Print this article  |  E-mail this article  |  Comment on this article

22% of Windows Installs Non-Genuine

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

January 22, 2007, 3:34 PM

Microsoft disclosed Monday that over one in five Windows installations were deemed non-genuine through the company's Windows Genuine Advantage program, which requires users to validate their operating system before downloading updates from the company.

Since WGA launched in July 2005, over 512 million users have attempted to validate their copy of Windows, Microsoft said. Of those, the non-genuine rate was 22.3 percent. 56,000 reports have been made by customers of counterfeit software, which grants that user a free replacement copy of Windows.

While high, that number is less than the average software piracy rate around the world, according to the Business Software Alliance. The BSA reports that 35 percent of the world's software is pirated (22 percent in North America specifically), and a Yankee Group study noted that 55 percent of organizations report instances of counterfeit or pirated software.

As it prepares to launch both Windows Vista and Office 2007 to the public next week, Microsoft has kicked off what it calls the "Genuine Fact Files" campaign for educating consumers on the downfall and risks associated with non-genuine software. It hopes to discourage users from downloading illicit software in the process.

Acknowledging that potential customers may be tempted to "try the new products first before they make the decision to buy" through the use of pirated software, Microsoft has posted an online "test drive" of Windows Vista, which joins an existing Web-based preview of Office 2007.

The Vista test drive, which requires Internet Explorer 6 or 7 and runs the operating system in a small Active X based virtual machine, lets visitors explore various new features of the forthcoming operating system, and guides them through common tasks. Meanwhile, a 60-day trial download of Office 2007 is also available.

Add a Comment (182 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By pig fister

edited Feb 26, 2007 - 8:18 AM

i use my company's office 11 on my work laptop which they have a huge licence for but i am getting the same errors as geordie:

Update for Office 2003 (KB919029)
Security Update for Outlook 2003 (KB924085)
Security Update for Office 2003 (KB920813)
Security Update for Office 2003 (KB929064)
Security Update for Word 2003 (KB929057)
Update for Excel 2003 (KB929058)
Update for Office 2003 (KB925251)
Update for Outlook 2003 Junk Email Filter (KB924885)
Update for PowerPoint 2003 (KB929060)

all failed since the release of vista and office 12, is this just a way to get ppl to update?

Score: 0

By Geordie

posted Feb 20, 2007 - 3:32 AM

Hi folks.
I have received YET AGAIN more security updates from Microsoft that have failed. I have reported 3 but I thought I had managed to sort out 2 of them but as I have just checked I am not so sure. I have now 8. The following are the failed security & updates for Windows XP 2:-
Outlook 2003 (KB924085), Outlook Junk Mail (KB924885),Office 2003 (KB920813), (KB929064) & (KB925251), Word 2003 (KB929057), Excel 2003 (KB929058), and lastly PowerPoint KB929060)
Is there (ever) going to be a download to check to see what has been accepted successfully and what hasn't? This is becoming very irritating to say the least! PLEASE if anyone has any idea (and please make it simple) how to sort this out! I am hoping for an early solution. Thank you.

Score: 0

By Geordie

posted Feb 20, 2007 - 3:32 AM

Hi folks.
I have received YET AGAIN more security updates from Microsoft that have failed. I have reported 3 but I thought I had managed to sort out 2 of them but as I have just checked I am not so sure. I have now 8. The following are the failed security & updates for Windows XP 2:-
Outlook 2003 (KB924085), Outlook Junk Mail (KB924885),Office 2003 (KB920813), (KB929064) & (KB925251), Word 2003 (KB929057), Excel 2003 (KB929058), and lastly PowerPoint KB929060)
Is there (ever) going to be a download to check to see what has been accepted successfully and what hasn't? This is becoming very irritating to say the least! PLEASE if anyone has any idea (and please make it simple) how to sort this out! I am hoping for an early solution. Thank you.

Score: 0

By Geordie

edited Feb 17, 2007 - 1:10 PM

Hi folks.
I have received YET AGAIN more security updates from Microsoft that have failed. I have reported 3 but I thought I had managed to sort out 2 of them but as I have just checked I am not so sure. I have now 8. The following are the failed security & updates:-
Outlook 2003 (KB924085), Outlook Junk Mail (KB924885),Office 2003 (KB920813), (KB929064) & (KB925251), Word 2003 (KB929057), Excel 2003 (KB929058), and lastly PowerPoint KB929060)
Is there (ever) going to be a download to check to see what has been accepted successfully and what hasn't? This is becoming very irritating to say the least! PLEASE if anyone has any idea (and please make it simple) how to sort this out! I am hoping for an early solution. Thank you.

Score: 0

By cannie

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 10:42 AM

Throw away the honey to avoid the flies?

Score: 0

By marty

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 10:06 AM

Perhaps $MS should limit their witch hunt for evil hackers to those aren't genuine??

This sent using gmail on firefox running Ubuntu. Fedora is pretty good as well. If MS$ is to survive they need to open source their spaghetti code

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 12:41 PM

lmao...

Yeah, cuz it's hurting them *so* much not to do so, right?

