great ideal to try to attain..but where the rubber meets the road you find its not realistic.

It just so happens that MS comes out with this system...I'd say the same thing if "fill in the name of your fav software company" came out with this system.

Would I be pissed if it glitched? You are damn right I would be...but that still doesn't change the reality that something like this is bound to have happened sooner or later by SOMEONE.

As for you losing your receipt that's really YOUR problem, no one elses.

I keep a file myself, so to answer you there... actually yeah I still do have my OS receipts from 3 years ago for XP.

Bottomline: I think its rich how everyone largely at least agrees that piracy is wrong and from a business perspective most can understand the impact it has on the bottomline (my god over 30 BILLION?)...yet no one expects any system like this to be in place.

Finally, funny you guys are worried about a simple server glitch disabling your OS to your computer....do you folks realize how much our physical well being and financial well being is relied upon on computer systems everyday of our lives? What if they glitched?

Well there are laws about that stuff.....yep and their are also laws against companies that deny you service and product access when you paid for them too.

Everyone on the site can disagree with my point...I don't change mine.



RE: almost sounds like
By segagenesis on 10/5/2006 8:48:20 AM , Rating: 2
A worthy challenge...

quote:
I don't care what you say my opinion is the same...

quote:
Everyone on the site can disagree with my point...I don't change mine.


This is still dangerous thinking, however, as it is akin to sticking fingers in your ears and yelling "la la la I cant hear you la la la".

quote:
It just so happens that MS comes out with this system...I'd say the same thing if "fill in the name of your fav software company" came out with this system.


What? This has been done for a long time now. And likewise, others (including myself) have chastised horrible protection schemes that lock the user out of the software they purchased when things go awry. Don't be too asinine to think that it's going to work perfectly... I've been burned on this before personally.

quote:
Bottomline: I think its rich how everyone largely at least agrees that piracy is wrong and from a business perspective most can understand the impact it has on the bottomline (my god over 30 BILLION?)...yet no one expects any system like this to be in place.


We can see where your going with that, but I should point out that estimated losses from piracy are exactly that, numbers someone pulled out of the air. With the US having the lowest rates of piracy for developed counties, you have bigger fish to fry.

quote:
Finally, funny you guys are worried about a simple server glitch disabling your OS to your computer....do you folks realize how much our physical well being and financial well being is relied upon on computer systems everyday of our lives? What if they glitched?


I can't tell if your trolling, but again where have you been? Wow I'm without my computer at home... big deal. What about businesses...

quote:
Well there are laws about that stuff.....yep and their are also laws against companies that deny you service and product access when you paid for them too.


Still, the asinine viewpoint of all this is dangerous. I'm certain this would be illegal in Germany and several other countries... but considering that the US government put Microsoft on trial, found them to be a monopoly, and nothing ever really came out of that... what luck is the average home user going to have proving thier case if so? It's all about perspective here.

I think you make some good points but your viewpoint is too narrow as this is the kind of slippery slope of the "stop whining easy mode defense" where it does not bother you until it actually affects you. Then, alas, its too late to do anything. Personal experience dictates that outright locking users out of software is a very bad practice that just will lead to users finding alternatives, and at this point in time Microsoft can only go down from the top.

I've dealt with a vast range of protected software and I can only say that those with simple serial codes despite being easily copyable have been the most reliable for us. I can't imagine how things would be if they went one step further and required USB dongles or worse. (Yeah, there is worse!)


RE: almost sounds like
By Schrag4 on 10/6/2006 12:18:04 PM , Rating: 2
I have to agree with rushfan on this one. You may not like the chances that something may go wrong with their servers and suddenly your OS isn't fully featured anymore, but then again you don't have to buy Vista either. To say that no security measure that may inconvenience you in the least should be in there is like saying we shouldn't have metal detectors in an airport. Ok, it's not exactly the same, but if you want to use Windows, then you want MS to make as much money as possible (so that they have the resources to fix/improve Windows). If you want them to make as much money as possible, then you should want them to stop software pirates from stealing their OS.

Of course maybe you want to steal the OS yourself, or maybe you just hate MS, in which case, yes, this blows from your perspective....


RE: almost sounds like
By trabpukcip on 10/9/2006 7:11:48 AM , Rating: 2
You don't even need to keep a file on it. When you upgrade with your Retail XP just use regedit on the machine you are upgrading from to get the key if can't find it.


RE: almost sounds like
By rushfan2006 on 10/4/2006 4:55:41 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Oh here we go with the whining on this one...


Only to someone that trolls through posts with the pure intent to find fault with ANYTHING they see, just for the sake of starting drama/controversy where there is none...

But anyways...of course not....the top quote you referred to is talking about the ILLEGAL users you know what they call "PIRATES"? -- to THOSE folks yeah...I'd disable the OS.

The second quote you selected, is talking about the HONEST-PAYING customers....oh wait silly me I mentioned that in the very quote you are talking about?

Therefore, how you see these contradictory -- is beyond me.

Nice attempt though. ;)



RE: almost sounds like
By rushfan2006 on 10/4/2006 4:56:56 PM , Rating: 2
How in the hell it quoted that statement above I have no idea.....I swear I didn't use that quote...oh well...