You guys slay me.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Jan 24, 2007 - 6:43 AM

"They are creating a feeling of fear and distrust in the public opinion. Insecurity is their most positive asset. Their final goal is to eliminate all kinds of free software"

"Unless we are mindless robots who buy when they say we buy."

And yet they keep lining up!

Hmmm. It seems to me that the ONLY two groups who are continually whining about MS and Windows are exactly those mentioned above, or the pirates who steal such a pristine example of masochistic delight.

And continuing to listen to this is like tuning in and watching an episode of Maury Povich's 'Whose baby is this?', or an episode of Jerry Springer where an erudite gentleman is cheating on his sister with a transvestite hooker.

"How Dare they!? I am a victim..."
I would use another word to describe such behavior.

Let's see, is it MS or is it the fool that continues to pay for and use (or to be used by) the product?

After 20 years of experience and heads up behavior, if you keep repeating the same behavior and keep expecting a different result, it has become rather difficult to distinguish just which party is the idiot!

Score: 0

By malves

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 10:20 PM

I guess all those people in stores buying computers are erasing Windows on their machines just to put on a pirate copy? I don't think so. Windows is on over 512 million of computers according to the report so 22.3% or 114 million devices are running pirated software in the US? And BSA is saying 35% of the worlds software is pirated. We're talking over a billion computers worldwide have conspired to deprive the world's software makers of their money? C'mon it is all lies and fact manipulation. They spin the truth to gain government favor to make laws that favor their business. It is estimated that there are only about 1 - 2% in the US who are real pirates. This is based off real stats of arrests and recorded sales from those arrests and the number of "smart" ones who don't get caught. Most times you only hear about how much they "potentially" lost in revenue which again are lies. Unless we are mindless robots who buy when they say we buy. Thei guestimates are just that a big guess. I wager that the real number is millions if not billions less then they think.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Jan 24, 2007 - 3:07 AM

moved

Score: 0

By cannie

edited Jan 24, 2007 - 10:59 AM

Nobody erases anything at all, and in my humble and totally personal opinion being a happy and legal Windows 98 SE user, MS doesn't need to do such complaints having a greater income than many nations in the world unless they want to take profit of it to promote Vista and maybe also eventually, as I have read searching in Google in order to know the meaning of the acronym TCPA, to promote laws which make it a criminal offence the developement and the use of any kind of free software in America.

Score: 0

By extremely well

edited Jan 24, 2007 - 1:18 AM

I don't doubt worldwide 22% would fail WGA, and that's what the story tells, not what you and others interpreted (the other 22% is talking about BSA's #'s...there aren't 500 million XP installs in the USA). But you are right, in the US, the # should be under 5%. But still..yeah, I did in fact erase XP Home on roughly 40+ friends/family machines (incl my own) and put pirated XP Pro on it cuz it was just so easy to do. Now with Vista's increased protections (which would eventually require constant cracking or staying with known security holes on an un-windows-updated OS)..I simply wouldn't erase the preinstalled Vista Home for friends/family. So am I a thief? Not really (not in my eyes), cuz I wouldn't have bought XP Pro anyway if it wasn't so easy to pirate...I would have kept XP Home for everyone.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 8:53 PM

Wow! So much angst over such a small issue.

Here's an idea. If you don't use Windows, you have no problem.

If you do buy Windows, you have no problem except for the fact that you DO use Windows. Enjoy!

If you are dumb enough to use a pirated copy of Windows (think about it, one would hope that someone would at least steal something of value!): tuff sh!t, you're an idiot.

So which one are you?

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 11:16 PM

According to your pristine logic, I'm the idiot who uses a pirated copy of Windows, while the ones who paid for the same thing are highly intelligent for paying for something of NO VALUE, and should enjoy it.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Jan 24, 2007 - 2:52 AM

As expected, you demonstrate your stupidity and you posit those who pay the big bucks for the OS with far too much credit.

You are 'both' idiots. ;-)

It will confuse you to no end, but those who are using the alternative OSes are not complaining about their environments; its only you wizards of IT who continually whine about Windows.

And yes, after 20 years, if you continue to choose to use Windows, you deserve exactly what you whine about. You have made your choice, now shut up and enjoy!

Thus your masochistic cries of pleasure are little more than low brow drive by entertainment for the rest of the populace who simply try to avoid stepping in your pity puddles.

Let's see...problems with Windows...MS is screwing us...now there is a unique, novel, and New topic!

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 6:34 AM

I never complain about MS products simply because I fully understand NOBODY can do a better job... Building an OS to work PRETTY DARN WELL with tens of thousands of pieces of hardware and software is no small task... And I'd never pay "big bucks" or in my def "retail price" for Windows... It'll come preinstalled on my machine and I may just shell out $50-$100 for an upgrade to Ultimate or something, if I really need it. $100 is not big bucks compared to the complexity of this software and amount of time spent on it... I always just compare it to AV and Photoshop or just WinRAR......they're insanely expensive from usage-benefit POV...

Score: 0

By foxfyre

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 6:39 AM

"NOBODY can do a better job"???

Ignorance is indeed bliss!

There are many other OSes that have greater functionality, are more robust and perform better than Windows.

Market share and marketing is NOT a valid measure of the quality of the product.

IF only it were!

Score: 0

By Arakiel

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 12:22 PM

"There are many other OSes that have greater functionality, are more robust and perform better than Windows."

You left out "and are totally unsuited for the average consumer". The only exception being the Mac, but they lost the market share war long ago and regaining it remains to be seen.

"Market share and marketing is NOT a valid measure of the quality of the product."

Maybe not, but they are what count the most at the end of the day. People will buy what sells the best and has the largest variety of accessories/software/potato twaddlers/whatever. it's like the iPod, is the iPod the best MP3 player? Hardly, but it's what people buy because it has the largest variety of accessories, it does what they want it to, and its what all their friends have.

Not everyone is a techie, to most people a computer is no different then their TV or stereo. If it gets them onto ebay and lets them send email they don't care what OS it runs, so they buy what everyone else has. They aren't idiots, they just don't give a damn.

Score: 0

By Secret Agent Man

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 7:35 AM

Now we're entering the realm of opinion, really. It's quite popular to whine about Windows, yet I (and many, many, many others I know) prefer it over other popular OS choices (i.e. Mac, Linux, etc). I myself had the opportunity to use Macintosh systems for over 6 years, and I must say I prefer Microsoft's product better. I have run into very few issues during the 5 years with Windows XP, and the same goes when I was running on Windows 98. But again, my experience is not your expierience. Insulting others because they continually indulge in a product that does not let them down is not prudent.

Score: 0

By imafurby

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 9:31 AM

I agree entirely, and thanks for an intelligent post!

Score: 0

By cranbers

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 7:54 PM

Those are only the people who try to validate. There are a lot of those who know windows is not genuine and therefore go to a third party download site. Sad thing is if you do a google search you can get around all of these already. Even the ie7 validation check in 2 mins with google. The internet is microsoft's worst enemy and their best friend. So I imagine that this is just stating that 22 percent of people check invalid prob dont even know their windows is not genuine.

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 11:20 PM

Most people don't wanna spend "2 minutes" (more like 10-20mins) researching and cracking every little component of the OS just to remain thieves. Yeah, once you know how to crack X, it may take you 2 minutes, but that's not the total amount of time you BURNED due to your PIRATE NATURE. I currently steal cuz it's easy. Once it's not easy enough, I won't. MS knows this, Apple knows this...everybody knows this...so piracy is going to go down, together with prices, while real competition will go up. In other words, if I'm gonna PAY for something, you're damn right I may not necessarily go for Vista. I may stick to XP...go to MacOS..Ubuntu..whatever.

Score: 0

By tipsyboy

edited Jan 23, 2007 - 5:36 PM

1. There are reasons why people use "non-genuine" versions of the MS OS. - You can experience the exclusive "activation" thrice a day, if you are experimenting with OSses and end up with the OS you bought for 180 bucks and won't be able to use it, because of this exclusion due to a possible three times "activation" in three months. This is an unacceptable tyranny that motivates people to use non-genuine OS versions, even if they possess a money bought original version.

2. Who is able to investigate the figures given here?

3. Who is able to look behind these figures if they should be true? Meaning: who knows for what reasons these figures show up?

So - what are you all talking about? In my eyes it's very foolish to draw any conclusion from what is given by MS - or any comparable global player - other than what MS wants us to figure out: that they are a poor, poor and very nice company that has a lot of reasons to act even more restrictive and tyrannically than they did until now. °__°

This is called "targeted misinformation". Look at the comment of "extremely well".

Don't expect the better for the buyer and the user . . .

At least they give us a 60-day-trial. But they won't think about their monopoly attitude with "activation" and WGA and what-not . . .Shame on that kind of attitude.

Score: 0

By cranbers

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 8:01 PM

Sad thing is even I have bought at least 5 copies of windows xp over the last 5 years. One for each new oem computer from dell hp etc. and 1 copy of a oem version from newegg. Now after figuring out that oem means once you have changed your computer beyond a certain point that version of windows you paid almost 100 dollars for is now dead. You have to buy a new version.

So it was at that time I jumped on emule and figured out just how easy pirating microsoft's os is. I mean its pitiful. so why would someone feed the beast over and over and over again when its that easy? I mean those computers are long gone that I had. How does microsoft think its fair that each processor is entitled to its "copy" of software and it is worth 100 dollars?

So point is, microsoft is using their monopoly to their advantage with a vengence. If microsoft had a 50/50 competitor, I can bet your sweet *** that microsoft wouldn't be able to pull crap like th at. That WGA that had a high percengate of failures that they install as a "critical" update. That would of ended them.

There is not a day that goes by I don't curse the judge that decided on the Microsoft case when they were convicted of abusing their monopoly. Majority of all the profits of the industry is going ot microsoft. Oem's give them billions along with companies and then you have us the home users. Can't unseat the king when everyone supports him.