RE: almost sounds like
By Garreye on 10/4/2006 11:39:10 PM , Rating: 2
I think the point he was making about the contradiction is in the fact that the anit-piracy software is never perfect and sometimes the honest-paying customer who paid for the OS are accused of being a pirate, at which point certain features of the OS are disabled, but the OS is still usable albeit with annoying messages every other minute saying ur windows is not genuine but still usable. If MS were to disable the OS completely and the anit-piracy software made a mistake then MS would have a major problem as the user's PC would be unusable until they called MS and then had to deal with the issue which may take a long time to resolve.


RE: almost sounds like
By rushfan2006 on 10/5/2006 7:31:36 AM , Rating: 2
But my frustration came in my post because that point you just made is exactly what I was talking about in my entire post.



RE: almost sounds like
By Emryse on 10/5/2006 8:55:58 AM , Rating: 2
I just want to add on a little something to what already amounts to a huge discussion on nothing that will ever change - or go away.

Simply put: I use MS. I purchase MS. When MS needs me to activate my software, I call or verify via my internet connection. I have never experienced a wait time longer than 15 minutes to complete this process, or a similar process designed to deter piracy. Ever.

And for those of you complaining about the time-wasting inconvenience of dealing with such a process, I ask you this: will activating your OS waste as much time as you've spent complaining about it on this forum, or searching for your illegal key or patch online perhaps?

Copyright protection / piracy deterence is HERE TO STAY. If you don't like it - hack it at your own risk, or don't use the product at all. As for me, I'll gladly confirm my copy is authentic, and I'll gladly take the free support that goes along with my genuinely purchased product.


RE: almost sounds like
By segagenesis on 10/5/2006 9:23:13 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Simply put: I use MS. I purchase MS. When MS needs me to activate my software, I call or verify via my internet connection. I have never experienced a wait time longer than 15 minutes to complete this process, or a similar process designed to deter piracy. Ever.


(golf claps) Good for you. I once had to wait three weeks for a company to get back to me because thier parallel port key failed. Do you think the software was usable during this time? Again, the asinine point of view that because everything works perfectly for you, it must work perfectly for everyone else! I certainly hope that you never have to work a marginally more important job where things get more complicated than that for software licensing. (Don't take that too personally)

quote:
And for those of you complaining about the time-wasting inconvenience of dealing with such a process, I ask you this: will activating your OS waste as much time as you've spent complaining about it on this forum, or searching for your illegal key or patch online perhaps?


Those who actually rip stuff off don't complain about it. They just do it and go about thier merry way. If they can't they dont complain either because of obvious reasons, what do you brag about pirating software on forums? Those who are against activities like this are, as me, fairly heated about the whole thing. I'm not trying to be a dick about the whole thing, but merely pointing out to some people such as yourself that things in the real world are not as rosy as one may believe.

quote:
Copyright protection / piracy deterence is HERE TO STAY. If you don't like it - hack it at your own risk, or don't use the product at all. As for me, I'll gladly confirm my copy is authentic, and I'll gladly take the free support that goes along with my genuinely purchased product.


Umm, in the past people who did not like it wrote letters to the company complaining. In some cases they actually reversed the comapnies stance on the matter. Honestly now, did you just start using PC's a few years ago? We stopped buying a particularly expensive (and horribly protected) piece of software a few years back. The company asked us why we would not be renewing our license and it was mentioned about the problems with thier licensing system, of course they gave the rebuttal that it was a problem on our end but the point of the matter is why do we have to deal with this? If, as you so say, its so easy to find a crack for this stuff then why are the legitimate users being punished as such?

So yeah, we stopped using the product altogether. Yet, would that company then chalk up the loss (about $100,000 or so from us?) to piracy as an excuse? I don't understand why people like copy protection when it does not stop pirates. I can only be tankful my own personal hell is somewhat smaller thanks to having more software as of late that is not bound by network licensing, hardware locks, activation or disk cheks.

Remember this guy? http://www.schindler.org/ Remember how much he hated copy protection too? If not, you have not been around long enough to really say that anti-piracy measures are always the best move to please customers. If Vista's protection is going to be so perfect as you describe, then how about lowering the price considering there are zero losses now? Some people you will never please...


RE: almost sounds like
By Locutus465 on 10/8/2006 8:36:46 PM , Rating: 2
Well, with Windows XP you have the option to activate over the phone, I assume the same flexability will be offered to Vista customers...


RE: almost sounds like
By Locutus465 on 10/8/2006 8:36:46 PM , Rating: 2
Well, with Windows XP you have the option to activate over the phone, I assume the same flexability will be offered to Vista customers...


RE: almost sounds like
By laok on 10/4/2006 2:20:38 PM , Rating: 2
That is my first impression after reading the article. Seems I'd better use a copyleft version to save some of my CPU/GPU power.


RE: almost sounds like
By Kamasutra on 10/4/2006 6:24:03 PM , Rating: 2
That only applies to Windows Aero and Windows Defender (both of which can be disabled manually anyway). ReadyBoost should help you save CPU power. The optional updates are "optional" and some will probably be useful, especially service packs.


why not just disable the OS altogether?
By johnsonx on 10/4/2006 2:28:21 PM , Rating: 2
This is not to say I agree with Microsoft's approach in the first place, but it strikes me as odd that Microsoft will essentially 'bless' your use of a pirated copy of Windows by allowing it to run with 'reduced functionality'. If they're serious about this, why are they pussy-footing around? Why not just disable the OS once it's been verified to be illegit? Or maybe force it to shut down after every ten minutes of use?

Give 30 days of increasingly stern warnings of course, but after that why let a pirate install run at all?




RE: why not just disable the OS altogether?
By Trisped on 10/4/2006 2:35:55 PM , Rating: 3
Because the pirates are usually home users who don't want to pay. Microsoft doesn't want them to get use to Linux, so instead allows them something, but at reduced functionality. The result is that they will keep using it (because that is easiest) and may become so annoyed with the performance drop or lack of features that they will upgrade to a legit copy.

They don't want to make the pirates enemies, just get them to pay for what they obviously find usefull.


By therealnickdanger on 10/4/2006 3:01:11 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. It's a good move, but I still find it somewhat shocking that many people don't pay for licenses. C'mon, it's the bedrock of the modern PC and it's only about $100. People drop $100 more on RAM that gives them a 2% edge...

Anyway, how exactly is this different than XP's 30-day activation? I guess I've never gone that long without activating...


RE: why not just disable the OS altogether?
By Wwhat on 10/4/06, Rating: 0
RE: why not just disable the OS altogether?
By bnme on 10/4/2006 5:17:07 PM , Rating: 2
Of course... but the thing is, if you purchase the software legally anyhow, this feature shouldn't really annoy you enough to not buy it. However, it'll put off a significant amount of people from pirating it (the casual piraters), if Vista came with no DRM at all.


By bnme on 10/4/2006 5:18:11 PM , Rating: 2
Add "compared to" before "if Vista came with no DRM at all"


RE: why not just disable the OS altogether?
By Kuroyama on 10/6/2006 12:35:18 PM , Rating: 2
That ludicrous justification applies to copying anything. I'd rather have a xeroxed textbook that I can easily unbind and "backup" with additional copies, instead of an original that is hard to make nice photocopies of. Guess I shouldn't buy the real thing!


By Wwhat on 10/8/2006 1:21:13 PM , Rating: 2
It is a real motivation, I did on occasion buy software who's protection was rather crippling while I read about the pirated version being worryfree, then I look at software I used that was pirated and remember hearing people complaining that had legal copies about the pesky protection.
These things when experienced both ways do certainly encourage a person to get pirated software.
Even the protection of many games where you have to have the original CD/DVD in the drive to play are quite annoying, you end up having to look for the thing when you want to play or to constantly having to have it in your drive so that when you need ot use it for something else you must swap, it's all adds up to being quite annoying.
Personaly I also like to have some privacy and don't like to have microsoft track me, now when I buy vista for instance with a CC they can tie the key to my name and their DRM and phonehome stuff keeps a constant track of me, I experience that as unacceptable, so I'd have to buy it with cash and constantly have to make sure my name doesn't somehow get 'DRM/WGA' transimtted to them when I use my name in it, it's all pesky and annoying.


RE: why not just disable the OS altogether?
By Christopher1 on 10/4/2006 9:42:43 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, an OEM copy is about 150 dollars, one in a store is about 300 dollars for the full version.

I would really like it however, if when Microsoft created "Service Pack 2 pre-installed!" discs that a person could send their original disk or copies of their system restore disk back to them and get that new version free.

I don't know how many times with my Windows XP nothing (no service packs!) version I have had a HELL of a time getting connected to the internet because Windows XP no service packs doesn't support Wireless networking.


By Kazairl on 10/4/2006 10:53:57 PM , Rating: 2
"I don't know how many times with my Windows XP nothing (no service packs!) version I have had a HELL of a time getting connected to the internet because Windows XP no service packs doesn't support Wireless networking."

You can use your original XP CD, the full network install of the SP2 patch, and CD-burning software to create a bootable XP CD that already has SP2 integrated into it. Search for "slipstreaming service pack 2 into Windows XP." One guide is at http://www.helpwithwindows.com/WindowsXP/winxp-sp2... . Just make sure you copy the hidden and system files when you copy your XP CD onto your hard disk.




By JMecc on 10/4/2006 3:23:30 PM , Rating: 2
Trisped hit the nail on the head - MS doesn't want users to switch to linux but nevertheless needs to restrict their pirated copy a little more than the no updates on XP. Whereas I can see users justifying piracy of business software to play with (students practicing AutoCAD skills at home rather than at school), Windows is a critical piece of software that influences your entire computing experience and should be payed for (like companies regularly using AutoCAD do). If you don't find that Windows is adding any value to your computer use, go to Linux instead although my guess is most would switch right back. I like providing inexpensive solutions for people to get decent computers but no one factors in Windows, assuming they can get it *free* somewhere. I hope that if MS successfully cracks down on piracy it will mean a price decrease on the whole (although maybe I'm dreaming).


RE: why not just disable the OS altogether?
By vanka on 10/4/2006 3:25:07 PM , Rating: 2
Or how about the people who unknowingly got a pirated version of Windows with their PC? It's not their fault that the guy who sold them their computer was a pirate, and now their computer doesn't work at all.