Score: 0

By extremely well

edited Jan 24, 2007 - 12:00 AM

I support MS and their anti-piracy methods. If nobody could be a pirate, REAL competition would occur, and me, the biggest pirate of MS software, would probably threaten and then calmly ACT on my threats to leave the MS-camp (to Mac/Linux) if the prices I am FORCED to pay are too high for my taste. This is why I also support DRM in the long run, even though I don't have a single DRM'ed music/video file in my possession (cuz I don't HAVE TO..right now). When I'll BE FORCED TO, then I will say "F YOU" to the artists who rape my wallet and listen to "nearly as good but at 1/10th price" artists. I could live quite happily without listening even to my most favorite singer...(if they think they're worth more than I think they are worth)...this isn't air & water we're talking about here... DRM = GOOD. This I say, again, while I will try to avoid it for as long as I can, just like I'll steal software for as long as I can. When I can't, then I'll know almost nobody else can, hence I'll know that what I pay IS what the product is worth - the most basic law of economics (supply and demand).

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 25, 2007 - 8:56 AM

lmao...

Wow.

You do know that you come across now as a spoiled brat, right?

"I don't wanna pay!"
"When they FORCE me to pay, I'll find something else that IS!"
"It's everyone else's fault but mine!"

Blame the "big" pirates all you want. You're still part of the problem.

Score: 0

By mdawkins

edited Jan 23, 2007 - 5:00 PM

That means there are 114 million possible F/OSS (Free/Open Source Software) users out there. The grass is getting greener every day.

Score: 0

By tipsyboy

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 5:22 PM

He! He! He! Yeah, everybody sees what he wants to see . . .

Score: 0

By cyberguy

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 4:36 PM

WGA has a very poor batting average of detecting truly 'illegal' windows installs. I have heard so many LEGAL OEM windows users get poop-pooed by this bogus WGA system. Yeah, considering how many OEM systems there are out there, I would take this claim with a pound of salt.

Score: 0

By extremely well

edited Jan 24, 2007 - 1:24 AM

The # is not accurate, but it definitely means something.. Gives some direction... In other words if MS doesn't change its "thief counting" method, but by using the same (flawed) method the percentage of thieves drops by 10% next year (due to increased hassle in stealing the OS) - well they know they've done SOMETHING right. If, of course, they're in the habbit of disinformation, then they can come next year with either a higher or lower percentage of thieves, simply by changing the counting methodology to achieve the desired end result...

Score: 0

By tipsyboy

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 5:24 PM

Hear !

Hear !

Here is thinking person . . .

Score: 0

By Dev3lop3

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 3:50 PM

I would have expected a percentage much higher since EVEN GENUINE INSTALLS SHOW UP AS NON-GENUINE!

Half of our XP machines show up as nongenuine even though the serial has been validated from microsoft. Go figure...

Score: 0

By extremely well

edited Jan 23, 2007 - 4:33 PM

The false-postives get offset by the false-negatives to some degree. For example, I've gotten "caught" using a blacklisted VLK twice or thrice, hence I'm counted more than once as a thief. Of course nobody knows how they count me for the pre-blacklisting, as I passed WGA fine for months... And of course now I use a currently-non-blacklisted VLK so I'm "legit" in the eyes of Mickyshaft once, thief thrice...

Score: 0

By SteveJohnSteele

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 3:41 PM

Genuine ???

If you get the program from the original website
Then get a pirate serial number ..
Then the Software IS Genuine

Or is this a meaning of the word Genuine I was previously unaware of ?!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 3:46 PM

You mean they consider software activated with a non-genuine, pirated key to...

*gasp*

...*not* be genuine??

Heaven, forbid!

Dude, the keys are part of what they use to determine validity. If you use a pirated key on a copy you actually have a valid key for, you're asking for it. Can you fault them for giving it to you?

Score: 0

By tipsyboy

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 3:15 PM

Yeah, yeah . . .

Figures don't lie, but liars can figure . . .

Score: 0

By BklynKid

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 2:00 PM

That's still hellovalot more than I ever thought.

Score: 0

By ds0934

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 1:34 PM

They can't possibly know for sure since VL installs don't get counted. They will for Vista though. They've admitted several times that their estimates for pirated VL installs are a guess.

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 2:33 PM

I have a VLK'ed XP Pro (Corp..naturally) and had been asked to go through WGA a few times.... had to change my VLK twice/thrice so I could keep passing it. Better than crappy WGA cracks.

Score: 0

By ds0934

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 2:46 PM

Some VL customers don't have to use WGA.

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 4:23 PM

I seriously doubt it. In fact, not only do I seriously doubt it, I know for a fact that ALL PIRATED VLK versions of XP Pro Corp on the net still require WGA..unless u specifically cracked it, which has NOTHING to do with VLK or non-VLK of course.

Score: 0

By ds0934

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 5:54 PM

There are VL contracts without WGA.

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 6:32 PM

VLK users are obliged to use WGA on XP as well as on Vista.

Score: 0

By HoIlywood__

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 12:38 PM

That's a typo, they meant 22% are genuine.

Score: 0

By SteveJohnSteele

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 3:43 PM

I would agree.

Another article mentioned that IE7 downloads numbered 25%
Since IE7 has WGA included maybe only 25% could install it - because only 25% had 'Genuine' Windows

Score: 0

By jdsmn

edited Jan 23, 2007 - 11:50 AM

I admit, i did pirate XP, on my old (and now disposed) PC. I did so because I got sick of seeing the dreaded blue-screen so frequently, even after a month of reinstallation on Millenium Edition. I paid for this OS, it was faulty. Can I get my money back? No. If ME would have worked properly, would I have pirated? NO !
I have a feeling that many were in the same situation.