RE: why not just disable the OS altogether?
By stromgald on 10/4/2006 3:53:15 PM , Rating: 3
I've seen these arguments before, and they kindof baffle me. Why is someone being duped into buying pirated Windows any of Microsoft's business? Its like blaming Ford because you bought a used Ford car that had all its insides swapped out with cheap, crap parts. I doubt Ford would fix such a car at a discounted rate like how Microsoft offers you an upgrade to a legit copy at a discounted rate. At least Microsoft does that for you.


By therealnickdanger on 10/4/2006 5:25:32 PM , Rating: 2
That's a decent analogy. IMO, the same applies to media. It shouldn't be the business of the MPAA or RIAA if I make a copy of a CD that I bought and give it to my sister or the guy down the street. In Microsoft's defense, it is unfair for them to unknowingly supply support and warranty for illegitimate copies as that raises their costs which ultimately raises ours.

In these days of intentionally gray digital rights, Microsoft is walking the fine line: force users to activate their software at the expense of losing some customers to other OSs versus losing some customers because the full version can be had for free, thus no incentive to buy. I'm pretty much indifferent since I'll happily shovel over my dough for Vista, but probably not until I find a reason to switch from the immaculate XP. It took me a good 1-2 years to make the jump from Win2K, but I may make this transistion faster since I had lots of fun with the Vista beta.


By SprintSlash on 10/4/2006 2:37:29 PM , Rating: 2
I think the main goal is to make you purchase legal copy of software. Think of letting you install and running in reduced functionality as "trial version" of the software, just to get you addicted.


By sxr7171 on 10/4/2006 7:32:54 PM , Rating: 2
A crippled version version would drive me far more crazy than one that just stopped working. I could just go back to XP, but having to see the new Vista interface everyday and having it crippled is a far worse fate.


By rcc on 10/5/2006 3:52:58 PM , Rating: 2
I'd say their goal is two fold.

1) Allow the user to purchase/upgrade etc. if they have a pirated copy.

2) They know this is not going to work perfectly, and this gives the system which is incorrectly IDed as pirated/fake/xyz, a chance to get it corrected and continue vital work in the process. They don't want to piss off their customers any more than necessary, while still protecting their work/investment.



This will help sales.
By Tupolev22m on 10/4/2006 2:16:17 PM , Rating: 1
As if we needed another reason not to switch to Vista. Microsoft being able to disable a valid install at any time on their whim? I don't use programs that can do that, I'll keep my XP or finally emulate my last games and switch to Ubuntu...




RE: This will help sales.
By laok on 10/4/2006 2:44:11 PM , Rating: 1
I do not want the damn Windows server that takes me days to configure to be disabled by M$, well, by mistake. One reboot per critical update is annoying enough already.


RE: This will help sales.
By bnme on 10/4/2006 4:05:41 PM , Rating: 1
Errr, the chances of your legal copy of Vista being locked up are tiny.

So you'd for-go the upgrade to Vista, which will have a new patching system that will make rebooting after patching a rarity, because of the small chance that Vista will mistakenly lock you out, and stay with the reboot-after-patching happy current version of Windows? Not to mention that the issue would be easily resolved with a call to Microsoft. Hey... whatever suits you.


RE: This will help sales.
By fic2 on 10/4/2006 7:00:06 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Errr, the chances of your legal copy of Vista being locked up are tiny.


According to this http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3140 the false positive rate is around 20% for XP. I wouldn't call that tiny.


RE: This will help sales.
By Christopher1 on 10/4/2006 9:45:24 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, some of those reports are now being challenged. Some of the people actually DID have an illegal version of Windows XP and didn't know it, because some 'techie' they knew told them they were going to put a legal version on it and just used one downloaded off the internet.


RE: This will help sales.
By kelmon on 10/5/2006 3:34:31 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, this happened to me yesterday on a laptop with a legitimate installation of Windows XP Pro that had been Activated and validated successfully a number of times previously by WGA. Yesterday, however, it was determined to be an illegal installation and I had to waste a valuable hour getting this problem corrected - a process that finally culminated in having to call their support group in India and get a new activation code.

An hour of some people's time might not be much but it wasn't time that I could afford yesterday. Worse, however, is the question of why waste of time was even necessary in the first place? Needless to say this appears to be (yet another) bodged job, at least in XP.


RE: This will help sales.
By imaheadcase on 10/4/2006 5:10:27 PM , Rating: 2
By using the $ sign in Microsoft your post was secretly flagged as being a Linux fanboy..


RE: This will help sales.
By Christopher1 on 10/4/2006 9:39:30 PM , Rating: 2
What are you talking about? It's one reboot per SERIES of patches.

I have installed many critical updates at one time before, and only had to reboot the ONE time, for all of them.

The fact is that even on Linux, when you patch something that has to do with the core of the operating system.... you gotta reboot.


funny
By Murst on 10/4/2006 3:06:48 PM , Rating: 3
Its amusing how people attack microsoft on stuff like this. Microsoft has every right to put in any type of protection into their software that they wish.

Also, for those people who complain about having to have an internet connection.. you don't. Microsoft has previously offered a phone number on windows installations that you can call and activate your copy of windows. I highly doubt this will not be available for vista.

And for the disabling part... I think XP had something like a limit of 5 installations (I think a separate installation is determined when the OS detects a different MB) per week on a single serial number before it blocked it. Vista will probably have something similar, and although I'm sure someone will pop out and state that they have a valid reason to install a single copy of vista on 6 different MBs per week, I doubt it will be on a more frequent basis than 1 per 100k installations.

The vast majority of customers will not be affected by this issue, even if people try to make it out like that is exactly what will happen.




RE: funny
By Staples on 10/4/2006 5:04:13 PM , Rating: 2
Most people complaining if you have not guessed are complaining because they can't steal Windows as easily. It is a simple concept and this is the way it is with everything. Remember everybody hating the idea of HD disk formats using copy protection? Ask them why. They will never say it but it is because they can't rent and burn like they do DVDs now days.

Now do I care? No, nor do I complain about Apple DRM. People who complain are the people who the copy protection was designed to stop.


RE: funny
By ammlm on 10/4/2006 5:45:39 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Remember everybody hating the idea of HD disk formats using copy protection? Ask them why. They will never say it but it is because they can't rent and burn like they do DVDs now days.


Errr...?...? I'm pretty sure that DVDs have copy protection, too. And I'm pretty sure that they cracked it. And I'm pretty sure that they'll crack HD DVD and BD copy protection.


RE: funny
By Ray 69 on 10/4/2006 7:14:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And for the disabling part... I think XP had something like a limit of 5 installations (I think a separate installation is determined when the OS detects a different MB) per week on a single serial number before it blocked it.


It didn't have to do with different hardware, just the number of times you went to activate it in a particular time frame (you state 1 week). I know because it happened to me when building a new system. When installing software (not changing ANY hardware), someting would happen screwing up XP so instead of spending unknown time trying to fix the install, I just re-installed and started over. After the 5th time I had to call MS. It was no problem getting it going again after explaining what was going on to the guy on the other end of the phone.


We have been through this before.....
By fyahman on 10/4/2006 3:43:52 PM , Rating: 2
MS is doing what they need to do to "protect" their software. Remember...your licensed the software..you dont own it...

Does it really matter though? If you buy your copy legit..good for you and you should have no problems (unless MS screws that up somehow)...if you pirate then I guess it sucks for you (for now). We all know eventually a hack will be made to get around this...remember Windows XP activation scheme? cracked....WGA....cracked...havent we been this route before?




RE: We have been through this before.....
By INeedCache on 10/4/2006 4:40:37 PM , Rating: 2
Not quite. With this feature being embedded within the OS code, it will be harder to disable, or "crack". Not saying it won't happen, because it likely will. But it will likely also be more difficult. I applaud MS, and any other software company, for taking measures to combat piracy. I for one, am sick and tired of the worn-out excuses for pirating software. It's all rationalization for a simply criminal act. Not one pirate would want it done to them. This will likely at least reduce some of the piracy.


By segagenesis on 10/4/2006 8:07:13 PM , Rating: 1
Well if you want to bring up that old strawman argument about "justification", you probably have never used a well protected piece of software before when you actually bought it. So you could say in your tone of voice that I for one am sick of companies treating paying customers like criminals. See how easy it was to turn that around?

People are going to keep ripping off software somewhere or somehow like they have been since you could have possibly been able to at the dawn of computing. Every time there is a discussion on piracy out come the silly comments like "omg those warez puppies are getting screwed over!" or in your case "stop making excuses". More appropriately put: They don't give a shred of care what you think. Some might make excuses as if they cant afford it, blah blah blah... but the fact of the matter is what are you we trying to do putting them down? Wax in morality?

Back to the point, I certainly hope everything works absolutely perfect in your world, because for the rest of it were not so blessed. I could go on about examples of problems with hardware locks to network licensing, to how older games with custom floppy protections wore out your disk drive (C64 woodpecker, how I loate thee). So yeah, I'm sick of having to prove I bought the software when someone down the road can run it without issue using cracks. Don't get me even started about how games I've bought quit working because the flaky CD protection failed with age after only a few months.

Obvioulsy this is a personal pet peeve about the subject because I really "don't get it" when people throw up fireworks and break out the champaghne when more difficult protections come out. For the experienced or seasoned users they usually work most of the time but when they fail, it really sucks when you cant use software you paid for.

I respect your position however I don't think better anti-piracy is going to solve anything for Windows Vista. I have bought everything from 3.1 to XP and for the first time I genuinely am thinking of switching to alternatives because companies that think I already stole thier product, don't deserve my money. Vote with your wallet.


RE: We have been through this before.....
By QueBert on 10/5/06, Rating: 0
RE: We have been through this before.....
By rcc on 10/5/2006 4:43:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not sure I agree with you about the pirates wouldn't want it done to them. If I was able to program, I would only do freeware.


So, what is it you do for a living?? And why do you charge money for it? Why don't you do it for free?

quote:
As it only takes ONE person cracking it to basically void even the most advanced protection scheme.


Interesting perspective, wildly inaccurate, but interesting. Contrary to your belief, having one person crack protections doesn't mean that everyone can or will use the cracked version.

It's up to a company to decide where the trade off is between money spent on developement of copy protection, and the money saved by having it in place. As with everything they do.... if they are right, they make money, if they are wrong, they loose it. And yes, they factor in loss of business as well.