MS can be glad, however, that Vista isn't that much better than XP, and if their WPA works on Vista, then more will just convert to linux (for good).

Score: 0

By aredo

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 6:34 PM

Vista has so many issues that Microsoft already announced that it's working on SP1 .. which I bet will be out by next summer if not even earlier.

Score: 0

By extremely well

edited Jan 23, 2007 - 4:36 PM

Nearly nobody will "switch" to Vista. XP is just so good that even if your PC is 1 year old, you'd normally just let it be (XP). People will start using Vista when it comes preinstalled on their PC, or possibly if they can get a very cheap upgrade to Vista Home which they'll consider installing upon an XP OS crash. "Out of the blue" the vast majority will not upgrade XP to Vista, if only because XP is going to be much easier to steal for the next few years while Vista-stealing will be a major PITA requiring constant cracking.

Score: 0

By cranbers

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 8:11 PM

Sad thing is vista is just as easy to crack if not easier then xp. Go do a search its pitiful. The os isn't even out yet and you can hack the activation on it. It takes 5 mins. 400 dollar os, free. RTM I might add. the only thing microsoft could do is post a "important activation system update" that showed up in the windows udpate program. Optional install I might add. So yeah microsoft put who knows how much though and effort into that. No doubt that is where half of the windows R&D money went.

Microsoft thinks they are so smart, well the sad thing is they can invent a lock for software and its broken faster then they could of created it. They are wasting all the time money and customer service and quality of product on this and its rediculous.

If you lock down a bank so tight with guards, locked doors and bank card checks at the door, your going to have a lot of people say this isn't worth it. I am going down the corner bank and I am not going to feel like a criminal just for banking there. Where do you draw the line? I already feel like a criminal when I have to validate my windows install at microsoft.com just to download the latest directx.

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 11:52 PM

I don't think Vista will be easy to crack in the long run. If you intend on running as close to bug-free and known-security-holes-free OS, you want Windows Updates turned ON, which means MS could and WILL at some point force WGA for security patches, or even they will inject crack-finding-code in some patch-EXEs. You have no business removing WGA with KNOWN CRACK X, per license agreement, thus MS can do that check for CRACK X whenever they want. If that self-check is pepper-sprayed 50,000 times in SP1 for Vista (for example), it's gonna take a while to clean off those checks and release a cracked-SP1... NOBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MINDS WILL SPEND HOURS MONTHLY CRACKING THEIR OS. MS will win the war against pirates, in my opinion...and in the future, Palladium (hardware encryption chip) will assist to the point it will be IMPOSSIBLE to crack/steal ANY SOFTWARE... Yeah some will say "anything is crackable"... not really... first go spend some time in cracking forums and know what is feasible and what isn't... then you'll realize some cracking are just not feasible even if possible. Spending 50 years cracking an OS is indeed crackable: it makes me crack up...

Score: 0

By ThaCHEESE

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 5:43 PM

most recently purchased computers or oem copies of windows xp have been coming with free upgrade coupons to vista for months now.

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 11:43 PM

We're talking about ppl PAYING to "switch" to Vista and how FEW they will be IMHO. Free upgrade from XP to Vista is the same as PREINSTALLED VISTA in my post, obviously...

Score: 0

By crashoverride

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 3:58 PM

Don't get me wrong. I like Linux but most Windows users are to ignorant to use Linux.

Score: 0

By bugmenot

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 10:51 PM

or perhaps they prefer spending time with their family and friends over figuring out how to write shell scripts in order to fetch their email.

Score: 0

By zenarcher

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 7:04 AM

If you were able to set up to fetch your email with Outlook Express, you could as easily set up to fetch email with Evolution in Linux. I can't imagine having to write a shell script to do so.

Actually, most Linux distributions are easier and quicker to set up than Windows. You can merely install, set up a few channels for extra packages and have everything you need...then, spend time with family or friends.

Or, you can install Windows....pay a fortune for different applications you want.....or hunt for days for free versions....and give up the time with family and friends, in exchange for responding to the Windows message, "You must restart Windows in order to complete the installation," messages.

Or, you can install Linux and just enjoy most everything you did with Windows (and some applications you can't get with Windows), or you can spend your time whining about how difficult it is to hack proprietary software.

Score: 0

By Secret Agent Man

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 7:41 AM

On the other side of the coin, Linux doesn't have half of the support that Windows does when it comes to software/gaming.

Score: 0

By zenarcher

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 10:08 AM

That is true if one is using a computer solely for gaming, which in my case, I don't. The few games I play work fine in Linux and if I were a gamer, I'd buy a WII, XBox or something specifically for gaming. As for functions associated with use of a computer, Linux works great in my case.

Score: 0

By dan-0

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 5:05 PM

good one. IT people are afraid of using linux. Its too bad one of the orgs for linux didn't market linux well enough to really compete with ms. windows wouldn't have such a following if it was marketed like 2k or xp. Theres no money in marketing an os you can get for free though...