And why is it that some people think that doing something unethical is somehow mitigated by the size of the company involved?


Double-Edged Sword
By SprintSlash on 10/4/2006 2:34:58 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft will definitely reduce the number of pirated software with this approach, but more people will probably end up buying new computer with Vista pre-installed, staying with Windows XP or switching to other OSes...

Vista may possibly lose popularity with this protection?




RE: Double-Edged Sword
By bnme on 10/4/2006 3:24:13 PM , Rating: 2
This new anti-pirating system will only affect... errr, pirates. Most consumers will purchase PC's with Vista already pre-loaded on. Most businesses will have open-licenses which probably won't require activation.

The pirates who would pirate the software whether it has copy-protection or not would be the only ones affected.

People building their own PC's or upgrade usually just go out and grab a new boxed versions of the OS, instead of opting to go to malware-laden sites to download pirated copies of Vista that might not even work.

Switching to Mac's is also not exactly the most cost-effective decision either (purchasing a brand new Mac vs. an upgrade copy of Vista). As for Linux...yeah well... it might also not be the most cost-effective switch for most consumers either (spend more time getting used to Linux than doing something a tad bit more productive).


RE: Double-Edged Sword
By msva124 on 10/4/2006 4:15:54 PM , Rating: 2
I think you're right. Pirated installs may not be a complete loss for Microsoft. If the pirate likes Vista, they probably spread good word of mouth causing other people to pay for it. Among other things. Basically it could have unintended consequences.

Then again, Microsoft is changing so many variables with this thing it will be impossible to tell if this one feature is raising or lowering sales.


A good operating system
By Chien de Rue on 10/5/2006 3:45:28 AM , Rating: 1
Here's one way to avoid Microsoft's greed:

Download a version of Linux that's very user friendly here:
http://www.mepis.org/node/1462 or try another (Ubuntu 6.06, Redhat,...)
Burn a "Live CD" and try it out. You will discover several things:
1. It's free AND it's legal
2. It looks as nice as Windows XP
3. It comes with a free and legal version of Office (OpenOffice)
4. You do not need to buy Antivirus software, that comes legally free with Linux too. And in fact viruses are hardly a problem in Linux.
5. You can try to run Linux as a dual boot system next to your "Windows" on the same computer. You can later decide which you want to keep.

By doing this you will free yourself from dependence on one company for your computer needs. Any professional user should look at this. You will save mega$$$$




RE: A good operating system
By B166ER on 10/5/2006 11:36:22 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah thats all crescent dough fresh, but tell me this, will my Emu 1212m be supported? Or hows about CubaseSX? Or WoW? Hmm, my motherboards latest and greatest drivers? Well since its free, maybe Ill have lots of FREE time to sit and wait for software/hardware/drivers to be supported. Linux is a waste of time. Its the most nonproductive productivity software availible.


RE: A good operating system
By fyahman on 10/5/2006 1:54:36 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
will my Emu 1212m be supported? Or hows about CubaseSX?


Ok, Mr. Producer...those may not be supported....yet..

quote:
Hmm, my motherboards latest and greatest drivers? Well since its free, maybe Ill have lots of FREE time to sit and wait for software/hardware/drivers to be supported.


what motherboard are you having problems with? nforce2? nforce3? 4? 5 series? ati chipsets? via chipsets? i have worked with numerous chipsets under linux and never once had to worry about driver issues...do your research sir before you comment

quote:
Its the most nonproductive productivity software availible.


Yes...because you cant get your Emu 1212m or CubaseSX to work. In your own words...WOW.....best argument not to try linux....you win sir.


RE: A good operating system
By Chien de Rue on 10/5/2006 11:44:21 PM , Rating: 2
You're right. If Emu 1212 and CubaseSX are important for you, Linux will be a waste of time for you specifically and vice versa.

But for all those who want a stable operating system, safe internet browsing, e-mail, writing documents, spreadsheets, presentations, process pictures and video, play MP3's and other music formats and plenty of other stuff... for free
Just try the Live CD and see for yourself.

True enough, if you want your unique piece of software to work, that may be difficult or even impossible in Linux.
If your hardware is not too old, the linux community will help you to solve the problem (for free). Or with the 250$ that you saved on the OS, you can buy a new piece of hardware.
Most users will enjoy the lack of viruses, spyware, crashes etc. Ah, they will also enjoy the lack of "software protection program" or WGA.


Oh great...
By 05SilverGT on 10/4/2006 2:09:44 PM , Rating: 2
Let the posts about Microsoft being the devil begin! I bet if Microsoft just dropped copy protection and the price of Windows Vista they would make just as much if not more money because of the increased number of units sold. As it stands now for the average user there is no major need for Vista.




RE: Oh great...
By Chadder007 on 10/4/2006 3:06:08 PM , Rating: 1
I totally agree. If they dropped the price in half and got rid of Software protection....they could be saving money by
*Not having to have servers to keep up with key code system.
*Not having to pay for Internet connections to those servers.
*Not having to have programmers constantly updating the program.
*Not having to have a tech support team to be on call for errors that are created by this system.
.....all of that money saved could be channeled into lower costs for the upgrades, but will they do it? Noooooo.


RE: Oh great...
By jconan on 10/4/2006 4:55:29 PM , Rating: 2
i agree... why don't they just make sim chips mandatory... one sim chip per license and do away with the software protection program cost savings and the sim chip works like dongle and it's cost effective... no overtime support and no tech supports


35 billion in losses? Get real
By encryptkeeper on 10/4/2006 5:35:33 PM , Rating: 3
Three industries need to wake up:
1. Software companies and publishers
2. The music industry
3. Hollywood

They all need to wake up and stop crying about piracy. Or at least, they need to stop exaggerating the "losses" that they incur due to piracy. Do you really think that ALL of those people who illegally copy software, music, and movies would actually buy them if they couldn't copy them for free??? I bet over 90% of those people would just do without.




RE: 35 billion in losses? Get real
By stmok on 10/5/2006 12:29:39 AM , Rating: 2
The worst one is the Music industry.

Their attack on P2P is basically an excuse or scape goat for not being adaptable to new technologies and distribution models. (They'd rather stick to the old way, because its proven and highly profitable).

Seriously, which idiot thought up taking legal action against potential customers? (ie: Bite the hand that feeds you).

Notice how Apple has this industry by the balls with their iTunes? Its because the music industry doesn't know how to adapt to the Internet and use it as another way to distribute content!

In fact, no one has properly figured out a balanced compromise!


Activate Online?
By Hakuryu on 10/4/2006 5:19:19 PM , Rating: 2
Correct me if I'm wrong, but nowhere in the article does it say you have to connect online to validate your copy of Vista. It says you must activate the copy by entering a valid key. Doesn't this key come with Vista?

It just sounds to me that if you don't enter the key after 30 days, then you get the reduced functionality.

However if you do have to connect online, or call a phone number, then I'm totally against it. I couldn't play Half Life 2 for a week because my cable was down, and we all know how much fun it is to call a company for something.

Activating online is ripe for problems too. Say I buy Vista retail, install it on a PC and the mobo dies. Then I take parts and create a new PC with a new mobo, and reinstall Vista. When activating online, will it not look like I'm trying to install on another PC? How will MS react to this?

Pirating does hurt MS, and they have the right to try and remedy this, but I just hope it doesn't come with a cost for legal users like hoops to jump through and extra processes running to determine legit copies.




RE: Activate Online?
By ac2005 on 10/4/2006 6:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Activating online is ripe for problems too. Say I buy Vista retail, install it on a PC and the mobo dies. Then I take parts and create a new PC with a new mobo, and reinstall Vista. When activating online, will it not look like I'm trying to install on another PC? How will MS react to this?


More than likely they won't care. I've had my key disabled on XP before because my computer died and I installed it on a new one. It just said that I had to call instead of activate online. I believe the number was freephone, and it was answered quickly, not at all a painful experience. I was just asked why I was reinstalling Windows and whether or not I had installed it on more than one computer, I told them the previous computer died and it was only installed on this computer and the guy said fine and gave me the new key.


Meh
By Mortal on 10/5/2006 12:06:18 AM , Rating: 2
Just another thing for the crackers to circumvent.

And so the cycle of life continues.




RE: Meh
By Profyrion on 10/5/2006 3:58:00 PM , Rating: 2
My sentiments exactly.


none
By bendarulz on 10/5/2006 8:48:19 PM , Rating: 2
Just think if it wasnt for piracy he might be a trillionaire,kinda reminds me of"Sympathy for the devil".




RE: none
By bendarulz on 10/6/2006 7:04:55 PM , Rating: 2
let me rephrase that as an estimated trillionaire.Based on the estimated losses.We all know that everyone who has lost data to an ms vulneribility has been reimbursed by microsoft.Why is it there is no gaurentee or warranty in any software eula?


Let them kill themselves,.
By greylica on 10/6/2006 8:09:13 AM , Rating: 2
It´s a simply price drop resolution, needed in every country, poorer or not, and people will not blame MS never more.
After using Linux and XP, First I understand that Linux is a good choice, second I discovered XP is poorer when compared to 2K, and 2K does the same thing, with the simple adition of some free software.
I waited for at least one year to try to switch to XP, and found the activation, well I don´t like it cause every time you have to activate you are giving them information about your live. I really prefer dongles.
It´s not an piracy worry, That way MS give the pirates the way to spy ourselves giving an example of how to obtain information about customers, this lead to rootkits like WGA.
The pirates is now boosting their performance with rootkits and using wga as an name of saints to invade our computers, who lead the way ? MS.
I simply will switch to linux definetly, and use my old licenses to dedicated machines whereas I payed licenses for programs that I use still today. I will not loose my money.
Let the world suffer with this, and we will see what will happen, I guess people will acelerate the switch to linux very faster.
One day them will state in mind that the price drop is the only way to bring back customers to stores again.
Mac OS-X with macintel machines sounds very good,at every day right now too.




RE: Let them kill themselves,.
By TwoBuy on 10/6/2006 2:39:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Mac OS-X with macintel machines sounds very good,at every day right now too


Kinda funny to bring up Mac. Windows phones home once for activation. Mac does it daily (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/07/privacy/in... yet no-one really complains...