Score: 0

By cannie

edited Jan 24, 2007 - 10:58 AM

ME was excellent, it was said in the 2000 MS ads, and I believed them and bought it. It was a bad decision: every now and then a blue screen and a new restart. I used ME for only one month. I feel I lost my time, and also some of my files and of course my money. Since then I decided I would never again join the MS upgrade bandwagon. I reloaded the Windows 98 SE I had bought in 1999 and I keep using it since then. For me it is enough. The tiny and old Windows 98 SE gives you some problems, but not others that everybody knows and which are even worse, and is more compatible than any other. If you renew some elements (Firefox, Maxthon, Thunderbird, Foxmail, Notepad++ etc.), and you use registry cleaners, disk cleaners and system optimizers, and of course if you use it properly, it is very reliable and blue screens do never appear at all.

Score: 0

By extremely well

edited Jan 23, 2007 - 4:28 PM

Yeah, right. Within a week or two of Windows Me's release, every techie-type and his dog knew it was a POS OS. If you buy your products based on maker's promises, well...you're gonna be a very frustrated individual. If, on the other hand, you purchase a product knowing fully well its FLAWS BASED ON USER REVIEW, then you'd know at least what to expect in the WORST CASE SCENARIO... Of course with Me, vast majority had stability issues right from the start...so it didn't take too much effort to educate yourself on the matter.

Score: 0

By cannie

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 4:48 PM

I have learnt a lot since then. You are right.

Score: 0

By ds0934

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 1:32 PM

The vast majority of Windows users can't handle the complexity of Linux, even with the newer, simplified distros like Ubuntu, Fedora and Suse. If they switch to anything, it'll be a Mac. It's much more in line with their capabilities (simplified user interface, etc.)

My next door neighbor bought a brand new Dell, the most expensive XPS he could afford. He plays Solitaire and surfs the web. That's it. He can't hook up a USB printer. I know from experience that there are thousands like him. Imagine handing him a Linux disk and saying "here you go, switch over!"

Score: 0

By bugmenot

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 10:49 PM

This kind of characterisation of a "typical windows user", along with OS pissing contests in general, is out of date. Although I'm sure it makes some people feel better to think of the world as a mass of drooling idiots who haven't a fraction of their awesome intelligence.

I've set Ubuntu up for family friends in their 60s, and after a brief tour of which programs are where, they have very few problems with it.

I suspect that lack of application support, and the cost in money time of getting up to speed with unfamiliar new software is what is keeping people stuck on windows. Not stupid users.

Score: 0

By gatescape

edited Jan 23, 2007 - 11:36 AM

22% only?
Are you kidding? I bet it's about 98%

And don't forget that there is a xp prof sp2 version which doesn't need to activate and can bypass wga

Score: 0

By trickie69r

edited Jan 23, 2007 - 7:04 AM

Does the 22% cover people who use cracked WGA files?

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 4:41 PM

If they got the "gotcha" message before they ventured into the realm of WGA-cracking, then yes, they're counted as thieves. If they cracked WGA on a virgin pirated OS knowing-in-advance they'll fail WGA anyway - then no, that theft is probably not counted for nothing. Basically they're going (my guess) by the ppl who went through WGA process.

Score: 0

By pickchevy

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 6:14 AM

Well, Vista should solve that problem for them.

Score: 0

By CdnShadow

edited Jan 22, 2007 - 10:56 PM

re : 56,000 reports have been made by customers of counterfeit software, which grants that user a free replacement copy of Windows.Don't Know but

We Know LOTS of people Who had Genuine Copies but had to contact Their computer Manufacturer at a Huge Loss of Time to Get Things Resolved Before They Could Do a Proper Windows Update as Well...

Score: 0

By Arakiel

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 8:11 AM

First: Learn how to use capital letters.
Second: Huge loss of time? It's a 2 minute, free, phone call!

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 1:28 PM

2 minutes times a lot of people is a lot of time wasted.

Score: 0

By Arakiel

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 2:51 PM

yes the collective nose picking that could have been accomplished by each person during that 2 minute period is a grevious loss to society. what a ridiculous argument, seriously.

2 minutes * a lot of people = still nothing of consequence since they aren't collaborating, or if they are, can't accomplish very much in 2 minutes.

Score: 0

By dan-0

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 7:23 PM

hey, I like picking my nose! and I need all the time I can get to do just that! ;-)

Seriously, it is more of a waste of microsoft to pay people to sit on the phones. all the OEM reinstalls I have done ended up have to give ms a call. and so what!

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 10:10 AM

Perhaps you should start talking your customers/clients/business to start using something other than OEM installs if this is a frequent occurance.

OEM isn't really supposed to be "re-installed". That's one of the reasons they usually supply restore CD's instead of the OS CD.

Score: 0

By dan-0

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 10:51 AM

OHHH, if I could get these ppl to do just that! not happening though.

The focus is that microsoft has call centers awaiting your call.

The difference of WGA violations are these:
1. Pirates who have copied the CD and put nice packaging on it and sold it.
2. Pirates who have downloaded and installed it. IMHO MS does not care about these so much. I think they will allow vista to pirate like this to a certain degree (to get IT and pirates to use and recommend it), but will disable it within 6 months.

They are going to stop #1 if they can. #2 is inconsequential. They will make it a hassle to fix it, so people will just buy it.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 12:37 PM

Heh..

Agree with you on both counts. They're not after the losers here, but the resellers. If they give these guys a hassle, that's just icing.

Score: 0

By agloco

edited Jan 22, 2007 - 11:56 PM

esp here in Asia...

--
http://myagloconetwork.blogspot.com

Score: 0

By CrazyDrumGuy

edited Jan 22, 2007 - 10:45 PM

Wait... so If someone tries to validate a pirated copy of Windows and it fails, they get a free, legit copy of Windows? That makes absolutely no sense.

56,000 reports have been made by customers of counterfeit software, which grants that user a free replacement copy of Windows.

Score: 0

By Silentmaster101

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 7:51 AM

in order to get a free copy you have to turn in the person who sold you the illegal copy. if you pirated it yourself then you just get your windows deactivated.

Score: 0

By cannie

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 3:38 AM

IMHO they know it. They are not silly people, but a giant thinking power, and follow the old war aphorism " If you can not destroy the enemy, ally with him". For MS the future is what really matters: they are investing big money to earn many more millions of dollars, by reinforcing their power and influence not only in the USA but also all over the world. Present customers of counterfeit software are nevertheless customers anyway, and this way they don't use Linux or any other substitute. This is good for MS. Meanwhile, they and their hardware producing allied corporations have the power to make us all MS-adicts in a near future dependent and paying people, including that customers of counterfeit software. You may search for "TCPA" on the Goggle, for details.

Score: 0

By Silentmaster101

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 7:52 AM

they have it in many computers already. you can turn it off in bios.....

Score: 0

By cannie

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 11:26 AM

I believe MS wants our computers to be totally in their hands, putting security before freedom (jail security?)and this is the real reason for a system so incredibly bulky. Most of those who buy a new computer do not understand anything of op-sys and go wherever they are driven. I'm afraid maybe in a short term you can't turn it off in bios any more.

Score: 0

By xyzcb1

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 5:08 PM

What MS want is maximize profit. They don't care what hardware it's software runs on, as long as they get pay for it.

Some can even argues that MS created software piracy. MS has some of the smartest mind in the industry, they know all the piracy exist, but they are not stopping it until recently. Why? Simple, in the past, they don't have a dominate position. In order to have a more dominate position and without scarifing profit, they allowed their software to be pirated by individual. Remember, those who will not buy, will never buy it. Corporate will not risk their business with pirate softare. Now, they capture most of the market, and want to stop piracy.

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 12:22 AM

You are 110% correct. MS has encouraged piracy in the home simply by NOT suing end-users like RIAA has done etc. They have NOT went ALL OUT on the home pirate. As you and I both know, they WILL eventually. This is why I don't have any remorse stealing MS software. Nor will I have any problem paying for MS software, or software by anyone else, the exact amount of money only I think is fair. If it aint fair, I'll stick to my old OS for as long as possible before possibly jumping ship and going with the competition (Mac/Linux/Windows-clone).

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 24, 2007 - 2:10 PM

Since when do *you* determine fair price? What gives *you* the right to determine the price of any companies products? Selfish much? Entitled much?

Don't buy it if it's too expensive, fine. But saying the cost excuses theft is absurd. The only control consumers have over price is choosing to buy or not to buy.

This is how economics work.

Piracy simply throws all of that out the window and actually delays or completely dashes *any* hope that the market would correct itself via supply/demand. It is the reason companies must resort to draconian measures to try and keep folks honest.

Score: 0

By extremely well

posted Jan 25, 2007 - 5:53 AM

I agreed with everything you said in advance already. The only difference is that you think that by "talking about piracy" it's gonna make any real difference. Most people BREAK THE LAW VERY HAPPILY WITH NO REMORSE when it comes to software piracy. The only way to combat it and, as we both agreed, bring supply-demand back (which will lower software prices, intensify competition, etc) is to FORCE PEOPLE TO PAY by hurting those who pirate REAL BAD. Until this is done, I'll continue being a pirate, and you can continue being a "sucker" in my book. Yes, I AM selfish, just like you. We're both true to ourselves hence by definition we are selfish and will remain so FOREVER.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 25, 2007 - 8:49 AM

You cannot logically pirate *and* wait for supply/demand to compensate.

That's not the way it works.

Sorry to inform you, but your belief system is flawed. The two cannot logically co-exist.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

edited Jan 22, 2007 - 11:34 PM

The free replacement only occurs when they report the person or company that distributed the pirated version to them, and generally then only if they are able to gather enough information to actually do something about it.

No, they're not giving pirates free copies.

...well, not intentionally.

I mean...

It's not like the pirates are paying for their copies.

So...

*sigh*

Okay, last beer. I swear.

Well, for tonight at least.

Score: 0

By terminalx

posted Jan 22, 2007 - 9:54 PM

One thing about OEM software...you can get a full version of ultimate for $200...as far as I can see it doesn't say I have to use it on a brand new pc...

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 22, 2007 - 10:07 PM

It doesn't. You can install OEM versions on old computers, new computers, etc... But you are limited on the number of times you can reactivate and you will have a hard time transferring it to another PC later on.

This is fine for folks buying new systems (which generally come with the OEM edition), or upgrading an older PC if they don't plan on replacing it any time soon. (or plan on replacing it with a PC that comes with it installed, again, likely OEM)

Retail edition is for the hardware enthusiasts who can spend the extra dough so they can do upgrades and swaps without too much hassle.

90% of the population could easily get by with the OEM edition.

Score: 0

By ds0934

posted Jan 22, 2007 - 9:08 PM

Geez. The whole key management infrastructure crap you have to deal with in Vista (business environments) was driven by this. Now legit business IT staff will have to suffer with the added crap due to others pirating. Once again, the good folk pay for the bad folk.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 22, 2007 - 10:03 PM

At least it won't be a nightmare. KMS servers are simple to set up on existing hardware and require pretty much zero admin after the initial setup.

Score: 0

By ds0934

edited Jan 23, 2007 - 1:24 PM

*if* you have a nice homogenious network where clients are accessible "most" of the time. We work in a military extended periods (without WAN connectivity). Secure processing is done in NON-networked enclosures. We aren't going to be migrating anytime soon.

Score: 0

By extremely well

edited Jan 24, 2007 - 12:34 AM

So you're not gonna be connected to the internet for more than 180days? (the period required to re-authenticate with KMS) If so, the "punishment" you'll get for not doing so..is..getting cut off from the net... Kind of a small price to pay when you aren't allowed to connect to the internet, no?

And of course MS will also allow you to pre-allocate a single code on MS server, so that you will activate ONCE (and get CHARGED/counted per activation) and never have to authenticate again. Can't even do that? Pick up the phone and manually activate each machine. You WILL run Vista on a PC your group will purchase in 3 years. You're NOT gonna downgrade it to XP instead of going through the "immense" amount of trouble Activating Vista...

MS has thought out the key management VERY WELL for Vista. They're so confident in its success (as I am, amid the crybabies who often know not what they speak) that they're promising to use it for ALL MS PRODUCTS IN THE FUTURE.

Score: 0

By PC_Tool

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 2:16 PM

Sorry, forgot to include the , "aside from certain rare and special circumstances". :p

Score: 0

By sjc001

edited Jan 22, 2007 - 8:50 PM

I believe that the number is much higher than they are letting on. There are keygens out there that make valid CD-Keys that will pass validation, and of course there are also cracked copies of the validation updates as well that make Microsoft believe that you are a valid user.

Never believe everything you hear from a corporation. They lie as a matter of policy.

Score: 0

By Gormless

posted Jan 22, 2007 - 8:38 PM

I wonder how many installs that do not come with a new PC are genuine.

Score: 0

By glock__17

posted Jan 22, 2007 - 8:17 PM

Wow 512 million users actually tried to validate.

So 112 million (22%) users:

a) Stupidly tried to validate their OS in spite of knowing their OS was pirated.

b) Discovered through WGA that their OS was bogus.

What this figure doesn't count though is those who know their OS is bogus and ignore WGA altogether. The piracy rate is a lot higher than 22%!

Score: 0

By pickchevy

posted Jan 23, 2007 - 6:19 AM

Knowing the way numbers get faked, these days, it was probably more like 5 million people trying over and over again. Some people just don't get "NO!" the first time.

Score: 0

By wat0114

edited Jan 22, 2007 - 9:42 PM

" Stupidly tried to validate their OS in spite of knowing their OS was pirated."

In some cases, sure, stupidy. But in many others, maybe they were desperate for updates and didn't know they could download free critical updates from Windows Download Center or, better yet, didn't know about Autopatcher. In some other cases, they were just curious to see what would happen :)

Score: 0

By ggvrsn

posted Jan 22, 2007 - 8:12 PM

Having come from India, I know why people in 3rd world countires still use Windows-95 or Windows-98 or even Windows 2000. With the exchange rate between US Dollar and Indian Rupee at 1:46 ($1 = 45 Rs), think about a person spending $199 + import tax, approx $260 = 11,960 Rs, which for some is almost 1 month's salary and that would be an years pay.

Think about it. if you had to pay your month's salary for a legitimate copy of an OS for your PC, would you pay for it?

Why would they want to upgrade or even think about purchasing this OS legally, when it can be obtained by asking his/her friend for a copy?

Most of these folks who cannot afford it, usually will have dial-up access to internet and are not worried about viruses or worms.

This is one of the main reasons why Linux is so popular in India. Not only is it affordable by the poor, it almost gives them the same set of applications they use (browser, IM client and editing office documents).

I visited India in November 2006 and was nicely surprised to see small shops, libraries, banks and insurance companies using RedHat or customised linux desktops and servers.

-GGR
Rajiv G Gunja

Score: 0

By sadred

posted Jan 22, 2007 - 8:51 PM

Totally agreed with you Rajiv,

I live in Mexico, and the average income is about 160 dollars per month... so it's obviously ridiculous to thing people would buy i legitimate copy of Windows Vista.

And before other guys start to bash me, i know there's a lot of people who earn more than 2000 dollars a month, but the minimum wage is around 5 dollars a day, and that applies for most of the people in Mexico.

If these guys could get down to earth and charge a fair amount of money for their software I'm sure there would be a lot more legitimate users, meanwhile it's better stick with free options.

Score: 0