I saw a comment about MS getting personal information from you via activation which isn't true. MS gets your product key and a hash of your hardware. No actual hardware information, no MAC address, no IP address, nothing. If you read their license agreement before you activate you can get the details.

During my Vista Beta2 experience I tried phone activation about a dozen times just to try it out. It only takes about 3-5 minutes to tell the computer a string of numbers and get a string of numbers back. I tried intentionally entring in the wrong code too so I could talk to a person. I had to give them my correct number string and then they read me off the confirmation code back. With a person it took more like 7-8 minutes; still not a difficult proceedure.

Overall, I havn't found vista's activation process to be anything that would keep me from using it. It takes a lot less time for me to activate Windows (even by phone with a CSR) than it does for me to get my drivers working when I install Linux (I use Mandrake, which I love) :).


By segagenesis on 10/4/2006 7:10:45 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah I have not posted in months. I posted a long time ago "why doesnt Microsoft just disable Windows altogether" as a joke in response to the typical asinine/cynical responses about WGA validation, although I did not expect them to take it seriously. So, I'll eat my hat about the topic since I guess I indirectly predicted it.

Of course, there are all the knee-jerk reactions I read above and the form letter "Microsoft has every right to do whatever..." pre-moulded responses I expected to see. What gets me is that people never seem to learn anymore. Remember a program called Lotus 1-2-3? Remember how it was copy protected until 3.0 because they got letters from users how annoying it was for years? Multiply that by tens of times for several popular software packages of the 80s and yesteryear... whats old is new again.

My point about all this is rather blunt, regardless of what those who are blissfully ignorant to the reality of the world and how harsh it is sometimes... all this does is piss off the legitimate user. I've said this before in the past year and I guess I have to keep bringing it up because people so easily forget how bad copy protection schemes could get in the old days. I mean come on, Windows XP activation was broken before it hit the market... at best they can try to curb casual piracy like from the two kids in the old SPA anti-piracy video with the rap guy who jumps out if you try to copy software on a Mac LC.

Granted, it will likely work and force a few more people to buy Windows, but the key term there is a few more. Dedicated pirates will continue to pirate windows regardless of what they put in for protection and I can only hope this does not adversely effect the corporate users who have been rather bypassed as of late. As a quick refresher I help administrate over 700 workstations for my job and false WGA positives in this situation would be a nightmare. I really do have sympathy sometimes for the active pro-Microsoft'ers who get behind everything that Microsoft does, but honestly what do you tell to someone who can't do any real work because Microsoft thinks they are trying to rip them off when they have not done so?

Perhaps its much ado about nothing, but it somewhat worries me that Microsoft can now effectively disable your computer remotely at will and as far as I know this is illegal in some countries and as stated above, Microsoft you are only hurting legitimate users I believe with this stuff. Not that it will ever convince them, but when your market share can only go down from Mac OS and Linux encroachment, maybe this is why more lesser developed counties are switching off Windows for good.

Apologies for the long winded reply but I figured I would make up for being absent.




By msva124 on 10/4/2006 7:15:14 PM , Rating: 1
Agreed. Unless they can prevent false positives, this will do more harm than good.


By stmok on 10/5/2006 12:18:34 AM , Rating: 1
Definitely agree with that.

The Geniune Advantage program is what made me consider Linux in the first place. (that was back in 2004, when rumblings of WGA began to appear). Otherwise, I would've never bothered to look into Linux.

I guess this new SPP scheme is just gonna reinforce my decision as the right one for me. (So despite some minor difficulties of a transition period, I'm glad I left being entirely reliant on Windows).

I simply don't agree with letting someone else disable MY systems without my permission. Its none of their business what I do with my system, as long as I acquired the OS and apps by legal means. (ie: buying it).


And this is different how?
By h0kiez on 10/4/2006 2:12:08 PM , Rating: 2
What this article fails to say is how or why this is any different from WGA and the way things operate now.




hm
By LumbergTech on 10/4/2006 4:42:15 PM , Rating: 2
I dont have a problem with them trying to protect their software, although personally I think that it really is mainly because they know that they have basic monopoly on the desktop OS market..which in turn will cause more people to pirate it because they dont really want to use windows but it is the only available choice for a number of different user segements..

I think that if they would quit wasting their money on all these crazy anti-piracy measures and offer a more compelling product that they could change the perception of many individuals who have a negative opinion of windows. They would rather put tons of money into a vain attempt to stop what they cannot.




By StrongBit on 10/20/2006 7:12:29 AM , Rating: 2
Hello, having read the article I had some related questions.

You wrote: ”
In the fight against software piracy, Microsoft today introduced an innovative set of technologies that will be included in Windows Vista and Windows Server “Longhorn.” The technologies are aimed at helping prevent piracy and protect customers from software tampering while making licensing easier to manage…”

Does this mean Microsoft Windows Vista and Windows Server registered users (application authors running on Windows) will be provided with additional tools aimed to stop and prevent their developed and distributed applications from crack, illegal intrusions, reverse engineering, illegal copying and use?

Thank you in advance for your answer it it’s possible

Kidest regards,

StrongBit Technology authors of EXECryptor anti-crack and anti-reversing application protection and licensing solutions.

http://www.strongbit.com




"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki